Left Flank

According to WaPo, the generals in Iraq are doing as little posible to keep favor with the White House and not make the situation in Baghdad worse.

Gates brought back from Baghdad a plan put forth by Iraqi leaders that would redefine the U.S. mission to focus more on fighting Sunni insurgents while the Shiite-led government tries to contain Shiite militias. He also brought back views from U.S. commanders on the ground, who have said publicly that they are open to a so-called surge in troops if their mission is clearly defined.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff have resisted additional troops unless a clear, achievable mission is defined and believe the White House is putting forward an ill-conceived idea in a desperate bid to salvage the situation. The Los Angeles Times reported yesterday that Gen. George W. Casey Jr. and Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno, the top commanders in Iraq, have decided to recommend the surge, a position that if true could make it easier for Bush to go forward even if Pentagon generals remain unenthusiastic.

It was unclear, however, whether Casey was genuinely supporting a buildup or simply restating privately what he has already said publicly. «I'm not necessarily opposed to the idea,» if sending more troops would help achieve strategic objectives, he said at a Baghdad news conference with Gates last week.

The White House and Pentagon officially had no comment. A Pentagon official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the discussions, said it would be an exaggeration to say that Casey is pushing for additional troops.

«To say that Casey wants more forces, that isn't the case,» the official said. Indeed, he said, Casey told Gates in Iraq that an infusion of U.S. forces would not help him politically with the Iraqi government and could impede reconciliation efforts.

«Casey's position all along has been, 'If you want to put additional forces in, I'm not opposed to that -- if it serves the strategic purpose, which is to put Iraqis in the lead,' » the official said.

Casey and Gates agreed that under the current «clear, hold and build» approach, more U.S. troops would be useful only as part of a broader reconstruction effort to hold areas after they have been cleared. This would involve immediate work such as garbage removal, followed by infrastructure projects.

Powered by ScribeFire.