Iraq report pessimistic over US role

US has little control of events and further deterioration is likely, intelligence assessment to say.
---
Mark Tran and agencies
Friday February 2, 2007
Guardian Unlimited


General George Casey, the outgoing US commander in Iraq, who is in line to be the new White House army chief of staff. Photograph: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

The US has little control of events in Iraq and there is a strong possibility of further deterioration, an intelligence assessment was expected to say today.

The long-awaited National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq expressed uncertainty about the capacity of Iraqi leaders to transcend sectarian interests and fight extremists, establish effective national institutions and end corruption.

A two-page version is to be made public today, after the 90-page classified NIE was presented to the US president, George Bush, yesterday.

---

---

According to the Washington Post, the document emphasises that although al-Qaida actions remains a problem, they have been surpassed by sectarian violence as the primary source of conflict and the most immediate threat to US goals. Iran, which the administration has accused of supplying and directing insurgents, is mentioned but is not a focus.

The NIE has been a source of controversy in the past. In October 2002, the NIE concluded - wrongly as it turned out - that Saddam Hussein had chemical and biological weapons and was "reconstituting" his nuclear weapons programme. The document provided the case of going to war in Iraq.

The intelligence assessment, which provides projections for the next 18 months, comes amid growing opposition to Mr Bush's Iraq policies from Congress, now under Democratic control after the November midterm elections.

The Senate is expected to debate a resolution next week, which was put forward by senior Democrats and Republicans who oppose Mr Bush's plan to send another 21,500 troops to Iraq. Although the resolution would not be binding, its passage would be an embarrassment for the White House.

Even among the US military, there is disagreement on the Mr Bush's troop "surge". The outgoing top US general in Iraq, George Casey, yesterday said Mr Bush has ordered more troops than needed to quell violence in Baghdad.

Gen Casey, who is in line to become the chief of staff of the army, said he had asked for two brigades - 7,000 troops - of additional forces rather than the five brigades that his successor, General David Petraeus, is now seeking.

"I did not want to bring one more American soldier into Iraq than was necessary to accomplish the mission," Gen Casey said.

He has said in the past that increasing the number of US troops would raise tension between Iraqis and American soldiers.

He added, however, that he understood how Gen Petraeus might want the full complement of 21,500 additional troops. They could "either reinforce success, maintain momentum or put more forces in a place where the plans are not working," he told a senate confirmation hearing yesterday.

The Iraqi government is also unenthusiastic about the US troop increase. At his November meeting with Mr Bush in Amman, Jordan, the prime minister Nuri al-Maliki, presented the Americans with an Iraqi security plan that involved increased deployment of Iraqi troops in Baghdad. But according to White House officials, the US found the Iraqi plan "deficient" and concluded that American troops were needed.

Gen Casey yesterday acknowledged that Mr Maliki was not enthusiastic about the American troop increase. "He leans toward not wanting to have to bring in more coalition forces."