Resolution condemns Iraq troop surge

US: Congress has moved closer to confrontation with President George Bush over his plan to send more troops to Iraq, with a …

US:Congress has moved closer to confrontation with President George Bush over his plan to send more troops to Iraq, with a key Senate committee backing a resolution that condemns the troop increase as contrary to the American national interest.

The foreign relations committee approved the non-binding resolution by 11 votes to nine but it may not have enough support in the full Senate to prevent a Republican filibuster that would block its passage.

Republican John Warner has proposed a milder resolution and senior Democrats sought yesterday to negotiate a compromise text that could command the 60 votes needed to avoid a filibuster.

Nebraska Republican Chuck Hagel joined Democrats to back the foreign relations committee resolution. "There is no strategy. This is a ping-pong game with American lives. These young men and women that we put in Anbar province, in Iraq, in Baghdad, are not beans - they're real lives. And we better be damn sure we know what we're doing, all of us, before we put 22,000 more Americans into that grinder," he said.

READ MORE

Mr Hagel criticised fellow Republicans who disapprove of Mr Bush's Iraq strategy but refused to back the resolution condemning it.

"This is not a defeatist resolution. This is not a cut-and-run resolution. We are not talking about cutting off funds, not supporting the troops. This is a very real, responsible addressing of the most divisive issue in this country since Vietnam.

"Yes, sure, it's tough. Absolutely. And I think all 100 senators ought to be on the line on this. What do you believe? What are you willing to support? What do you think? Why were you elected? If you wanted a safe job, go sell shoes," he said.

Mr Warner acknowledged that his resolution, which has the support of a number of moderate Republicans, is broadly similar to the Democratic-sponsored one but uses milder language. It leaves open the possibility of Mr Bush sending in a much smaller number of troops, particularly to the western Anbar province, and uses language that some say may be seen as less partisan.

Illinois senator Barack Obama, who is seeking the Democratic presidential nomination for 2008, said the US public could no longer trust Mr Bush to ensure that Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki will fulfil his commitments under the new plan.

"We are past the point where we can simply take it on good faith from the president that this will work. And we are past the point where we can simply take it on good faith that the Maliki government is prepared to take the steps it needs to take in order to succeed . . . This is not a situation in which we have been impatient. The American people have shown enormous resolve," Mr Obama said.

The White House made clear that the troop increase will go ahead regardless of what Congress says and the Senate is today expected to approve overwhelmingly the nomination of Lt Gen David Petraeus to command US forces in Iraq.

Republican senator John McCain said there could be no compromise on the question of whether more troops should be sent or not. But he said he and other conservative Republicans were in the early stages of discussing legislation that could increase scrutiny of the build-up.

"There is legitimate concern about increasing congressional oversight. One of the areas we really need to work on is setting some benchmarks so the American people and Congress will know whether we are making progress or not," he said.