This is breaking news. Senator Richard Lugar gave a speech
on the Senate floor saying that it’s time to change policy in Iraq. No kidding,
but coming from Lugar this is a huge development. He’s respected by everyone
on both sides.
I rise today to offer observations on the continuing involvement of the United
States in Iraq. In my judgment, our course in Iraq has lost contact with our
vital national security interests in the Middle East and beyond. Our continuing
absorption with military activities in Iraq is limiting our diplomatic assertiveness
there and elsewhere in the world. The prospects that the current “surge”
strategy will succeed in the way originally envisioned by the President are
very limited within the short period framed by our own domestic political
debate. And the strident, polarized nature of that debate increases the risk
that our involvement in Iraq will end in a poorly planned withdrawal that
undercuts our vital interests in the Middle East. Unless we recalibrate our
strategy in Iraq to fit our domestic political conditions and the broader
needs of U.S. national security, we risk foreign policy failures that could
greatly diminish our influence in the region and the world.The current debate on Iraq in Washington has not been conducive to a thoughtful
revision of our Iraq policy. Our debate is being driven by partisan political
calculations and understandable fatigue with bad news — including deaths
and injuries to Americans. We have been debating and voting on whether to
fund American troops in Iraq and whether to place conditions on such funding.
We have contemplated in great detail whether Iraqi success in achieving certain
benchmarks should determine whether funding is approved or whether a withdrawal
should commence. I would observe that none of this debate addresses our vital
interests any more than they are addressed by an unquestioned devotion to
an ill-defined strategy of “staying the course” in Iraq.I speak to my fellow Senators, when I say that the President is not the only
American leader who will have to make adjustments to his or her thinking.
Each of us should take a step back from the sloganeering rhetoric and political
opportunism that has sometimes characterized this debate. The task of securing
U.S. interests in the Middle East will be extremely difficult if Iraq policy
is formulated on a partisan basis, with the protagonists on both sides ignoring
the complexities at the core of our situation.Commentators frequently suggest that the United States has no good options
in Iraq. That may be true from a certain perspective. But I believe that we
do have viable options that could strengthen our position in the Middle East,
and reduce the prospect of terrorism, regional war, and other calamities.
But seizing these opportunities will require the President to downsize the
U.S. military’s role in Iraq and place much more emphasis on diplomatic
and economic options. It will also require members of Congress to be receptive
to overtures by the President to construct a new policy outside the binary
choice of surge versus withdrawal. We don’t owe the President our unquestioning
agreement, but we do owe him and the American people our constructive engagement.Seeking a Sustainable Policy
In my judgment, the costs and risks of continuing down the current path outweigh
the potential benefits that might be … ..Lugar
Senate Floor Speech Calls for Course Change in Iraq
Connecting our Iraq Strategy to our Vital Interests
But will the walls come tumbling down? Time to step it up.
Comments are closed.