War Opponents Ready Attacks on Petraeus Testimony

General David Petraeus is scheduled for congressional testimony next week. The timing couldn't be better for antiwar surrender hawks. For over a year we've seen steady progress in Iraq, with an improving security picture, but the outbreak of sectarian violence in Basra cancels all that, to hear some tell it:

As stories hit the papers ... about the new Iraq intelligence assessment, I wanted to reiterate a point I made earlier in the week. While the Administration and others will cite the report as another sign that we are making progress in Iraq, with reporting of the classified document citing "significant security improvements and progress toward healing," and a more "upbeat analysis of conditions in Iraq than the last major assessment," there are some very important things to keep in mind.

The updated Iraq NIE analyzes only the subsequent six months after the previous update to the Iraq NIE, which was completed and released in August 2007. While it is deplorable that there is going to be no formal public document describing the findings—as has been the tradition in the past—due to DNI McConnel’s absurd declaration that “All future NIEs will not have unclassified key judgments”, it almost doesn’t matter. The New York Times article, for instance, states:

Among the factors seen as contributing to the ebb in violence in Iraq have been the cease-fire observed by the Mahdi Army, the militia founded by the cleric Moktada al-Sadr.

But since the report only examines the months ending in January 2008, this aspect is already outdated. The findings of this assessment highlight the reduction in violence from August 2007—when Sadr acquiesced to a ceasefire— to January 2008. The updated NIE would not include any examination of the ground changing events from last month.

March turned out to be the deadliest month in Iraq since August's NIE, with attacks against Americans reaching their highest level since the surge reached its peak last June. The upheaval that occurred in Basra and Baghdad, a success for Sadr’s forces and an embarrassment, from both an operational and perception perspective, for Maliki and tangentially America, makes the findings in the updated NIE effectively antiquated. The Washington Post nails this aspect:

Violence declined substantially late last year, although it leveled off during the initial months of 2008 and increased dramatically during last week's fighting between Iraqi and U.S. forces and Shiite militias in Baghdad, Basra and elsewhere in southern Iraq. Those conflicts are not substantively addressed in the new report, sources said.

This last line hints to way the Administration might also be reticent to turn the assessment into a declassified, public summary. If the document is so upbeat, wouldn't, politically, the Administration want to release a glossy version, bound and full of graphs, triumphantly trumpeted the improved security situation, especially as Petraeus and Crocker come to Capitol Hill next week? But after March, the NIE went from being a compendium of confidence to an embarrassing catalog of just how quickly "good" can turn to disaster, and so-called progress regresses into setback.

This analysis is like saying the Kansas City Royals should play in the World Series because of a hot streak in the last ten days of the season.

But recall what Daniel Henninger reminded us last week regarding Basra:

The Democrats appear so invested in a failure that a half-week of violence erases a year of progress.

But check out Tigerhawk, who's got a good post on Nancy Pelosi's plans to attack the general:

If you are among those who wonder why the Democrats have a reputation for being anti-military and soft on national defense, look no further:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) warned Army Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker on Thursday not to "put a shine on recent events” in Iraq when they testify before Congress next week.

“I hope we don’t hear any glorification of what happened in Basra,” said Pelosi, referring to a recent military offensive against Shiite militants in the city led by the Iraqi government and supported by U.S. forces.

Yes, the Speaker of the House is "warning" the American theater commander in the middle of a war not to "put a shine on" in his report. Because, God forbid, he might suggest there was cause for optimism. We cannot, after all, have the general leading our soldiers actually saying there is a chance for victory. You know, in public, in front of television cameras where actual Americans might see him.

Ten thousand jihadis could surrender tomorrow and beg to be waterboarded and Nancy Pelosi would refuse to view it as victory.

Pelosi did say one thing that is certainly true but wholly inconsistent with her policy prescription: That Moqtada al-Sadr's ceasefire in Basra was on orders from Tehran.

Although powerful Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr agreed to a ceasefire after six days of fighting, Pelosi wondered why the U.S. was caught off guard by the offensive and questioned how the ceasefire was achieved, saying the terms were "probably dictated from Iran.”

So, the senior Democrat in our national government acknowledges that Iran is waging a proxy war against the United States and the government of Iraq, and yet believes (i) it is in our national interest to cede Iraq to the Islamic Republic and (ii) the United States has no casus belli against Iran. And that the one American general who has shown some capacity for counterinsurgency needs to be warned against any suggestion of victory, tactical or otherwise.

Check.

I'll have more antiwar spin machinations in upcoming posts. Notice how MoveOn's not reprised it "General Betray Us" ad in anticipation of the Petraeus testimony - so far.

Photo Credit: ABC News