"We had some bad assumptions about simply putting people through the door of the training facilities and expecting they would be ready," one U.S. official said. "The trouble is, a lot of these guys went through the training programs and then, instead of fighting, ran away. It's proven much more difficult than I think people were cognizant of."
Pentagon officials have disclosed few details about the new training plan, which is being developed by the two top commanders in the region, Gens. John P. Abizaid and George W. Casey Jr. It was reviewed this month by retired Gen. Gary E. Luck at the request of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.
 
Friday's Question:
| | |
|
Several officials familiar with it said the plan will involve not only training more Iraqi forces but also assigning U.S. officers to work directly with Iraqi soldiers and police officers in the field to develop stronger leadership. The plan also will seek to fill senior positions at the Iraqi ministries of defense and interior and strengthen connections between the ministries and Iraqi forces in the field, officials said.
By the spring, U.S. commanders hope to have Iraqi forces begin to take the lead in combat operations in some areas. Such a shift will need to be coordinated closely with Iraqi authorities to avoid the kind of premature handovers that U.S. officials say in retrospect occurred in cities such as Fallujah and Samarra, which in recent months have required U.S. combat offensives to reimpose control. The idea appears in keeping with the concept voiced publicly last week by British Prime Minister Tony Blair in an interview with the Financial Times.
At least some senior administration officials here remain wary of this piecemeal approach, worried that areas that may seem to have a low threat level at the moment could turn into insurgent cauldrons later. As a case in point, they cite Mosul, which had appeared relatively calm for months before experiencing a wave of violence last fall that caused the city's police force to collapse virtually overnight.
"The idea that a particular region is quiet now and, therefore, we can turn it over to the Iraqis is a little too simplistic for what we now know are the realities of Iraq," one U.S. official said.
The administration says about 120,000 Iraqi troops have been trained, but Democrats such as Sen. Carl M. Levin (Mich.) and independent analysts call that an exaggeration. Anthony H. Cordesman, a former Pentagon official now at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, estimated last week that, in reality, only 7,000 to 11,000 Iraqi troops have been sufficiently trained to be considered effective.
In the meantime, the Bush administration navigates between warnings against making overly optimistic assumptions about bringing troops home and warnings that public patience is not limitless.
"We need to stop planning for the rosy scenario, start planning for the more difficult scenarios, hoping and working so that they not come about," said Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), of the Armed Services Committee. "We need to be open to the idea that the insurgency will not go away after the vote is taken."
But another member of the committee, Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), said the public's "frustration level is rising. People are looking for something [in order] to get out. There's a real possibility that if nothing changes in six months or a year, the American people would demand we get out."
Reed himself opposes a precipitous pullout. "You have to ask yourself, if we leave, what happens to Iraq? I think it would be chaos."
