'06 Cuts In Iraq Troops Unlikely

"Time is short, the level of violence is great, the margins for error are narrow," co-chairman and former congressman Lee H. Hamilton (D-Ind.) said at a news conference at the U.S. Institute for Peace. He declined to discuss the group's research but painted a generally grim picture. "This is a very tough problem. The options are limited; there is no silver bullet; there is no magic formula to this very tough situation in Iraq."

The group, which began looking into Iraq's prospects in March, is expected to produce a report sometime after the November elections, a schedule that former secretary of state James A. Baker III said is designed to remove any politics from the group's findings. Baker, who is also a co-chairman, said the group's focus is on Iraq's future, not on any past mistakes that led to the country's current tumult.

Discussing a particularly troubled area, Anbar province in western Iraq, Abizaid said that despite serious security problems he has no immediate plans to significantly increase U.S. forces there, as was recommended by the senior Marine intelligence officer in Anbar in a classified report last month.

"It's very, very clear that Anbar province is a problem that will have to be dealt with over time," Abizaid said. "It's a violent area, it's a tribal area, it's a tough area," he said. He added that the Iraqi forces there "need a lot of work."

"Whenever we bring out foreigners -- be that anyone who's not from al-Anbar -- to serve in the military or police units there, they immediately want to go somewhere else," he said, suggesting that recruiting people from local Sunni tribes to serve as auxiliary forces might offer a solution.

Asked why he would not send additional U.S. troops to Anbar, Abizaid said that it is a huge area with many small population centers that would "soak up a lot of troops from the decisive areas where we need them more," such as Baghdad. "Ample troops doesn't mean you have enough troops to do everything, everywhere," he said.

Abizaid said substantially increasing U.S. ground forces could breed dependency in Iraqi troops while complicating the already demanding rotations of U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and for other contingencies.

The general also said that there are now more U.S. troops in Afghanistan than ever before. U.S. commanders expect the current U.S. troop level of 20,000 to remain fairly steady at least until the spring. Insiders attributed recent increases to a growing training program for Afghan security forces, noting that the actual number of troops in combat roles has held steady. Currently, about 4,500 troops are involved in training the Afghan army.

Staff writers Thomas E. Ricks and Josh White contributed to this report.