Around Pentagon, Referendum on War

Incumbent Allen Backs Bush on Iraq; Webb Opposed Force Before It Was Used

The contenders on the Nov. 7 ballot: Democrat James Webb, left, and Sen. George Allen (R-Va.). (Pool - Getty Images)

Virginia's U.S. Senate race could become the nation's marquee referendum on President Bush's Iraq policy as George Allen and James Webb offer voters stark differences about a war that polls show is increasingly unpopular.

Though the candidates have been sidetracked for weeks by questions about character, the war is a major issue in a state that is home to the Pentagon, the world's largest naval station, at Norfolk, and tens of thousands of veterans. The Democratic candidate in the Virginia Senate race is one of the few running this fall who is a decorated Vietnam War hero whose son is serving in Iraq with the Marine Corps.

The war is dominating Senate races across the country, but Bush easily won Virginia in 2004 and Democrats are hoping to prove that public attitudes about the war are changing.

"Webb and Allen are essentially reflecting what seems to be the two national party positions on the war," said Mark Rush, a political science professor at Washington and Lee University. "You essentially have Allen saying 'Stay the course.' . . . The Democrat is saying, 'We can do it better and differently,' but doesn't really say how."

Republican Sen. Allen, who in 2002 voted to authorize the use of force against Iraq, has been a steadfast supporter of Bush's decision to invade, remove Saddam Hussein and turn the country over to an elected government. Allen, who won't rule out sending more troops to Iraq, said the United States cannot afford to withdraw without a decisive victory that guarantees that the country will not become a haven for terrorists.

Webb, a former Marine, opposed the conflict before it began. He calls the war a "strategic blunder of historic proportions" and wants to reposition troops to other Arab nations, out of harm's way. "We didn't go into Iraq because of terrorism. We have terrorism in Iraq because we went in there," Webb says.

But beyond the contenders' backgrounds and TV sound bites, foreign policy and political analysts say neither candidate has provided comprehensive plans for either a victory or a quick withdrawal. Absent those, voters could be left to make decisions based on each candidate's position before the war started in 2003 and which of the two offers the best hope for getting the troops out as quickly as possible, foreign policy analysts say.

"It is really a referendum on decisions made years ago rather than presenting the voters with two different, viable set of options," said Nathan J. Brown, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Webb wants the United States to involve Iraq's neighbors, including Iran and Syria, in discussions about how to bring stability to the region. Allen chides the idea, saying the United States should not talk to sponsors of terrorism.

On the campaign trail, Allen, who says he keeps a slain Virginia soldier's dog tags on his mirror at home, is fond of saying "there is no substitute for victory" and troops need to come home in "victory, not defeat." Webb says the troops have a victory because they deposed Hussein and concluded the hunt for weapons of mass destruction.

Webb, who says that the U.S. presence is inciting attacks on American troops, has also called for a clear statement from Bush that the country has no plans to occupy Iraq. Webb has accused Allen of supporting plans to build four permanent military bases in Iraq.

Allen counters that the bases are needed to protect troops, but he discounts Webb's assertion that the bases are there to stay. Allen notes that he recently voted for a congressional resolution stating that the bases are not permanent.