President Unbowed as Benchmarks Are Unmet

The report judged that progress was "satisfactory" in eight of 18 benchmarks, including a review of the Iraqi constitution; legislation to divide Iraq into semi-autonomous regions; the protection of minority rights; and government, military and civil support for the new strategy. But it noted mixed progress on new electoral laws, militia disarmament and the reduction in militia control of local areas.

Areas receiving unsatisfactory grades included reform of Iraq's de-Baathification laws; enactment of a new law governing oil revenue; the ability of Iraqi security forces to operate independently from U.S. forces; and a range of benchmarks measuring sectarian bias in the government.

Last night's House vote showed that Democratic leaders have solidified their party's unity, winning over conservative Democrats while pulling aboard a few straggling liberals who had sought an even firmer response. But Republicans by and large remained united behind Bush, a sign of the growing polarization in that chamber over the war.

Under the bill, which mirrors a bipartisan amendment now under debate in the Senate, combat troops would have to start coming home within 120 days of passage, with most of them out by April 1, 2008. An unstated number of troops -- perhaps tens of thousands, according to Senate GOP supporters -- would probably remain to combat terrorism, protect U.S. diplomatic facilities and train Iraqi security forces, although Bush would be required to justify their continued deployment.

The president has said he would veto such legislation, and there are no signs that Democrats could muster enough votes to override him.

The 223 to 201 House vote included four Republicans supporting the bill and 10 Democrats opposed. The four Republicans included two who have voted for withdrawal before -- Reps. Wayne T. Gilchrest (Md.) And Walter B. Jones (N.C.) -- and two who haven't -- Jo Ann Emerson (Mo.) and John J. "Jimmy" Duncan Jr. (Tenn.).

In a statement, Emerson said she was seeking an alternative between unilateral withdrawal and remaining indefinitely. "The middle ground requires that we make plans now to redeploy our forces from Iraq in the visible future, not tomorrow, but eventually and in stages," she said.

Moderate Republicans -- who have been breaking against Bush in the Senate -- stuck with him in the House. Rep. Michael N. Castle (Del.), a leading moderate, stressed that he would like to see the administration change course, but not the way Democrats are prescribing.

"I've never thought that setting an arbitrary deadline for complete withdrawal makes any sense," Castle said. "I just think that would leave the possibility of Iraq being in total disarray forever."

Meanwhile, in the Senate, Warner and Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.), unveiled an amendment yesterday to a defense policy bill, urging Bush to begin laying the groundwork for all conceivable outcomes that could emerge from the September report by Petraeus and Crocker.

The White House has been clearly working Republicans hard, anxious to maintain adequate support to sustain any Bush veto of Iraq legislation -- the key to his leverage on Capitol Hill. Bush yesterday described the Republicans who have voiced concern about his policies, including Lugar and Sen. Pete V. Domenici (R-N.M.), as "good, honorable people" who share his concern that "a precipitous withdrawal would embolden al-Qaeda."

Looking to shore up support with such lawmakers, Bush reiterated his interest in the Iraq Study Group recommendations, which appeal to the moderate GOP lawmakers. He also announced that he is dispatching Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates to the Middle East in August -- answering lawmakers' desire for increased regional diplomacy. Rice will go to Israel and the Palestinian territories as part of a broader regional swing later this month before she joins Gates in early August to try to win greater support from Iraq's neighbors, U.S. officials said.

But Bush gave little indication that he is ready to jettison his basic approach to Iraq. "I know some in Washington would like us to start leaving Iraq now," he said. "To begin withdrawing before our commanders tell us we are ready would be dangerous for Iraq, for the region, and for the United States. It would mean surrendering the future of Iraq to al-Qaeda. It would mean that we'd be risking mass killings on a horrific scale."

Staff writers Karen DeYoung and Robin Wright contributed to this report.