A Welcome Distraction

And, as Julian E. Barnes writes in this morning's Los Angeles Times: "A key Republican House leader said Sunday that if President Bush's current strategy in Iraq is not working by fall, members of Congress will demand to know what the White House's next plan is.

"Rep. John A. Boehner of Ohio, the House minority leader, said the troop buildup had shown some success and noted that it was not yet complete. But he embraced the idea of setting benchmarks for the Iraqi government and requiring Bush to assess the Iraqis' progress on a monthly basis.

"'Over the course of the next three months or four months, we'll have some idea how well the plan is working,' Boehner told Chris Wallace on 'Fox News Sunday.' 'Early signs are indicating there is clearly some success on a number of fronts. But . . . by the time we get to September, October, members are going to want to know how well this is working, and if it isn't, what's Plan B?'"

Et Tu, Gates?

Peter Spiegel and Julian E. Barnes write in the Los Angeles Times: "President Bush has mobilized his administration, including his top general in Iraq, in a major push to win more time and money for his war strategy. But one crucial voice has been missing from the chorus: Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates'.

"In fact, Gates' recent comments seem to run counter to the message from the White House. During a recent trip to the Middle East, Gates told the Iraqi government that time was running out and praised Democratic efforts in the U.S. Congress to set a timetable for withdrawal, saying it would help prod the Iraqis. He reiterated that point during a meeting with reporters last week.

"A spokesman for Gates insisted there was no distance between the Defense secretary's thinking on the timetable for Iraq and views held by the White House or Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of U.S. troops in Iraq.

"But his warnings to Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki are just the latest indications from Gates that he believes the window of opportunity for the administration to get Iraq right is closing sooner rather than later. . . .

"'I believe Gates is on a completely different page than President Bush and Gen. Petraeus,' said a former senior Defense official who has supported the buildup. 'He wants to see some results by summer, and if he doesn't see those results, he seems willing to throw the towel in.'"

White House Departure

Peter Baker writes in The Washington Post about the resignation of J.D. Crouch: "Crouch, the No. 2 official at the National Security Council, has been a pivotal figure on a series of difficult issues, including Afghanistan, North Korea, Iran and the detention policy for terrorism suspects. And it was his interagency group meeting at the White House complex for many weeks last winter that resulted in the ongoing troop buildup in Iraq, which has become the defining decision of the year for Bush. . . .

"Crouch becomes the second top official involved in crafting the new Iraq strategy to leave before it is clear if the new approach will work. Meghan O'Sullivan, the deputy national security adviser for Iraq and Afghanistan, also plans to resign soon. The departures will leave national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley huge holes to fill even as he tries to find a new 'war czar' to oversee Iraq."

Help Wanted

Deb Riechmann writes for the Associated Press: "Now that the White House is searching for a 'war czar,' it begs the question of who has been coordinating U.S. involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan the past four years.

"A team of West Wing players led by national security adviser Stephen Hadley has tried to keep turf-conscious agencies marching in the same direction on military, political and reconstruction fronts. A few Bush aides say privately, however, that the White House probably should have recruited someone to oversee the war effort a year ago.