Contact: Josh Holly; 202.226.3988
Opening Statement of Congressman Todd Akin
Oversight & Investigations Subcommittee Hearing on
Post-Surge Alternatives for Iraq
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held another hearing in its ongoing series regarding post-surge strategies for Iraq. Ranking Republican Todd Akin (R-MO) released the following opening statement for the subcommittee’s hearing:
“When we last met as a subcommittee on this topic this past July, the security situation in Iraq—while improving—was still unstable, and the success of the surge was questioned—if not in doubt. Many of the witnesses who came before this subcommittee predicted that the surge had little—if any—chance of success. Well, here we are six months later, and fortunately the skeptics were wrong. There seems to be a growing consensus that the surge has worked; that is, the security situation in Iraq, particularly in Baghdad and Anbar province, is much improved according to all the commonly cited metrics. General Keane, in particular, I’d like to thank you for the critical testimony you provided this subcommittee in July. It gave me a fuller understanding of General Petraeus’ strategy, and I believe it assisted the Congress in ultimately funding the surge.
“With success, however, comes a new set of challenges. This is what we’d like to have our witnesses focus on today. The central questions we face in Iraq are: how do we take advantage of the progress we’ve made as a result of the surge; how can we make the security gains last; how can we translate progress on the security track into progress on the political track; and finally, what will the U.S. presence in Iraq look like in the months and years to come?
“The Administration has given us some insight into how they plan to proceed in the coming year. In November 2007, President Bush and Prime Minister Maliki signed a Deceleration of Principles which stated that by 2009 the U.S. would move from a Security Council-mandated presence in Iraq to a traditional bilateral relationship with Iraq. This will include a status of forces agreement (SOFA) that would, presumably, delineate the size, roles and mission of U.S. forces in Iraq.
“Moving towards a conventional bilateral relationship with a stable Iraq has always been our policy goal, but I’m curious to hear our witnesses’ views on the Deceleration of Principles. In particular, do you think the timeline is realistic? Moreover, what has to happen on the ground in Iraq in the next twelve months to make a successful shift to a normalized bilateral relationship? Finally, what should a SOFA with Iraq look like, and can you articulate the types of roles and missions U.S. forces in Iraq should continue? The more you can help us think about these questions the better prepared we will be to address the next cycle of Iraq legislation that will come before this House in the coming months.”
###