Click
photo to play
Length: 4:09
WOLF BLITZER: Back now to the shifting strategy and
the shifting timetable for the war in Iraq. Top U.S.
officials are urging Iraqis to take responsibility
for their own security within the next year and a
half. That's not linked to a U.S. troop withdrawal
but our latest poll suggest Americans are looking for
such a link. Fifty seven percent of those polled say
they favor setting a timetable for a pullout, 40
percent say they're opposed.
And joining us now from Baghdad, our correspondent,
Michael Ware. Michael, we heard the U.S. Military
Commander General Casey suggest today it could take
another 12 months to 18 months for Iraqi troops to be
positioned to take charge of their own security. Is
that -- based on what you've seen on the ground, and
you've been there on and off for more than three
years -- is that realistic?
WARE: Well, Wolf, I think you put it best when you
said that General Casey suggested that the Iraqi
security forces might be capable of defending
themselves in 12 to 18 months. The word he used in
the press conference was "I believe." There was no
clear commitment on this. Whilst on one hand yes it
does spell out some kind of time frame, which may be
a useful mechanism for measuring developmental
progress in a very lose way.
On the other hand, Wolf, we've heard this so many
times before. We've had so many other deadlines or
time frames stated, slip and pass us by that honestly
the statement today is almost meaningless, because
there's always a heavy caveat.
Not only is it just a belief by the commander on the
ground here, but it's also as always
conditions-based. U.S. troops can't withdraw on any
given date unless the situation on the ground
permits, and that's implicit I believe in General
Casey's statement today -- Wolf.
BLITZER: Do these words, though -- suggesting a
timeline, suggesting that the United States wants the
Iraqi government to meet certain benchmarks along
this timeline -- is it likely to have an impact on
this Iraqi government, which seems so fragile to
begin with in forcing them to deal with these death
squads and these militias?
WARE: Well, the U.S. is clearly ramping up the
pressure, Wolf. I mean they want to see results.
They've bet the house on Prime Minister Maliki, whom
one of his most senior security people today
privately admitted to me or confirmed to me, has
relatively little power within the government and
relies primarily on the American forces for any kind
of muscle.
And if it's not the American forces, he's looking to
Muqtada al-Sadr and his Jaish al Mahdi, whose
political support helped land him as the compromise
candidate for the prime minister. There's very little
that Maliki can force through. Now we heard
Ambassador Khalilzad say that essentially the Iraqi
government -- Maliki -- has agreed to agree on a
timeline by the end of the year.
So we need to be very careful of the words here. And
as we saw the White House spokesman say just
yesterday, even when it comes to the end of the year,
the U.S. is not making any ultimatums. Quite frankly,
it's got very little to back up any ultimatum --
Wolf.
BLITZER: One final question, we don't have a lot of
time, Michael. This Balkan option, dividing up Iraq
into three separate parts -- a Kurdish part in the
north, a Shiite part in the south and a Sunni part
sort of in the central -- the White House says that's
a nonstarter. What are they saying where you are?
WARE: Oh, absolutely, it's a nonstarter. I mean, to
fracture this state like this would have drastic
domestic implications and regional implications. And
this issue touches upon so many others that
Ambassador Khalilzad and General Casey referred to
today. From the equal distribution of oil revenues to
the Sunni insurgency to Iran to the militias. I mean,
this very much is just the tip of a massive iceberg.
Wolf?
BLITZER: All right, Michael, thanks very much.
Michael Ware reporting for us from
Baghdad.