Length:
5:05
LARGE (59.6 MB) -----
SMALL (6.0 MB)
WOLF
BLITZER: When President Bush announced the Iraq troop
surge 15 months ago, he also laid out some markers
for Iraq to meet.
Let's get a Reality Check right now from CNN's
Michael Ware.
He's been covering the war since it began. He's here
in Washington right now. He's up on Capitol Hill.
He's been watching these hearings all day -- Michael,
it must be a fascinating experience for you. But
you'll tell us about it in a second.
I want to go through what President Bush told the
nation 15 months ago when he addressed the nation,
January 2007, about these benchmarks, these goals
that the Iraqis were supposed to fulfill and what he
predicted -- what he said would happen. And let's get
a Reality Check on what actually has happened.
For example, he said the Iraqi government takes
responsibility for security in all of Iraq's
provinces by November, 2007. That's last November.
That exactly hasn't happened yet, has it?
MICHAEL WARE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: The short answer,
Wolf, no, it hasn't. Whilst a number of Iraq's
provinces are now under Iraqi control, they are
predominantly the Kurdish regions in the north --
which have been self-autonomous even under Saddam
since the no-fly zone -- and the Shia-dominated
provinces in the south, which are under the control
of Iranian-backed militias and political parties.
This is Shia areas where there's very few Sunnis.
There's relatively no presence of al Qaeda. And,
essentially, as one Western diplomat calls much of
the south, it's little Iran without the flag. So we
have some provinces under Iraqi control, but we can
hardly call that a success. And certainly the entire
country, you have to be kidding. No way.
BLITZER: All right. The second thing he set as a
benchmark, to give every Iraqi citizen a stake in the
country's economy, Iraq will pass legislation to
share oil revenues among all Iraqis.
Have they done it?
WARE: Well, there is an oil revenue sharing law, but
just because you've got something on paper, doesn't
mean it's happening on the ground. It's still bogged
down in the process. Certainly it hasn't gone to
every Iraqi. The Sunnis certainly aren't seeing the
results of that. So, in essence, it's like a half
tick. Yes, there's something, but it ain't
everything. No, we can't put a full tick in that box,
either.
BLITZER: The third thing he said is to show it is
committed to delivering a better life, the Iraqi
government will spend $10 billion of its own money on
reconstruction and infrastructure projects that will
create new jobs.
We did some checking. The Government Accountability
Office says they've pledged $10 billion, but last
year they only spent 4.4 percent of that. The White
House says they spent 24 percent of the $10 billion.
They still have a long way to go on that front.
WARE: Absolutely. And I think in this year's budget,
they have pledged perhaps another $13 billion or
something of that order. But again, who cares?
You're not seeing it on the ground, either because of
security reasons or sectarian political reasons,
where there is no delivery of aid into areas that are
deemed hostile to the government, particularly, say,
in the Sunni west. So, no. No tick in that box
either, Wolf. Certainly not for the ordinary Iraqi,
who's eking out their miserable lives amidst the war.
BLITZER: Now, here's another thing he said. To
empower local leaders, Iraqis will hold provisional
elections later this year, meaning in 2007.
Now they're expecting to hold the elections later
this year, meaning 2008, is that right?
WARE: Oh, that's correct. And so, not only has it
been delayed, but this has been a difficult birth,
this legislation. It was touted by the U.S. mission
as part of the political surge -- one of three key
pieces of legislation that were finally bludgeoned
through the Iraqi parliament. Yet this one was kicked
back by the Presidential Council, effectively a veto.
After some backroom dealing and the bashing of heads
together, that legislation for the provincial
elections is back on. But we still have to draw up
provincial elections law. And the clock is ticking on
how to do that.
At the end of the day, if these elections are held,
again, it's mainly Iran's parties who look to benefit
and we're going to see a decentralization of security
and power, to that governors and the provincial
councils, away from the central government. So no
tick.
BLITZER: One of the benchmarks he did mention, to be
fair to the president, he did say they would reform
the de-Baathification laws.
They have reformed those de-Baathification laws to a
certain degree, haven't they?
WARE: Well, if you happen to, you know, one day throw
in a couple of bucks and actually join the Baath
Party. But, in essence, the real Baathists that this
is supposed to target, the people who this is
supposed to bring back into the community, they're
not touched by this legislation. And, hello, this is
a Shia-dominated government -- a government comprised
of factions all of whom primarily are linked to Iran
in one way or another.
Do you really think they're going to let the
Baathists back? The proof is going to be in the
pudding. And right now, that pudding stinks. It's not
fit for service.
BLITZER: All right. Stand by, because you're going to
come back in the next hour. We'll talk about these
hearings today. As I said, it's probably interesting
for you. Normally, you're in the war zone, but you're
on Capitol Hill right now.
We'll get back to you in the next hour, Michael.
Thank you.
Length:
3:00
LARGE (35.3 MB) -----
SMALL (3.4 MB)
WOLF
BLITZER: Let's get some analysis from our man up
there on Capitol Hill, right now, Michael Ware,
normally our man in Baghdad, but you're watching this
hearing.
What did you think of that exchange, that Senator
Obama had with Ryan Crocker and General David
Petraeus?
WARE: Well, like much of what I've witnessed today in
the Armed Services Committee, now in Foreign
Relations, we're not learning anything new. And the
questioning by any of the members of the committees
is hardly probing. And it seems to be more about
politicizing or political grandstanding for the
members of the committee's benefit themselves. I
mean, it seems like there's so much wasted
opportunity here.
Now, obviously Senator Obama was trying to wrap
things up and give it a sharper edge to try and pull
all these fragments of the testimony that are very
much fuzzy on the edges and say, well, look, you
know, what is it that can get us out? What is it that
can do this?
But I have to say, you know, his questions, like so
many others, from so many other people, reflect what
strikes me as fundamental misunderstandings about the
nature of the fight in the Iraq or the nature of the
current situation in Iraq or what it's going to take
to hold this country together, even as messy and as
ugly as it is right now.
So, I have to say, overall, including Senator Obama's
exchange that I think you just witnessed, it's --
it's frighteningly disappointing.
BLITZER: Well, give us one example of a question you
would have liked to have heard.
WARE: Well, for example, when we're touching upon
Iran: we all know they're there. No need to ask, you
know, "what are Iraqi intermediaries are saying, I'm
sure you've sent messages there." We all know that.
It's been in the papers for goodness sakes. People
rant about it on TV.
Let's find out what exactly are you doing to curb
Iranian interference. Come on, come clean. What are
you doing? How are you cutting out this tumor of
Iranian influence?
Because at the end of the day, there is no real
answer. Because American policy remains light and
fluffy on that. It's, "well they're Persians, they're
Arabs, the Iraqis are firmly nationalist, there's a
long history but they are scarred by the Iran/Iraq
war and let's cross our fingers and hope those
divisions are enough to divide them." Well, it hasn't
helped with Lebanese Hezbollah and their Arabs. It
hasn't helped with Hamas in Palestine and their
Arabs. There seems to be very little clarity on the
main issue of this war which is America's competition
for influence with Iran.
Now, why that's not being drilled home, I have no
idea. And I think it reflects the nature of the body
-- general body of knowledge held by members of the
committee. I mean, I just see a lot of oxygen being
wasted here. I wish I could jump in with my own
boxing gloves and have a go at it myself.
BLITZER: All right, stand by.
There's still a lot more questioning today. We've got
a full day of hearings tomorrow as well, maybe some
of those questions you want asked will be asked and
answered.
Michael's going to be back with us shortly. Thanks,
Michael Ware, up on Capitol Hill.