ThinkProgress Home
ThinkProgress - Security
ThinkProgress Logo

Security

CNN’s Ware Disputes Kagan’s Claim That Iraq Has ‘Met 12 Out Of The Original 18 Benchmarks’

Last week, surge architect and American Enterprise Institute fellow Frederick Kagan wrote an article in the Weekly Standard claiming that “the Government of Iraq has now met 12 out of the original 18 benchmarks set for it.” He adds that “it has made substantial progress on five more, and only one remains truly stalled.”

Since Kagan released his assessment, conservatives have rushed to embrace and promote it. Kagan’s list got distributed to “Republicans on the House Armed Services Committee” last week, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) referred to it in his Townhall.com column, Sens. James Inhofe (R-OK) and Jon Kyl (R-AZ) both cited it to reporters, and Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) quoted it to Amb. Ryan Crocker yesterday.

But, as CQ’s Josh Rogin points out today, “Kagan’s assessment takes controversial stances, including declaring that ‘there are no safe havens in Iraq for outlaws.’” Though not responding directly to Kagan, on CNN’s The Situation Room yesterday, Michael Ware, who has reported from Iraq since before the U.S. invasion in 2003, also disputed some of Kagan’s claims to progress. “The proof has got to be in the pudding, and right now, that pudding stinks,” said Ware. Watch it:

[flv http://video.thinkprogress.org/2008/04/WareBenchmarksPudding.320.240.flv]

Ware only discussed a few of the benchmarks, but here’s how his criticisms clash with three of Kagan’s declarations of progress:


Benchmarks Kagan Ware
Allocating and spending $10 billion in Iraqi revenue for reconstruction projects, including delivery of essential services, on an equitable basis. “The government has achieved equity on this point: all groups think they are being discriminated against. Progress in spending the budget has been significant, and the government is working actively to improve it.” “In this year’s budget, they’ve pledged another $13 billion…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.”
Enacting and implementing legislation establishing an Independent High Electoral Commission, provincial elections law, provincial council authorities, and a date for provincial elections. “Passed by CoR on February 13, 2008; vetoed by Vice President Adel
Abdul Mehdi on February 26, 2008; veto withdrawn and law approved by Presidency Council on March 19, 2008. Provincial powers law set October 1, 2008 as date for elections.”
“After some back room 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. And 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 de-centralization of security and power to the governors and to the provincial counsels, away from the central government
Enacting and implementing legislation on de-Baathification. “Passed by CoR on January 12, 2008; approved by Presidency Council in February 2008.” “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 Shi’a-dominated government, a government comprised of factions — all of them primarily are linked to Iran in one way or another — You really think they’re gonna let the Baathists back?

Though he seemingly embraced Kagan’s benchmarks while being questioned by Cornyn yesterday, Crocker backed off a bit in his testimony before the House Armed Services today, saying that “we’ve achieved or made significant progress on about a dozen of them.”

According to Center for American Progress Senior Fellow Brian Katulis and analyst Peter Juul, “supporters of the surge are conflating procedural parliamentary movement with genuine political reconciliation.”

Tags:

By clicking and submitting a comment I acknowledge the ThinkProgress Privacy Policy and agree to the ThinkProgress Terms of Use. I understand that my comments are also being governed by Facebook, Yahoo, AOL, or Hotmail’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policies as applicable, which can be found here.