One of the principal goals of U.S. presence in Iraq is building an Iraqi military that can operate independently. Kevin noted today just how remarkably slow progress has been.
September 2005: The number of Iraqi army battalions that can fight insurgents without U.S. and coalition help has dropped from three to one, top U.S. generals told Congress yesterday….Gen. George W. Casey Jr., who oversees U.S. forces in Iraq, said there are fewer Iraqi battalions at “Level 1” readiness than there were a few months ago.
Today: The number of Iraqi army battalions that operate independently, with no assistance from U.S. forces, has dropped from 10 to six over the last two months, the top U.S. general said on Friday.
So, we were up to 10 for a little while, but the net gain of battalions is three — over the last two years.
As it turns out, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Peter Pace was asked about this problem (it was one of the 18 benchmarks in this week’s interim White House report) at a press briefing yesterday.
You can watch the video, but essentially, Pace argues that the backsliding doesn’t really matter; it’s all just routine. But in the next breath, he says he’d like to see the number reach double digits again. (In other words, “The number of battalions isn’t a problem, but we hope to fix it soon.”)
Spencer Ackerman added:
Let’s concede Pace’s point that as “units operate in the field” they incur casualties and equipment damage that impact readiness. That’s military reality. But the broader question is why there aren’t offsetting increases for those declines based upon improved capabilities among other battalions as they progress from being “in the lead” of operations to outright independence. Pace concedes the issue when he talks about wanting to see battalions progress through the overall readiness assessments. That, however, should probably make Pace more concerned about the backsliding than he emphasized this afternoon.
Alas, he wasn’t asked that one.