Despite all of the anticipation, yesterday’s joint House hearing with Gen. David Petraeus and Amb. Ryan Crocker was a bit of a dud. Everyone seemed to be going through the motions, and all we heard were predictable answers to predictable questions. When colorful charts are the highlight of the afternoon, you know it was a missed opportunity.
To their credit, senators appear far better prepared during this morning’s hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, where members are challenging Petraeus and Crocker in more informative ways. Even some Republicans are taking their oversight duties seriously today.
Senate Republicans sharply challenged President Bush’s top military general and ambassador in Iraq on Tuesday in a sign that some within the GOP retain serious misgivings about the protracted war.
“Are we going to continue to invest blood and treasure at the same rate we’re doing now? For what?” asked Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., who supports legislation setting a deadline to bring troops home.
The deep-seated doubt expressed at the hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee reflected just how far Congress had come since the war began over four years ago. And Republican senators raised tough questions that rivaled those asked by Democratic presidential hopefuls on the panel.
That’s actually not hyperbole, and it’s also not because the Dems were holding back. Most of the Foreign Relations Committee have availed themselves well this morning, not just for political theater, but in gleaning some important information.
There’s simply no way to summarize all the exchanges, but here are some details to keep in mind:
* Committee Chairman Joe Biden (D-Del.) got Petraeus to concede his proposed troop withdrawals — allegedly a major concession — were scheduled to happen anyway.
* Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), who rhetorically broke with the Bush policy in June (though he won’t vote against it), continued to express his disapproval this morning. As Tim Grieve noted, Lugar believes it’s time to “lay the groundwork” for “sustainable alternatives,” to “prepare for the next phase of our involvement in Iraq, whether that is a partial withdrawal, a gradual redeployment or some other option.”
* Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) crushed Petraeus and Crocker on why the surge policy is not responsible for progress in Anbar.
* Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) accused Petraeus and Crocker of “bright-line contradictions” between their assessments and independent data. He also emphasized that if a surge can’t bring about political reconciliation, there shouldn’t be a surge.
* Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) pressed Petraeus and Crocker on al Qaeda and accused them of suffering from “myopia.”
* And Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) asked Crocker what the chances are of political progress before the end of Bush’s presidency. Crocker couldn’t say.
Stay tuned.