A bipartisan option

Saturday, July 14, 2007

Sen. Ken Salazar is being roasted by a number of left-wing commentators and groups for trying to devise a broad, bipartisan approach to changing course in Iraq. Heaven forbid that Congress avoid splintering into futile factional fighting as this nation tries to unwind from a military commitment that is now more than four years old.

We're not saying that Salazar's amendment, which has 12 other co-sponsors, including six Republicans, is necessarily ideal. First of all, it's immensely complex; it also includes a number of mandates that might take substantially more time than the bill contemplates.

But critics need to face some awkward truths themselves. First, President Bush maintains the upper hand in setting policy and will veto any legislation forcing a rapid withdrawal by a hard deadline.

Second, as USA Today pointed out Friday, a "rush to the exits" almost guarantees bloody turmoil in its wake. There may be turmoil anyway that escalates out of control, but policy-makers have a duty to at least try to minimize its likelihood. The more measured approach adopted by Salazar and his Senate colleagues attempts to do that.

Time magazine quotes White House staffers as saying the administration will move after September to reduce troop levels to "a range just under 100,000." And it notes that Bush, at his press conference Thursday, said he himself favors a somewhat more constrained future role for U.S. troops - or at least that's a reasonable take on his words. So a drawdown will very likely start late this year or early next no matter which side prevails in the present debate.

Most Americans now oppose the war, but we'd be willing to bet that most also realize that not all U.S. troops are going to be out of Iraq by next fall's election. There is simply no consensus, in Congress or within the electorate, on the future U.S. relationship with Iraq - for example, on whether to leave a rump force, from 20,000 to 40,000 troops, to deal with training and anti-terrorism.

Salazar's group is pushing to forge the broadest possible coalition to move the U.S. mission away from combat. It's a cause worthy of support.