Congress' message hurts U.S.

by Scott Darnell

Daily Lobo columnist

With about half the U.S. snowed in on Valentine's Day, President Bush likely felt that he had a captive audience when he held a news conference to address a few issues. He spoke about the beginning stages of the security crackdown in Iraq, detailing that U.S. forces in Baghdad are teaming with Iraqi security forces to clear insurgents from the area and hold the areas afterward.

Bush summarized his plan into three phases: "Clear, hold, then build," noting the reason for troop escalation was that forces had been "clearing" just fine, but that securing and reconstructing were not being done as effectively.

Bush sent a message to Congress that its discussion of any resolution opposing his plan was premature; it has not yet given the plan an opportunity to work and is not giving Gen. David Petraeus - whom the Senate confirmed unanimously - the benefit of the doubt to execute his and the president's plan.

Bush did not appreciate the message the nonbinding resolution sent to our troops and our enemies, but he stressed that he did not want to see a binding resolution that would cut the funding and resources necessary for the troops to do their job.

It is perplexing that more than 35 days have passed since Bush announced his new way forward in Iraq, and all the Democrats have accomplished on the war - the issue that won them control of Congress - is a nonbinding resolution that simply offers their opinion on Bush's plan. This is why commanders and presidents direct wars and not a large body of politicians in Washington, D.C.

Furthermore, if Congress will not pass a binding resolution that would cut funding for the war, it is unreasonable to go forward with a nonbinding one. U.S. public officials - including the president and legislators - must always recognize the audiences to which they speak, which often include the American people, our enemies and our troops. Congress does not realize that its passive, inconsequential expression of displeasure - its "message to the president" - is also a message to our troops, telling them Congress does not support the mission they're undertaking. It's also a message to our enemies, telling them it is safe to continue killing innocent Iraqis because our government lacks a unified willingness to defeat them. Most importantly, Congress' preoccupation with the expression of its nonbinding opinion is preventing it from teaming up with Bush to pass immigration reform, health care reform, education reform and a balanced budget bill - domestic issues where there is a real opportunity for bipartisan work and compromise.

Addressing the recent breakthrough in diplomacy with North Korea, Bush firmly asserted that his administration is in control of its foreign policy and diplomacy - not Congress. North Korea agreed to shut down its nuclear weapons facility and allow weapons inspectors to verify it had done so. In exchange, Bush outlined that food, oil and economic assistance would be available to the country as it showed compliance with the agreement. The assistance would come from numerous countries, including South Korea and China. This supports Bush's insistence that talks between North Korea and the U.S. take place in a multilateral setting, ensuring that no country is in isolation and providing sources of pressure to assure compliance with agreements reached.

Finally, Bush mentioned the presence of Iranian fighters, known as the Quds Force, supplying deadly missiles to insurgents in Iraq. Although Bush noted that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was not known to have directed the activity, he said it was a moot point. Whether caused by a band of Iranian rogues or a direct order from Ahmadinejad, this situation clearly identifies the perilous nature of the Middle East and exemplifies the consequences of failing to ensure a stable, peaceful and progressive Iraq. Terrorists who wish to harm the U.S. are waiting for the U.S. to surrender in the region and allow savage and brutal chaos to reign.

None of us asked for a world where an Iraqi dictator attacks his neighbors and allows the rape, murder and torture of his citizens. None of us asked for a world where an Iranian dictator calls for the extermination of the Jewish people, boasts about his imminent creation of nuclear weapons and aims to bring instability to Iraq and the Middle East. None of us asked for a world where a North Korean dictator holds the civilized world hostage, starving his people to save his nuclear weapon program.

But that's the world in which we live, due in part to a lack of resolve by past leaders to recognize these threats and adequately deal with them. It's our fight now, and we're either committed to it or we aren't - there's no middle ground in the fight between terror and freedom, liberty and tyranny.

Scott Darnell is a senior political science major and ran political field operations in central New Mexico for the Bush campaign.