Report to Congress on the Situation in Iraq

Petraeus concluded that "the military objectives of the surge are, in large measure, being met". He cited what he called recent consistent declines in security incidents. He partially attributed those declines to recent blows dealt against Al-Qaeda during the surge. He added that "we have also disrupted Shia militia extremists, capturing the head and numerous other leaders of the Iranian-supported Special Groups, along with a senior Lebanese Hezbollah operative supporting Iran's activities in Iraq." He argued that Coalition and Iraqi operations had drastically reduced ethno-sectarian violence in the country, though he stated that the gains were not entirely even. As such, he recommended a gradual drawdown of U.S. forces in Iraq, with a goal of reaching pre-surge troop levels by July 2008. Troop reductions would continue past this point as the situation warrants. Despite allegations that Petraeus' report would be written by the White House,[http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-pullback15aug15,0,4840766.story?page=1&coll=la-home-center%2F "Top General May Propose Pullbacks."] Los Angeles Times. Published August 15, 2007. Retrieved September 10, 2007. Petraeus insisted that he had written this testimony himself, without it having "been cleared by, nor shared with, anyone in the Pentagon, the White House, or Congress."[https://web.archive.org/web/20070910193939/http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/pdfs/Petraeus-Testimony20070910.pdf "Report to Congress on the Situation in Iraq."] United States Department of Defense [http://www.defenselink.mil/ central website]. Released September 10, 2007. Retrieved September 10, 2007.

Though Crocker acknowledged slow political progress in many areas, and a lack of progress on many important pieces of legislation, he argued that, "a secure, stable democratic Iraq at peace with its neighbors is attainable." Though a national framework has fallen short of being implemented legislatively in key issues such as oil distribution, he observed that "even in the absence of legislation there is practical action as the central government shares oil revenues through budget allocations on an equitable basis with Iraq's provinces." He pointed out that provincial gains have been more pronounced, explaining that "there is abundant evidence that the security gains have opened the door for meaningful politics."[https://2001-2009.state.gov/p/nea/rls/rm/2007/91941.htm "Report to Congress on the Situation in Iraq: Ambassador Crocker." 10 Sept 2007.] retrieved 10 September 2007.

Several Congressional Democrats strongly criticised the report before it came out. Democratic Representative Rahm Emanuel of Illinois stated that "We don't need a report that wins the Nobel Prize for creative statistics or the Pulitzer for fiction."{{cite web|url=https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3575785&page=1|title=Dems Bash Upcoming Petraeus Report|date=12 February 2009|website=ABC News}} After Petraeus' testimony, Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada argued the General's "plan is just more of the same" and "is neither a drawdown or a change in mission that we need." He also said that Congressional Democrats plan "to change the course of the war".https://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070912/ap_on_go_co/us_iraq;_ylt=AnBCfjVD3A8VO2KEOTCURaKs0NUE {{Dead link|date=February 2022}}

Democratic Representative Robert Wexler of Florida accused Petraeus of "cherry-picking statistics" and "massaging information". Some members of the House Foreign Affairs and Armed Services Committees regarded the testimony as a publicity stunt; Representative Ike Skelton stated that "Iraqi leaders have made no progress".

Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee Tom Lantos of California called the General and the Ambassador "Two of our nation's most capable public servants" and said Democrats feel "esteem for their professionalism." He also said "We can no longer take their assertions on Iraq at face value"; concluding, "We need to get out of Iraq, for that country's sake as well as our own."{{cite web|url=http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/democratic-response-presidents-address/story.aspx?guid=%7BD8CCFF12-73A1-48D6-AEFB-860F4D3A2BBA%7D|title=Text of Democratic response to president's address|last=MarketWatch|publisher=}}

Republican Presidential candidate Duncan Hunter called the report "a candid, independent assessment given with integrity".[https://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/11/washington/11policy.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1 Petraeus Warns Against Quick Pullback in Iraq] News Graphic Republican Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona stated that "I commend General Petraeus for his honest and forthright assessment of the situation in Iraq."{{cite web|url=http://kyl.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=282218|title=Senator Jon Kyl Press Office|url-status=dead|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20100727170503/http://kyl.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=282218|archivedate=2010-07-27}} Anti-war Republican Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska criticized the report while praising Petraeus, saying "It's not your fault, general... It's not Ambassador Crocker's fault. It's this administration's fault."{{cite web|url=https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=14350283|title=Political Junkie: The Impact of the Iraq Reports|website=NPR|publisher=}}

The Bush Administration accepted Petraeus' troop deployment recommendations. It also stated that "Iraq's Government Has Not Yet Met Its Own Legislative Benchmarks" (the original capitalization).{{cite web|url=https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/09/20070913.html|title=Fact Sheet: "Return On Success" Guiding Principle For Troop Levels In Iraq|website=georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov}} Three other government reports measuring progress in Iraq were commissioned prior to Petraeus' testimony.{{cite news|url=https://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-09-10-iraq-compare_N.htm | work=USA Today | title=Comparing four views on Iraq situation | first=Jim | last=Michaels | date=September 10, 2007 | accessdate=May 22, 2010}}

A Government Accountability Office report stated that the Iraqi Government did not meet 11 of the 18 benchmark measures as of August 30, 2007.{{cite web|url=http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d071195.pdf|title=GAO-07-1195 Securing, Stabilizing, and Rebuilding Iraq: Iraqi Government Has Not Met Most Legislative, Security, and Economic Benchmarks|publisher=}}

On September 14, a White House survey reported "satisfactory" progress on 9 of the 18 benchmarks.{{cite web |url=http://thegate.nationaljournal.com/images/091407_wh_benchmark2.pdf |title=Archived copy |accessdate=2008-02-20 |url-status=dead |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20080227135710/http://thegate.nationaljournal.com/images/091407_wh_benchmark2.pdf |archivedate=2008-02-27 }}

[http://www.cfr.org/bios/11107/lionel_beehner.html Lionel Beehner] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080221024656/http://www.cfr.org/bios/11107/lionel_beehner.html |date=2008-02-21 }} of the nonpartisan Council of Foreign Relations has called the benchmarks "vague because the metrics to measure them are imprecise."{{cite web|url=http://www.cfr.org/publication/13329/defining_benchmarks_in_iraq.html|title=Defining ‘Benchmarks’ in Iraq - Council on Foreign Relations|publisher=|access-date=2007-09-29|archive-date=2008-11-12|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081112122538/http://www.cfr.org/publication/13329/defining_benchmarks_in_iraq.html|url-status=dead}} The New York Times stated on May 13 that "Nobody in Washington seems to agree on what progress actually means – or how, precisely, it might be measured."{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/13/weekinreview/13stolb.html?_r=1&em&ex=1179201600&en=a3692f9496243b17&ei=5087%0A&oref=slogin | work=The New York Times | title=See You in September, Whatever That Means | date=May 13, 2007 | accessdate=May 22, 2010}}

Petraeus has stated that his recommendations are not dependent on the Iraqi government's ability to meet the benchmarks.{{cite news|url=https://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=ahmkGCj9m5F4&refer=home | work=Bloomberg | title=Petraeus Says Force Cuts Not Dependent on Benchmarks (Update1) | date=September 14, 2007}} President Bush held a televised address on September 13 in which he discussed the recommendations.[https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/13/AR2007091301746.html?hpid=topnews "Bush Tells Nation He Will Begin to Roll Back 'Surge'"] in The Washington Post The non-partisan FactCheck.org criticized some of his comments, saying the President had "played loose with the facts".{{cite web|url=http://www.factcheck.org/operation_iraqi_gloss-over.html|title=Operation Iraqi Gloss-Over|publisher=|access-date=2007-09-25|archive-date=2007-10-03|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071003185357/http://www.factcheck.org/operation_iraqi_gloss-over.html|url-status=dead}}

On February 16, 2008, Iraqi Defense Minister Abdel Qader Jassim Mohammed told reporters that the surge was "working very well" and that Iraq has a "pressing" need for troops to stay to secure Iraqi borders. He stated that "Results for 2007 prove that -- Baghdad is good now".[http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hASe7-hLd4uM5glg9_2tFjVoPliA "Iraq needs US troops for deterrence: minister"] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080720085942/http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hASe7-hLd4uM5glg9_2tFjVoPliA |date=2008-07-20 }}. AFP. Published February 16, 2008.

Anti-war liberal advocacy group MoveOn.org published a [https://web.archive.org/web/20071009170409/http://pol.moveon.org/petraeus.html full-page ad] in The New York Times on September 10, 2007 accusing Petraeus of "cooking the books for the White House". The ad also labeled him "General Betray Us".{{cite web|url=https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Decision2008/story?id=3581727&page=1|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070913050044/https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Decision2008/story?id=3581727&page=1|url-status=dead|archive-date=13 September 2007|title=Ad Against Petraeus Strikes a Nerve|date=2 July 2019|website=ABC News}}{{cite web|url=http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2007/09/general_betray_us.html|archive-url=https://archive.today/20200516010514/http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2007/09/general_betray_us.html|url-status=dead|archive-date=May 16, 2020|title=General Betray Us?|website=WaPo Fact Checker}}

On September 20, the Senate passed an amendment by Republican John Cornyn of Texas condemning the ad. All 49 Republican Senators and 22 Democratic Senators voted in support.{{cite web|url=https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00344|title=U.S. Senate: U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 110th Congress - 1st Session|website=www.senate.gov}}{{cite news|url=https://www.foxnews.com/story/senate-votes-to-condemn-moveon-for-ad-attacking-general-petraeus | work=Fox News | title=Senate Votes to Condemn MoveOn for Ad Attacking General Petraeus | date=September 21, 2007}} The House passed an amendment criticizing the ad "in the strongest terms" by a 341-79 vote on September 26.{{cite web|url=http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c110:2:./temp/~c110n1vzvQ:e27159:|title=Congress.gov - Library of Congress|website=thomas.loc.gov|access-date=2021-08-14|archive-date=2016-01-21|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160121223137/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c110%3A2%3A.%2Ftemp%2F~c110n1vzvQ%3Ae27159%3A|url-status=dead}}{{cite news|publisher=Associated Press |date=September 20, 2007|url=http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-09-20-senate-condemn_N.htm|title=Senate Condemns "General Betray Us" Ad}}{{cite news

| last =Marre

| first =Klaus

| title =House overwhelmingly condemns MoveOn ad

| work =The Hill

| date= 2007-09-26

|url=http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/house-overwhelmingly-condemns-moveon-ad-2007-09-26.html

|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071013141502/http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/house-overwhelmingly-condemns-moveon-ad-2007-09-26.html

|url-status=dead

|archive-date=October 13, 2007

| accessdate = 2007-09-26 }}

{{further|MoveOn.org ad controversy}}

Council of Foreign Relations consulting editor [https://www.nytimes.com/ref/national/_begwer-bio.html Bernard Gwertzman] stated that, during his testimony, Ambassador Crocker "really couldn't hold out the hope of any immediate breakthrough on a reconciliation front. He was, I thought, in State Department-ese as gloomy as you could be." Council President Richard N. Haass stated that "He [Crocker] was not holding out high prospects of reconciliation. He was basically saying that benchmarks hadn't been met and were not likely to be met. This is part and parcel of a larger story."{{cite web|url=http://www.cfr.org/publication/14184/|title=Haass: Petraeus, Crocker Blunt Congressional Criticism on Iraq - Council on Foreign Relations|publisher=|access-date=2007-09-29|archive-date=2008-03-20|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080320072048/http://www.cfr.org/publication/14184/|url-status=dead}} Fellow [http://www.cfr.org/bios/68/charles_a_kupchan.html Charles Kupchan] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071024192229/http://www.cfr.org/bios/68/charles_a_kupchan.html |date=2007-10-24 }} argued that "The central issue is whether the surge shows signs of providing sufficient security in Baghdad and elsewhere to promote political stability, sectarian reconciliation, and functioning state institutions. The answer is unequivocally, "no."" Fellow Stephen Biddle argued that "Monday's testimony yielded a mixed picture".{{cite web|url=http://www.cfr.org/publication/14191/cfr_fellows_respond_to_iraq_testimony.html|title=CFR Fellows Respond to Iraq Testimony - Council on Foreign Relations|publisher=|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080208080126/http://www.cfr.org/publication/14191/cfr_fellows_respond_to_iraq_testimony.html |archive-date=2008-02-08 }}

[http://www.thenation.com/directory/bios/tom_engelhardt Thomas Engelhardt] wrote in left-liberal journal The Nation that "Numbers in Iraq are a slippery matter at best, though again, why anyone pays serious attention to US military numbers from that country is a mystery. On countless occasions in the past, these have been ridiculous undercounts of disaster."{{cite news |url=http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070924/engelhardt |title=Iraq Progress: By the Numbers |date=September 10, 2007 |website=The Nation |first=Tom |last=Engelhardt |author-link=Tom Engelhardt |language=en |access-date=23 August 2023 |archive-date=Sep 18, 2007 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070918054932/http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070924/engelhardt}} The Washington Post stated on September 25 that "Apparent contradictions are relatively easy to find in the flood of bar charts and trend lines the military produces. Civilian casualty numbers in the Pentagon's latest quarterly report on Iraq last week, for example, differ significantly from those presented by the top commander in Iraq, Gen. David H. Petraeus, in his recent congressional testimony." The story quoted a Multi-National Force-Iraq spokesperson saying that "There is a current effort to consolidate multiple databases in theater".{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/24/AR2007092401929.html | newspaper=The Washington Post | title=What Defines a Killing as Sectarian? | first=Karen | last=DeYoung | date=September 25, 2007 | accessdate=May 22, 2010}}

Three other reports on the current situation in Iraq—a [http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d071222t.pdf General Accounting Office study], [https://www.politico.com/pdf/PPM44_070823iraq_nie_-_kj's_-_08-23-07.pdf a National Intelligence Estimate], and [https://web.archive.org/web/20071004225311/http://media.csis.org/isf.pdf an independent commission assessment] by retired general James L. Jones—were published for Congress around the same time as Petraeus' report. USA Today compared the four reports' findings.[https://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-09-10-iraq-compare_N.htm "Comparing four views on Iraq situation"] by [https://www.usatoday.com/community/tags/reporter.aspx?id=298 Jim Michaels] in USA Today on September 9, 2007 The New York Times also did so.{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/ref/world/20070910_REPORTS_GRAPHIC.html |title=Assessments of the War | work=The New York Times | date=September 10, 2007 | accessdate=May 22, 2010}}

In December 2007, The Washington Post's [http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/ "Fact Checker"] stated that "While some of Petraeus's statistics are open to challenge, his claims about a general reduction in violence have been borne out over subsequent months. It now looks as if Petraeus was broadly right on this issue at least".{{cite news|url=http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2007/12/most_revealing_bloopers_hillar_1.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120426184257/http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2007/12/most_revealing_bloopers_hillar_1.html |url-status=dead |archive-date=April 26, 2012 | newspaper=The Washington Post | accessdate=July 2, 2019 | title=Most Revealing Fibs: Hillary Clinton}} Michael E. O'Hanlon and Jason H. Campbell of the non-partisan Brookings Institution stated in January 2008 that Iraq's security environment had reached its best levels since early 2004 and credited Petraeus' strategy for the improvement. They considered Iraq's economy and political system to be "only marginally better than a year ago".[http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2007/12/22-iraq-ohanlon "The State of Iraq: An Update"]. Brookings Institution. Published February 16, 2008. O'Hanlon stated that month that "Overall, Iraq's political system probably merits a grade of roughly C for its performance over the last 12 months."[http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2008/01/27-iraq-ohanlon "Iraq's Progress Report"]. Brookings Institution. Published January 27, 2008. He also stated that "the pace of progress is finally picking up." U.S. News & World Report stated that Iraq has experienced a "dramatic drop in violence and other signs of progress in recent months" and also stated that the "political divisions in Iraq remain deep, and if they are not bridged soon, civil war could well erupt again."[https://www.usnews.com/articles/news/iraq/2008/01/17/a-generals-assessment.html "Why David Petraeus Wants to Go Slowly on Troop Drawdowns"]. U.S. News & World Report. Published January 17, 2008.

The Wall Street Journal has stated the report decreased public discontent with the war in Iraq, but the changes were "modest".{{cite news|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB118963001295125505 | work=The Wall Street Journal | title=Public Gives Bush Slight Reprieve | first=John | last=Harwood | date=September 13, 2007}} USA Today has stated, in contrast, that "attitudes toward the war have solidified".{{cite news|url=https://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-09-18-poll-iraq_N.htm | work=USA Today | title=Poll: Public not swayed by Petraeus | first=Susan | last=Page | date=September 19, 2007 | accessdate=May 22, 2010}} A Fox News poll taken from September 11 to 12 reported that 49% of Americans believe "the recent increase in U.S. troops has led to major improvements in the situation in Iraq, [or] minor improvements" while 48% disagree and 3% felt unsure. It also found that 35% considered Petraeus's report "truthful and objective", 40% considered it "slanted", and 25% felt unsure. The poll had a 3% margin of error.{{cite web|url=http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm|title=Iraq|website=www.pollingreport.com}}

An early September CNN poll found that 53% did not believe the General's report would be "independent and objective"; an August USA Today poll stated the same thing.{{cite news|url=http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/09/10/surge.poll/index.html | work=CNN | title=Poll: Petraeus recommendations tough sell to Americans - CNN.com | date=September 10, 2007 | accessdate=May 22, 2010}} A mid-September Pew Research Center survey found that, of everyone who has heard of his report, 57% support his recommendations. The survey also stated that 32% of Americans have not heard of the report and that, overall, the President's address and Petraeus' report did not change minds about the surge.{{cite web|url=http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=355|title=Petraeus' Proposals Favored, But No Lift in War Support|date=18 September 2007|publisher=}} Another Pew Research Center survey found that 18% of Americans want to remove all troops immediately, 18% support a gradual withdrawal over the next two years, 39% support keeping troops in, and 7% feel unsure.{{cite web|url=http://pewresearch.org/pubs/604/democrats-debate-iraq|title=Dems Debate Iraq Withdrawal Timetable|date=27 September 2007|publisher=}} A late-September ABC News poll asked about Petraeus' recommendations without mentioning him by name. The poll reported that 43% of Americans think the number of troops should be reduced "more quickly", 12% "more slowly", and 38% agree with the recommendations.

An early February 2008 Gallup Poll found that 60% of Americans believe the decision to invade Iraq was a mistake. The poll also found that 43% think that the troop increase is "making the situation there better".[https://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-02-17-Iraqcongress_N.htm "Progress in Iraq reshapes debate over war"]. USA Today. Published February 18, 2008.

The New York Times has stated that Iraqis viewed the report ambivalently, but that most believed it accurately portrayed the situation on the ground.{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/12/world/middleeast/12reax.html?_r=1&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/People/P/Petraeus,%20David%20H.&oref=slogin | work=The New York Times | title=For Iraqis, General's Report Offers Bitter Truth | first=Alissa J. | last=Rubin |authorlink= Alissa J. Rubin | date=September 12, 2007 | accessdate=May 22, 2010}} A BBC News poll published the day of Petraeus' testimony reported that 70% of Iraqis believe that the surge has worsened conditions in the country.{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6983841.stm | work=BBC News | title=US surge has failed - Iraqi poll | date=September 10, 2007 | accessdate=May 22, 2010}} It also reported that over 90% of Iraqi Sunnis consider attacks on American forces acceptable while 50% of Iraqi Shia do.{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6986993.stm | work=BBC News | title=Iraq poll makes for grim reading | date=September 10, 2007 | accessdate=May 22, 2010 | first=Nick | last=Childs}} Another BBC poll found that only 35% of Iraqis supported an immediate withdrawal of coalition troops. The remainder thought the forces should stay until it met its goals regarding the security situation or its goals in strengthening the Government of Iraq.{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/19_03_07_iraqpollnew.pdf |title=Iraq Poll 2007 | work=BBC News | accessdate=May 22, 2010}}

{{Portal|Iraq}}

• Iraq War troop surge of 2007
• MoveOn.org ad controversy
• Multinational force in Iraq
• Iraq insurgency

{{Reflist|2}}

• [http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/pdfs/Petraeus-Testimony-Slides20070910.pdf Slides accompanying Petraeus' report]
• [https://2001-2009.state.gov/p/nea/rls/rm/2007/91941.htm Full text of Crocker's report]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Report To Congress On The Situation In Iraq}}

Category:2007 in Iraq

Category:Occupation of Iraq

Category:Iraq War documents

Category:Iraq–United States relations

Category:Reports of the United States government

Category:2007 in American politics