All Thing Considered’s Tom Crann talks with Minnesota 1st District Representative Tim Walz about one of the deadliest days of the Iraq war in months after troop surge. The two discuss Iraq timelines, political solutions, funding of military, and Katrina recovery aid.
SPEAKER 1: Those four bombings in Baghdad made for one of the deadliest days in Iraq in months. Attacks like those today are supposed to be prevented by the US-Iraqi security crackdown, which began in February. Well, for reaction to today's news and an assessment of the troop surge so far, we're checking in with members of Minnesota's congressional delegation. First, Congressman Tim Walz. He's a Democrat who represents Minnesota's 1st Congressional District. Congressman Walz, thanks for joining me from Washington. It's good to have you.
TIM WALZ: Thank you for having me.
SPEAKER 1: Well, despite today's bombings, is it fair to say that the surge is working overall to reduce violence in Baghdad?
TIM WALZ: Well, I don't think by any quantifiable statistics it is. We're seeing a little bit of reduction in Baghdad. But in the outer ring cities, we're starting to see about a 15% increase. And, trying-- once as we've said all along-- trying to put the onus of responsibility to stop this violence strictly on a military and on a military solution is not the way to go. And I think today, unfortunately, as tragic as it is, it's not that surprising to many of us. I think these short-term gains that the president was looking at a week or two of downturn in deaths as a measure of success is very dangerous. I'm looking at the overall picture, and it doesn't appear that it's changed much at all.
SPEAKER 1: What criteria will you be using ultimately to determine if this latest strategy, this troop surge, is successful or not?
TIM WALZ: Yeah, I think the one that we all have to measure by is if the political solution is getting there. These are things that Secretary Gates and General Petraeus and almost everyone except the president has alluded to that the solution is not military-- it's political. And we've seen no movement on any of the benchmarks or those decisions that are going to bring stability to Iraq.
And today is no more an exception to that. I saw that the answer was to fire more of the top Iraqi generals. These are people that the president claims are so highly trained over the last four years, and they can't even secure the neighborhoods of Baghdad with all the force of the United States there.
So my measures are going to be almost strictly based on, are we making progress on that political and social front, which I'm very, very leery about right now-- especially after last week's rallies, or whatever you want to call them, by al-Sadr. That shows me that there's a potential for great fracturing amongst this tenuous government.
SPEAKER 1: When it comes to a timetable, there are those who believe that a timetable would have a negative impact and not a positive impact. How do you answer that? That if you give a date of time for withdrawal, then you're just letting people know when to hang back until, and then they have a date.
TIM WALZ: Well, the flaw in that logic is that if 93%, by our own accounts, are Iraqi fighters, they will wait us out because they've lived there for several millennia, and their future generations will continue to live there. That's a very weak argument. The idea that they know that we're going to stay on is doing nothing except fuel this sectarian violence. That's the whole problem classifying what this is. And the president-- and especially the vice president-- is insisting on trying to blend this with a 9/11-al-Qaeda-type operation. When the bulk of the fighting in Iraq is a religious Civil War amongst Iraqi Sunni and Shias, is where we've got into these problems.
SPEAKER 1: Let's talk about the politics here at home on this issue. After a meeting with President Bush this afternoon, Congressional leaders say they're still planning to approve a war funding bill that calls for a withdrawal and still gives a date. And the president has promised to veto any measure with a withdrawal timeline. What do you see as the next step here? If this goes through, the president vetoes it. And then where do you go from there?
TIM WALZ: Well, then I think, they're going to bring it back. We can ask the president what he wants to give up. What is he uncomfortable with? Is he uncomfortable fully funding the soldiers? Is he uncomfortable fully funding VA care? Is he uncomfortable fully funding the recovery for Katrina disaster that's long overdue? And he'll need to let us know what he's uncomfortable with, and we'll see if we can remove it.
I, for one, am not going to remove any money from funding the troops or the veterans or Katrina recovery, so I'm willing to listen. But the president needs to know what his objection is to this. If his objection is that he wants no strings attached, those days were over after November 7th.
SPEAKER 1: If the president vetoes as is promised, then that could cut off funding for not only for the troops in Iraq but also for the Katrina recovery funding and the other funding that's in the bill. Are you willing to see that funding go away and compromise on that, or at least be held accountable for that?
TIM WALZ: Sure. But first, we need to get the facts straight on that. The CBO has said the troops are fully funded until July 15, and this bill that we provided only took 60% of the time that the Republican Congress took last time with this. So the president is muddying the water again with electioneering, and that I have no time for.
So, yes, I'm willing to go on record and say that if this takes a little more time to get it done because it is not jeopardizing that. I feel horrible about the delay on the Katrina recovery, and that's one that I feel anguish over. And I think maybe what would happen if we have to strip that out and bring that up immediately right back-- there's been talk that might be the way to do that-- to get that through.
But the president is playing games with this. This is faster than the Republicans when they control both houses and the White House got it done. It's good until July 15. And anything short of that is absolute false. It's absolutely untrue. And the president needs to understand that American people and Congress are sure not buying that.
SPEAKER 1: Congressman Tim Walz represents Minnesota's 1st Congressional District. Thank you, Congressman Walz, for speaking with us today.
TIM WALZ: Thank you so much.
Views and opinions expressed in the content do not represent the opinions of APMG. APMG is not responsible for objectionable content and language represented on the site. Please use the "Contact Us" button if you'd like to report a piece of content. Thank you.
Transcriptions provided are machine generated, and while APMG makes the best effort for accuracy, mistakes will happen. Please excuse these errors and use the "Contact Us" button if you'd like to report an error. Thank you.