Coleman presses Petraeus for dates

WASHINGTON - U.S. Sen. Norm Coleman, a consistent backer of the war in Iraq, on Tuesday pressed Gen. David Petraeus, the top commander, for a long-term plan that would include timelines for U.S. troop withdrawals.

"Americans want to see a light at the end of the tunnel," said the Minnesota Republican, who is walking a tightrope to the 2008 election. "We need to see some plan out there."

It was the first time he has publicly called on military leaders to attach specific dates to long-anticipated plans for drawing down troops.

Coleman's statement came as he questioned Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker on Capitol Hill.

Petraeus has told Congress that the military success of the recent troop surge could permit the return of as many as 30,000 troops by next summer.

Coleman cautioned that his long-term view is three to five years out. What he was seeking from Petraeus on Tuesday, he said, was more "specificity."

The significance of Coleman's move was a matter of debate on Tuesday, with Minnesota Republicans arguing that Coleman was simply articulating the public's desire for details on a withdrawal, while DFLers characterized it as empty words.

"Whatever Norm Coleman says in front of a microphone, he has yet to take any action to change the course of the war in Iraq," said Minnesota DFL Chair Brian Melendez. Democrats noted that Coleman has voted consistently to oppose withdrawal deadlines until now.

Republicans said Coleman's statement is far different from Democratic troop withdrawal proposals, which they say have been based on legislative decrees rather than conditions on the ground.

"Senator Coleman has articulated what's on every Minnesotan's mind -- a more defined plan to stabilize Iraq that will allow our troops to return home," said Minnesota GOP spokesman Mark Drake.

Coleman said Tuesday that he opposes the "precipitous" withdrawal of combat troops by next spring, as Democratic leaders have proposed.

"I'd like to have a clearer sense of the long-term timetable for force reduction and mission shift," he said.

Coleman's move comes one week after he endorsed a plan by Sen. John Warner, R-Va., for a symbolic withdrawal of 5,000 troops by the end of the year. Tuesday's move would suggest Coleman is continuing his search for a political endgame to the unpopular war.

Minnesota Democrats immediately questioned Coleman's pronouncement, noting that he has steadfastly voted against withdrawal deadlines, and suggesting that he is wavering to line up with public sentiment against the war.

White House officials declined to comment on Coleman's call for a force reduction timetable. Asked by reporters about Coleman's "light at the end of the tunnel," White House spokesman Tony Snow cited the Iraqis' desire for "a stable democracy where they are able to handle the means of security."

Coleman was among several vulnerable Republicans facing reelection next year who pressed Petraeus on how long the U.S. military commitment to Iraq might last. Another was Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, who, like Coleman, has faced a blitz of pro- and anti-war ads.

A joint effort

Coleman also was joined by anti-war stalwart Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., in asking Petraeus if a chart showing a "timeline" for stepped-down force commitments could be accompanied by specific dates, beyond the scheduled end of the troop surge by next summer.

"I cannot offer you that," said Petraeus, explaining that his chart represented U.S. force reductions goals as the military mission shifts from "leading" to "strategic overwatch" of combat operations in Iraq.

"Looking at what General Petraeus offered with the chart, the logical questions was, OK, General, looks great," Coleman said later in an interview. "It laid out a vision for force reduction and mission shift. Can we tell the American public how long that's going to take?"

Asked if the plan for the future should include attaching dates to force reduction steps, he replied, "Yeah, I would not be opposed to attaching some dates."

Asked if that should be done by Congress, as Democrats have insisted, or by the military command in Iraq, as Coleman and other Republicans believe, Coleman said: "We need to do it in concert. That needs to be done. My sense is it can be done with a longer term perspective."

A projection, not fixed dates

Coleman spokesman Tom Steward emphasized that the senator was calling for a military projection of timelines, not fixed deadlines that could cut short military gains and possible political reconciliation in Iraq.

"Senator Coleman's position on Iraq should and will reflect the changing circumstances on the ground," Steward said.

Coleman's leading DFL opponents in next year's Senate race said his position constituted a political about-face.

"It's a complete flip-flop," said attorney Mike Ciresi, arguing that a timetable is a timetable, no matter how far out in the future it is. "He wants to tie dates to specific actions. That's a timetable."

Andy Barr, a spokesman for Al Franken, called it an "attempt to avoid paying the political price for continuing to support George W. Bush's policy in Iraq."

Coleman acknowledged that he hasn't asked for a timetable for action before, saying that it represented a progression in his thinking

"The reality of the war in Iraq is you're constantly reflecting on how do we, in the end, make the shift in mission in a way that doesn't undermine the efforts of our men and women on the front line," he said.

Kevin Diaz • 202-408-2753

Kevin Diaz • kdiaz@startribune.com