'Give Us a Chance'

Virginia Senator John Warner is the senior Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee and a trusted voice on both sides of the aisle . He is withholding judgment for now on the president's new plan to send more troops to Iraq, but makes it clear in an interview with NEWSWEEK's Eleanor Clift that Congress is prepared to assert its rightful role as an equal partner in the war-making powers of the administration. Excerpts:

NEWSWEEK: As we look at this confrontation between Congress and the White House over this new policy towards Iraq, a lot of people are looking to you to either lead the way to support the president, or deliver the word to him that this can't be sustained. Please give me a sense of where you are.

Warner: When I got back from Iraq in October I made the statement that this situation is neither going forward or backward; it's going sideways…At the current time I've indicated that [the president's plan] deserves very serious consideration by the Congress. I'm studying that report in the context of the Baker-Hamilton commission and I made a request of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs [of Staff] to look at some of the A-team, B-team—red team, blue team—type of analysis that's done in the Pentagon.

That's like war games.

Yes, war games. I also expressed to [Joint Chiefs chairman Peter] Pace my great concern about getting the American G.I. in the crossfire of hatred between Sunni and Shia. Those hatreds go back over 1,000 years ; they're predicated on strong religious differences. And that's not for the American G.I. to settle; it's for the Iraqi G.I. to settle. [Also,] three, four months ago in the Armed Services committee, together with [Michigan Democratic Sen.] Carl Levin, I put an amendment in requiring the executive branch to prepare a National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq…That document could bear on the decision making. There's a lot to be studied, and I just urge my colleagues not to jump to their [conclusions] until they've had a chance to do some studying.

In the meantime, the troops in the surge are already in Iraq.

While some of the first increments of troops have arrived, more will arrive in February, more in March, so it's the sequencing of this flow of troops—but a small percentage have arrived to date.

There is speculation that if the initial reports of this new strategy are grim that it would fall to you as a senior Republican to go to the White House with the bad news, or to broker some sort of compromise.

I don't want to appoint myself to any position. I just stepped down as [committee] chairman after six years under our rules. But you can be sure that I think my past actions have indicated my willingness to do what I think is in the best interest of the nation—and if that necessitated visiting the president as I've done twice [in the last two weeks]—I wouldn't hesitate.

Did you say visiting the president?

The president asked a group of us to come down [on Jan. 5] and we went down for a 20-minute meeting and stayed almost an hour. It was a very constructive give and take. I then returned at the invitation of the president [last] Monday accompanying nine or 10 other senators. I urged the president last fall that before he laid down his plan it would be wise to consult with the Congress—and a measure of consultation has taken place, and it's continuing. I also urged the president to be open-minded about some ideas to incorporate in the plan, and he specifically put that in his statement [in last week's speech.]

But if you came to believe his policy is not working, you wouldn't hesitate to tell him that.

No, I wouldn't hesitate to tell him privately. Privately.

What are your feelings about the Baker-Hamilton commission?

[The report] had some very good points in it. I think there's more substance in that than they're given credit for—I think they did a good job.

It seems to be you could easily have a bipartisan resolution that would get a lot of Democratic and Republican support.

To the extent that we could achieve a significant bipartisan position, I think it would be helpful to the president and to the country. But it's too early—we're barely in the formative stages. You've got to remember, the president started working on this [plan] in October. He worked intensely October, November, December—and the Senate has had this 48 hours. So give us a chance.

But meanwhile the war's been going on for [almost] four years, and you wish that a lot of this study had gone on two years ago, three years ago.

You are correct, but this is where we are.

You met with General [David] Petraeus [newly appointed as top U.S. military commander in Iraq]. Are you convinced that he's convinced that this surge can work?

The general is a very impressive military professional, and I've been dealing with these people ever since I was secretary of the Navy. He's a very exceptional person. I think it's premature to ask him that question.

The speculation is that the generals were strong-armed into supporting this plan—that they had reservations.

I'm going to withdraw from any observations on that at this time. I leave that to you.

So much of this rests on the willingness or ability of Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki. In your questions [during the committee hearing], you seemed less than convinced that the White House had a handle on his motivations, and ability.

I think the president and his team as well as the Congress have to deal with realities that there are question marks with regard to Maliki….He's not the Rock of Gibraltar but we've got to deal with the cards that we're dealt.

And the speculation that the administration may widen the war to Iran?

I [asked] that specific question and [Defense Secretary Robert] Gates was very forthcoming, as was the chairman of the Joint Chiefs. [They said] that to the extent Iran and Syria have been infiltrating into Iraq, then all of those measures to curtail that be done within the sovereign territory of Iraq.

American troops stormed diplomatic ground [during a raid on an Iranian consulate in northern Iraq last week.] That seems to be crossing that line a bit.

I thought you were talking about whether we would—like in Vietnam—have incursions across sovereign territory of Iraq into either Syria or Iran. At the moment, Gates and the chairman said that was not being contemplated.

You lived through Vietnam. Are you getting a sense of deja vu here?

Well, it's an entirely different military operation and geography and the like. The only aspect of Vietnam we must watch now is the gradual withdrawal of the people and then the Congress from supporting the troops. And fortunately thus far both Republicans and Democrats—and I certainly strongly support this—have a great admiration for the troops and have no intentions in any way to restrict their funding.