by Julian E. Barnes
President Obama will discuss U.S. military involvement in Iraq with his senior national security team this afternoon, a critical first meeting as the new administration reshapes the Pentagon's war strategy.
"Running up to the inauguration, the president made clear this is one of the important items on his agenda," said Bryan Whitman, the Pentagon spokesman. "This is a logical first step for a new president that wants to speak to the people most directly responsibility for managing and executing the wars."
Obama is scheduled to meet with White House National Security Advisor James L. Jones and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates along with Adm. Michael G. Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. David H. Petraeus, the head of U.S. forces in the Middle East. In addition, Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, the top commander in Iraq, will participate by video teleconference.
At the meeting, expected to begin around 4 p.m. eastern time, Obama could order an change in war policy and direct the military to speed up its withdrawals.
But some officials believe it is more likely the president will request the Defense Department take some time to draft new plans for his approval. Military officials said that will give them a chance to reconcile commanders' current plans with the wishes of the new president.
During the campaign and after the election, Obama repeated his wish to withdraw all combat forces within 16 months, or by mid-2010. Advisors have said he would be open to leaving a residual force of tens of thousands of non-combat forces to train Iraqis and provide support
The U.S. has agreed to withdraw its entire military force by the end of 2011 under a security agreement with Iraq. Odierno has developed another plan that will allow the removal of forces before the end of 2011, but has a more cautious timetable than the one outlined by Obama.
Odierno and other commanders want to ensure they have enough forces to help with Iraqi security for national elections scheduled at the end of the year.
Mideast Peace
On another foreign policy issue, Obama placed calls to several Mideast leaders today to demonstrate his interest in Arab-Israeli peace "from the beginning of his term and to look for ways to strengthen a ceasefire following Israel's three-week offensive in the Gaza Strip, the White House said.
Obama called Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and Jordan King Abdullah.
"In the aftermath of the Gaza conflict, he emphasized his determination to work to help consolidate the ceasefire by establishing an effective anti-smuggling regime to prevent Hamas from rearming, and facilitating in partnership with the Palestinian Authority a major reconstruction effort for Palestinians in Gaza," the White House said.
Guantanamo
On another matter, Obama issued his first order to the military Tuesday night, ordering Gates to temporary halt all military commission proceedings at the U.S. detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Whitman said today that the military was awaiting a "broader comprehensive review of policy and procedures." Defense officials also said they are awaiting an executive order from the White House, expected within a week, that will outline further the future of the prison at Guantanamo.
"The president has made his intentions well known and he has taken the first steps," Whitman said. "I suspect the department would get [further] guidance in the near future."
Whitman said that Gates was asked by the president to suspend the hearings. Gates issued a vocal order last night asking for a temporary halt.
There are two ongoing cases at Guantanamo. In one case this morning, prosecutors today asked for a 120-day continuance, which was unopposed by defense counsel and granted by a judge.
Military officials said that Gates' verbal order on Guantanamo will likely be followed up with a written directive today.
Comments
As Iraq prepares for its second free election, let us be vigilant against attempts to dilute democratic values under the rhetoric of expanding rights, such as giving union supporters exclusive control over whether secret ballot elections are even held in unionization drives, as the Employee-Free Choice Act would do. Those employees who would vote "NO UNION" should not have that right taken away merely because workers sign cards with no protection of privacy, as secret-ballot elections provide both in Iraq and the United States of America.
Posted by: Democracy Requires Secret Ballot Elections | January 21, 2009 1:47 PM
We don't know exactly which idiot Neocon came up with the invented word "Homeland" back in the days after 9-11, but clearly it was a word meant to promote fear, jingoism, and unquestioning patriotism. No matter that this new word was clumsy, inelegant and overtly manipulative. In those days of bi-partisan and fervent patriotism, it was abundantly clear that almost nobody, and certainly no politician, was going to ask questions like, "Why do we need a new word to refer to the United States, and, is it really appropriate for this new word to have unmistakable resonance with the Nazi concept of Fatherland?"
As we bid adieu to the most subversive, divisive, lawless, incompetent and destructive administration in our nation's history, as we open a new chapter, it is time to add an exclamation point to this moment of transition.
It's time to get rid of all official uses of the word Homeland.
After nearly six years of bloody preemptive war and occupation of Iraq with the mendacious pretext of defending the Homeland, after warrantless wiretapping, Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, rendition, torture, indefinite detention without charge and official disdain for due process, international treaties and international law, and after Katrina and the bureaucratic disaster that is the Department of Homeland Security, the concept of U.S. Homeland has taken on the additional and perverse connotations of unaccountable executive lawlessness, incompetence and defiant failure.
When this country elected Barack Obama by a commanding margin, we voted not only for change, but also for honesty, open discourse and a return to constitutional law. Barack Obama has made it as clear as anyone in the last 50 years that words -- and symbols -- matter.
As President Obama moves ahead with restructuring the DHS, including once again making FEMA a high-level independent agency, it would seem to be an opportune time to officially change the name -- Department of Domestic Security perhaps? -- and put behind us one of the worst symbols of the bleakest chapter in our nation's history.
Posted by: Jason Gatz | January 21, 2009 1:57 PM
I also heard that Obama put a salary cap on all Whitehouse employees making over 100K.
Posted by: bill r. | January 21, 2009 2:15 PM
Posted by: Democracy Requires Secret Ballot Elections | January 21, 2009 1:47 PM
This has been a paid announcement from the National Chamber of Commerce on behalf of CEOs and the Union Busters of America.
Posted by: International Brotherhood of Corporate Schills | January 21, 2009 2:21 PM
Teresa,
I know that you work for a Republican group that spends all of it's time and money trying to kill unions but can you at least save your anti-union schtick for threads that it applies to and not ones like this one? You are going to lose, we've just had two elections and your team was on the wrong end of both of them. Elections have consequences and you've just had your butt handed to you by the American people...twice.
Big Business has a great responsibility for the destruction of our economy and has taken the lead in exploiting labor through every mechanism they can devise, outsourcing, offshoring, H1-b abuse, or employment of illegals. To even give big business any way for input to legislation that they have every intention to use for their advantage is foolish.
One in five union activists gets illegally fired prior to an election for unionization, according to economist Dean Baker and NLRB data. This is why we need EFCA. It will level the playing field between workers and companies. It will give working people a fighting chance. And it will help build a new economy in which a middle class is strong and the wealthy do not steal all that is there, i.e., an American economy based on our values and not on the values of Bush and Wall Street.
It matters to all of us. Not only is worker intimidation by business unjust, but when workers are free to choose to join a union, our economy can work for everyone again. The Employee Free Choice Act will help America’s working families improve their standard of living, fix a broken system that gives corporations far too much power, and restore fairness and the promise of the American Dream to many.
Building a middle class is the key to a healthy economy. The Great Class Stratification of the last thirty years led to the Depression we now are experiencing. A fair economy is a healthy economy. FDR showed that with the New Deal and we had more fairness, and a healthy economy, for 40 years while unions were relatively strong. Now Obama will show it again.
Posted by: No matter the post name, I know you | January 21, 2009 2:29 PM
Okay, let's see how many liberal cities line up to accept the Gitmo prisoners for trial in their towns. San Francisco, Bezerkely, Detroit, Oakland, NYC, Boston? Sure, and pigs fly. So just bring them to Chicago, put them in Cook County Jail with the general population and....voila, problem solved. Or, better yet, we can house them all in Obama's house since it's empty.
Posted by: Derrock | January 21, 2009 3:13 PM
Next, Obama will propose a new American flag-- white, with a spineless, yellow chicken in the center, it's head stuck in the sand, to symbolize the new United States.
Posted by: Jim | January 21, 2009 3:27 PM
..
Okay, let's see how many liberal cities line up to accept the Gitmo prisoners for trial in their towns. San Francisco, Bezerkely, Detroit, Oakland, NYC, Boston? Sure, and pigs fly. So just bring them to Chicago, put them in Cook County Jail with the general population and....voila, problem solved. Or, better yet, we can house them all in Obama's house since it's empty.
Posted by: Derrock | January 21, 2009 3:13 PM
...
"Liberal cities"?
Sounds like the Wingnutters are trying to restart the civil war just because they've been defeated at the ballotbox in two straight blowout elections. Nevermind that they earned their 4th party gadfly status and will probabaly be out of power for the next 25 years.
It's all about them and it always has been. It has nothing to do with the good of America for the GOPer partisans.
When the Repubs lose they don't reorganize and fix themselves, they just cry louder and longer.
Posted by: Dyslin | January 21, 2009 4:02 PM
Jim....You are so cleaver. Do you have any ideas more suitable than sandbox talk? I highly recommend a pacifier than a computer.
Posted by: bill r. | January 21, 2009 4:16 PM
Name one thriving industry that is unionized. Oh right. Government. Any others?
Posted by: Bailers | January 21, 2009 4:59 PM
Bailers....you fool, I can tell you that EVERY industry did better with the unions in the 50's than what we have now. Hell, we have even lost complete industries now, such as the textile industry, thanks to the pugs and their "free trade" crap. Oh I know, you'll tell me that Bill signed NAFTA, and I'll tell you to do your homework again.
Posted by: Xcellentform | January 21, 2009 5:09 PM
Name one thriving industry that is unionized. Oh right. Government. Any others?
Posted by: Bailers | January 21, 2009 4:59 PM
Hollywood. Actors, directors, technical crew.
Baseball.
Football.
Trucking.
Commercial Construction
I could go on further, but I think you get the point.
Posted by: Mel | January 21, 2009 5:09 PM
Posted by: Derrock | January 21, 2009 3:13 PM
We'll heck, who wants any criminals in thier town? That's just too scary to contemplate. I think we should immediately ship any convicted criminals out oif the country, rather than having the terrible awful threat of having them in prison. We need to take over all of Cuba to house every criminal. I can't sleep at night thinking about the scary scary murderers at Marion prison being in the same state as me. It's amazing that anyone is left alive in the state with a huge danger of that magnitude around. The mhordes of prisoners running around will get us all!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Another cowardly Republican | January 21, 2009 5:45 PM
OK, Dyslin, would "predominantly liberal cities" suit you better? I don't think you can honestly deny that, say, Berkeley, Calif., is "liberal." Or do you believe that there is no such thing as a "liberal" anymore? Is that what this is about? Semantics? Or are you one of those "enlightened" folks who believe that people who agree with you are smart and everyone else is stupid?
Posted by: JB | January 21, 2009 5:47 PM
--It;s interesting how the conservatives on this blog ignore the key point: Obama jumped into the hard issues with both feet and one hand on day one. He could've easily spent today getting organized with his staff, and no one would have faulted him for it, but instead he got right down to business.
You disagree with his policies? Fine, that is democracy in action. But as you think about whining about the 'evils' of an Obama presidency, you might consider just how much he took on today.
Posted by: forest for the trees | January 21, 2009 6:21 PM