Hearing of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs - Iraqi Benchmarks: An Objective Assessment

Statement

HEARING OF THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
SUBJECT: IRAQI BENCHMARKS: AN OBJECTIVE ASSESSMENT
CHAIRED BY: REP. TOM LANTOS (D-CA)
WITNESS: DAVID WALKER, COMPTROLLER GENERAL, GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

REP. CHRISTOPHER SMITH (R-NJ): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

And Mr. Walker, let me ask you a few questions. And thank you for testimony here today.

It seems to me the most superficial view of the benchmarks reduces the benchmarks to a win-loss or a met or unmet analysis, and some of the news reporting that I've read has already done that. But since all benchmarks aren't equal, I wonder if you could give us some insights as to those to which you give more weight and the GAO gives more weight as being more important.

Secondly, what consideration should be given as to when -- not if, but when certain benchmarks ought to be met, particularly in the political area? It seems to me that amnesty, benchmark number six, and militia disarmament, benchmark number seven, both have language in the report that said that conditions were not right. And on amnesty, having worked with a number of people who were involved with commissions around the world, whether it be in South Africa or in El Salvador, for example, when general grants of amnesty are given it usually comes at the end of a reconciliation process not in the beginning. And a premature issuance of amnesty could be profoundly counterproductive if thugs are let out on the street or at least given the ability or the thought that they might be let out on the street.

Thirdly, is there a benchmark that today adequately captures the extraordinary cooperation with tribal leaders in combating al Qaeda? Is that contained in any of this reporting or is that more recent or are the benchmarks not configured in a way that would capture that data?

Finally, you mention progress in several areas including Anbar province. I wonder if you could define what you mean by several areas and define and quantify what you mean by progress.

And finally, and you did allude to this earlier -- I do have another question -- are there any benchmarks not enumerated in GAO's mandate that you would suggest to the Congress that would be necessary to give us a more adequate and more incisive -- and insight as to what is really going on on the ground?

MR. WALKER: That's a lot, Mr. Smith. (Let me try ?) to address some of it, but I think they're all excellent questions.

I would not want to say which ones I think are more important than others without having to have enough time to really think about that, but let me give you a general description of what I think would be relevant. Obviously, to the extent that you're talking about the Iraqis being able to police their own streets, the Iraqis being able to do so not only in an effective manner but an evenhanded manner, those are I think of particular importance in order to achieve not only security but broader reconciliation objectives over time.

Secondly, legislative actions that demonstrate both in form and in substance that it is one country, you know, operating for the collective best interests of all rather than the narrow interests of a few, obviously are ones that have more importance and they also provide the infrastructure to make sure it's not just something that's going to happen one time, it's going to happen on a recurring basis. Like for example, I heard one hearing yesterday well, some money is being provided to Al Anbar province this month by the government.

Well, maybe that's true, maybe it's not true; the question is who gets the money, what happens with the money and what assurance is there that it will happen next month, next year, five years from now, whatever, okay?

I do believe that you ought to consider our report and these benchmarks. But I also believe that you ought to think about whether or not you raise this up to a little higher level and talk about what should our goals be at this point going forward, what should the objectives be, what should the metrics and milestones be, including what should our role be going forward? That would incorporate some of these benchmarks, but it would also incorporate other things that aren't in these benchmarks.

And I've -- you know, I've talked about economic. I've talked about foreign relations. I've talked about trying to get, you know, more cooperation of our allies with regard to capacity building. Those are some examples, and as I said before the House Armed Services Committee this morning, I said we'd would be more than happy to work with the Congress on a bipartisan basis to try to help come up with something if you thought that would be helpful, but I'd want it to be a bipartisan request. It's not something I would want to do on our own nickel. It's something I would want to be asked to do on a bipartisan basis by appropriate members of committee or overall leadership.

REP. SMITH: Just briefly on the amnesty issue.

MR. WALKER: Oh, on the --

REP. SMITH: That is the one of the benchmarks that remain unmet.

MR. WALKER: Right, that's correct.

REP. SMITH: That could be premature. I mean --

MR. WALKER: I understand your point.

REP. SMITH: -- layering in a timeline that takes those kinds of considerations.

MR. WALKER: I understand your point, and I think your point is well taken. And that's why I think you have to look at where do we stand, what progress are we making, which ones are more -- most important, what's a realistic amount of time that it should take to achieve those metrics and milestones, okay?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source