By Aaron Blake
Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain’s suggestion that the United States add troops in Iraq has apparently given the idea some political traction in recent weeks. McCain’s Arizona colleague Sen. Jon Kyl (R) joined the call, and at least two other Republicans in close races suggested they would be open to the idea.
But the position, on its surface, doesn’t appear to be a political winner. According to a recent MSNBC/McClatchy poll, a small minority of Americans believes that troop levels in Iraq should be increased — less than 20 percent in most Senate battleground states.
The seeming unpopularity of such a position has made it prime political hay, and Democrats are pouncing. Facing criticism, the campaigns of Kyl and Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-R.I.) have scaled back their public statements on the issue in recent days.
McCain expressed his belief in the need for more troops in August during an appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” and Kyl has in recent weeks expressed agreement.
On Thursday, Kyl’s Democratic opponent, Jim Pederson, held a conference call with Lawrence Korb, a former assistant defense secretary under President Reagan, in which the two of them decried adding troops to the “civil war” in Iraq. Korb is now with the left-leaning Center for American Progress.
Kyl spokesman Andy Chasin clarified yesterday that Kyl means more troops might be needed if commanders on the ground say they are, though Kyl’s previous statements and a press release on the topic from his campaign make no mention of commanders’ preferences.
“Kyl’s position has been that he would support more troops if that’s what commanders want, but he agrees with the general proposition from McCain that more troops may be needed,” Chasin said.
The Pederson campaign said Kyl is hedging.
“I guess he’s backing off that position,” Pederson spokesman Mark Bergman said. “He’s made himself very clear.”
When McCain was in Rhode Island last week campaigning for Chafee and promoting his call for more troops in the process, Chafee was noncommittal about whether he agreed with the idea. He told The Providence Journal: “We’ll have to have some discussions on that.”
After Chafee’s campaign manager, Ian Lang, on a local radio show responded to a similar question last Friday by saying the senator is looking at everything, the opposition seized on the comments.
Democratic candidate Sheldon Whitehouse called for Chafee to clearly enunciate where he stands on McCain’s proposal.
Lang told The Hill on Monday that Chafee would not, in fact, consider adding troops. Chafee was the only Republican senator to vote against the war but is not calling for an immediate withdrawal; Whitehouse has called for a “rapid” withdrawal, with all troops out as early as the end of the year.
Chafee did vote in favor of Sen. Carl Levin’s (D-Mich.) amendment in June that called for a phased withdrawal of troops.
Lang said the comments have been taken out of context and that adding troops is not an option. Only 15 percent of Rhode Islanders favor adding troops, according to the MSNBC/McClatchy poll.
“It’s off the table,” Lang said. “What you have here is Sheldon Whitehouse trying to distort the senator’s record and trying to muddy the waters, especially when you consider that Sheldon Whitehouse’s record on Iraq is remarkably inconsistent.”
The Whitehouse campaign is now accusing Chafee of an “astonishing” shift in opinion.
“The real issue is what are you going to do on Iraq now,” Whitehouse spokeswoman Alex Swartsel said. “That’s a question that Sheldon Whitehouse has answered and Linc Chafee has not.”
Like Kyl, Washington Republican Senate candidate Mike McGavick said last week that he would support sending additional troops if military experts said it was necessary. In his state, the poll indicates just 16 percent of people would send more troops.
McGavick’s opponent, Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), has gradually sought to distance herself from McGavick on the issue of Iraq, an issue some experts have predicted could greatly harm her candidacy.
Cantwell had for months stuck by her support for the war, apparently alienating a significant anti-war portion of the electorate. But recent polls have shown her ahead by double digits.
McGavick’s view on adding troops appears to create some more space between the two on the issue, but a spokesman said political calculus didn’t factor in.
“Mike’s position on Iraq is he wants the troops home as soon as possible, like everybody else, but he wants them home in victory, not in defeat,” spokesman Elliott Bundy said. “If it’s going to take more troops to get it done, then we should listen to our commanders.”
http://thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Campaign/101106_iraq.html
