Mission accomplished

Nico Pitney

President Bush ignored the will of the American people yesterday and vetoed binding legislation that would have required him to begin withdrawing US forces from Iraq. It was a legislative showdown with congress that Bush and his Republican allies chose. After all, conservatives in the closely-divided Senate could have easily blocked the Iraq bill with a filibuster when it came to a vote last month.

Instead, they let it pass by a razor-thin margin so that President Bush could spend the month using his bully pulpit to blister war critics for "threatening to abandon troops in harm's way" and advocating a "timetable for retreat".

Bush's hope was to divide war critics and demonstrate to the American public that, far from being a lame duck, he can still bring congress to heel. It didn't work. If anything, public opinion has shifted further away from the president's position. Meanwhile, opponents of the war in congress have repeatedly said they are ready to reach a compromise with the White House, effectively painting Bush as intransigent.

These political realities are framing this second, post-veto stage of the Iraq debate. Something is happening that Bush has sought to avoid: conservative support is continuing to peel away. Late last month, Olympia Snowe became the third Republican senator to announce support for withdrawing US forces out of Iraq under certain conditions. (In 2008, Snowe faces a difficult reelection in her traditionally liberal home state of Maine.)

Other longtime Bush allies are getting weak knees. Republican senator John Sununu of liberal New Hampshire, who is being hounded over his support for the war, canceled four consecutive townhall meetings with constituents during the Easter recess.

This shift among congressional conservatives is not happening by accident. Activist groups, working in tandem with veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, are running aggressive ad campaigns targeting Bush's allies in congress who face tight elections in 2008. The grassroots group MoveOn.org regularly organizes hundreds of high-profile rallies across the country. An organization called the Progressive States Network has helped introduce resolutions opposing the war in state governments, forcing up-and-coming conservative state legislators to endorse the war, thus making it more difficult for them to run for higher office.

The basic strategy underlying these efforts is simple: unite progressives, divide conservatives, and isolate the president politically. The key to bringing a responsible end to this war is to have Bush's supporters to see their political futures flash before their eyes - until they finally say to the president: enough.

For the Bush administration, its only hope for shifting public opinion (besides fear-mongering) is for the president's escalation policy to show some positive results.

But the early signs are awful. In recent weeks, Iraq has seen the deadliest single attack since the war began (a suicide truck bombing in Tal Afar that killed 152 people), the deadliest attack yet inside the Green Zone (a suicide bomb inside the Iraq parliament), and the deadliest day for American ground forces since the war began (when 9 US soldiers were killed). Civilian deaths in Baghdad are up and, for the first time, the US military has suffered four straight months of 80 or more fatalities.

In other words, this is a critical period for those who want to end this disastrous war. War critics in congress must perform a difficult balancing act, avoiding capitulation to President Bush while not overplaying their hand and appearing obstinate. Moving forward, many have started warming to a "tight leash" approach: offering Bush a short infusion of cash for the war combined with continued pressure for greater accountability on military readiness standards and benchmarks for the Iraqi government.

This war will not be over as soon as many of us wish. The United States is in the middle of a years-long, multi-round Iraq debate that will continue until President Bush leaves office. But proponents of changing course still maintain a strong advantage, and if they remain aggressive and politically savvy, they will remain in charge of this debate.