NPR's Kelemen reported McCain's response to Maliki's call for withdrawal timetable, but not McCain's 2004 assertion that “it's obvious” the U.S. “would have to leave” if Iraq requested it

Written by Matt Gertz

Published

NPR's Michele Kelemen reported that Sen. John McCain “suggested in an interview with MSNBC that the Iraqi calls for a troop withdrawal date may be driven by politics in Baghdad,” and quoted McCain as saying, “The Iraqis have made it very clear, including the meetings I had with the president and foreign minister of Iraq, that it's based on conditions on the ground. [...] I've always said we will come home with honor and with victory and not through a set timetable.” But Kelemen did not note that in 2004, when asked what the United States would do if the “Iraqi government asks us to leave,” McCain responded, “I think it's obvious that we would have to leave.”

On the July 9 edition of National Public Radio's Morning Edition, diplomatic correspondent Michele Kelemen reported that Sen. John McCain “suggested in an interview with MSNBC that the Iraqi calls for a troop withdrawal date may be driven by politics in Baghdad, where Prime Minister [Nouri al-] Maliki is facing a lot of skepticism about the status of forces agreement.” Kelemen was referring to recent reported statements by Maliki and Iraqi national security adviser Mowaffak al-Rubaie suggesting that a timetable for withdrawal of U.S. forces could be a requirement for any status of forces agreement between the countries. Kelemen then aired the following statements McCain made on the July 8 edition of MSNBC's Morning Joe: “The Iraqis have made it very clear, including the meetings I had with the president and foreign minister of Iraq that it is based on conditions on the ground. [...] I've always said we will come home with honor and with victory and not through a set timetable.” But Kelemen did not note that in 2004, when asked what the United States would do if the “Iraqi government asks us to leave, even if we are unhappy about the security situation there,” McCain responded, “I think it's obvious that we would have to leave.”

During an April 22, 2004, appearance at the Council on Foreign Relations, McCain had the following exchange with then-council chairman and moderator Peter G. Peterson:

PETERSON: We're now ready for questions. Please wait for the microphone, identify yourself, keep your questions to the point, if you would, and try to remember we have only one speaker here, speaker McCain. Our distinguished new head of the Washington office asked me to kick off one or two, senator, and let me try.

Let me give you a hypothetical, senator. What would or should we do if, in the post-June 30th period, a so-called sovereign Iraqi government asks us to leave, even if we are unhappy about the security situation there? I understand it's a hypothetical, but it's at least possible.

McCAIN: Well, if that scenario evolves, then I think it's obvious that we would have to leave because -- if it was an elected government of Iraq -- and we've been asked to leave other places in the world. If it were an extremist government, then I think we would have other challenges, but I don't see how we could stay when our whole emphasis and policy has been based on turning the Iraqi government over to the Iraqi people.

PETERSON: A second and final question from me. As you know --

McCAIN: By the way, could I -- if we do it right, that's not going to happen, but we will be there militarily for a long, long, long time.

From the July 9 edition of NPR's Morning Edition:

KELEMAN: The Bush administration has been trying to negotiate a status of forces agreement with Iraq to make sure U.S. troops have the legal right to be there once a United Nations mandate ends late this year. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has now made clear the invitation won't be open-ended. His national security adviser told reporters that Iraq can't accept any agreement unless it has clear, exact date for a withdrawal of U.S. troops. That would be hard to swallow for the Bush administration, according to Kenneth Katzman of the Congressional Research Service.

KATZMAN [audio clip]: That would be a very, very big journey for the administration to sign on to any type of firm timetable for withdrawal.

KELEMAN: The Bush administration argues that the U.S. drawdown should be based on conditions on the ground, not on a timetable that could allow insurgents to simply wait it out and regroup. State Department spokesman Gonzalo Gallegos reinforced this view in his briefing yesterday.

GALLEGOS [audio clip]: We're looking at conditions, not calendars, here. We're making progress and are committed to departing, as evidenced by the fact that we have transferred over half of the county's provinces to provisional Iraqi control, and we're planning on removing the fifth and final surge brigade at the end of the month here, if things go according to plan.

KELEMAN: The Bush administration and Republican presidential hopeful John McCain have argued that the so-called “surge” has worked, but the progress is fragile so the U.S. can't rush out. McCain suggested in an interview with MSNBC that the Iraqi calls for a troop withdrawal date may be driven by politics in Baghdad, where Prime Minister Maliki is facing a lot of skepticism about the status of forces negotiations.

McCAIN [audio clip]: The Iraqis have made it very clear, including the meetings I had with the president and foreign minister of Iraq, that it's based on conditions on the ground. [...] I've always said we we'll come home with honor and with victory and not through a set timetable.

KELEMAN: Democrat Barack Obama, on the other hand, said it was encouraging to him to hear the Iraqis talk about the need to set out a time frame for the U.S. to pull out.

OBAMA [audio clip]: I think that Prime Minister Maliki's statement is consistent with my view about how a withdrawal should proceed and how a status of force agreement should not be structured without congressional input, and should not be rushed.