White House: No rift with military on Iraq troops

Washington, Dec 20: US President George W Bush is consideringa short-term increase of US troop strength in Iraq, a spokesman saidtoday as he denied reports of a rift between White House officialspushing the option and resistant Pentagon chiefs.

A temporary increase troop strength -- cited as a possibility inthe report of a high-powered Iraq Study Group -- was ''something that'sbeing explored'' as Bush considers options on Iraq, White Housespokesman Tony Snow told reporters.

But asked about a Washington Post report that White Houseofficials were at odds with the Pentagon's Joint Chiefs of Staff, Snowsaid, ''I think people are trying to create a fight between thepresident and the Joint Chiefs where one does not exist.'' ''ThePresident has not made a decision on the way forward, and he has askedmilitary commanders to consider a range of options,'' he said.

The Post reported that White House officials were aggressivelypromoting a ''surge'' of 15,000 to 30,000 troops, over the unanimousdisagreement of the leaders of the different US military branches.

But Snow said Bush was not at odds with the Joint Chiefs.

''I'm saying, tonally, it's wrong.'' ''The president hasn't shown his hand here. He is asking people questions,'' Snow said.

Bush has said repeatedly that troop levels will be guided by what commanders on the ground want.

Although Bush was considering the surge option, his administrationhas been cool to other recommendations of the Iraq Study Group,including talks with Iran and Syria, and he has said he rejects optionsthat would ''lead to defeat.'' Bush delayed unveiling a new strategy onIraq until early next year, partly because he wanted to give DefenseSecretary Robert Gates, who was sworn into office this week, a chanceto visit the country and have input into the review.

He has been under increasing pressure to change course in Iraq, where sectarian violence shows no sign of abating.

Democrats took control of Congress from Bush's Republican Party inNovember elections largely by calling for a new direction in the war.

Incoming House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton, a Missouri Democrat, was skeptical about a surge in troops.

''There's been some speculation recently about an increase of20,000 to 30,000 or more troops into Iraq. If that be the case, I don'tthink it will change a thing,'' Skelton said. ''It could actuallyexacerbate the situation even further. And I'm very concerned aboutadditional burden on the Army and Marine Corps.''

The study group'sreport said it could ''support a short-term redeployment or surge ofAmerican combat forces to stabilize Baghdad, or to speed up thetraining and equipping mission, if the US commander in Iraq determinesthat such steps would be effective.'' But the report rejected ''asubstantial increase'' in troops of 1,00,000 to 2,00,000 and also animmediate withdrawal of forces.

Supporters of sending more troops to Iraq said the Pentagon's ownbleak assessment on Monday of a 22 per cent rise in violence over thepast three months meant that a short-term influx of US forces wasneeded.

But critics said the rising violence showed instead that US efforts to secure Baghdad were not working.

Gen John Abizaid, the US military commander of forces in the WestAsia, said last month that ''troop levels need to stay where theyare,'' rejecting calls for troop increases and withdrawals.

Gen. Peter Schoomaker, the Army's chief of staff, this monthwarned that the Army was strained and ''will break'' if the force wasnot expanded.

Reuters