SCHIFF: Thank you, Madam Chair.
At the outset, I want to associate myself with the remarks made by Chairman Obey. Now, in year five of the war, where we seem to be is that we will have our troops at a level which is essentially historic high but for the aberrant time of the surge for perhaps the indefinite future.
And I think what we're hearing is that Ambassador, what you would like to do is essentially stay the present course that we're on, the present diplomatic strategy, the present military strategy in the hope that things will change for the better. I think it's very realistic with that strategy to expect that we will be in Iraq for several more years to come at a minimum, and potentially at these same high levels of troops.
I don't think that the American people will accept that course. What's more, I think they're right to reject it. I don't think the country is going to accept our presence in Iraq extending to the length of two World War IIs.
And so I have two questions. If this track is not sustainable, and in my view not desirable, what are the alternatives? And I'm not talking simply about question of how soon we draw down troops; but rather, you've been employing a certain diplomatic strategy in the region. You're going to continue employing that strategy. It seems to me, though, at the pace of progress -- in terms of reconciliation, in terms of the regional diplomatic effort -- that it will take many more years before there's any real demonstrable improvement in the situation.
If that track isn't going to work, what are the alternatives that we can pursue, that have been rejected, but that we need to consider? And furthermore, what steps are being taken now in a reasonable prospect that we'll have a next administration with a very different idea of what we should be doing in Iraq? What steps are we taking now to mitigate the risk that, when we do draw down our forces, that there's an increase in violence? What steps are we taking today? So those are my two questions. What are the alternatives to our present course? What are the responsible alternatives? And also what steps are we taking now if there is a change of our policy in a few months?
CROCKER: Sir, as the senior civilian official in Iraq, my whole focus and effort is on doing everything I can to see that the course of action on which we are currently embarked is successful. And I think there -- as I've said in my statement, and as you've heard -- I think there has been progress.
Neither General Petraeus nor I have said that the surge has succeeded. We have said that the surge is working, that violence levels have come down. And as this has happened, we are starting to see some positive signs, both at the local levels and at the national levels as a better security climate allows more political and economic activity.
SCHIFF: Ambassador...
CROCKER: My focus is directed to making that work.
SCHIFF: If I could interject, in my view, the progress has been so halting, that the steps toward reconciliation have been so small, that if we extrapolate and expect that the pace of that reconciliation will remain the same, even if we assume it's in a positive direction, it will remain the same, we're still going to be there for years and years and years. And I don't think that's sustainable. I also think the only reason we're going back to the pre-surge levels is because our own military can't sustain the pace, much less the facts on the ground.
So what I still would like to hear from you is what are the alternatives? What are the strategies that you're not employing, that have been rejected for whatever reason? You can tell us why you rejected them. But what are the alternatives if we're not willing to accept the strategy that says we're going to be there for several more years. It may get better, it may not. But realistically, we can't expect anything dramatic to improve in the next several years.
CROCKER: Again, I am not focused on alternatives. I'm focused on making this current effort succeed. I have said previously that I believe that moving away from conditions-based redeployment and using just a timeline without respect to conditions puts us at a very high level of risk of seeing this spiral away from us in very serious ways that could allow Al Qaida to reestablish its presence in Iraq as our strategic enemy. It could allow Iran significantly more influence, and could lead to sectarian violence on a scale we have not seen before.
So I think we are on a course of action that is showing, not only promise, but results. And I think we should continue to drive that forward.
SCHIFF: Madam Chair, my time is up. But if the ambassador maybe could respond back to us in writing about the steps that you're taking now, in the event that there is a change of course next year, to mitigate the risk of any escalation of violence. I'd appreciate it.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
SCHIFF: Thank you, Madam Chair.
-30-