Voters for Peace reports Obama would: Leave 140,000 private U.S. military troops in Iraq; Tens of thousands of U.S. soldiers in Iraq, and; Expand combat forces in surrounding nations to strike Iraq

Sen. Obama gets loud applause in his stump speech when he claims that he will “end the war in 2009.” And, many in the media have described him as the peace candidate in the presidential race. However, Voters for Peace[1] highlights recent comments by Senator Obama and his campaign that indicate he does not intend to “end” the war in 2009 but to continue the occupation with different tactics.

“Voters for Peace does not endorse or oppose candidates, but we do educate the public and peace voters in particular about what candidates actually stand for. Often in elections it is difficult to parse the rhetoric with reality,” said Kevin Zeese, executive director of Voters for Peace. “In the case of Senator Obama he has ridden his pre-war speech opposing the Iraq war to become the anti-war candidate in the 2008 election. In fact, it is a mantel he has not yet earned. Voters for Peace urges Senator Obama to strengthen his opposition to the Iraq occupation so that he is consistent with the majority of U.S. voters who want the occupation ended.”

Voters for Peace pointed to the following recent statements:

1. Senator Obama told Amy Goodman of Democracy Now that he would leave 140,000 private military contractors in Iraq. Senator Obama specifically said:

“We have 140,000 private contractors right there, so unless we want to replace all of or a big chunk of those with US troops, we can't draw down the contractors faster than we can draw down our troops.”

These troops, some of whom are fairly classified as mercenaries, are a privatized military. The actions of some of these private troops have been very controversial in Iraq as they have killed civilians and are not answerable to civilian or military courts. See: http://votersforpeace.us/press/index.php?itemid=143.

2. Senator Obama would move combat troops from Iraq to nearby countries like Kuwait where they would serve as a “strike force” that can attack inside Iraq. Sen. Obama told Amy Goodman:

“We do need to have a strike force in the region. It doesn't necessarily have to be in Iraq; it could be in Kuwait or other places. But we do have to have some presence in order to not only protect them, but also potentially to protect their territorial integrity.”

Expanding the Iraq occupation to other countries risks further destabalization of the region and brings more countries into the conflict.

3. The Obama campaign has said that the residual force of troops remaining in Iraq could be 60,000 to 80,000 soldiers. Colin Kahl writes in a report for the Obama Campaign that “the U.S. should aim to transition to a sustainable over-watch posture (of perhaps 60,000–80,000 forces) by the end of 2010 (although the specific timelines should be the byproduct of negotiations and conditions on the ground).” The author is the head of the day-to-day working group on Iraq for the campaign. Sen. Obama has said there will be a residual force but has not provided a number of how many troops that would involve. Voters for Peace calls on Sen. Obama to clarify his current thinking on how large a residual force will be needed. See http://votersforpeace.us/press/index.php?itemid=158.

4. Samantha Power, who was a main foreign policy advisor until her recent resignation, said that Sen. Obama will not feel constrained by promises made in the presidential campaign. She described the withdrawal of one to two brigades of combat troops as a “best case scenario.” And also said: “He will, of course, not rely on some plan that he's crafted as a presidential candidate or a U.S. Senator. He will rely upon a plan – an operational plan – that he pulls together in consultation with people who are on the ground to whom he doesn't have daily access now, as a result of not being the president.” This comment seems to indicate that the withdrawal plan being described during the campaign may merely be election year promises that could dramatically change when the election is over. Sen. Obama has said nothing to clarify the comments of his foreign policy advisor. See http://votersforpeace.us/press/index.php?itemid=191.

In taking all of these comments together Voters for Peace concludes that the likely end result of Sen. Obama’s withdrawal is up to 220,000 soldiers, including both private military and government military, remaining in Iraq, as well as strike forces of U.S. combat troops in the region to attack inside Iraq. “This is a far cry from the applause line that Senator Obama puts forward in his stump speech. It is hard to see how this is actually an end to the war,” said Zeese.

And that is the best case scenario. The worst case scenario is that after the election is over President Obama will say that changed circumstances will not allow any withdrawal.

The Voters for Peace website includes the voting record of all the candidates. Obama’s voting record includes many votes in favor of war funding. His funding from the military industrial complex as of March 20 was over $195,000. Obama has called for an additional 92,000 troops in the U.S. military at a cost of billions annually. And his foreign policy pronouncements have also included keeping the military option on the table in Iran and a pledge to use U.S. troops in foreign countries without their permission.

“Voters for Peace urges Senator Obama to return to his pre-war position opposing the U.S. invasion of Iraq and his early comment in the presidential campaign that he ‘wants to end the mindset’ that got the U.S. into this war,” said Zeese. “This would bring him back to where most American voters are. Two thirds want the occupation in Iraq to really end. They want a rapid withdrawal and tax dollars used to restore the U.S. economy.”

Voters for Peace is a non-partisan organization working to educate and organize peace voters into an effective political bloc. Its membership of 220,000 peace voters are working together to influence all candidates on the peace agenda. It educates voters by compiling information on the candidates including their voting record, key speeches and statements, news articles and news columns about their positions on war and militarism.

[1] This is one of a series of reports Voters for Peace will be issuing on the presidential candidates when it is necessary to correct the record. See http://www.Voters for Peace.US.

-###-

April 22, 2008 Kevin Zeese is Executive Director of Voters for Peace, www.VotersForPeace.US.