After Zarqawi: A Drawdown of Troops?

(2 of 4)
The reality is that the removal of al-Zarqawi may unearth as many new dilemmas as it solves. The hit has forced the Administration to confront a messy breach emerging among top aides. While some officials believe the U.S. should maintain its troop strength for the foreseeable future, others have argued that the Administration should capitalize on any improvements in the situation to accelerate the handover to Iraqis. Administration aides tell TIME that West Wing officials had hoped to reduce the number of troops in Iraq from today's 129,000 to about 100,000 by the end of the year, and possibly before the midterm congressional elections. But the country's slide toward an all-out civil war in recent months had begun to convince them that a drawdown anytime soon would not be feasible. Aides say the White House still wants to preserve the option of eventually saying the Iraqis are prepared to assume greater responsibility, allowing the U.S. to "stand down," as Bush puts it in speeches. That's why Administration officials continue to credit the Baghdad government with every incremental bit of progress in the country. It was no coincidence that U.S. commanders highlighted the relatively passive participation of Iraqi forces in the al-Zarqawi raid and that Administration officials praised new Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki for naming his last three government ministers--even though it took the Iraqis almost two months to agree on them. "The only way they can ever bring down the troop number is to make a strong case to the American people that the people of Iraq are doing well," a former senior Administration official says.