Signs point to U.S., British troop cuts in Iraq

Both the United States and Britain have indicated they are making plans to reduce the number of troops stationed in Iraq in the next year.

Pentagon officials said Monday it is too early to predict the specific size and timing of major reductions in U.S. troop levels. A similar statement came Monday from Prime Minister Tony Blair's office, which said Britain has not decided to withdraw troops from Iraq, although contingency planning is under way.

A leaked government memorandum shows Britain is considering scaling back its troop presence from 8,500 to 3,000 by the middle of 2006, saving nearly $1 billion annually.

The memo, marked “Secret — U.K. Eyes Only,” and signed by Britain’s Defense Secretary John Reid, also says there is a “strong U.S. military desire for significant force reductions.”

“Emerging U.S. plans assume that 14 out of 18 provinces could be handed over to Iraqi control by early 2006,” which would see the multinational force cut from 176,000 to 66,000.

British officials confirmed the authenticity of the document, first published by the newspaper The Mail on Sunday.

The Pentagon is eager to pull some of its 135,000 troops out of Iraq in 2006, partly because the counterinsurgency is stretching the Army and Marine Corps perilously thin as casualties mount and partly because officials believe the presence of a large U.S. force is generating tacit support for anti-American violence.

Troops won't be withdrawn this year
It appears highly unlikely that any significant numbers will be withdrawn before the end of the year. U.S. commanders expect the insurgency to remain at or near its current strength at least until after a scheduled October referendum on a new Iraqi constitution, followed by December elections for a new government.

Attempts by U.S. officials to predict the course of the insurgency have been off the mark, and officials have been forced more than once to scrap plans to reduce the U.S. force in Iraq. The force peaked at about 160,000 in January, when extra troops were needed to bolster security for the elections.

London and Washington are reluctant to set a timetable for withdrawing British troops from Iraq, fearing such a move would give heart to militants waging a bloody insurgency in Iraq.

No U.S. comment on memo
Bryan Whitman, a senior Pentagon spokesman, declined to comment directly on the leaked British memo Monday.

"It's not for me to speculate on when there might be a reduction in U.S. forces," he said, adding that U.S. officials have said repeatedly for months that their goal is to begin reductions in 2006 if conditions permit.

"We look at the conditions as being the determining factor as to what the U.S. presence there needs to be, and we have contingencies for an increased presence, a steady state, and also a decreased presence," Whitman said.

The memo, titled “Options for future U.K. force posture in Iraq,” sheds new light on British military planning. It sets out a timeframe for handing responsibility to Iraqi forces in specific towns in southern Iraq.

“We have a clear U.K. military aspiration to hand over to Iraqi control in al-Muthanna and Maysan provinces in October 2005 and in the other two multinational division south east provinces, Dhi Qar and Basra in April 2006,” the document adds.

MORE FROM MIDEAST & N. AFRICA

Mideast & N. Africa Section Front

Defiant Iran accelerates nuclear program Newsweek: What China will want to back Iran sanctions   Lebanon warns of "dangerous" situation with Israel Iran rewards Basij militia with political clout Newsweek: No action from Iran on prisoner deal Tel Aviv man accused of enslaving women Egypt arrests top 3 opposition leaders Mideast & N. Africa Section Front   Add Mideast & N. Africa headlines to your news reader: