﻿ US Senate defeats Iraq timetable bid | News | Al Jazeera

US Senate defeats Iraq timetable bid

The Republican-controlled Senate has defeated a Democratic effort to pressure President George W Bush to outline a timetable for a phased withdrawal of US troops from Iraq.

    The final Senate proposal did not call for a withdrawal timetable

    It then overwhelmingly endorsed a weaker statement of US policy in Iraq. By 58-40, senators on Tuesday rejected a Democratic plan that the minority party's leadership advanced in the wake of declining public support for a conflict that has claimed more than 2000 US lives and cost more than $200 billion.

    The non-binding measure called for Bush to outline a plan for gradually withdrawing US troops from Iraq.

    Republicans countered with their own non-binding alternative.

    It urged that 2006 "should be a period of significant transition to full Iraqi sovereignty", with Iraqi forces taking the lead in providing security, a step Republicans said would create the conditions for the phased redeployment of US forces.
    On a 79-19 vote, the Senate approved that Republican-sponsored proposal, which did not call for the president to put forth a withdrawal timetable.
    Staying the course

    US lawmakers are feeling the heat from frustrated constituents heading into a congressional election year in which a third of the Senate and all 435 House members are up for re-election.

    Democratic Congressmen want
    US troops brought home quickly

    Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid said: "We want to change the course. We can't stay the course."
    The Senate added the Republican policy to a defence bill the Senate is hoping to complete work on as early as Tuesday.

    Overall, the bill includes provisions that, taken together, mark an effort by the Senate to rein in some of the wide authority lawmakers gave Bush after the 11 September 2001 attacks.
    The measure includes White House-opposed language that would prohibit the cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of detainees and standardise interrogation procedures used by US troops.

    The Bush administration has threatened to veto any bill that includes language about the treatment of detainees, arguing it would limit the president's ability to prevent terrorist attacks.
    Military tribunals

    Later Tuesday, the Senate was expected to add to the bill a proposal that would, in effect, endorse the Bush administration's military tribunals for prosecuting suspected foreign terrorists held at the US naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
    Under a compromise reached by a bipartisan group of senators, those detainees would be able to appeal their status as "enemy combatants" and the rulings of US military tribunals to a federal appeals court in Washington DC.


    Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist

    That avenue would take the place of the one tool the Supreme Court gave detainees in 2004 to fight the legality of their detentions - the right to file habeas corpus petitions in any federal court.
    Reflecting senators' anger over recent leaks of classified information to the public, the bill also includes provisions requiring the Bush administration to provide Congress with details on purportedly secret CIA prisons overseas and stripping of security clearances of any federal government official who knowingly discloses national security secrets.
    The House version of the defence bill doesn't include those provisions, nor does it include the language on the detention, interrogation or prosecution of detainees.

    Fate unclear

    House Republicans who would be part of negotiations over a final defence bill tend to stand with the president.
    As a result, it's unclear whether any of those provisions will survive House and Senate negotiations and actually end up in the final defence bill.

    Also uncertain is whether there will even be a final defence bill that makes it to the president's desk, given that the bill is not a must-pass measure.

    It sets Pentagon policy and authorises spending but doesn't actually provide the dollars.

    SOURCE: Agencies


    Interactive: How does your country vote at the UN?

    Interactive: How does your country vote at the UN?


    'We were forced out by the government soldiers'

    'We were forced out by the government soldiers'


    Interactive: Plundering Cambodia's forests

    Interactive: Plundering Cambodia's forests
