WASHINGTON — A new U.S.-Iraqi agreement raising the possibility of a withdrawal time line threatens to complicate the war policies of presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain.
It bolsters Obama's call for a quick exit but also could undercut one of the Democrat's signature issues — opposition to the war — as he prepares for a high-stakes trip to the region. It leaves McCain caught between his objections to any timetable and the evolving wishes of the Republican president he hopes to succeed.
Iraq has been replaced by the sputtering economy as issue No. 1 for U.S. voters, but the war remains a pivotal campaign issue even though violence there has declined.
Less than four months before the election, it's uncertain whether apparent steps toward the war's conclusion will dilute the political power of Iraq in the campaign.
McCain sought to keep it on the front burner by unleashing a new TV ad highly critical of his Democratic rival. The ad says Obama hasn't been to Iraq in years and voted against war funding to win the nomination but "now Obama is changing to help himself become president." McCain, it says, has always supported the Iraq strategy "that's working."
Of the accord, McCain said it vindicated his long-standing call for more troops but was careful to suggest it left the timing of withdrawal indefinite. Obama commended the Bush administration for dropping its opposition to discussing with Iraq the removal of U.S. combat troops and urged it to pressure the leaders of Iraqi factions to reach political accommodations.
Iraq long has been a major difference between the two.
Obama, with no military experience and a thin foreign policy resume, opposed the war from the start and won the Democratic nomination in part by rallying the antiwar wing of his party with a full-throated call for withdrawal. The Illinois senator promises "I will end this war" but also has said that U.S. troop safety and Iraq stability might force him to adjust his timetable, and that his upcoming Iraq trip may lead him to refine, but not basically alter, his position.
McCain, an ex-Navy pilot and Vietnam prisoner of war who has long specialized in national security issues, supported the decision to go to war. The Arizona senator spent years criticizing President Bush for not sending more troops and now emphasizes that Bush's decision to finally do so last year has helped reduce the violence. McCain long has rejected any timetable or date for withdrawal.
The line between the two could blur now that Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki have agreed to force reduction language in a broader security agreement to keep American troops in Iraq after a U.N. mandate expires on Dec. 31.
When Maliki publicly said he supported a timetable, Obama argued that the stance was in line with his own position and out of step with long-term presence favored by McCain and Bush. Said Obama: "I hope that this administration as well as John McCain is listening to what Prime Minister al-Maliki has to say."
Indeed, the U.S.-Iraqi agreement reinforces Obama's argument that troops should start coming home, for it's hard to argue against some time frame when both countries have endorsed such an approach. However, the accord also could end up diluting one of Obama's core issues. If there are signs that the war is ending, would that dampen the enthusiasm and urgency felt by voters initially drawn to his anti-war stance?
Underscoring his precarious position, McCain has been choosing his words carefully. After meeting in Washington with Iraqi President Jalal Talabani last month, McCain said he was "confident that the two nations, as sovereign nations, will reach agreement in the best interest of the United States of America and the best interest of the government of Iraq." Left unsaid was whether a time frame should be a part of any agreement.