Daschle Questions Future Success of U.S. War Effort

After months of studied solidarity behind the war on terrorism, congressional Democrats are posing increasingly skeptical questions about the campaign’s goals and direction, as well as President Bush’s proposed military buildup.

Questions came from the top of the Democratic Party on Thursday when Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota told reporters that the future success of the mission in Afghanistan was “in doubt” and that the military cannot yet claim victory because terrorist leaders remain at large.

“Clearly, we’ve got to find [Mullah] Mohammed Omar [the head of the former Taliban regime], we’ve got to find Osama bin Laden and we’ve got to find other key leaders of the Al Qaeda network, or we will have failed,” Daschle said. “We’re not safe until we have broken the back of Al Qaeda, and we haven’t done that yet.”

Republicans immediately slammed Daschle for casting doubt on the war effort while troops are in the field.

“How dare Sen. Daschle criticize President Bush while we are fighting our war on terrorism,” said Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.).

A spokeswoman for Daschle later issued a statement saying the senator did not intend his comments to be construed as critical of Bush and his campaign against terrorism.

But Daschle’s remarks underscored a growing willingness on the part of Democrats to challenge Bush on security matters as the administration opens new, more uncertain fronts in the war on terrorism.

One point of contention has emerged over Bush’s request for a hefty hike in the defense budget, which includes money for missile defense systems and other weapons that skeptics say are not needed for the war on terrorism.

The increasingly confrontational tone also reflects the political pressures on Democrats as they struggle to balance their general support for Bush’s foreign and defense policies against the need to draw distinctions between the two parties in the 2002 campaign.

Bush himself has signaled that the season for political combat has arrived, as he has begun campaigning for Republican candidates around the country--most recently his fund-raising appearance in North Carolina on Wednesday for Senate contender Elizabeth Hanford Dole.

“There’s a frustration that as the election is clicking on, the base of our party is getting ready to engage,” said Michael Meehan, a top Democratic political strategist. “We’re ready to have a battle of political ideas, and a lot of Democrats now are taking heart that we can engage.”

Democratic leaders have been walking a political tightrope for months, as Bush’s political standing has soared in the aftermath of his response to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. The administration’s campaign in Afghanistan to rout the Al Qaeda network--which is blamed for the attacks--has enjoyed broad public support.

Demonstrating the national unity behind the U.S. military campaign, Democrats initially refrained from any criticism of Bush. By year’s end, they ventured to criticize him on tax policy and other domestic issues, while remaining forcefully with him on foreign matters.

That has changed as the administration’s war effort began to reach beyond Afghanistan. In his State of the Union address, Bush identified Iraq, North Korea and Iran as an “axis of evil.” Daschle, among others, criticized Bush for linking the three countries indiscriminately.

In a television interview in early February, Daschle said: “It’s important for us to look at each of these countries . . . as problems that we’ve got to address clearly, but I think we’ve got to be very careful with the rhetoric of that kind.”

In recent days, other Democrats have stepped up questions on other defense matters. While Democrats in September abruptly dropped their fight with Bush on his plans to pull out of the Antiballistic Missile Treaty and build a missile defense system, many are now prepared to resume these fights.

And while many Democrats last fall seemed ready to approve any defense budget increase proposed by Bush, they are more dubious now.

“We can’t provide a blank check,” Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) said at a hearing Thursday on Bush’s defense budget. “Serious questions deserve to be asked.”

Questions about the aim of the anti-terrorist mission intensified as word came this week that the administration was expanding the U.S. military presence in Georgia, in the former Soviet Union.

“We need to know what direction the war is going in and how do we judge whether we have been successful or not,” Rep. Charles B. Rangel (D-N.Y.) said in a television interview Wednesday. “We as a nation do not know what is going on and it is frightening.”

Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.), in an especially pointed comment at a hearing Wednesday, accused Pentagon officials of “looking for opportunities to stay longer” in the region rather than for ways to complete their mission.

“I think that we seem to be good at developing entrance strategies, and not so good at developing exit strategies,” Byrd said. “Where are we? What’s it going to cost? What’s the endgame here?”

No skeptic has gotten a harsher response than Daschle, who as the Senate’s leader has thwarted the administration on several domestic initiatives and is seen as a potential challenger to Bush in 2004. His comments Thursday were not as extensive as Byrd’s, but Daschle endorsed his line of skeptical questioning.

Asked whether he thought the success of the war had been overstated, Daschle said no, but added, “The continued success I think is still somewhat in doubt. . . . The jury’s still out,” given that Bin Laden and several of his key allies have not yet been found.

Bush and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld have said eliminating the Al Qaeda terrorist network is a central objective in the war on terrorism, but they have taken pains not to make finding Bin Laden and Omar among the goals that define success in the campaign.

“Finding Omar and Osama bin Laden would be nice,” Rumsfeld said last week while at Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada. But, he added, “There are any number of people who could pick up for him and go on the next day and manage that network and continue to commit terrorist acts. So it’s a mistake to personalize it and think of it in terms of just a single individual.”

Several other congressional Republicans joined Lott in rebuking Daschle for his comments.

House Majority Whip Tom DeLay of Texas issued a one-word reaction: “Disgusting.” Rep. Thomas M. Davis of Virginia, chairman of the GOP House campaign committee, accused Daschle of “giving aid and comfort to our enemies.” Sen. Bill Frist of Tennessee, chairman of another campaign committee, termed Daschle’s comments “thoughtless and ill-timed.”

At the White House, Press Secretary Ari Fleischer said members of Congress had a right to criticize the administration’s war effort. But, he added, “when it comes to the defense of the nation, the president surely hopes that nobody will vote to underfund our nation’s defense need.”

Nor could Fleischer resist an indirect swipe at Daschle: “Obviously, there’s going to be politics involved. Some people may want to run for president one day.”

*

Times staff writer John Hendren contributed to this report.