Sen. Gillibrand skeptical of Afghanistan timeline

WASHINGTON — Sen. Kirsten E. Gillibrand expressed skepticism Wednesday that a U.S. counter-insurgency effort in Afghanistan can be completed in a year and a half as planned by the Obama administration.

"That's a rather short time frame," Mrs. Gillibrand, D-N.Y., said during a break from a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing with Gen. David H. Petraeus and the U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan, Karl W. Eikenberry.

Mrs. Gillibrand, a member of the committee, said the "short" timeline for the military surge is one of several concerns she has for commanders that she planned to submit for the record after Wednesday's hearing. She said she is looking for indications of how comfortable Gen. Petraeus, who led the surge in Iraq in 2007, is with the time frame laid out for Afghanistan.

At Wednesday's hearing, Gen. Petraeus said he envisions an outcome similar to that in Iraq, where the U.S. military buildup helped local officials gain more control over the country's security and, ultimately, its politics.

"Afghanistan is not Iraq. It's also not Vietnam or a lot of other places," Gen. Petraeus told senators.

The smooth transition to Afghan control, and to general stability in the region, also depends on U.S. coordination with neighboring Pakistan, to keep militants from simply fleeing there and taking shelter, Gen. Petraeus said. The United States is working with Pakistan "so they can be there with a catcher's mitt, or an anvil, or whatever it may be," he said.

Wednesday's hearing was one of a handful on Capitol Hill, as military commanders and top diplomats work through the Armed Services and Foreign Relations committees in both the House and Senate to answer questions about the strategy of sending about 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan with a timeline for gradual withdrawal.

Republicans generally support the buildup but are doubtful about withdrawal timelines. Democrats are divided among those supporting the buildup and those opposing it.

Mrs. Gillibrand, while not opposing the strategy, made clear Wednesday that she has plenty of questions. In addition to those about the time frame, she said she wonders about reports that Mr. Eikenberry initially opposed a military surge. And she said wants to know more about plans for civilian improvements in the country, including education. About 60 percent of the country's population is younger than 25, but formal schooling seems to end around age 11, she said.

Lawmakers continue to grapple with how to pay for the mission, which the Pentagon estimated at around $35 billion, but which Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has called a "ballpark figure." Mrs. Gillibrand said she would oppose a new tax to pay for the buildup but that her first question is how long the U.S. presence will last.

"Is this a 10-year, or 20-year, commitment?" she said.