WASHINGTON, November 5, 2003 -- Now that President Bush has received Congressional approval of his request for $87 billion to continue the occupation of Iraq, it is time for a major course correction in his handling of the crisis, starting with new leadership at the Pentagon.  The President should ask Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to resign.

The tragic deaths of 16 American soldiers in a downed helicopter last weekend underscored the Secretary's gross mismanagement of the war and occupation of Iraq, and his insensitivity toward the troops and their families.  The deaths raised the total of American troops who have died since March 20th to 379, at least 240 of them since the President declared the end of major combat operations on May 1st.  But the most compassion the Secretary could muster during a half hour interview on “Meet The Press” was a 13-word expression of condolences to the families. The rest of the time was spent defending a flawed policy.

The buck stops with the President.  He put Donald Rumsfeld at the controls in the Pentagon, and the President has the responsibility to make a change now that the military operation has gone wrong. Secretary Rumsfeld has also widened the credibility gap on the war by becoming the cheerleader and architect of the war while a leaked internal memo exposed his own doubts about the war's success.

This is not about who leaked the memo but about the Secretary's deception of the American people with his earlier, repeated upbeat assessments.  Occurring just as the White House had embarked on its own campaign touting the war's success, the Secretary's memo embarrassed the President, but more importantly, unnerved Americans with loved ones on the ground in Iraq. The Secretary's defense,  that he was merely asking questions to provoke thought in the Department, doesn't fly.  As the leader of the war effort, his job is to provide answers and offer explanations.

The Secretary's miscalculations began prior to the invasion of Iraq.  Ignoring the advice of top generals--including Army Chief of Staff Gen. Eric Shinseki--Rumsfeld insisted on going in with fewer troops than would ultimately be needed to sustain the occupation. Even since the invasion, with the shortage of U.S. forces obvious to everyone, the Secretary continues to oppose a larger role by the United Nations, with the dubious argument that former Iraqi army troops can fill the void.

In the meantime, the overall condition of the U.S. military continues to deteriorate to the detriment of our brave troops.  In Iraq, the Army lacks sufficient personnel to maintain its current level of 130,000 troops beyond next spring, without international help or calling up additional reservists.  For the first time since the Vietnam War, Army troops may face back-to-back combat tours with a few weeks leave in between. 

At the same time, 20,000 reserves in Iraq and Kuwait are being extended for up to a year and 180,000 others are deployed in other countries.  So much for the Secretary's boast during the run-up to war that the U.S. was capable of taking on North Korea after quickly dispatching Iraq.  The result is diminishing morale among the troops, particularly reservists, and growing anger among their families.  Increasing numbers of reservists and active duty careerists are threatening to quit the military, prompting warnings of severe recruitment problems beginning next year.

The escalating casualties underscore another problem that may, in the long run, be even more troubling to the integrity of our armed forces.  Disproportionately, the young men and women who are making the ultimate sacrifice are from minority groups, and the lower socio-economic classes of whites -- those from economically depressed small towns in rural areas.  By and large, the children of America's affluent families, who are not drawn to military service, are least represented among the casualties.  This defies the American principle of shared sacrifice.

The ideal of burden sharing, especially in times of war, demands that all citizens share in the responsibilities and sacrifice that arise from conflict.  The moral case is clear in Iraq, where we are demanding too much from overextended and exhausted troops.  Chief among them are our reserves, so-called weekend soldiers, many of whom served in earlier conflicts.  For all intents and purposes, they have been “drafted” into the regular army.  Several from Harlem in my Congressional district, deployed with the 719th Transportation Company, are grandmothers.

If we are going to stay the course in Iraq, as the President insists, he must change his attitude and approach toward our allies by injecting a healthy dose of humility.  And, only by turning over more control to the United Nations can we reassure our potential supporters that the occupation is an international humanitarian effort rather than an American geopolitical adventure.

The President would make this easier if he told Secretary Rumsfeld to resign.

(Rep. Rangel is a combat veteran of the Korean War.  He was awarded the purple heart and the bronze star for his service in that conflict.  A Democrat, he has served in Congress since 1971 and is the senior member from the New York State delegation.)