This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-05-431T 
entitled 'Rebuilding Iraq: Preliminary Observations on Challenges in 
Transferring Security Responsibilities to Iraqi Military and Police' 
which was released on March 14, 2005. 

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part 
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every 
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of 
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text 
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the 
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided 
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed 
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic 
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail 
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this 
document to Webmaster@gao.gov. 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work 
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the 
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this 
material separately. 

United States Government Accountability Office:

GAO:

For Release on Delivery Expected at 12:00 p.m. EST:

Monday, March 14, 2005:

Testimony:

Before the Committee on Government Reform; Subcommittee on National 
Security, Emerging Threats, and International Relations; House of 
Representatives:

Rebuilding Iraq: 

Preliminary Observations on Challenges in Transferring Security 
Responsibilities to Iraqi Military and Police:

Statement of Joseph A. Christoff, Director, International Affairs and 
Trade:

GAO-05-431T:

GAO Highlights:

Highlights of GAO-05-431T, a testimony before the Committee on 
Government Reform; Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats, 
and International Relations; House of Representatives

Why GAO Did This Study:

Since the fall of the former Iraq regime in April 2003, the 
multinational force has been working to develop Iraqi military and 
police forces capable of maintaining security. To support this effort, 
the United States provided about $5.8 billion in 2003-04 to develop 
Iraq’s security capability. In February 2005, the president requested a 
supplemental appropriation with an additional $5.7 billion to 
accelerate the development of Iraqi military and police forces. 

GAO provides preliminary observations on (1) the strategy for 
transferring security responsibilities to Iraqi military and police 
forces; (2) the data on the status of forces, and (3) challenges that 
the Multi-National Force in Iraq faces in transferring security 
missions to these forces. 

To prepare this statement, GAO used unclassified reports, status 
updates, security plans, and other documents from the Departments of 
Defense and State. GAO also used testimonies and other statements for 
the record from officials such as the Secretary of Defense. In 
addition, GAO visited the Iraqi police training facility in Jordan. 

What GAO Found:

The Multinational Force in Iraq has developed and begun to implement a 
strategy to transfer security responsibilities to the Iraqi military 
and police forces. This strategy would allow a gradual drawdown of its 
forces based on the multinational force neutralizing the insurgency and 
developing Iraqi military and police services that can independently 
maintain security. 

U.S. government agencies do not report reliable data on the extent to 
which Iraqi security forces are trained and equipped. As of late 
February 2005, the State Department reported that about 82,000 police 
forces under the Iraqi Ministry of Interior and almost 60,000 military 
forces under the Iraqi Ministry of Defense have been trained and 
equipped. However, the reported number of Iraqi police is unreliable 
because the Ministry of Interior does not receive consistent and 
accurate reporting from the police forces around the country. The data 
does not exclude police absent from duty. Further, the departments of 
State and Defense no longer report on the extent to which Iraqi 
security forces are equipped with their required weapons, vehicles, 
communications equipment, and body armor. 

The insurgency in Iraq has intensified since June 2003, making it 
difficult to transfer security responsibilities to Iraqi forces. From 
that time through January 2005, insurgent attacks grew in number, 
complexity, and intensity. At the same time, the multinational force 
has faced four key challenges in increasing the capability of Iraqi 
forces: (1) training, equipping, and sustaining a changing force 
structure; (2) developing a system for measuring the readiness and 
capability of Iraqi forces; (3) building loyalty and leadership 
throughout the Iraqi chain of command; and (4) developing a police 
force that upholds the rule of law in a hostile environment. 

The multinational force is taking steps to address these challenges, 
such as developing a system to assess unit readiness and embedding US 
forces within Iraqi units. However, without reliable reporting data, a 
more capable Iraqi force, and stronger Iraqi leadership, the Department 
of Defense faces difficulties in implementing its strategy to draw down 
U.S. forces from Iraq. 

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-431T. 

To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on 
the link above. For more information, contact Joseph Christoff at (202) 
512-8979 or christoffj@gao.gov. 

[End of section]

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:

I am pleased to be here today to discuss challenges in transferring 
security responsibilities from the multinational force to the Iraqi 
military and police forces. In April 2005, we will issue a classified 
report to the Congress that provides additional analysis on this 
subject. 

The former Iraqi regime fell in April 2003, and the United Nations 
recognized an interim administration--the Coalition Provisional 
Authority. On May 23, 2003, the Authority dissolved the military and 
paramilitary organizations of the former Iraqi regime and announced 
plans to create a new national self-defense capability for Iraq. In 
June 2004, the Authority transferred sovereignty to an interim 
government. At the time of Iraq's January 2005 elections, more than 
159,000 U.S. forces and 24,500 coalition forces were operating 
throughout Iraq. 

As of March 2005, the United States has made available about $5.8 
billion to develop Iraq's security capability. In February 2005, the 
President requested a supplemental appropriation for Iraq, Afghanistan, 
and other purposes that included an additional $5.7 billion to 
accelerate the development of Iraqi security forces. 

Today, I will provide preliminary observations on (1) the strategy for 
transferring security responsibilities to Iraqi military and police 
forces, (2) data on the status of Iraqi forces, and (3) challenges the 
Multi-National Force in Iraq (MNF-I) faces in transferring security 
missions to these forces. 

This statement only includes unclassified information. (See appendix I 
for details on our scope and methodology.) We conducted work for this 
statement in February and March 2005 in accordance with generally 
accepted government auditing standards. 

Summary:

Since fall 2003, MNF-I has developed and refined a plan to transfer 
security responsibilities to the Iraqi military and police 
forces.[Footnote 1] The plan's objective was to allow a gradual 
drawdown of coalition forces first in conjunction with the 
neutralization of Iraq's insurgency and second with the development of 
Iraqi forces capable of securing their country. In summer 2004, MNF-I 
developed and began implementing a comprehensive campaign plan with 
this transition concept. The campaign plan is classified. As of March 
2005, the Commander, U.S. Central Command, stated that Iraqi security 
forces were growing in capability but were not ready to take on the 
insurgency without the presence, help, mentoring, and assistance of MNF-
I. 

U.S. government data do not provide reliable information on the status 
of Iraqi military and police forces. The goal of the multinational 
force is to train and equip about 271,000 Iraqi security forces by July 
2006. As of late February 2005, the State Department reported that 
about 82,000 police forces under the Iraqi Ministry of Interior and 
almost 60,000 military forces under the Iraqi Ministry of Defense have 
been trained and equipped. However, the reported number of Iraqi police 
is unreliable because the Ministry of Interior does not receive 
consistent and accurate reporting from the police forces around the 
country. The data also include police absent from duty. Further, State 
no longer reports on the extent to which Iraqi security forces have 
their required weapons, vehicles, communication equipment, and body 
armor. 

The insurgency in Iraq has intensified since June 2003, making it 
difficult to transfer security responsibilities to Iraqi forces. 
According to Department of Defense officials and documents, the 
insurgency has grown in intensity and sophistication. Attacks against 
the coalition and its Iraqi forces have increased in number over time, 
with the highest peaks of attacks occurring in August and November 2004 
and in January 2005. At the same time, MNF-I faces four challenges in 
building an Iraqi security force capable of combating the insurgency. 
First, the Iraqi force structure for the military and police is 
changing with the creation of new units by MNF-I and the Iraqi 
ministries. This makes it difficult to provide effective support--the 
training, equipment, and sustaining of Iraqi forces. Second, MNF-I is 
still developing a system to assess the readiness of Iraqi military and 
police forces so they can identify weaknesses and provide them with 
effective support. Third, developing strong Iraqi leadership and 
ensuring the loyalty of all personnel throughout the chain of command 
has proven difficult. Fourth, MNF-I and the Iraqi ministries find it 
difficult to train a national police force that abides by the rule of 
law while operating in a hostile environment. 

MNF-I is aware of these challenges and is working to address them. For 
example, MNF-I is developing a system to measure the readiness of the 
Iraqi military and police and is moving to expand a system of embedded 
U.S. trainers to help develop strong Iraqi leadership. 

Background:

The Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), established in May 2003, was 
the U.N.-recognized coalition authority led by the United States and 
the United Kingdom that was responsible for the temporary governance of 
Iraq. In May 2003, the CPA dissolved the military organizations of the 
former regime and began the process of creating or reestablishing new 
Iraqi security forces, including the police and new Iraqi army. Over 
time, multinational force commanders assumed responsibility for 
recruiting and training some Iraqi defense and police forces in their 
areas of responsibility.[Footnote 2] On June 28, 2004, the CPA 
transferred power to a sovereign Iraqi interim government, the CPA 
officially dissolved, and Iraq's transitional period began. Under 
Iraq's transitional law,[Footnote 3] the transitional period covers the 
interim government phase and the transitional government period, which 
is scheduled to end by December 31, 2005.[Footnote 4]

The multinational force (MNF-I) has the authority to take all necessary 
measures to contribute to security and stability in Iraq during this 
process, working in partnership with the Iraqi government to reach 
agreement on security and policy issues. A May 2004 national security 
presidential directive required the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) to 
direct all U.S. government efforts to organize, equip, and train Iraqi 
security forces. The Multi-National Security Transition Command-Iraq, 
which operates under MNF-I, now leads coalition efforts to train, 
equip, and organize Iraqi security forces. 

MNF-I Plan for Transferring Security Responsibilities to Iraqi Forces:

In October 2003, the multinational force outlined a four-phased plan 
for transferring security missions to Iraqi security forces. The four 
phases were (1) mutual support, where the multinational force 
establishes conditions for transferring security responsibilities to 
Iraqi forces; (2) transition to local control, where Iraqi forces in a 
local area assume responsibility for security; (3) transition to 
regional control, where Iraqi forces are responsible for larger 
regions; and (4) transition to strategic over watch, where Iraqi forces 
on a national level are capable of maintaining a secure environment 
against internal and external threats, with broad monitoring from the 
multinational force. The plan's objective was to allow a gradual 
drawdown of coalition forces first in conjunction with the 
neutralization of Iraq's insurgency and second with the development of 
Iraqi forces capable of securing their country.[Footnote 5]

Citing the growing capability of Iraqi security forces, MNF-I attempted 
to quickly shift responsibilities to them in February 2004 but did not 
succeed in this effort. In March 2004, Iraqi security forces numbered 
about 203,000, including about 76,000 police, 78,000 facilities 
protection officers,[Footnote 6] and about 38,000 in the civilian 
defense corps. Police and military units performed poorly during an 
escalation of insurgent attacks against the coalition in April 2004. 
According to a July 2004 executive branch report to Congress, many 
Iraqi security forces around the country collapsed during this 
uprising. Some Iraqi forces fought alongside coalition forces. Other 
units abandoned their posts and responsibilities and in some cases 
assisted the insurgency. 

A number of problems contributed to the collapse of Iraqi security 
forces. MNF-I identified problems in training and equipping them as 
among the reasons for their poor performance. Training of police and 
some defense forces was not uniform and varied widely across Iraq. MNF- 
I's commanders had the leeway to institute their own versions of the 
transitional police curriculum, and the training for some defense 
forces did not prepare them to fight against well-armed insurgents. 
Further, according to the CPA Director of Police, when Iraqi police 
voluntarily returned to duty in May 2003, CPA initially provided 
limited training and did not thoroughly vet the personnel to get them 
on the streets quickly. Many police who were hired remain untrained and 
unvetted, according to Department of Defense (DOD) officials. 

MNF-I completed a campaign plan[Footnote 7] during summer 2004 that 
elaborated and refined the original strategy for transferring security 
responsibilities to Iraqi forces at the local, regional, and then 
national levels. Further details on this campaign plan are classified. 

On March 1, 2005, the CENTCOM Commander told the Senate Armed Services 
Committee that Iraqi security forces were growing in capability but 
were not yet ready to take on the insurgency without the presence, 
help, mentoring, and assistance of MNF-I. He cited a mixed performance 
record for the Iraqi security forces during the previous 11 months. The 
commander further testified that focused training and mentoring of 
Iraqi Intervention Forces, Iraqi Special Operations Forces, and 
National Guard forces contributed to successful coalition operations in 
places such as Najaf and Kufa during August 2004 and Fallujah during 
November 2004, and during the January 2005 elections. On the other 
hand, he also cited instances of poor performance by the police in 
western Baghdad from August through October 2004 and Mosul during 
November 2004. 

Data on Iraqi Security Forces Has Limitations:

U.S. government data does not provide reliable information on the 
status of Iraqi military and police forces. According to a March 2005 
State Department report, as of February 28, 2005, the Iraqi Ministry of 
Defense had 59,695 operational troops, or roughly two thirds of the 
total required. The Ministry of Interior had 82,072 trained and 
equipped officers on duty, or almost half of the total required. Table 
1 shows status of Iraqi forces under the Ministries of Defense and 
Interior. 

Table 1: Status of Iraqi Security Forces as Reported by the Department 
of State:

Ministry: Defense; 
Component: Iraq Army; 
* Regular Army; 
* National Guard; 
* Intervention Force; 
* Special Operations; 
Required[A]: 94,656; 
Operational/Trained and Equipped[B]: 58,992; 
Percentage of Required: 62%. 

Component: Air Force; 
Required[A]: 453; 
Operational/Trained and Equipped[B]: 186; 
Percentage of Required: 41%. 

Component: Navy; 
Required[A]: 582; 
Operational/Trained and Equipped[B]: 517; 
Percentage of Required: 89%. 

Component: Sub-total; 
Required[A]: 95,691; 
Operational/Trained and Equipped[B]: 59,695[C]; 
Percentage of Required: 62%. 

Ministry: Interior; 
Component: Iraqi Police Service; 
Required[A]: 135,000; 
Operational/Trained and Equipped[B]: 55,274; 
Percentage of Required: 39. 

Component: Highway Patrol; 
Required[A]: 6,300. 

Component: Other forces; 
* Civil Intervention; 
* Special Police; 
* Emergency Response; 
* Border Enforcement; 
* Dignitary Protection; 
Required[A]: 34,050; 
Operational/Trained and Equipped[B]: 26,798; 
Percentage of Required: 79%. 

Component: Sub-total; 
Required[A]: 175,350; 
Operational/Trained and Equipped[B]: 82,072[D]; 
Percentage of Required: 47%. 

Total; 
Required[A]: 271,041; 
Operational/Trained and Equipped[B]: 141,761; 
Percentage of Required: 52%. 

Source: State Department reports. 

[A] Required numbers are from 1/19/05 Iraq Weekly Status Report. 

[B] The term "operational" refers to Ministry of Defense forces. The 
term "trained and equipped" refers to Ministry of Interior forces. 
Numbers are from 3/2/05 Iraq Weekly Status Report. 

[C] Unauthorized absent personnel are not included in Ministry of 
Defense numbers. 

[D] Unauthorized absent personnel are included in Ministry of Interior 
numbers. 

[End of table]

MNF-I's goal is to train and equip a total of about 271,000 Iraqi 
security forces by July 2006. However, the numbers of security forces, 
as reported in table 1, are limited in providing accurate and complete 
information on the status of Iraqi forces. Specifically:

* The reported number of security forces overstates the number actually 
serving. Ministry of Interior reports, for example, include police who 
are absent without leave in its totals. Ministry of Defense reports 
exclude the absent military personnel from its totals. According to DOD 
officials, the number of absentees is probably in the tens of 
thousands. 

* The reported number of Iraqi police is unreliable. According to a 
senior official from the U.S. embassy in Baghdad, MNF-I does not know 
how many Iraqi police are on duty at any given point because the 
Ministry of Interior does not receive consistent and accurate reporting 
from police stations across Iraq. 

* The Departments of Defense and State do not provide additional 
information on the extent to which trained Iraqi security forces have 
their necessary equipment. As recently as September 2004, State issued 
unclassified reports with detailed information on the number of 
weapons, vehicles, communication equipment, and body amour required by 
each security force compared to the amount received. State had also 
provided weekly unclassified updates on the number of personnel trained 
in each unit. 

In addition, the total number of Iraqi security forces includes forces 
with varying missions and training levels. Not all units are designed 
to be capable of fighting the insurgency. For example, the police 
service, which numbers about 55,000 of Iraq's 141,000 personnel who 
have received training, has a civilian law enforcement function. As of 
mid-December 2004, paramilitary training for a high-threat hostile 
environment was not part of the curriculum for new recruits. The 
missions of other units, such as the Ministry of Defense's commando 
battalion and the Ministry of Interior's Emergency Response Unit, focus 
on combating terrorism. Required training for both forces includes 
counterterrorism. Table 2 provides information on the types of military 
and police units, their missions, and their training. 

Table 2: Missions and Training of Iraqi Security Forces:

Ministry: Defense; 
Unit: Iraqi Army: * Regular Army; 
Mission: Defend Iraq against external threats; When directed, assist in 
providing defense against internal threats;
Training: Eight weeks of basic training. Before deployment units 
receive follow-on operational training. 

Unit: Iraqi Army: * National Guard; 
Mission: Conduct stability operations to support internal security. 
Conduct constabulary duties in support of internal security;
Training: Abbreviated 3-week basic training. Follow-on training similar 
to that given the regular army. 

Unit: Iraqi Army: * Intervention Force; 
Mission: Conduct operations to defeat anti- Iraqi forces, with primary 
focus on urban areas. Assist in the restoration of a secure and stable 
environment;
Training: Four weeks of cadre training (for officers and 
noncommissioned officers); 
13 weeks basic and urban operations training. 

Unit: Iraqi Army: * Commando Battalion; 
Mission: Support the Iraqi Counter- Terrorist Force. Similar in 
organization, training, and mission to the U.S. Army Ranger Battalion;
Training: Regular army basic training. Instruction includes counter 
terrorism and unconventional warfare. 

Unit: Iraqi Army: * Counter-Terrorist Task Force; 
Mission: Direct action counter- terrorism similar mission, and training 
to U.S. Special Forces with counter-terrorist function;
Training: Regular Army basic training; specialized 13-week course. 

Unit: Air Force; 
Mission: Provide aerial reconnaissance and rotary and fixed-wing 
transport for Iraqi Security Forces and authorities;
Training: Training consists of 1 to 4 month familiarization 
instruction. 

Unit: Navy; 
Mission: Conduct security operations on Iraqi territorial waters, 
including gas and oil platforms, and, in conjunction with Department of 
Border Enforcement, conduct police operations on Iraq's coastline and 
territorial waters to counter piracy, smuggling, and other unlawful 
actions;
Training: Regular Army basic training; 
follow- on training for land-and sea-based troops, advanced seamanship 
training. 

Ministry: Interior; 
Unit: Police; 
Mission: Provide law enforcement, public safety and internal security;
Training: New officers: 8-week academy training. Serving officers: 3-
week course. 

Unit: Highway Patrol; 
Mission: Provide law enforcement, internal security, and convoy 
security along Iraq's highways;
Training: N/A. 

Other forces: 

Unit: * Civil Intervention Force; 
Mission: Provide a national level, high end, rapid response police 
capability to counter large-scale disobedience and insurgents;
Training: N/A. 

Unit: * Special Police Commando; 
Mission: Provide a direct action, special operations, and counter 
insurgency capability in support of Ministry of Interior;
Training: N/A. 

Unit: * Emergency Response Unit; 
Mission: Provide a special operations police capability in support of 
the Iraqi Police Service;
Training: Standard regular police training; 8-week specialized training 
focusing on terrorist incidents, high-risk searches, and weapons of 
mass destruction. 

Unit: * Department of Border Enforcement; 
Mission: Protect the integrity of Iraq's border and monitor and control 
the movement of persons and goods;
Training: 4-week academy training. 

Unit: * Bureau of Dignitary Protection; 
Mission: Provide close protection, convoy security, and fixed-site 
security for Iraqi key political leaders;
Training: N/A. 

Source: MNF-I documents and DOD testimonies before Congress. 

Note: N/A = Not available from an unclassified source. 

[End of table]

Challenges to Transferring Security Missions to Iraqi Control:

The multinational force's security transition plan depends on 
neutralizing the insurgent threat and increasing Iraqi security 
capability. The insurgent threat has increased since June 2003, as 
insurgent attacks have grown in number, sophistication, and complexity. 
At the same time, MNF-I and the Iraqi government confront difficulties 
to building Iraqi security forces that are capable of effectively 
combating the insurgency. These include programming effective support 
for a changing force structure, assessing progress in developing 
capable forces without a system for measuring their readiness, 
developing leadership and loyalty throughout the Iraqi chain of 
command, and developing police who abide by the rule of law in a 
hostile environment. 

The Insurgency Has Intensified:

According to senior military officials, the insurgency in Iraq-- 
particularly the Sunni insurgency--has grown in number, complexity, and 
intensity over the past 18 months. On February 3, 2005, the Chairman of 
the Joint Chiefs of Staff told the Senate Armed Services Committee that 
the insurgency in Iraq had built up slowly during the first year, then 
became very intense from summer 2004 through January 2005. Figure 1 
provides Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) data showing these trends in 
enemy initiated attacks against the coalition, its Iraqi partners, and 
infrastructure. Overall attacks peaked in August 2004 due to a rise in 
violence in Sunni-dominated regions and an uprising by the Mahdi Army, 
a Shi'a insurgent group led by radical Shi'a cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. 
Although the November 2004 and January 2005 numbers were slightly lower 
than those for August, it is significant that almost all of the attacks 
in these 2 months took place in Sunni-majority areas, whereas the 
August attacks took place countrywide. MNF-I is the primary target of 
the attacks, but the number of attacks against Iraqi civilians and 
security forces increased significantly during January 2005. On March 
1, 2005, the CENTCOM Commander told the Senate Armed Services Committee 
that more Iraqi security forces than Americans have died in action 
against insurgents since June 2004. 

Figure 1: Violent Incidents Against the Coalition and Its Partners, by 
Month, June 2003 Through February 2005:

[See PDF for image]

[A] According to DIA officals, June 2003 data are incomplete. 

[End of figure]

Insurgents have demonstrated their ability to increase attacks around 
key events, according to the DIA Director's February 2005 statement 
before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. For example, 
attacks spiked in April and May 2004, the months before the transfer of 
power to the Iraqi interim government; in November 2004 due to a rise 
in violence in Sunni-dominated areas during Ramadan and MNF-I's 
operation against insurgents in Fallujah; and in January 2005 before 
the Iraqi elections. The DIA Director testified that attacks on Iraq's 
election day reached about 300, double the previous 1 day high of about 
150 during last year's Ramadan. About 80 percent of all attacks 
occurred in Sunni-dominated central Iraq, with the Kurdish north and 
Shia south remaining relatively calm. 

In February and March 2004, the DIA Director and CENTCOM Commander 
presented their views of the nature of the insurgency to the Senate 
Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Armed Services 
Committee, respectively. According to these officials, the core of the 
insurgency consists of Sunni Arabs, dominated by Ba'athist and former 
regime elements. Shi'a militant groups, such as those associated with 
the radical Shi'a cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, remain a threat to the 
political process. Following the latest round of fighting last August 
and September, DIA concluded that al-Sadr's forces were re-arming, re- 
organizing, and training, with al-Sadr keeping his options open to 
employ his forces. Jihadists have been responsible for many high- 
profile attacks that have a disproportionate impact, although their 
activity accounts for only a fraction of the overall violence. Foreign 
fighters comprise a small component of the insurgency and a very small 
percentage of all detainees. DIA believes that insurgents' infiltration 
and subversion of emerging government institutions, security, and 
intelligence services will be a major problem for the new government. 

In late October 2004, according to a CENTCOM document, MNF-I estimated 
the overall size of active enemy forces at about 20,000. The estimate 
consisted of about 10,000 former regime members; about 3,000 members of 
al Sadr's forces;[Footnote 8] about 1,000 in the al-Zarqawi terrorist 
network; and about 5,000 criminals, religious extremists, and their 
supporters. In February and March 2005, the Chairman of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff and the CENTCOM Commander told the Senate Armed 
Services Committee that it is difficult to develop an accurate estimate 
of the number of insurgents. The CENTCOM commander explained that the 
number of insurgent fighters, supporters, and sympathizers can rise and 
fall depending on the politics, problems, and major offensive 
operations in a given area. He also acknowledged that gaps exist in the 
intelligence concerning the broader insurgency, particularly in the 
area of human intelligence. 

The CENTCOM commander and MNF-I commanding general recently cited 
Iraq's January 2005 elections as an important step toward Iraqi 
sovereignty and security but cautioned against possible violence in the 
future. In March 2005, the MNF-I commanding general stated that the 
insurgency has sufficient ammunition, weapons, money, and people to 
maintain about 50 to 60 attacks per day in the Sunni areas. The CENTCOM 
Commander told the Senate Armed Services Committee that the upcoming 
processes of writing an Iraqi constitution and forming a new government 
could trigger more violence, as the former regime elements in the 
insurgency seek a return to power. The MNF-I commanding general stated 
that a combination of political, military, economic, and communications 
efforts will ultimately defeat the insurgency. 

Challenges to Increasing the Capability of Iraqi Security Forces:

On March 1, 2005, the CENTCOM Commander told the Senate Armed Services 
Committee that Iraqi security forces are not yet ready to take on the 
insurgency without the presence, help, mentoring, and assistance of MNF-
I. MNF-I has faced four key challenges in helping Iraq develop security 
forces capable of combating the insurgency or conducting law 
enforcement duties in a hostile environment. These key challenges are 
(1) training, equipping, and sustaining a changing force structure; (2) 
determining progress in developing capable forces without a system for 
measuring their readiness; (3) developing loyalty and leadership 
throughout the Iraqi chain of command; and (4) developing police 
capable of democratic law enforcement in a hostile environment. 

Iraqi Security Force Structure Is Constantly Changing:

The Iraqi security force structure has constantly changed in response 
to the growing insurgency. This makes it difficult to provide effective 
support--the training, equipping, and sustaining of Iraqi forces. DOD 
defines force structure as the numbers, size, and composition of units 
that comprise defense forces.[Footnote 9] Some changes to the Iraqi 
force structure have resulted from a Multi-National Security Transition 
Command-Iraq analysis of needed Iraqi security capabilities during 
summer 2004 and reported in October 2004.[Footnote 10] The Iraqi 
government has made other changes to forces under the Ministries of 
Defense and Interior to allow them to better respond to the increased 
threat. According to a February 2005 DOD budget document, MNF-I and the 
Iraqi government plan to increase the force structure over the next 
year. 

According to the October report, a number of enhancements in Iraqi 
force capabilities and infrastructure were critically needed to meet 
the current threat environment. Based on this review, the MNF-I 
Commander decided to increase the size of the Iraqi Police Service from 
90,000 to 135,000 personnel; the Iraqi National Guard by 20 battalions 
to 62 battalions; and the Department of Border Enforcement from 16,000 
to 32,000 border officers. The review also supported in the creation of 
the Civil Intervention Force, which consists of nine specialized Public 
Order Battalions and two Special Police Regiments under the Ministry of 
Interior. This force is designed to provide a national level, high-end, 
rapid response capability to counter large-scale civil disobedience and 
insurgency activities. 

Over the past year, the Iraqi government has created, merged, and 
expanded Iraqi security forces under the Ministries of Defense and 
Interior. For example, according to a DOD official, the Iraqi Army 
Chief of Staff created the Iraqi Intervention Force in April 2004 in 
response to the unwillingness of a regular Army battalion to fight 
Iraqi insurgents in Fallujah. This intervention force will be comprised 
of nine battalions and is the counter-insurgency wing of the Iraqi 
Army. According to Iraq's national security strategy,[Footnote 11] the 
Iraqi government decided to increase the Iraqi Army from 100,000 
soldiers to 150,000 personnel by the end of this year and extend the 
time required to complete their training from July 2005 to December 
2005. The government planned to form this larger army by including the 
Iraqi National Guard and accelerating the training and recruitment of 
new troops. In addition, in late 2004, the Ministry of Interior added 
the Mechanized Police Brigade, a paramilitary, counter-insurgency unit 
that will consist of three battalions that will deploy to high-risk 
areas. It also created the paramilitary, army-type Special Police 
Commando brigades. 

According to DOD document supporting the February 2005 supplemental 
request, the Iraqi government planned to add a number of additional 
military elements, primarily support units, to the force structure over 
the next year. These include logistics units at the division level and 
below, a mechanized division, and a brigade each for signals, military 
police, engineering, and logistics. 

System for Measuring Iraqi Readiness Has Not Been Developed:

MNF-I officials stated that, as of March 2005, MNF-I and the Iraqi 
government do not yet have a system in place to assess the readiness of 
Iraq's various security forces to accomplish their assigned missions 
and tasks.[Footnote 12] However, in early 2005, the commanding general 
of the Multi-National Security Transition Command-Iraq said that MNF-I 
had begun work on a system to assess Iraqi capabilities. MNF-I plans to 
develop a rating system along the lines of the U.S. military readiness 
reporting system. According to the commanding general of the Multi- 
National Security Transition Command-Iraq, this system most likely 
would have Iraqi brigade commanders evaluating such things as the 
training readiness of their units, their personnel field, and their 
equipping levels. They also would provide a subjective judgment of the 
units' readiness. The commanding general said that this rating system 
would take time to implement. 

It is unclear at this time whether the system under development would 
provide adequate measures for determining the capability of Iraqi 
police. Because the police have a civilian law enforcement function 
rather than a military or paramilitary role in combating the 
insurgency, MNF-I may have to develop a separate system for determining 
police readiness. 

Developing an Effective Iraqi Chain of Command:

On March 1, 2005, the CENTCOM Commander told the Senate Armed Services 
Committee that the establishment of an effective Iraqi chain of command 
is a critical factor in determining when Iraqi security forces will be 
capable of taking the lead in fighting the counterinsurgency. The 
CENTCOM Commander added that the Iraqi chain of command must be loyal 
and capable, take orders from the Iraqi head of state through the 
lawful chain of command, and fight to serve the Iraqi people. MNF-I 
faces several challenges in helping to develop an effective chain of 
command, including questionable loyalty among some Iraqi security 
forces, poor leadership in Iraqi units, and the destabilizing influence 
of militias outside the control of the Iraqi government. 

The executive branch reported in July 2004 that some Iraqi security 
forces had turned to fight with insurgents during the spring 
uprising.[Footnote 13] In October 2004, in response to questions we 
submitted, CENTCOM officials indicated that it is difficult to 
determine with any certainty the true level of insurgent infiltration 
within Iraqi security forces. Recent reports indicate that some Iraqi 
security personnel continue to cooperate with insurgents. For example, 
a February 2005 report cited instances of insurgent infiltration of 
Iraqi police forces. Police manning a checkpoint in one area were 
reporting convoy movements by mobile telephone to local terrorists. 
Police in another area were infiltrated by former regime elements. 

In February 2005 press briefings, the Secretary of Defense and the 
commanding general of the Multi-National Security Transition Command- 
Iraq cited the leadership of Iraqi security forces as a critical 
element in developing Iraqi forces capable of combating insurgents. MNF-
I officials indicated that they plan to expand the use of military 
transition teams to support Iraqi units. These teams would help train 
the units and headquarters and accompany them into combat. On March 1, 
2005, the CENTCOM Commander told the Senate Armed Services Committee 
that there is broad, general agreement that MNF-I must do more to 
train, advise, mentor, and help Iraqi security forces. CENTCOM has 
requested an additional 1,487 troops to support these efforts and must 
have the continued support of the new Iraqi government. 

The continued existence of militias outside the control of Iraq's 
central government also presents a major challenge to developing an 
effective chain of command. In late May 2004, the CPA developed a 
transition and reintegration strategy for disbanding or controlling 
militias that existed prior to the transfer of power to the Iraqi 
interim government.[Footnote 14] Detailed information on the current 
status of militias in Iraq is classified. However, the CENTCOM 
Commander acknowledged the continued existence of older militias and 
the recent creation of new militias. He said that their presence will 
ultimately be destabilizing unless they are strictly controlled, come 
under government supervision, and are not allowed to operate 
independently. 

Developing a Police Force in a Hostile Environment:

MNF-I's efforts to develop a police force that abides by and upholds 
the rule of law while operating in a hostile environment have been 
difficult. U.S. police trainers in Jordan told us in mid-December 2004 
that Iraqi police were trained and equipped to do community policing in 
a permissive security environment. Thus, Iraqi police were not prepared 
to withstand the insurgent attacks that they have faced over the past 
year and a half. According to the State Department's Country Report on 
Human Rights Practices for 2004, more than 1,500 Iraqi police have been 
killed between April 2003 and December 2004. To address this weakness, 
MNF-I and the Iraqi government report taking steps to better prepare 
some police to operate during an insurgency. In a December 2004 press 
briefing, the MNF-I Commander stated that MNF-I was moving to add 
paramilitary-type skills to the police training program to improve some 
units' ability to operate in a counterinsurgency environment. U.S. 
police trainers in Jordan told us that the curriculum was being revised 
to provide police paramilitary capabilities. In addition, according to 
the Iraq's national security strategy, the Iraqi government is in the 
process of upgrading security measures at police stations throughout 
the country. 

According to State's 2004 human rights report, police have operated in 
a hostile environment. Attacks by insurgents and foreign terrorists 
have resulted in killings, kidnappings, violence, and torture. 
Bombings, executions, killings of government officials, shootings, and 
intimidation were a daily occurrence throughout all regions and sectors 
of society. The report also states that members of the Ministry of 
Interior's security forces committed numerous, serious human rights 
abuses. For example, in early December 2004, the Basrah police reported 
that the Internal Affairs Unit was involved in the killings of 10 
members of the Baath Party and the killings of a mother and daughter 
accused of prostitution. The report further states that, according to 
Human Rights Watch, torture and ill treatment of detainees by the 
police was commonplace. Additionally, the report states that corruption 
continued to be a problem. The Iraq Commission for Public Integrity was 
investigating cases of police abuse involving unlawful arrests, 
beatings, and theft of valuables from the homes of persons detained. 

Conclusion:

The multinational force has been working to transfer full security 
responsibilities for the country to the Iraqi military and police. 
However, the multinational force and Iraq face the challenges of an 
intense insurgency, a changing Iraqi force structure, the lack of a 
system to measure military and police readiness, an Iraqi leadership 
and chain of command in its infancy, and a police force that finds it 
difficult to uphold the rule of law in a hostile environment. MNF-I 
recognizes these challenges and is moving to address them so it can 
begin to reduce its presence in Iraq and draw down its troops. Of 
particular note is MNF-I's effort to develop a system to assess unit 
readiness and to embed MNFI-I transition teams into units to mentor 
Iraqis. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. I will be happy to 
answer any questions you or the other Subcommittee members may have. 

Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:

For further information, please contact Joseph A. Christoff on (202) 
512-8979. Individuals who made key contributions to this testimony were 
Lynn Cothern, Mattias Fenton, Laura Helm, Judy McCloskey, Tet Miyabara, 
Michael Rohrback, and Audrey Solis. 

[End of section]

Appendix I: Scope and Methodology:

We provided preliminary observations on 1) the strategy for 
transferring security responsibilities to Iraqi military and police 
forces, 2) the data on the status of the forces, and 3) challenges the 
Multi. National Force in Iraq (MNF-I) faces in transferring security 
missions to these forces. We conducted our review for this statement 
during February and March 2005 in accordance with generally accepted 
government auditing standards. We used only unclassified information 
for this statement:

To examine the strategy for transferring security responsibilities to 
Iraqi forces, we focused on the 2003 security transition concept plan. 
We obtained and reviewed the transition plan and related documents and 
interviewed officials from the Coalition Provisional Authority and the 
Departments of State and Defense. Our work on this issue is described 
in June 2004 GAO report entitled Rebuilding Iraq: Resource, Security, 
Governance, Essential Services, and Oversight Issues (GAO-04-902R). To 
update information on the transition concept, we reviewed statements 
for the record from the Commander, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) 
Commander and the MNF-I commanding general on the campaign plan and on 
the capability and recent performance of Iraqi security forces. These 
statements focused on Iraqi security forces' ability to perform against 
the insurgency, as well as the training and mentoring of forces that 
contributed to successful operations. 

To determine the data on Iraqi security forces, we reviewed 
unclassified Department of State status reports from June 2004 to March 
2005 that provided information about the number of troops by the 
Ministries of Defense and Interior. We interviewed State and Department 
of Defense (DOD) officials about the number of Iraqi police on duty and 
the structure of the Iraqi police forces. To identify the type of 
training the Iraqi security forces receive, we reviewed and organized 
data and information from the Multi-National Security Transition 
Command-Iraq. We also visited the Jordan International Police Training 
Center in Amman, Jordan to determine the training security forces 
receive. This approach allowed us to verify that Iraqi security forces 
have varying missions and training levels and not all are designed to 
be capable of fighting the insurgency. 

To discuss the insurgency in Iraq, we reviewed statements for the 
record from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Director of 
the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), and the CENTCOM Commander on the 
status of the insurgency. We obtained data and reports from DIA on the 
number of reported incidents from June 2003 through February 2005. We 
obtained written responses from CENTCOM on the strength and composition 
of the insurgency. To address the challenges to increasing the 
capability of Iraqi security forces, we reviewed statements for the 
record by the CENTCOM Commander, the MNF-I commanding general, and DOD 
officials. We also examined the Iraqi National Security Strategy, 
funding documents from the Office of Management and Budget and State 
Department, and the fiscal year 2005 Supplemental Request of the 
President. We obtained and reviewed further breakdowns of briefings on 
the supplemental request. To identify challenges in developing the 
Iraqi police force, we interviewed police trainers in Jordan and 
reviewed the State Department's Country Report on Human Rights 
Practices for 2004. 

We obtained comments on a draft of this statement from State and DOD, 
including CENTCOM. All generally agreed with our statement and provided 
technical comments that we have incorporated as appropriate. 

FOOTNOTES

[1] GAO, Rebuilding Iraq: Resource, Security, Governance, Essential 
Services, and Oversight Issues, GAO-04-902R (Washington, D.C.: June 28, 
2004). 

[2] The CPA was responsible for police training at the Baghdad and 
Jordan academies. The Iraqi army units were trained by the Multi- 
National Security Transition Command-Iraq. 

[3] Law of Administration for the State of Iraq for the Transitional 
Period, March 2004. 

[4] See Iraq's Transitional Law, GAO-04-746R, May 25, 2004, for more 
information on key events during Iraq's transitional period. 

[5] For more information on the security transition concept, see GAO-04-
902R. 

[6] The Departments of State and Defense stopped counting the 
Facilities Protection Service as part of the Iraqi security force 
structure in September 2004. The mission of the Facilities Protection 
Service is to guard and secure individual ministry and municipal 
buildings against vandalism and theft. 

[7] According to DOD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms (JP 1- 
02; Nov. 30, 2004), a campaign plan is a plan for a series of related 
military operations to accomplish a strategic or operational objective 
within a given time and space. 

[8] MNF-I refers to the al-Sadr's forces as Muqtada Militia. 

[9] DOD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms. 

[10] Office of Management and Budget, Quarterly Update to Congress, 
Section 2207 Report, (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 2004). 

[11] Strategy for National Security and the Role of the Army and 
Internal Security Forces, January 2005. 

[12] DOD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms defines readiness 
as the synthesis of two distinct but interrelated levels: (1) unit 
readiness, which is the ability to provide capabilities required by 
combatant commanders to execute their assigned missions; this is 
derived from the ability of each unit to deliver the outputs for which 
it was assigned; and (2) joint readiness, which is the combatant 
commander's ability to integrate and synchronize ready combat and 
support forces to execute his or her assigned missions. 

[13] Section 2207 report. 

[14] Nine militias accepted the transition plans, but others either had 
not agreed or decided to continue hostile operations against the 
coalition rather than take part in the transition and reintegration 
process. See GAO-04-902R for more information on Iraq's militias and 
earlier efforts to disband them.