Powell Says US Forces Are Losing.

Badly overstretched US forces in Iraq are losing the war and a temporary US troop surge will probably not help, according Colin Powell, who has served both as secretary of state and as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In one of his few commentaries on the war since leaving the current administration, Powell quickly added that the situation could be reversed.

Powell recommended an intense effort to train and support Iraqi security forces and strengthen the government in Baghdad. He was deeply sceptical about increasing troop levels. "There really are no additional troops" to send, Powell said, adding that he agreed with those who said the US Army was "about broken".

Powell said he was unsure that new troops could suppress sectarian violence or secure Baghdad. He urged the US to do everything possible to prepare Iraqis to take the lead in responsibility; the "baton pass", he said, should begin by mid-2007.

Powell on Dec. 17 told CBS News: "We are losing - we haven't lost - and this is the time, now, to start to put in place the kinds of strategies that will turn this situation around".

Harry Reid, the Senate Democratic leader, on Dec. 17 said he would "go along with" a troop increase if it were clearly intended to lead to an ultimate withdrawal by early 2008. Reid supported the proposal of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group (ISG) to undertake a broad regional effort to gain diplomatic support for a peaceful Iraq.

Powell endorsed another study group idea: opening talks with Syria and Iran, a suggestion that Bush has distanced himself from. He has kept a low public profile since leaving office as secretary of state in January 2005 but has emerged at points in the debate over Iraq to weigh in, as when he said that Iraq was embroiled in civil war. A troop increase, he said on Dec. 17, "cannot be sustained".

Powell said the thousands of additional US soldiers sent into Baghdad since the summer had been unable to stabilise the city and more probably could not tip the balance.

The deployment of further troops would, moreover, impose long-term costs on a badly stretched military. While Reid suggested that he would support an increase only of two or three months, a retired general, Jack Keane, one of five Iraq experts who met with Bush on Dec. 11, called that schedule "impossible".

Keane, a former army vice chief of staff, said Iraq could not be secured before mid-2008, adding: "It will take a couple of months just to get forces in".

The surge option was discussed extensively during Bush's briefing at the Pentagon on Dec. 13 and the president appeared to be strongly leaning in that direction. Officials said that options being considered included the deployment of more than 50,000 additional troops, but that the political and logistical obstacles to an increase larger than 20,000 to 30,000 troops would be prohibitive.

In most plans, the troop increase would be accomplished largely by accelerating some scheduled deployments while delaying the departure of units in Iraq. Powell said that meant it would be "a surge that you'd have to pay for later".

The current strategy stresses stepping up the training of Iraqi forces and handing off to them as soon as possible. Powell, who as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the country's top military position, helped lead the US-led coalition to throw Iraqi troops out of Kuwait in the first Gulf war, said he was unsure this time whether victory could be achieved, adding: "If victory means you have got rid of every insurgent, that you have peace throughout the country, I don't see that in the cards right now". But it was possible, he said, to install a certain level of order and security.