WASHINGTON, Oct 5 (AFP) - Former US administrator in Iraq Paul Bremer sparked a political storm on Tuesday by saying not enough US troops had been sent to back the invasion.
John Kerry, the Democratic challenger to President George W. Bush in the November 2 US election, called on the Bush administration to acknowledge its misjudgment over the invasion of Iraq.
The White House largely remained quiet about Bremer's comments only suggesting that Bremer did not raise the issue with Bush, without making a firm denial.
Bremer sparked the controversy with a speech on Monday that contradicted assertions by Bush and top Defense Department officials that the US military had everything it needed to secure Iraq.
The administration has also been embarrassed again by remarks from Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld who said in a speech he had seen no "strong, hard evidence" linking former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda.
Bremer said: "We never had enough troops on the ground."
He told a conference of insurance professionals that he arrived in Baghdad in May 2003 to find "horrid" looting because of the lack of patrols.
"We paid a big price for not stopping it, because it established an atmosphere of lawlessness," Bremer said.
In a statement sent later to The Washington Post, Bremer stressed his support for the US strategy in Iraq, however.
"I believe that we currently have sufficient troop levels in Iraq," he said, noting that his references to troop levels referred to May 2003, "when I believed we needed either more coalition troops or Iraqi security forces to address the looting."
Bremer raised similar concerns about troop levels at a forum at DePauw University in Indiana on September 16, according to a transcript released by the university.
"The single most important change -- the one thing that would have improved the situation -- would have been having more troops in Iraq at the beginning and throughout," Bremer was quoted as saying.
"Although I raised this issue a number of times with our government, I should have been even more insistent," he said.
The White House suggested that Bremer had never raised his worries with Bush. But spokesman Scott McClellan did not make a categorical denial.
"They met on a regular basis. I don't remember that Ambassador Bremer ever talked about that, but we never got into the habit of reading out any of those discussions," McClellan said.
The administration made the case that decisions on troop levels were made in consultation with troop commanders.
Larry DiRita, the Pentagon spokesman, said in a statement that Rumsfeld relied on recommendations from military commanders and the Joint Chiefs of Staff "as the basis for decisions regarding force levels."
"The commander of the US Central Command determined the number of US forces needed during the major combat phase of operations in Iraq, and the forces needed since the end of major combat operations in May 2003," he said.
With Iraq now a key issue in the campaign for the November 2 presidential election, Democrat Kerry seized on Bremer's remarks to step up pressure on the Republican administration.
Speaking in Tipton, Iowa, Kerry said "just today we have learned that America's top official who was responsible for managing the coalition provisional authority has acknowledged two big mistakes."
Kerry called on the Bush administration to "acknowledge those mistakes."
During a debate between Kerry and Bush last week, the Democrat insisted the administration had ignored pre-war advice on troop numbers, even from top military professionals.
Bremer's remarks drew a stark contrast with repeated upbeat statements by Bush, Rumsfeld and other top administration officials, who have consistently insisted the United States had enough forces in Iraq.
About 133,000 US troops are currently deployed in Iraq, forming the bulk of an international coalition that toppled Saddam's government. Other nations in the coalition have about 23,500 soldiers in Iraq.
Despite the failure to find weapons of mass destruction, the main justification for the war, Bremer said he agreed with Bush's decision to invade Iraq because there was a "real possibility" Saddam might have provided weapons to terrorist groups that had vowed to kill Americans.