In a long-awaited joint hearing on the war Monday, Democrats intend to press Gen. David H. Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker about whether the Iraqi government is making enough political progress.

“What in the world is the Iraqi government doing?” said Ike Skelton, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, when asked Sept. 7 what he intended to ask Petraeus and Crocker. “We go through all this blood and treasure to secure their country. It’s astounding.”

Skelton’s comments underscore how Democrats intend to adjust the lens of Monday’s Armed Services and Foreign Affairs hearing to focus not on the recent reported security gains that Republicans want to tout, but on the prospects that Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki will make the political compromises needed to ensure that recent military gains have staying power.

The Democrats also are raising concerns about the report’s integrity, accusing the administration of manipulating underlying data to make the situation seem more favorable.

Skelton, D-Mo., who will run the hearing, said he will focus on whether the Maliki government is capable of making political compromises with Sunnis. Petraeus himself has said there is no military solution in Iraq, only a political one.

Democrats are expected to question whether military progress in Iraq has been accompanied by the kind of political success it was designed to facilitate.

House GOP leaders, for their part, are expected to focus on those military gains. The House Republican Conference, chaired by Adam H. Putnam of Florida, circulated a memo on the floor Friday that highlights recent security gains in Baghdad and Anbar province. The report also stresses Petraeus’ credentials and says the consequences of failure in Iraq are enormous.

“The debate about whether the surge is working is over,” it says.

While Congress last week received three reports on the war — from U.S. intelligence agencies, the Government Accountability Office and a commission headed by former Gen. James L. Jones — the Petraeus report is highly anticipated because it is expected to foreshadow and provide justification for the administration’s next steps.

The three previous reports showed that despite some progress, much work is yet to be done in Iraq. Democrats seized on those reports and are expected to quote from them in questioning Petraeus and Crocker.

The two are “expected to present the rosiest scenario possible,” said House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer, D-Md., in a statement. “However, a clear pattern has already been established by three recent, independent reports: Despite the surge, Iraqis are not making progress toward political reconciliation, and there has not been a clear decrease in violence.”

Skelton echoed Hoyer’s view.

“The lack of political progress in Iraq is disturbing and I fear that all of our military efforts will be for naught if the Iraqis fail to achieve the political settlements needed to secure a bright future for that country,” Skelton said in a statement.

Joe Sestak of Pennsylvania, a freshman Democrat who formerly served as an admiral, is an Armed Services member whose knowledge of military affairs dwarfs that of his colleagues. He said the questions in Iraq are not military but political. And he said Petraeus and Crocker are not even the right officials to be testifying about the strategic implications of the Iraq War.

“I view with grave concern that we have allowed the tone of this debate to be set by a general, a military person, no matter how respected,” he said. “What I want to hear on Monday — which we won’t — is what is the political progress in Iraq and the region.”

Leading up to Monday’s hearing, Democrats have questioned whether Petraeus and Crocker can be relied upon to give an independent assessment.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., last week called it the “Petraeus-Crocker presentation of the Bush report.” Democrat Tom Lantos of California, who chairs the Foreign Affairs Committee, also questioned Petraeus’ autonomy.

Sen. Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the Democratic whip, said, “By carefully manipulating the statistics, the Bush-Petraeus report will try to persuade us that violence in Iraq is decreasing and thus the surge is working.”

The hearing is vital to Republican political aspirations because the party’s leaders believe the two administration officials will support the position that more patience is required with the war, which is now in its fifth year. Republicans intend on Monday to elicit from the general and the ambassador positive news from the front, according to a GOP aide involved in consultations before the hearing.

In the hearing, Republicans will be looking to get concrete data and examples about not only military progress but also less-publicized political gains.

Robin Hayes, R-N.C., an Armed Services member whose district includes Fort Bragg, said he thinks the military situation is improving in the parts of Iraq where the surge has focused. “This will be Gen. Petraeus’ report, not the White House or anyone else’s,’’ said Hayes, who narrowly won re-election last fall.

Petraeus and Crocker will appear before 107 members in the huge Cannon Caucus Room, with each member given five minutes to ask questions. Then, on Tuesday, the two will testify before the Senate Armed Services and Foreign Relations committees. Later in the week, the White House will send Congress a report updating it on the war.

Edward Epstein, Alan K. Ota and Josh Rogin contributed to this story.