Email This to a Friend
U.S.-Iraq Negotiations Come Down to the Wire
The Status of Forces Agreement hangs in the balance — as does the future of Iraq.
Negotiations over the Status of Forces Agreement have reached a very difficult moment as time runs out quickly. Tension and an exchange of blunt statements and warnings have dominated the environment in the last few days. On the one hand, the Iraqi cabinet and many in the parliament rejected the final draft, demanding unspecified adjustments. On the other hand, the American administration largely rejected those demands and warned of the consequences of an Iraqi failure to ratify the agreement.
It appears that direct communications are not in their best shape, to the extent that the British commanders in Iraq are playing the moderator role between the Iraqi and American sides, according to state-owned Al-Sabah:
A parliamentary source said that Britain has become the moderator between Washington and the parliamentary powers. The source revealed that a meeting was held between Ali Adeeb of the UIA [United Iraqi Alliance] and the deputy commander of British forces, and lasted for an hour. This meeting was followed by another meeting [between the British commander] and members of the Accord Front and a third one with a number of other parliamentary powers.
Not all members of parliament share the cabinet’s rejection of the agreement. In fact some suggest that refusing to sign the agreement is tantamount to opening the door for coups. Al-Bayyna al-Jadida quoted three prominent Iraqi lawmakers speaking along these lines:
Chief of the Kurdistan Alliance Fouad Masoum said if the agreement is not signed by the end of the year, U.S. troops will be left without legal cover from the UN. This means they will not have to perform security-keeping operations. This justifies concerns about the possibility of a coup. … Chief of the Accord Front Adnan Duleimi also warned of a coup toppling the government. Meanwhile MP Iyad Jamal Ad-Din says that the departure of U.S. troops — or their presence with no operational significance if the agreement is not signed — exposes Iraq to security threats, top of which is a coup against the democratic system in the country.
Page 1 of 2 Next ->
Omar and Mohammed Fadhil are PJM's Baghdad editors and they blog at Iraq the Model.
 |
 |
 |
Podcasts |  PJM Home |
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
9 Comments
1. john from cinncinati:what did Obama tell these guys? when full sharia law gets under way in Iraq they will wish for the bad Americans again. Oh when are the Iraqi’s going to stand up. America cleaned house and now the bad spirits want to come back in, if they do it will be much worse than even when Saddam was in charge. the fatwas are coming from outside of Iraq? do you think they are in Iraq’s best interest, they want to conquer Iraq without being viewed as occupiers.
Oct 25, 2008 - 5:34 am 2. 888:The signing of the SOFA by both parties will be a breakthrough, watershed event and will pave the way to a more stable, peaceful and prosperous Iraq just like the SOFAs with South Korea, Japan and Germany did the same for those US allies. There will still be many small bumps along the way to stability in the country and region, but, at least, continued US presence in Iraq will serve as a deterrent to the dangerous, nuclear ambitions of next door neighbor, Iran, and radical Islamic terrorist factions throughout the Middle East.
If Obama wins, he will be disastrous for the region and the gains made thus far because he will significantly draw down the military as he has pledged to do, so he can use Defense funding for his trillion dollar domestic social spending program. But it is our military’s presence throughout the Gulf/Southwest Asia and to the south (from Iraq, Bahrain, Qatar, UAE to Africa) that is keeping the fragile peace throughout the volatile region. By throwing in the white flag of surrender, retreat and defeat, Obama could very well cause massive chaos, civil war, and destabilization. Plus, all the American and allied lives lost and injured there in defense of freedom will have been for naught.
Oct 25, 2008 - 8:39 am 3. Robert L. Mayo:As previously reported, during his trip to Iraq Sen. Obama privately asked members of the Iraqi government to block a status of forces agreement with the Bush administration. He may get his wish.
If, after coming so close to victory, Sen. Obama’s interference produces a coup, or civil war against Iranian domination, his Presidency will be destroyed as the man who lost Iraq.
Oct 25, 2008 - 12:07 pm 4. Marc Malone:This will all clear up after the election. If McCain gets elected, the agreement will be signed, as the detrators know that this is the best deal they’ll get. If Obama gets elected, it will go down in defeat, as everyone maneuvers for a power-grab. Tribal poilitics will become dominant once again.
The resulting chaos will be blamed by Obama of the inability of Bush to get an agreement signed. He also will not interfere further in the subsequent collapse of the Iraqi government, “not wanting to shed any more American troops’ lives over there, trying to fix Bush’s mistake”.
Imagine: all that effort and sacrifice for naught.
Oct 25, 2008 - 2:54 pm 5. Brian H:Nah, it’s just Iraqis having a little fun playing brinkmanship. Isn’t it exciting?
Oct 25, 2008 - 3:04 pm 6. NS:It is pretty clear that the Iraqis are stalling because they DONT want a SOFA agreement- not just by the end of this year – not EVER. Maliki could have shown some leadership here – he has chosen not to. It is pretty clear now why he basically sandbagged McCain back in July by saying that he agreed with Obama on a 16 month deadline for withdrawal.
Obama wanted troops out in 16 months after he assumes Presidency no matter what the situation on the ground is. It is possible that he will ask Maliki to agree to extend the UN mandate by 18 months and then withdraw all troops within that time.
The US is not going to give the Iraqis the right to prosecute US soldiers – its just not going to happen.Its not going to agree to any other crazy conditions either.
So this charade will end when Maliki announces that he is going to request for an extension of the UN mandate after Obama’s victory is officially declared.
SCARY.
Oct 26, 2008 - 1:12 pm 7. Ex-fetus:Bring the troops home, we need them here for the counter coup against Obama bin Biden.
Oct 26, 2008 - 5:51 pm 8. Saltmine:It is perfectly clear that the primary threat of a coup is from the Iraqi army. A modest garrison of American military strategically placed would be sufficient to greatly reduce the threat of an army coup. Can’t the civilian Iraqi government authorities understand this?
Oct 26, 2008 - 7:41 pm 9. Marc Malone:Saltmine – It’s not that they don’t understand it. It’s a normal consideration in the third world. That’s how tribalism works. Hussein had his sons in charge of the military for a reason.
The big concern is a reversion to civil war. The Shia would love to dominate the Sunni. Why bother sharing? In the third world, you support your family, period. Your family supports your tribe/sect, period. You rise or fall together. You don’t reach out to the other tribe. You don’t hire other tribesmen if there is anyone from your tribe needing work, be he however incompetent. The other tribesmen get the scut jobs.
Only our presence convinces them to try to learn new behavior patterns, that is, democracy and power-and-revenue-sharing. That’s why the victory is still fragile. We’ve won the war. We’ve had 15 casualties in Iraq this month, mostly non-combat. It’s over. Now, we must win the peace.
Oct 29, 2008 - 1:08 am