"This is the day of our sovereignty," said Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki.
"Together we will go forward toward a free, prosperous and glorious Iraq, where Iraqis can live with pride and dignity and can be proud that they are sons of this beloved country," he said.
Since the cabinet approved the final version of the security agreement Nov. 16, the government has waged an intense effort to urge approval of the measure, which goes into effect Jan. 1, 2009, when the United Nations mandate that now governs U.S. troop operations in the country expires.
There's a timetable in the document that requires U.S. troops to withdraw from cities and towns by June 30, 2009, and for all troops to leave by the end of 2011 unless the Iraqis and Americans negotiate a separate pact to govern an extension of the American military presence. Which leaves the door open to further arrangements, of course.
This is a defeat for Iran, which was lobbying the Shiite government we set up not to ratify the deal.Ultimately, Iraq decided it didn't want to become an Iranian colony.
We'll see what develops..
I hope you are right about this being a defeat for Iran. Unfortunately I think this may be in error. "...unless the Iraqis and the Americans negotiate a separate pact to govern and extension of the American military prescense." I think this part may have benn inserted into the agreement as a face saving measure for the Aemricans.
ReplyDeleteSince early 2004 or early, the Americans realized that the intellegence that led to the Iraqi front in the war was in error. The Aemricans have been looking for a face saving way out of Iraq since then. There never was any serious plans for a long range American military presence in Iraq.
The chances of the Iraqis wanting to negotiate an extension would probably be quite high if they felt the Aemricans could be trusted. Since they don't think we can be trusted, the chances of them requesting negotiating sessions to extend the Aemrican presence is about 1 in 100. The chances of the Aemricans agreeing to negotiate an extension are about 1 in 10,000 or less. The Aemricans want out and all that is required is a face saving measure.
While American military bases in Iraq would have been helpful in the war on Jihad, The Iraqis are not going to agree to that. Such an agreement would have angered Iran and Syria. With the American government and the American people anxious to withdraw they likely felt the Aemricans could not be trusted to actually honor an agreement on long term Amrican military bases. If Aemrica backed out on such an agreeemmt amd betrayed the Iraqis and their government, the Iranians and the Syrians would have punished the Iraqi governemtn severly.
Iraq borders several countries who are heavy supporters of Islamic terrorists. These bases could have been used to keep a close eye on these countries and could have served as a check on them. Unfortunately the bases would have had negative utility for the Americans. The Iraqis have said their territory can not be used to attack neighboring terrorist supporting states. Again I think this comes down to trust. The Iraqis can read history. They know about the South Vietnamesw were betrayed. They know about the Bay of Pig Invasion. Also, America's betrayal of them after the first Gulf War has still got to be fresh in their minds.
With that said the Iraqis may be willing to be somewhat flexible on the issue of their territory being used to attack terrorist bases in neighboring countries. American forces recently conducted an attack on Syrian targets or so we have been told. This would not have occurred without approval from the highest levels of the Iraqi government.
In summary, I hope and pray that this agreement is a defeat for Iran but I think it may be nothing more than a way for the Americans to acheive a face saving exit from Iraq. Even if the Iraqis wanted to negotiate a longer US military presence, it seems unlikely the Americans will want to do so no matter how many times or how many ways the Iraqis may ask them to do so.
I was negligent in my previous post in not mentioning the base betrayal of Georgia by NATO and America. Any type of deal with the Aemricans that would invovle a long range American prescense in Iraq would be bound to infuriate the Iranians and the Syrians. It would be a disaster for the Iraqis to negotiate a long range American military prescense with the Americans only tot hav the Americans abandon them. It would be equally disasterous for the Iraqis to ask the Americans to remain in the country only to have the Americans refuse. Eitehr Way Irana nd Syris would be infuriated. Bottom line: right now America and the West cannot be trusted.
ReplyDeleteI wish this wasn't so but it is. If I wre a foreign government, I surw wouldn't trust us right now.
It was a defeat that the left-wing illuminati will not admit. They still believe we're losing the war.
ReplyDelete