Michael Jansen
The White House and the Pentagon are clearly concerned that Iraq will not approve the proposed agreement providing a legal basis for US troops to remain in Iraq beyond the end of the year.
On Tuesday, Defence Secretary Robert Gates and the head of the US joint chiefs-of-staff, Admiral Michael Mullen, warned that Iraq’s security could be compromised if US troops are forced to suspend operations before conditions in the country are stabilised. Gates took a tough line, saying that without an agreement, “we basically stop doing anything” in Iraq. This means operations would cease, troops would stay in their bases and preparations for withdrawal would begin.
Mullen warned that Iraqi forces are not yet ready to take full control and accused Iran of doing its best to torpedo the “Status of Forces Agreement” (SOFA), negotiated over the past seven months by US and Iraqi teams.
Since last Friday, Iraq’s national security council has been discussing the latest draft on which Prime Minister Nouri Maliki has expressed reservations. On Tuesday, the Iraqi Cabinet said that the draft would have to be amended. The text calls for US troops to leave Iraqi cities, including the fortified Green Zone in Baghdad, by June, and to pull out of the country by the end of 2011, unless conditions on the ground do not permit.
Iraqis have the impression that the qualifying phrase negates the commitment to pull out. They are also unhappy with the provisions granting immunity to US troops for crimes committed while on operations outside their bases.
Hundreds of Iraqi civilians have been killed and thousands wounded by US soldiers and Pentagon contractors on patrol, at checkpoints and during military missions. Iraqis, who feel insecure every time they leave their homes, insist that US personnel should be held accountable for their actions.
Washington does not seem to understand that the majority of Iraqis want US forces to leave Iraq as soon as possible. Fifty thousand Iraqis marched from Sadr City into central Baghdad last Saturday to demand an early withdrawal of US troops and to condemn the proposed security agreement. While most of the protesters were Shiites called upon to rally by dissident cleric Moqtada Sadr, Sunnis and Christians also took part, indicating that the withdrawal demand is multi-confessional.
The Kurds, 15 per cent of the population, constitute the only community which really wants US troops to stay on. Shiite and Sunni groups dependent on US support also want to retain the US presence.
It is significant that Sadr’s message, read out to the throng by an aide, was addressed primarily to Iraqi legislators rather than to the demonstrators. He told members of the national assembly: “The Iraqi government has abandoned its duty before God and its people and referred the agreement to you, knowing that ratifying it will stigmatise Iraq and its government for years to come.... If they tell you that the agreement ends the presence of the occupation, let me tell you that the occupier will retain his bases. And whoever tells you that [the agreement] gives us sovereignty is a liar. I am confident that your brothers in parliament will champion the will of the people over that of the occupier .... Do not betray the people.”
These were stirring words delivered by a politician who is well aware that each and every member of parliament expects to face his or her constitutents next year in a general election. Furthermore, since the legislators belong to parties and blocs which are fielding candidates for provincial councils as well as the national assembly, legislators and parties do not want to take any decisions likely to alienate voters.
George W. Bush and his minions are now having to pay a price for installing democracy in Iraq - even if the communal-confessional system chosen for the country is not only deeply flawed but also threatens the very existence of the country.
Since the proposed SOFA is a highly controversial document rejected by so many Iraqis, Maliki apparently wants two-thirds of legislators to approve the text. However, he does not even have the votes of a majority of the 275 seat assembly. He can count only on the Kurdish bloc, with 58 seats.
All 27 members of his own Dawa party may not be prepared to vote for the measure, while his main coalition partner, the pro-Iranian Supreme Iraq Islamic Council (SIIC) is critical of the text and is calling for detailed analysis and further discussion. The Sunni bloc and the majority of Christians are expressing strong reservations.
This being the case, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari has warned Washington that an agreement on SOFA is unlikely before the November 4 presidential and congressional elections in the US. Clearly, the Bush administration had been hoping to come up with an accord ahead of the US vote in the hope that positive news from Iraq could give a boost to the faltering prospects of Republican presidential hopeful John McCain.
The fact that Republicans believe that the SOFA can be portrayed as a major advance or even a victory in Iraq shows just how far removed from reality their thinking is.
Although approval of the SOFA would be a coup for the administration because of widespread Iraqi disapproval, US voters are not focused on or even terribly interested in what is happening in Iraq. The global economic meltdown, which is taking place during the watch of the Bush administration, is not only preoccupying US voters but is frightening vulnerable citizens around the globe.
It is ironic, and perhaps historically just, that the very same words, “It’s the econonmy, stoopid” may bring down George Bush II, the president who conquered Iraq, just as those words lost the 1992 election for his father, George Bush I, the man who waged war on Iraq.
