Maliki now on board with “withdrawal agreement”
posted at 5:10 pm on November 14, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
The much-delayed status-of-forces agreement (SOFA) between Iraq and the US may move forward, thanks to Nouri al-Maliki’s endorsement of the latest version. Maliki calls it a “withdrawal agreement” that requires American troops to leave in 2011. The new nomenclature apparently intends to garner wider support in the National Assembly:
For the first time, Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki declared his support for a security agreement between the United States and Iraq in an executive council meeting last week, a close aide to the premier said Friday.
Sami al Askari said that Maliki plans to address the nation in coming days to ask for that Iraqis support the agreement, which Iraqi officials now call the “withdrawal agreement.”
The declaration is an about face for Maliki, who was maintained a tough line throughout the negotiations and in some cases publicly criticized early drafts of the agreement. Askari said the U.S. had agreed to two amendments the Iraqi government had sought to the agreement, and that the two negotiating teams would work through the night on Friday to compare the Arabic and English texts.
“We can’t get anymore,” Askari said. “In practice the Americans they can’t do anything alone according to this agreement . . . He feels now after all the amendments that it’s not a perfect agreement, but that he [Maliki] can now go to the people and say look this is far better to accept this than the other options.”
Maliki didn’t get the one concession he sought the most. The Bush administration refused to allow Iraq to prosecute American soldiers for any crimes committed in Iraq. Maliki had to know that the US would never budge on that point, but apparently feels comfortable enough with the gains he made using that as leverage. They did get the authority to inspect American cargo coming into Iraq, a particular sore point relating to Iraqi sovereignty.
The sudden agreement doesn’t leave much time for the notoriously slow National Assembly to approve it. The current UN mandate runs out at the end of December, at which point the US lacks any legal justification to remain in Iraq. Maliki doesn’t want to extend the UN mandate, as it will negate all of the points he has negotiated, including a pullback of US troops from major population centers next year. The incoming Obama administration wouldn’t want an extension of the mandate either, as it would hamstring them from making any adjustments to the SOFA after taking office.
Can the Iraqi parliament get this approved in the next seven weeks? I’d doubt it.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
You aren’t alone.
upinak on November 14, 2008 at 5:14 PM
Do whatever is necessary to prevent Obama from claiming any credit for any success in Iraq.
DerKrieger on November 14, 2008 at 5:17 PM
I guess time will tell. But it might be that they would rather make an agreement with the Bush administration than take their chances with the next one. And whatever happens in regards to the UN mandate, you can’t just wave a magic wand and make 150,000 American troops disappear. There will still need to be some kind of arrangement.
Maybe they have dealt with enough of this in the past weeks that they can get it done. We will find out.
Terrye on November 14, 2008 at 5:19 PM
Will Obama ever use the words success or victory when referring to Iraq? I wonder…
yeahNO!
joepub on November 14, 2008 at 5:20 PM
This has taken too long and it makes me nervous it’s still not done. If our Congress can wait out Bush to vote on things, I’m pretty sure the Iraqi one can too.
CP on November 14, 2008 at 5:22 PM
Seriously doubt it, which will be a disgrace.
CP on November 14, 2008 at 5:24 PM
President Bush has really aged in the last couple of years or so. :(
baldilocks on November 14, 2008 at 5:28 PM
It won’t be long before the Iraqis shift their position to trying to make sure we don’t leave too soon.
Mark1971 on November 14, 2008 at 5:29 PM
I doubt it, too. But what can you expect from an infant ‘democracy’ in that part of the world?
Badger40 on November 14, 2008 at 5:30 PM
If Obama gets on board with this, will the left hate him? He’s repeatedly talked about getting out on day 1.
lodge on November 14, 2008 at 5:33 PM
President Bush,
Have a major speech, this month, announcing our victory in Iraq. Have a parade. Thank our troops. Thank those who gave their last full measure of devotion. Express appreciation, recognition and our country’s debt to their families. Thank our allies. Thank American’s for their patience and sacrifice.
Star20 on November 14, 2008 at 5:37 PM
If the MSM or Obama himself goes out there and tries to take credit for this withdrawl agreement, as if their actions caused us to leave as victors, I will go absolutely bonkers. I’m not kidding
Defector01 on November 14, 2008 at 5:39 PM
Folks, Obama winning allows the media to say that we won in Iraq. Combined with Clinton as SOS, American hegemony may stay intact as long as the grownups like Bush made the economic deal before spineless Barry comes along in January.
Anti-Harkonnen Freedom Fighter on November 14, 2008 at 5:41 PM
Do they risk Obama and Joe “Three Pieces” Biden?
Theworldisnotenough on November 14, 2008 at 5:43 PM
On the other hand… there’s an Iraqi parliament.
Jim Treacher on November 14, 2008 at 5:45 PM
Do they risk Obama and Joe “Three Pieces” Biden?
Exactly – the SOFA locks in the US until 2011 ends….more than barry’s timeframe.
Maliki paid obama off with his election time support for Obama, and now Maliki is locking in his country’s interest by ensuring us support through the end of 2011 and beyond.
Anti-Harkonnen Freedom Fighter on November 14, 2008 at 5:45 PM
It’s up to the Iraquis to succeed or fail at this point. They have the beginnings of a working representative democracy and for the first time in, well, ever, they serve a country and not a strongman. And they owe it all to George W. Bush, whose resolve and strength of character brought it about, and whom they now treat with something akin to disdain. Can’t say my heart overflows with pro-Iraqi feeling right now.
troyriser_gopftw on November 14, 2008 at 5:56 PM
Hey, as long as a legitimate democratic body chooses to say “screw you US, get out,” it’s fine by me.
However, if AQ starts going hog-wild over there, then I just hope the next CinC has enough balls to send us in, whether or not the Iraqis agree.
Eyes on the prize–our #1 priority is the elimination of radicalism, not the guarantee of democracy.
m064404 on November 14, 2008 at 6:16 PM
I still think Pres Bush made an error when Maliki was giving his support to Obama to play against McCain as well, Bush should have said, If Maliki really believes that Iraq Security can handle all the security in Iraq, I will be consulting with Gen Petraeus and Odorno to hand over security in all provinces to the Iraqi government within three weeks. That would have put the fear of God in Maliki and his loss of face and backtracking would have been priceless. Instead Maliki was able to manipulate this election and give credibility to Obama that he doesn’t deserve.
eaglewingz08 on November 14, 2008 at 6:21 PM
glacial progress is progress none the less. I get angry at Maliki playing the nationalist card against the USA, but we did want a majoritarian government and not a puppet state. The Iraqis do not hate America, but they are Nationalistic (No matter what that fool Biden thinks) and a limited US presence is what the country would prefer. Anyway the Iraqi’s area practical people, don’t be shocked if the “withdrawal” leaves a significant US presence.
rob verdi on November 14, 2008 at 6:33 PM
hindsight being, well, hindsight…but wouldn’t THAT have been fun!
Chewy the Lab on November 14, 2008 at 6:36 PM
I’ve heard “may move forward” before.
I’m worried about contractors. The last round of “may move forward” left them OTF.
tuffy on November 14, 2008 at 6:39 PM
Ridiculous anyway you slice it. The U.S. should treat Iraq as it did Japan in WWI: take it or lump it, and we’ll leave when we’re damn good and ready.
Given the politically correct President who’s been in office the past eight years, and the outright multiculturalist one coming in, that will never happen, of course.
JDPerren on November 14, 2008 at 6:52 PM
Four words which I am open to anyone to correct.
No. Iraqi. Air. Force.
I.e. no combat air capability.
Enduring air bases anyone?
saint on November 14, 2008 at 7:15 PM
All I want is a victory in Iraq parade in a southern state where it is still warm enough to march in full uniform. I want a group of Vietnam and Gulf vets honored as well, along with the heroes that are responsible for VI day.
Please let this happen before George Bush leaves office and we surrender to the demons that are about to lead this great nation and lower the bar to the dirt.
Hening on November 14, 2008 at 7:26 PM
We will have significant numbers of troops in Iraq for a while.
Whether it is at the recruiting offices,MEPS,guys I know that are coming back,they all say that the last thing the Iraqi people want is to see us leave right now.
They know damn good and well how peace was achieved on their streets and a mass withdrawal would jeopardize that.
Besides,Obama has enough to deal with concerning the economy and figuring out how to spin his way out of all the promises he is going to break,the last thing he needs is problems over seas that could be interpreted as being created by his lack of leadership or judgment.
NSA wiretapping,terrorist interrogations,bombing strikes,patriot act…and many other tools used by the Bush
administration have been and will be used by Obama.Liberals
and their friends in the press will be okay with them then because it will be a democrat doing it.
Get ready liberals,you are going to get 4 more years of Bush
anyway.
Baxter Greene on November 14, 2008 at 8:14 PM
Cap’n, I disagree sir, with this part:
The Bush administration refused to allow Iraq to prosecute American soldiers for any crimes committed in Iraq. Maliki had to know that the US would never budge on that point.
I think there are large segments of the political/protest class in this country other countries who would jump all over the chance to support criminal proceedings against allied troops generally and American troops in particular.
Obama’s probably one of them. Although he will not lead on the issue, I dont think he’ll lift a finger to avoid it happening, and more than a few high-ranking people in the gubment will be pushing hard for it.
Do we seriously believe that Code Pink, MoveOn, half the Dems in Congress, CNN, Olby-Matthews-Maher and just about every major national daily newspaper wouldnt sell their mothers for the chance to endlessly cover dozens or hundreds of Iraqi Mi Lais committed by the evil Yanquis. Tom Hayden Jane Fonda would pass out with delighted anticipation.
Mike D. on November 14, 2008 at 8:29 PM
January 2nd is seven weeks from now. What’s so special about that date?
Did Ed mean to say “nine and a half weeks”?
Pythagoras on November 14, 2008 at 10:34 PM
That is sad. The Dictator won’t let that happen. If he does, I would be shocked. Not likely though. :( Those poor people.
sheebe on November 15, 2008 at 12:49 AM
One hopes.
I’ve been wondering about this for a while now. Iraq is not going to be able to defend itself (particularly from Iran) with just mechanized infantry. They are going to need tanks, they are going to need strike and superiority fighter jets, and they will need some kind of navy.
Count to 10 on November 15, 2008 at 4:50 PM
Comment pages: