Iraq PM Wants Short-Term U.S. Agreement

Al-Maliki Proposes Interim Deal Instead Of Formal Agreement On Presence Of U.S. Troops

(CBS/AP)  Iraq's prime minister said Monday his country is now proposing an interim deal with the United States on the presence of American troops instead of a more formal agreement — and wants to include a timetable for a U.S. withdrawal.

Some type of agreement is needed to keep U.S. troops in Iraq after a U.N. mandate expires at year's end. But many Iraqi lawmakers had criticized the government's attempt to negotiate a formal status of forces agreement, worried that U.S. demands would threaten the country's sovereignty.

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said the memorandum "now on the table" includes a formula for the withdrawal of U.S. troops — an idea opposed by President Bush.

"The goal is to end the presence (of foreign troops)," al-Maliki told several Arab ambassadors to the United Arab Emirates during a meeting in Abu Dhabi.

The prime minister provided no details. But his national security adviser, Mouwaffak al-Rubaie, told The Associated Press that the government is proposing a timetable conditioned on the ability of Iraqi forces to provide security.

U.S. officials have said little publicly about the negotiations. Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, did not comment directly on the specifics when asked about it on a trip to Baghdad.

"We'd all like to see U.S. troops get out of here at some point in time," Mullen said. "However, from a military perspective I need the laws and the regulations and the agreements from the government of Iraq in order to continue operations beyond the 31st of December of this year."

With the latest moves, Iraq's government appeared to be trying to blunt opposition in parliament to any deal.

Al-Maliki also could be trying to avoid parliament altogether. He has promised in the past to submit a formal agreement with the U.S. to the legislative body.

But his spokesman indicated Monday that the government might feel no need to get approval from parliament for a shorter-term interim deal.

"It is up to the Cabinet whether to approve it or sign on it, without going back to the parliament," said spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh.

Legal experts said the form of the deal was less significant than its substance.

"You could theoretically include everything in a memorandum of understanding that you could in a formal status of forces agreement," said Michael Matheson, an expert on international law at George Washington University Law School.

The Bush administration has said it doesn't need congressional approval even for a full status of forces agreement — a position criticized by some U.S. lawmakers.

The contentious issues have been U.S. authority to carry out military operations in Iraq and arrest the country's citizens, along with legal immunity for private contractors and control of Iraqi air space.

Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari said last week after a visit to Washington that the U.S. had agreed to drop immunity for private contractors and give up control of Iraqi air space if Iraq guaranteed it could protect the country's skies.

But those concessions, never confirmed by the U.S. side, were apparently not enough to cement a formal agreement, leading Iraq instead to pursue the memorandum.

Al-Maliki said the memorandum would not ignore the thorny issues that held up a more formal deal.

"The memorandum tackles troop movement and presence, respect of sovereignty, direct arrests and direct immunity," he said.

Iraq's government has felt increasingly confident in recent weeks about its authority and the country's improved stability.

Parliament said Monday it would vote July 15 whether to approve provincial elections originally scheduled for Oct. 1. But a senior election official said it was impossible to hold the elections on schedule. If the vote is to be held before the end of the year, parliament must approve the elections by the end of July, said Judge Qassim al-Aboudi.

Violence in Iraq has fallen to its lowest level in four years. The change has been driven by the 2007 buildup of American forces, the Sunni tribal revolt against al Qaeda in Iraq and crackdowns against Shiite militias and Sunni extremists.

Despite the gains, frequent attacks continue.

A roadside bomb killed four people and injured three others Monday close to the Iranian border near Khanaqin, 90 miles northeast of Baghdad, said border guard Capt. Sarchel Abdul-Karim.

Another bomb near a dress shop in Baqouba killed one woman Monday and wounded 14 other people, police said. Baqouba, 35 miles northeast of Baghdad, and the surrounding Diyala province remain one of the country's most violent regions.

Also Monday, gunmen killed a member of the Sunni Iraqi Islamic Party in Tal Afar, 260 miles northwest of Baghdad, said police, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk to the media.

Al-Maliki's comments Monday came at a meeting with several Arab ambassadors to the United Arab Emirates in the capital, Abu Dhabi.

On Sunday, the United Arab Emirates canceled all its Iraqi debt and moved to restore a full diplomatic mission in Baghdad by naming a new ambassador.

The move was part of a recent warming between Iraq's Shiite-led government and its mostly Sunni Muslim neighbors. Washington has pushed Gulf states like the UAE to restore ties with the war-torn country.

The Emirates' official news agency, WAM, said the debt was $4 billion not including interest. A UAE official who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media said the total debt was $7 billion when interest was added.

The White House applauded the Emirates for forgiving the debt and resuming diplomatic operations in Iraq, reported CBS News correspondent Mark Knoller.

[impeach__w]

Just get out already! Let them work on kiling each other. If you can''t take their oil, at least buy it.

[impeach__w]

Why can''t the Bushes pull out in time?

If Papa bush had pulled out sooner 9 months before W was born we would not be in the mess we are in now!

[samsel3]

The Times of India August 2007 reported :

" Iran, Iraq signed an agreement to build pipelines for the transfer of Iraqi crude oil and oil products." Under the deal crude will be refined and sent back to Iraq. Bush opposed this agreement and wanted the Iraqi Parliment to accept and sign a U.S. designed oil law that would result in huge profits for BIG OIL.

Iraqi oil workers and 63% of Iraqis polled are opposed to the Bush law and prefer a hands off Iraq oil policy."

[samsel3]

On January 26, 1998 in a letter to the President the PNAC asked Clinton to invade Iraq and get rid of Saddam Hussein.. Clinton refused their request.

February 12, 1998 John J. Maresca vp of UNOCAL oil appeared before a House sub committee. The purpose of the meeting was to gain support for exploitation of oil & natural gas resources in the Caspian Sea area.

In his testimony he stated, "The key question is how the energy resources of Central Asia can be made available to nearby Asian markets ". The exploitation option stated : "One obvious route south would cross Iran, but this is foreclosed by American companies because of U.S. sanctions (with Iran ) . The only other possible route is across Afghanistan, which of course has it''s own unique challenges. " He continued saying, " the pipeline we have proposed across Afghanistan could not begin until a recognized government is in place that has the confidence of governments,lenders (world monitary fund & world bank ) ,and our company "...

..."UNOCAL and other American companies are prepared to undertake the job ".

195 days 18 hours is long enough. And let the Great Decider lead them out. How about a marching song? Rick of Texas has provided this one:

198 days left of Bush on the Mall!
198 days left of Bush!

Take him down,
Slap him around.

198 days left of Bush on the Mall!

Okay, okay, it''s a drinking song, but you don''t have to twist the National Anthem to sing along!

[deacon20081]

Un-like the USA where we are more civilized and don''t kill our leaders..we will try them yes...but we allow the courts to work; Iraqi''s will blow up and or kill the entire families of their defacto leadership when they feel the country is threatened by a puppet government doing the bidding of "outside influences" namely Bush and Company. Their leaders are well aware of this fact. The spoils of War are what the Oil Companies are after and the Iraqi people know it full well. Democracy is working in Iraq after all as they insist on saying no to a corrupt governing body. Good for them.

[barocalto]

Bush claims Operation Iraqi Freedom was about bringing democracy to Iraq.
Posted by alphaa10
................................
All those Iragi''s walking around with those purple fingers after the last several free democratic elections has been great to see.

And guess what the Iragi''s are getting their democracy which is such great news... and yes Bush is getting his democracy in Irag....

[barocalto]

General Wesley Clark.

Clark stated he viewed a defense department memo that described how the U.S. was going to take out seven countries in five years...."starting with Iraq,then Syria and Lebanon, then Libya,then Somalia and Sudan, and back to Iran."
Posted by samsel3
............................
We can only hope...

But since the source is Wesley Clark I doubt if there is any truth in the statement.

[samsel3]

" Iraqi oil workers and 63% of Iraqis polled are opposed to the Bush law and prefer a hands off Iraq oil policy."

The Times of India August 2007 reported :

" Iran, Iraq signed an agreement to build pipelines for the transfer of Iraqi crude oil and oil products."" Under the deal crude will be refined and sent back to Iraq."

"Bush opposed this agreement and wanted the Iraqi Parliment to accept and sign a U.S. designed oil law that would result in huge profits for BIG OIL."

[samsel3]

Somehow I won''t put too much faith in any poll that came out of Irag..

Posted by Barocalto at 04:21 PM : Jul 07, 2008

And who''s poll would you trust ? Bush & Cheney have been sucessful in accomplishing a big piece of what they set out to do. They still have a few more goals to meet by the end of their terms.

In an interview published by the French, dedefensa.org journalist Amy Goodman''s interview with General Wesley Clark.

Clark stated he viewed a defense department memo that described how the U.S. was going to take out seven countries in five years...."starting with Iraq,then Syria and Lebanon, then Libya,then Somalia and Sudan, and back to Iran."

[vnveteran72]

"Al-Maliki says the proposed memorandum includes a formula for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq".

Sounds like he wants us out to me....and in a short amount of time at that.....

[barocalto]

Iraqis polled
Posted by samsel3

Somehow I won''t put too much faith in any poll that came out of Irag..

[alphaa10-2009]

Bush claims Operation Iraqi Freedom was about bringing democracy to Iraq. That hasn''t happened, even nearly. Instead, Bush created a simmering civil war, and a de facto partition of the country along sectarian / religious lines.

The only fitting resolution is al Maliki finally begins to act in the very freedom Bush insisted he invaded to provide. Even if that means US troops are asked to leave.

The principal problem with Bush''s prevarication about his oil and other strategic interests in Iraq is simple-- the policy of denial, and the lies Bush, Cheney and folowers told, over and over, have come back to haunt them.

The result is an amusing burlesque of sober foreign policy, as well as an enduring legacy of shame for Bush, the GOP camp followers, and their minions.

[j-whitman]

dmw1167,,,, Read the friggin article *******

[j-whitman]

dmw1167,,,, You don''t have to look any further than this article to see how Bush & McBush are wrong,,, Both Bush & McBush said we would be in Iraq untill after either''s administrations

Maliki says 2 years with time tables, as Obama''s been saying ------ Bush & McCain oppose both ideas & always have.

[samsel3]

Iraq''s oil infrastructure was rebuilt when Cheney controlled Haliburton. Halliburton/Iraq deal was done through the French because it was illegal for US companies to deal with Iraq, except for the oil for food program which US oil companies participated in.

Saddam was charging US Oil interests more for oil then other countries and cutting off supplies at times .

On January 26, 1998 in a letter to the President the PNAC asked Clinton to invade Iraq and get rid of Saddam Hussein.. Clinton refused their request.

Paul Wolfowitz,Don Rumsfeld, Scooter Libby, George H.W. Bush, Richard Cheney, Eliot Cohen. Zalmay Khalilzad, Steve Forbes, Donald Kagan, Pete Rodman, Henry S Rowen, Dan Quale, William J.Bennett, Jeb Bush,

they are all members of the PNAC Project for a New American Century.

[samsel3]

" Iraqi oil workers and 63% of Iraqis polled are opposed to the Bush law and prefer a hands off Iraq oil policy."

The Times of India August 2007 reported :

" Iran, Iraq signed an agreement to build pipelines for the transfer of Iraqi crude oil and oil products." Under the deal crude will be refined and sent back to Iraq. Bush opposed this agreement and wanted the Iraqi Parliment to accept and sign a U.S. designed oil law that would result in huge profits for BIG OIL.

[quatermass2]

Barocalto:
But today, on July 6, 2008, the Associated Press reports that Saddam Hussein had a nuclear program
At the Tuwaitha nuclear complex just south of Baghdad
Which included 550 metric tons (over 1.2 million pounds) of "yellowcake", or concentrated uranium
And multiple devices that could be used in a nuclear weapon.

That''''''''s pretty big news, isn''''''''t it?
====================================================
Wow, you ARE thick - how many times do you need to be told that is stuff we captured in 1991?????

" Later, U.N. inspectors documented and safeguarded the yellowcake, which had been stored in aging drums and containers since before the 1991 Gulf War. There was no evidence of any yellowcake dating from after 1991, the official said.

U.S. and Iraqi forces have guarded the 23,000-acre (9,300-hectare) site - surrounded by huge sand berms - following a wave of looting after Saddam''s fall that included villagers toting away yellowcake storage barrels for use as drinking water cisterns."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/07/05/world/main4235028.shtml?source=search_story

So QUIT SPAMMING THE THREAD!

[toldyouso12]

CORRECTION:
hat Al Maliki is a collaborator--he can only stay in power and stay RICH and stay alive, as long as we stay in Iraq--for his own sake, he will draw it all out and keep us there, until he dies. LOL

Posted by toldyouso12 at 02:52 PM : Jul 07, 2008

NOTE: If Obama wins, Al Maliki may all of a sudden have to care more about the real Iraq and not serving our interests--that ought to be real interesting.

[toldyouso12]

Sure, Bush is upset--he wanted Iraq to be our colony and oil flunky. But he should not be that upset. Al Maliki is his boy. The "Short term agreement" is like our promise to leave Iraq after they hold Democratic elections" it is a way to get an agreement that no one has any intention of honoring. So Al Maliki gets the agreement, then lets Americans stay and stay and stay. Because he knows...like Bush knows..that Al Maliki is a collaborator--he can only stay in power and stay reach and stay alive, as long as we stay in Iraq--for his own sake, he will draw it all out and keep us there, until he dies. LOL