U.S. Troops to Leave Iraq Weeks Ahead of Schedule

After President Obama announced at the end of last month that the U.S. troops in Iraq would be pulled out by the end of the year, the administration is now speeding up the complete withdrawal of approximately 40 000 troops by early December this year. This announcement was met by strong disagreement in the ranks of the Republicans. They fear that the pulling out of the US forces at this point would leave the country prey to Iran and give Al Qaeda a chance of resurgence.

Senator John McCain, who ran against Obama in the 2008 elections, deeply criticized the President's decision to withdraw all US troops by December this year. He expressed his concern that the administration's commitment to the complete withdrawal of US forces from Iraq may have played a crucial role in accelerating the process. However, one of the key issues the US had to face was the refusal of the Iraqi government to grant judicial immunity in case to any remaining US troops.

Nevertheless, Republicans' concern about spreading Iranian influence within Iraq may not be that implausible. Iranian military and political power in the country is now further enhanced by its growing soft power. According to Al Arabiya, cheap goods produced in Iran have flooded the Iraqi markets, while Iranian companies have invested billions of dollars in construction projects throughout the country, including the holy cities of Najaf and Kerbala.

In comparison, the Democrats perceive this decision as a relief on the US economy. While a war is always costly both financially and in terms of humanties casualties, sustaining it in a period of economic recession risks the stability of the whole country.

Yet, as the US prepares to pull out its troops, both American and Iraqi analysts are expressing fear of a new surge of Al Qaeda offshoot in the country. With the death of Osama bin Laden, the organization is seeking to assert more power and strengthen its position with its allies. Senior Iraqi analysts are concerned that ties between Al Qaeda and members of the former ruling Baath party may start to reform once the American troops withdraw.

Still it is worth noting that in any circumstances the withdrawal of the US troops from Iraq effectively puts and end to an eight-year war that cost the lives of more than 100 000 civilians and 4000 troops.

How long can Maliki hold on?

Since 2005 Iraq has been defined by its constitution, as a federal state. But will the lack of powers that al-Maliki has granted to local authorities be his downfall?

Opposition members have accused Maliki of abusing his authority and fear that he is consolidating power that according to the constitution of Iraq, should have been devolved to local bodies.

It is the view of some Iraqis that al-Maliki must allow the country to become more federal and devolve even more responsibilities to the provinces. Once Maliki has created a truly federal Iraq, his time to step down as Prime Minister will have arrived.

If Maliki continues to hoard power in this manner he will cause the fragmentation of Iraq.

His consultants advise his that increased federalism with greater funding to the provincial governments is the only solution for the country. Until now, no region has gathered enough signatures to call for a referendum on autonomy but this will not always be the case. If the regional authorities do garner enough support and achieve autonomy, the Iraq of today will cease to exist.

At present, despite the official federal nature of Iraq, too many decisions are made by the Maliki government; this needs to change. If Maliki continues to refuse the demands of the local governments, for greater autonomy, they will put more and more pressure on him and Iraq could fragment.

What Maliki will do about federal Iraq remains to be seen.At present his focus is on the withdrawal of the US troops, scheduled for the end of the year; which is, according to Mayada Al Askari, Maliki’s greatest test yet.

Al-Maliki’s government continue to postpone their discussions over whether they wish America to leave as scheduled or remain in the country a little longer. Many Iraqi’s and Iraqi groups strongly oppose any future for the US in Iraq and the American people would also need convincing.

The Iraqis must sit down together and decide what to do about the future of American troops in Iraq... but will this leave time for discussion on the future of federalism or will it all be too late for Maliki and indeed for Iraq?

Outstaying their welcome?

US Defence Secretary Robert Gates has expressed his hope that Baghdad will ask US troops to stay beyond their scheduled departure. This conflicts with President Obama’s previous pledge that the US will continue to support Iraq whilst bringing all US troops home. There are currently about 47,000 Americans in uniform in Iraq, all of whom are scheduled to leave by December 31 under an agreement worked out in 2008, shortly before Obama became President.

Gates said that a prolonged US military presence could help sustain security capabilities and other gains Iraq has made in recent years, and would send a signal of reassurance to other Arab countries facing civil unrest. Iraq could become a model for a multi-sectarian society in the Arab world “that shows that democracy works”. His comments observed that, whilst Iraqi political and military leaders acknowledge that they need further US military support, popular sentiment is strongly against an extended US presence and complicates seeking continued military help.

But surely, as a country which has had democracy essentially imposed on it from the outside, wouldn’t Iraq would make a weak example of functioning democracy? Wouldn’t Tunisia or Egypt – both countries in which democracy rose from within – set a better example? Additionally, the indication that popular sentiment might be less important than the opinions of those in power goes against the whole principle of democracy. The unpopularity of US presence should simplify and strengthen the military’s commitment to leave by the scheduled date. Gates has conceded that “we’ll just have to wait and see because the initiative ultimately has to come from the Iraqis” – but just who he is talking about when he refers to “the Iraqis” is unclear. If Gates is willing to listen to the requests of officials over the overwhelming consensus of the civilian population, the US’ fight for so-called “democracy” in the Arab world may prove to be fruitless.

Iraq raid on Church an attempt to undermine government formation

The raid by a group of fanatics on the Baghdad Catholic church was conducted by non-Iraqis thought to be of Saudi extraction according to NCF sources in Iraq. Our sources feel that this is part of a push to de-rail moves at government formation by using violence to undermine Malaki's authority.

Current status of negotiations are centred on a deal whereby Allawi would get one of his people as speaker of the parliament plus the position of chair of the special "National Strategic Committtee" that the USA is lobbying hard to promote. This with a Malaki Premiership.

Interesting. For an alternative view condemning the raids from a different angle see this from Potkin.

Ribal Al-Assad Condemns Iranian regime's interference in Iraq and the despicable hostage taking of Christians in Iraq by criminals pretending to be Muslims

The UN at it again

The United Nations is interfering in Iraq yet again. When will they learn to shut up. Iraq has a long history of UN created pain. Now the UN is trying to dictate the agenda on government formation, following, as almost always, the American lead. It is impossible to expect a final new government in Iraq before Eid. Especially with the USA being so keen on a government of national unity including Allawi. Best current bet is Allawi Foreign Minister and Malaki PM with Kurdish support and Hakim and the Sadderists as opposition. It is difficult for the Sadderists to accept Malaki as premier which is why an all shiite governing coalition is now unlikely.

UN urges Iraq to quickly form new government - Arab News - 05 August, 2010:
The UN Security Council is strongly urging Iraqi politicians to quickly agree on a new government, a call backed by the top United Nations envoy who warns that the country has reached "a critical juncture."

Iraq: A Petro-State Once More

Events in modern Iraq have always been inevitably linked to the nation’s vast oil endowments. As early as 1920, under the guise of the League of Nations Britain brought together the Ottoman provinces of Basra, Baghdad and Mosul in order to better exploit the holdings of the Turkish Petroleum Company. Later, the Ba’ath Party nationalized the Iraqi Petroleum Company arousing the hostility of the British and United States. And under Saddam Hussein these vast oil revenues were used to enrich the Sunni minority (particularly Saddam’s own Tikriti clan, indeed so much power and wealth was amassed by the Tikriti’s that Saddam was moved to pass a law in 1972 banning the use of surnames in Iraq in order to mask this reality), which had the effect of marginalizing the Shiite majority and reigniting a destabilizing sectarian rift. And these are but a few examples of how Iraq’s modern history has been governed by oil.

So what is the state of the oil industry in Iraq today? There is undoubtedly a consensus that Iraq is one the great hydrocarbon preserves in world. An array of expert testimony alludes to this, with Iraq having at least 115 million barrels of proven crude oil reserves. Iraq has the second-largest endowment of oil, amounting to approximately 11 per cent of the global total. Unsurprisingly, due the chronic instability which Iraq has experienced only 17 of 80 oil fields have been developed. All of this then points to huge potential revenues that perhaps could assist the reconstruction of Iraq’s infrastructure. Yet in the aftermath of the US-led invasion in 2003, daily oil production plummeted. Indeed, in Kirkuk (the ownership of which has been bitterly disputed) around 200,000 to 300,000 barrels of oil per day were being re-injected into because of local refining and transport constraints. Recent signs, however, are more encouraging. In 2008, the US Department of Energy reported that Iraq’s crude oil production under the control of state-owned oil companies averaged 2.4 million barrels per day (still below its pre-war production capacity level of 2.9 million barrels per day in 2003) and it is expected this year that for the first time subsequent to the invasion, Iraq will exceed its pre-war levels.

By all accounts the current Oil Minister, Hussain al-Shahristani (jailed by Saddam Hussein for refusing to assist in the development of nuclear weapons) has been beneficial for the re-development of Iraq’s oil industry. Shahristani has been successful in persuading Nuri al-Maliki to allow foreign firms to participate in the development of Iraq oil fields, despite opposition from many quarters. This was manifested dramatically in 2008 with a $3.5 billion dollar 20-year service contract agreement between Iraq’s state-owned North Oil Company and the Chinese National Petroleum Corporation to develop the Adhab oil field in the Wasit province. Iraq clearly faces many obstacles on its way to reasserting itself as a major oil state (the status of Kirkuk offers a cautionary tale). For the world though, exploiting Iraq’s oil reserves is a way of postponing the inescapable scenario of peak oil. Consequently, all major foreign powers have an interest in facilitating Iraq’s reemergence as a major oil producer. If they succeed in circumventing the numerous obstacles the conclusion is likely to be slightly depressing. The only viable vision of Iraq after all the destruction seems to be that of an oil-fuelled petro-state with no other function other than that of enriching local technocratic and bureaucratic elites. Just as in 2003 when American tanks protected no part of Baghdad other than the Oil Ministry (as well the Ministry of the Interior with its thousands of intelligence files) it seems that the value of Iraq to the wider world has been reduced down its vast oil reserves.

Iraq locked in two-man power struggle after vote

Two months after a general election that produced no outright winner, Iraq has become locked in a battle between two men fighting for power that threatens its fragile security and hopes for stability.... A great democracy is born ! ! !

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

To leave or not to leave Iraq in the lurch?

As President Obama plans to speed up U.S pullout from Iraq before the 2011 exit date put forward by the former American President Bush, to 31 of Agust 2010. Reducing the number of troops stationed in Iraq to around 50.000 to assist the Iraqi Army to take over once the U.S has withdrawn it troops. There are growing concerns internally and externally, that leaving Iraq while there are some major issues which have remained unresolved can be dangerous.

The two main issues are, control over the ethnically divided city of Kirkuk and Iraq’s oil reserves and the distribution of Iraq’s national wealth.

Despite the string of successful elections since 2005, Iraq could explode over Kirkuk and oil if they are not resolved before the U.S troop withdrawal.

The Kurdish Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani , has urged President Obama to pressure the Iraqi Government into scheduling a referendum on the issue of Kirkuk to create a stable environment for the U.S to leave.The Iraqi Government has failed to announce any date for a referendum on the issue of Kirkuk which remains deeply divided.

NCF delegation for Iraq

The NCF sends a delegation to Iraq today:

To provide an objective appraisal of the electoral issues in Iraq in anticipation of the forthcoming provincial local elections.
Specifically:
• Assessing the KRG position towards the current political configuration in Iraq and the effect the tension between the Kurds and the central government will have on the local elections.• Evaluating the extent to which the sectarian and ethnic affiliations will dominate the elections. • Assessing the political situation in Southern Iraq and the effects the developments since 2005 will have on the January local elections.
The delegation will travel to Arbil from London by air. Delegates will then travel up to Dohuk and from there to Sinjar and the Ninevah Plain, travelling back to Arbil for meetings with regional officials including prominent members of the Kurdistan Regional Government. The delegates will then proceed from Arbil to Baghdad - Najaf- Nasiriyah - Karbala returning via Amman to London.

PRESIDENT MASOUD BARZANI AT CSIS

This comes in from Stafford: Kurdistan Region President Masoud Barzani gave a talk and answered questions at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a well-respected, bipartisan, premier thinktank in Washington DC. It was broadcast by C-SPAN (Cable-Satellite Public Affairs Network) and may be watched via the following link:

Click here: C-SPAN Capitol Hill, The White House and National Politics

Iraqi president warns against delay in US deal

President Talabani is better - that's the good news. The bad news is he's flogging a dead horse on the Status of the Forces agreement. He wants everyone's hands tied before any Obama victory. He can see the way the wind is blowing I guess. Interesting times.

Iraq's President Jalal Talabani returned home Monday after heart surgery and warned that a delay in an agreement on the presence of US troops in the country beyond 2008 could undermine sovereignty.

Kurdistan's right of return

Stafford Clarry sends this comment:

Today, some 5 million displaced Iraqis attract less attention than 150,000 Georgians. Most displaced people are in desperate need of urgent and regular basic assistance - shelter, food, fuel, cooking utensils, health service, personal items, etc.
It is not for want of resources. Actually, there is a surplus. Those most responsible for their welfare have yet to provide the assistance Iraqi refugees and IDPs have urgently needed for months, even years.
In addition to inadequate shelter and food, and other basic living requirements, displaced children are growing up without adequate schooling which will adversely affect Iraq's future even further.

Leaving Anbar?

Well - so US forces are leaving Anbar. Of course that does not mean they are leaving Anbar. The vast US marine Camp Fallujah will remain. The embeded PRT goys who negotiate with the tribes will remain. Is it a mere symbolic handover? In a sense yes. But it is an indication that things have progressed dramatically. Unconcievable two years ago. Strategically Iraq is a success. Will the Iraq Army patrol the streets of Fallujah? Of course not. It would be more than their lives are worth. That will be left to the newly established "Neighborhood Watch" teams of local militia. Fallujah is a city state now. But still it is peaceful, it is progress, and Anbar is quiet thank God. But the word Anbar means "Arsenal" - and boy what an arsenal. Awash wish weapons. So nobody should take anything forgranted.

Iraqi forces yesterday took control of the Sunni Anbar province, once the most explosive battlefield in Iraq, from the US military, symbolising the growing security gains in the war-torn country.

Divisive politics

Iraqi politicians have fallen flat on their faces, yet again. The Economist is concerned that "the politicians will again muff their chance to make a breakthrough towards a real accommodation between Iraq’s competing sects and groups." And they have, failing to pass a law to allow for sorely needed local elections.

Kirkuk is the issue crippling the process, and it shouldn't have gotten to this point. A referendum deciding the fate of the city should have happened long ago, as stipulated in the constitution. And then al-Maliki perhaps bombastically proposed an unrealistic bill to parliament, vetoed by Talabini. The rushing to pass a law before parliament recess in the last few weeks only seems to have exacerbate the Kirkuk problem.

The New York Times reports that "violence has declined in the city in the past year, but the drop masks deep mistrust between the city’s ethnic groups that exploded last week when a suicide bomber attacked a Kurdish demonstration and a mob of Kurds responded by attacking the nearby headquarters of the Turkmen political front. Turkmen guards fired on the crowd, and the day’s violence left 28 people dead and more than 200 wounded."

Kirkuk is historically Kurdish. And despite ethnic cleansing and Arabization under Saddam, it is still predominantly Kurdish. What the issue really represents is denial that Iraq is a fragmented and fragmenting nation. The Iraqi politicians need to stop obsessing about their nationalist project. In any case, delivering better local administration, which the provincial elections would have been a move towards, may be the only way to keep the central government effective.

Baghdad Jews Have Become a Fearful Few

We have worked on hostage related issues and other matters affecting the Baghdad Jewish community for two years now. Always careful not to allow the media to highlight their plight lest it focus attention on them. And now this from an irresponsible New York Times reporter:

By STEPHEN FARRELL
BAGHDAD — "I have no future here to stay."
Written in broken English but with perfect clarity, the message is a stark and plaintive assessment from one of the last Jews of Babylon.
The community of Jews in Baghdad is now all but vanished in a land where their heritage recedes back to Abraham of Ur, to Jonah's prophesying to Nineveh, and to Nebuchadnezzar's sending Jews into exile here more than 2,500 years ago.
Just over half a century ago, Iraq's Jews numbered more than 130,000. But now, in the city that was once the community's heart, they cannot muster even a minyan, the 10 Jewish men required to perform some of the most important rituals of their faith. They are scared even to publicize their exact number.

TO VIEW FULL ARTICLE CLICK HERE

Cooperating with the CIA Is a Moral Obligation

Felix sends this item - In an article published on April 1, 2008, in the Arab liberal e-journal Elaph, Iraqi liberal Khudayr Taher, who now lives in the U.S., wrote that American intelligence has done a great service to humanity in helping to defeat Nazism, communism, the Taliban, and Saddam Hussein, and that cooperating with the CIA is a moral and religious obligation:

"When we in the Arab world look at others we are accustomed to projecting our own faults onto them. We pull out rash and gratuitous ready-made judgments that are without basis in reality. In so doing, we do wrong to ourselves and to others. "When the subject of the CIA comes up, [we] fling out a handful of descriptions and accusations that have nothing to do with reality. The CIA is a national [security] apparatus whose mission is different than that of the intelligence apparatuses in Arab states. It is an apparatus that defends the national interest, and not the ruling regime.

TO VIEW FULL ITEM CLICK HERE

Iraq to spend 590 million dollars on weapons

Anything that results in Iraq's corrupt Ministry of Interior getting hold of more weapons is always troubling. What are they going to use them for - more kidnappings by the Baghdad Police Force?

Agence France-Presse - 03 April, 2008
Iraq is expected to buy more than 590 million dollars in military equipment in 2008, including weapons and ammunition, the US military said on Wednesday.Iraq's interior ministry is already in various stages of negotiations to purchase the equipment through nine deals via the US-run foreign military sales programme, a statement said.

TO VIEW FULL ITEM CLICK HERE

Two Observations

1. The political process FAILED in Iraq - but not the democratic experiment. It was SUPREMELY succesful despite Western interference (e.g. with the Ninevah recount). Democracy was seized upon enthusiastically by the Iraqis and adopted for their own. It will be hard to row back on that process. Impossible really except by imposing a true dictator - another Saddam - and that would have to be done externally as the two main power blocks (Shiite and Kurd) have no interest in abandoning democracy.

2. At regional level Iraq now resembles Mediaeval Italy with city states (like Fallujah) and principalities (like the two Kurdistans). It will remain fragmented. War will be created if a new central authority wishes to restore central hegemony. Iraq is no longer truly just one country in the united sense but more a loose federation of mini-states bound together by a puppet overarching assembly. Does this contradict my first paragraph - maybe.

No end to the suffering?

How different perspectives can be. Zaki travelled with me - as he always does if he needs to get into the interior of Iraq - and he saw things as bad whereas I saw them as phenomenally better - better than they have been in years.

Any Iraqis who had dared believe that security was returning to their troubled country had their illusions shattered when, on 23 November, an explosion at al-Ghazl pet market in central Baghdad claimed the lives of 15 Iraqis and injured about 60 more.
Four members of a Shia cell were arrested by Iraqi and US forces and admitted that they had carried out the attack, planting the bombs in crates to blend innocently with those of traders selling chickens, pigeons and sheep for household use. They claimed under interrogation that they had hoped local people would assume al-Qaeda had targeted the market - as it has many times in the past - and turn to the Shia militias for protection.

TO VIEW FULL ITEM CLICK HERE

Prostitution ordeal of Iraqi girls

Mialy emerged from the shadows to send this story in which the BBC's Lina Sinjab investigates the growing problem of sex trafficking and prostitution among Iraqi refugees in Syria. Mialy writes: "thought you might be interested in this article. Unfortunately it's pretty shocking and sad the difficulties and sexual exploitation of young women and girls caused by the mess that is Iraq but it's often overlooked ..."

TO VIEW STORY CLICK HERE