Iraqi Leader: Internal Strife Could Destroy Iraq

If anything can destroy the new Iraq, it will be the internal strife that has always plagued that country. (A prior Shiite demonstration is pictured above.) No matter how hard America and its Coalition partners tried or how heavy the loss we sustained, we can’t force the Iraqis to get along with each other. Only the different Iraqi factions can find the common ground that must hold their nation together:

* * * *

Arizona Daily Star (Tucson)
January 26, 2009

Sectarianism A 'Rotten Thing,' Iraqi Leader Says

By Associated Press

BAGHDAD — Iraq's prime minister on Sunday blamed sectarianism for destroying the country, as he tried to tap into a backlash against religious parties before next weekend's nationwide provincial elections.

Nouri al-Maliki, a Shiite, has been delivering numerous speeches in the days leading up to Saturday's provincial elections in a thinly veiled effort to rally support for the candidates running under the umbrella group that includes his Dawa party.

"Sectarianism is behind the destruction of the country," al-Maliki told academics and sportsmen at a forum in Baghdad. "It is natural that we have different views, but we are all representing a unified Iraq that is not ready for division."

He appeared to be distancing himself from the major religious parties, particularly his governmental ally the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, after years of violence between Shiites and Sunnis.

He told the forum that sectarianism is a "rotten thing" and that Iraqis must focus on rebuilding efforts.

Al-Maliki isn't running, but his pictures have been plastered on campaign posters throughout Iraq, and he has campaigned extensively as he seeks to solidify his power base before national parliamentary elections later this year.

For years, al-Maliki himself had a reputation as a hard- line Shiite nationalist. But there are signs the public, especially in Baghdad and other major cities, has grown weary of the religious parties that have dominated national politics since the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003.

Al-Maliki's criticism of sectarian politics appeared to be an effort to tap into public discontent against parties run by clerics, such as the Supreme Council.

The prime minister also favors centralized rule and opposes a bid by the council, the country's biggest Shiite party, to establish a self-ruled region in the Shiite south modeled on the autonomous Kurdish administration in the north.

Voters on Saturday will be choosing ruling councils in 14 of the country's 18 provinces. It will be the first nationwide balloting in three years. A strong showing by al-Maliki's Coalition of the State of Law would bolster him against political rivals.

(Above article from Associated Press.)

* * * *

Charles M. Grist
www.TheCobraTeam.com
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

Opinions Vary on Iraq Troop Withdrawal Options

I know it's been awhile since my last posting (sorry about that). I have been traveling again, but it looks like that is slowly coming to an end. My pre-retirement medical exams, etc. may keep me in the Orlando area until I begin my terminal leave. We shall see.

Both Americans and Iraqis are debating when and under what circumstances American troops will begin to withdraw from Iraq. The following New York Times article offers some interesting perspectives, but some of the Iraqis who were interviewed have political agendas for their groups:

* * * *

New York Times
September 9, 2008
Pg. 6

Should U.S. Forces Withdraw From Iraq?

By Stephen Farrell

BAGHDAD — As Iraqi and American diplomats negotiate how long and under what circumstances American troops will remain in Iraq, Iraqis are also debating the issue.

For Iraqis, as for Americans, the answer is far more complex than a simple “stay” or “go.” For both it is about blood, treasure, pride, dignity and a nation’s sense of itself and its place in the world.

But a lot more Iraqi blood than American has already been spilled, and stands to be spilled again, if the politicians get it wrong.

On the streets of Iraq, the questions being asked about the continuing American presence are about sovereignty, stability and America’s intentions in Iraq’s past, present and future: How many American troops will stay? How quickly will they go? If they stay, where will they be based? To do what? With what powers? And under what restrictions?

For the most part, Iraqis’ views fall into three categories. One group, which includes many followers of the Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr, and some intensely nationalist Sunni Arabs in parts of the country that have suffered the worst since the invasion, simply want the Americans to leave, period. They say no amount of American effort now can make up for the horrors of the occupation, including the destruction of society and the killing of innocent civilians.

A second group takes a similarly dim view of the occupation, but worries that the brief period this year of improving security in Iraq will be vulnerable if the Americans abruptly withdraws. They say that the United States has a moral obligation to remain, and that continued presence of the occupiers is preferable to a return to rule by gangs and militias.

A third group worries that without a referee, Iraq’s dominant powers — Kurds in the far north and Shiites in the center and south — will brutally dominate other groups.

The Americans are not the first to face such quandaries in Iraq. In August 1920, only two years after his declining colonial power had emerged from the devastation of World War I, the British secretary of war, Winston Churchill, wrote (but did not send) a letter to his prime minister that contained this assessment of Mesopotamia:

“It seems to me so gratuitous that after all the struggles of war, just when we want to get together our slender military resources and re-establish our finances and have a little in hand in case of danger here or there, we should be compelled to go on pouring armies and treasure into these thankless deserts.”

A millennium and a half earlier, in A.D. 694, the Umayyad provincial governor Al-Hajjaj also faced a fractious Baghdad. His response to one angry crowd was a speech learned by all Iraqi schoolchildren: “I see heads before me that are ripe and ready for the plucking, and I am the one to pluck them, and I see blood glistening between the turbans and the beards.” The turbans melted away.

Five years later, Al-Hajjaj faced a rebellion in a troublesome region to his east, which forced him to move troops from Iraq. That rebellion was in Kabulistan, now part of Afghanistan, a historical parallel that drew a wry smile from Gen. David H. Petraeus, the commander of American forces in Iraq, when it was pointed out to him last month. General Petraeus will soon move up the chain of command to take over the Central Command region, making him responsible for an area that covers both Iraq and what was Kabulistan.

Names and governments change, but there is nothing new under the Mesopotamian sun.

The debate goes on. Following are some Iraqi perspectives on whether and how American troops should stay in their country.

Opinions of the Iraqis

The Choice Is Not Ours: America Wants to Stay

I don’t expect that the Americans will leave Iraq because they reached the maximum level of political influence in the region. America is controlling the future of energy, so I believe it’s not to America’s benefit for it to leave Iraq. -- ISMAIL KABABCHI, 38, a restaurant worker in central Baghdad

America will not leave Iraq. I think my grandsons’ grandsons will watch Uncle Sam and his blue jeans. The idea that America will depart is a kind of delusion because America came for its interests in Iraq. Iraq represents the most important treasure in the struggle among the superpowers for it includes plenty of wealth in addition to its important geographic location. In the long run, America will not leave Iraq because it reached the treasure of the world. -- SAID AL-MAJMAYI, 50, a painter in Baquba

Or Maybe It Doesn’t

I expect that the Americans will leave Iraq sooner or later because they can’t control the security situation. I expect their departure within the next few months because of the achievements of the Iraqi security forces and the Awakening in terms of security and stability. That will help the American forces leave Iraq and save the rest of their dignity before the situation turns bad again like between 2004 and 2005. -- ABU ABDUL QADER AL-JUMAYLI, 60, a retired army officer in Falluja

The withdrawal is coming, no doubt. America has lost its influence in Iraq to a very great and dangerous degree. The No. 1 country in the world didn’t imagine that it would become a toy in the hand of radical parties and armed groups, or some powers which will ally with America at daytime and conspire against it at night. -- MATEEN OMAR OJI, 32, a teacher in Kirkuk

America Must Leave Iraq Now

We want to push them out immediately. We don’t need them, and we don’t want them. We have two governments, the Iraqi and American governments. We are confused about who we need to obey, the Americans or Iraqis. And both the American and Iraqi governments are hurting the Iraqi people. -- ABDUL RAHMAN HAMED HUSSEIN, a social worker in Abu Dshir, south of Baghdad, who follows the radical Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr

I want them to leave because they caused destruction for us, they have robbed us and they never gave us any of what they had promised to give us. If a civil war breaks out after their departure, it would be their doing. It’s going on now because of them. They are inflaming it. Iraqis have proved that they are not being seduced by the American actions. Their departure is the beginning of the road toward stability. What ever happens after their withdrawal, it will be finished within a year. -- MUHAMMAD SNAD, 36, an electrical technician in Mosul

We Don’t Love the Americans, But Withdrawal Is Worse

I am not with the coalition forces’ withdrawal from Iraq currently, because chaos and destruction will be all over Iraq. Even before the Americans came, we used to have genocide, destruction and wars. We know that the Americans came for their own benefit, yet they are our only solution. -- NISREEN HASSAN, 25, a teacher in Sulaimaniya

The presence of the American forces will make Iraq a regional and international power. If the Americans withdraw, Iraq will be subject to domination from neighboring countries which support terrorism in Iraq to protect their interests, so the departure of the American forces doesn’t serve Iraq’s interest. -- ABD MUHAMMAD AL-BEDEER, Samawa

If It’s Not the Americans, Someone Else Will Take Over

The coalition forces are the best solution to Iraq’s situation, they are just like a strong dam against the outside and the inside enemies and even the neighboring countries. They are all wolves — the Arabs, the Persians and the Turks. -- JALEEL MAHMOOD, 31, Sulaimaniya

Staying is the best thing for Iraq. If the Americans depart, half of Iraq will go to the Kurds and Iran will take the other half. We need a safety valve. America occupied Iraq and must solve the problems before its departure. America’s departure will increase the problems. -- AMJAD SALAH, 34, a driver in Basra

The Dream Deferred: Please Go, Just Not Yet

I don’t want them to leave right now, but I don’t want to see them here forever. Sooner or later the Americans have to leave Iraq or understand that our policy differs from their policy. They have to recognize the sovereignty of Iraq. I’d love to keep good relations with America rather than telling bad stories to my kids about it. -- HUDA HANI, 33, a Shiite employee of the Ministry of Higher Education in Baghdad

I’m against the Americans’ withdrawing before we have a fully independent government and security forces. I witnessed many terrible things with the Americans, and I don’t want the same thing to happen with the next generations. It would be better for both sides to have a scheduled withdrawal. -- MUHAMMAD MAHDI, 28, a Sunni graduate of the College of Arts who now works as a taxi driver in Baghdad

No one accepts the residence of the occupier, but the withdrawal should be studied well and not randomly. Things are getting better now, and we don’t want anything to affect that. The Americans are probably one of the reasons behind the previous chaos, but their quick withdrawal will generate bigger chaos. -- SALIM MUHAMMAD, 40, Najaf

Saying No and Meaning Yes

All of them declare in public that they are against the Americans remaining in Iraq. They demand Iraqi liberation. They always raise the same slogan: Independence for Iraq. But in private sessions or meetings they are always telling me and other reporters that the Americans must stay, and that if they leave right now it would be a big mistake. The reasons for this political hypocrisy are like a disease. Most of the Iraqi politicians suffer from it. Their aim is to maintain their reputation in the public eye. -- TAREQ MAHER, an employee of The New York Times in Baghdad

In public we say we do not want American troops, but our hearts say they should stay in Iraq until we become a state of institutions based on democracy and dialogue, not violence. Most of our recent leaders are tiny in the political world and the Americans want to teach them how to be leaders. Really we need them to stay more. They are a fence against Iran’s ambitions toward Iraq. -- AHMED HASOON, 38, a teacher in Basra

Never Mind the Troops, I’m Leaving Iraq

At night in all seasons, especially in summer, it is so very, very hot because we are suffering from electricity shortages and water shortages. So many times I have to buy my baby’s milk from the black market. The American forces have been here for such a long time, and still it is not stable and nothing is sure. Sometimes I feel that I should leave Iraq and claim asylum or refugee status, so that later on I would be lucky enough to get another nationality, which would make me feel respectable and that I have some rights. As an Iraqi now I cannot help my country improve. But maybe later on with a new nationality I would be able to come back and do something. Only then will my voice be heard. -- ANWAR ALI, an employee of The New York Times in Baghdad who is seeking asylum in the United States

Reporting was contributed by Richard A. Oppel Jr. from Kirkuk; Riyadh Mohammed, Ali Hameed, Mohamed Hussein and Anwar J. Ali from Baghdad; and Iraqi employees of The New York Times from Mosul, Salahuddin Province, Falluja, Kirkuk, Diyala Province, Najaf, Karbala, Basra and the Kurdish-administered northern region of Iraq.

* * * *

We will continue to negotiate the terms of our troop drawdown. Hopefully the Iraqis will work with us to make sure that the pace does not risk losing the security gains we have made together.

However, in the end it is their country. When they decide they don't want us there, we will have no choice but to leave.

Charles M. Grist
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

Mahdi Army Influence Weakened By the Surge

I've been busy at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, but I'm glad to see all the reports about the improvements in Iraq because of the surge.

The following story was in the New York Times and it talks about the declining influence of Muqtada al Sadr's Mahdi Army. Unfortunately, these fundamentalist Shiite militiamen will alway be in the shadows because they are supported, trained and financed by their Iranian mentors.

We will eventually draw down our troop levels in Iraq (as the Iraqi government is able to assume more responsibility), but we must keep our eyes on these thugs from Sadr City and be ready to swat them like flies should they re-emerge:

* * * *

New York Times
July 27, 2008
Pg. 1

Shiite Militia In Baghdad Sees Its Power Ebb

By Sabrina Tavernise

BAGHDAD — The militia that was once the biggest defender of poor Shiites in Iraq, the Mahdi Army, has been profoundly weakened in a number of neighborhoods across Baghdad, in an important, if tentative, milestone for stability in Iraq.

It is a remarkable change from years past, when the militia, led by the anti-American cleric Moktada al-Sadr, controlled a broad swath of Baghdad, including local governments and police forces. But its use of extortion and violence began alienating much of the Shiite population to the point that many quietly supported American military sweeps against the group.

Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki struck another blow this spring, when he led a military operation against it in Baghdad and in several southern cities.

The shift, if it holds, would solidify a transfer of power from Mr. Sadr, who had lorded his once broad political support over the government, to Mr. Maliki, who is increasingly seen as a true national leader.

It is part of a general decline in violence that is resonating in American as well as Iraqi politics: Senator John McCain argues that the advances in Iraq would have been impossible without the increase in American troops known as the surge, while Senator Barack Obama, who opposed the increase, says the security improvements should allow a faster withdrawal of combat troops.

The Mahdi Army’s decline also means that the Iraqi state, all but impotent in the early years of the war, has begun to act the part, taking over delivery of some services and control of some neighborhoods.

“The Iraqi government broke their branches and took down their tree,” said Abu Amjad, a civil servant who lives in the northern Baghdad district of Sadr City, once seen as an unbreachable stronghold for the group.

The change is showing up in the lives of ordinary people. The price of cooking gas is less than a fifth of what it was when the militia controlled local gas stations, and kerosene for heating has also become much less expensive. In interviews, 17 Iraqis, including municipal officials, gas station workers and residents, described a pattern in which the militia’s control over the local economy and public services had ebbed. Merchants say they no longer have to pay protection money to militiamen. In some cases, employees with allegiances to the militia have been fired or transferred. Despite the militia’s weakened state, none of the Iraqis interviewed agreed to have their full names published for fear of retribution.

In a further sign of weakness, Shiite tribes in several neighborhoods are asking for compensation from militia members’ families for past wrongs.

The changes are not irreversible. The security gains are in the hands of unseasoned Iraqi soldiers at checkpoints spread throughout Baghdad’s neighborhoods. And local government officials have barely begun to take hold of service distribution networks, potentially leaving a window for the militia to reassert itself.

The militia’s roots are still in the ground, Abu Amjad said, and “given any chance, they will grow again.”

A Criminal Enterprise

At the peak of the militia’s control last summer, it was involved at all levels of the local economy, taking money from gas stations, private minibus services, electric switching stations, food and clothing markets, ice factories, and even collecting rent from squatters in houses whose owners had been displaced. The four main gas stations in Sadr City were handing over a total of about $13,000 a day, according to a member of the local council.

“It’s almost like the old Mafia criminal days in the United States,” said Brig. Gen. Jeffrey W. Talley, an Army engineer rebuilding Sadr City’s main market.

Um Hussein, a mother of 10 in Sadr City, the largest Shiite district in the capital and one of the poorest, said her family’s fuel bill had dropped so far that she could afford to buy one of her daughters a pair of earrings with the savings. Others interviewed listed simpler purchases that had now become possible: tomatoes, laundry detergent, gasoline.

One young man said that even though his house was right across from a distribution center that sold cooking gas, he was not allowed to buy it there at state prices, but instead was forced to wait for a militia-affiliated distributor who sold it at higher prices.

“We had to get our share of the cooking gas from Mahdi Army people,” Um Hussein said. “Now, everything is available. We are free to buy what we want.”

Before, the Mahdi Army controlled the 12 trucks that made daily deliveries of cooking gas canisters for the district, because the leader of the Sadr City district council, who was affiliated with the militia, was the one who handled the trucks’ documents.

“We had no idea when they were coming or where they were going,” the council member said, referring to the trucks.

Those who questioned the militia’s authority were dealt with harshly. A gas station worker from Kadhimiya recalled a man in his 60s being beaten badly for refusing to pay the inflated gas price last year. The Sadr City council member described his relationship with the militia by touching his hand to his face.

“I was kissing them here, here and here,” he said pointing to his right cheek, his left cheek and then his forehead.

A spokesman for the movement in Sadr City, Sayeed Jaleel al-Sarkhy, defended the Mahdi Army, saying in an interview that it was not a formal militia and denying the charges that it had taken control of local services. He said the militia had been infiltrated by criminals who used the name of the Mahdi Army as a cover.

The Mahdi Army is an army of believers,” he said. “It was established to serve the people.”

An employee in the Sadr City local government who oversees trash collectors — daily laborers whose salaries he said were controlled by the militia — said that had long stopped being true.

“I am sick all over,” he said. “I am blind. I’ve got a headache. I’ve got a toothache. My back hurts. All of this is from the Mahdi Army.”

Signs of Weakness

A month after Mr. Maliki’s military operation, strange things started to happen in Shuala, a vast expanse of concrete and sand-colored houses in northern Baghdad that was one of the Mahdi Army’s main strongholds. Militia members suddenly stopped showing up to collect money from the main gas station, a worker there said.

A member of the Shuala district council said: “They used to come and order us to give them 100 gas canisters. Now it’s, ‘Can you please give me a gas canister?’”

Then, several weeks later, 11 workers, guards and even a director, all state employees with ties to the militia, were transferred to other areas. Employees’ pictures were posted so American and Iraqi soldiers could identify impostors.

The Iraqi Army now occupies the militia’s old headquarters in Shuala. Soldiers set up 18 checkpoints around the neighborhood, including at the gas station. When the militia opened a new office, soldiers put a checkpoint there, too, said an Iraqi major from the unit based there. Iraqi soldiers recently distributed warning notices to families squatting in houses whose rent had been collected by the Mahdi Army until May.

In Sadr City, the authorities closed the militia’s radio station. The leader of the district council was arrested by the American military. Cooking gas delivery documents must now be approved by three officials, not just one, the council member said.

Another sign of weakness is the growing number of financial settlements between powerful Shiites and Mahdi Army members’ families over loved ones who were killed by the militia. In Topchi, a Shiite neighborhood in western Baghdad, a handwritten list of militia members’ names was taped up in the market this month, with the warning for their families to leave town. Several of their houses were attacked.

Some militia members’ families went to the local council to ask for help. They found none. Mahdi militiamen killed four local council members over several weeks last fall.

“I told them this isn’t good, they must not be blamed,” the council member said. Even so, “if your brother has been killed, this is the time for revenge.”

Now neighborhoods are breathing more freely. A hairdresser in Ameen, a militia-controlled neighborhood in southeast Baghdad, said her clients no longer had to cover their faces when they left her house wearing makeup. Minibuses ferrying commuters in Sadr City are no longer required to play religious songs, said Abu Amjad, the civil servant, and now play songs about love, some even sung by women.

“They lost everything,” said the Sadr City government employee. “The Sadr movement has no power now. There is no militia control.”

Lingering Fears

The Mahdi Army might be weak, but it is not gone.

Majid, a Sadr City resident who works in a government ministry, said several Iraqi Army officers in his area had to move their families to other neighborhoods after Mr. Maliki’s military operation because the militia threatened them. Bombs are still wounding and killing American soldiers in the district. And early this month, one Iraqi officer’s teenage son was kidnapped and killed, his body hung in a public place as a warning, said Majid, who gave only his first name because he feared reprisals.

“People are still afraid of the Mahdi Army,” he said. “You still get punished if you talk bad about them.”

While most of the Iraqi soldiers at the new checkpoints seem loyal to the government, others have sympathies closer to the militia. A friend of Majid’s was obliged to pay a steep tribal settlement, after telling an army patrol about his neighbor, a militia member. The patrol had been infiltrated and leaked the tip to the neighbor.

“They are still trying to influence things,” General Talley said, though his overall assessment was that their control was receding.

The shift comes at a crucial moment: Iraqis will vote in provincial elections in December. The weakening of the Sadrists in national politics clears the stage for the group’s most bitter rival — a Shiite party led by another cleric, Abdul Aziz al-Hakim. One of the party’s members, Jalal al-Din al-Sagheer, a sheik and a member of Parliament, is arranging state aid for Sunni families willing to move back to Topchi.

The timing was not missed by the Sadr movement’s spokesman, who said the government had recently warned the group to vacate its office. He blames Mr. Hakim’s party for the attempts to marginalize his movement, whose members have also been targets of a political crackdown in southern Iraq.

“Some parties are occupying large buildings in Jadriya,” he said, referring indirectly to the headquarters of Mr. Hakim’s party. “That’s what makes us suspicious. Why only us?”

He added, “The main motive is to exclude the Sadr movement from politics.”
One indicator of whether the new gains will hold is whether local governments can truly fill the gap that the militia left and deliver services effectively and consistently.

General Talley said his unit had recently spent $34 million to help reconstruct a major market in Sadr City. But the district council has gotten bogged down in arguments over who has the right to disburse $100 million that Mr. Maliki promised Sadr City after the military operation. The district council was given 90 days to come up with projects. More than 30 days have passed and not one proposal has been submitted, council members said.

“To be honest with you, I find it very slow,” said Haidar al-Abadi, an adviser to Mr. Maliki who said that funds had been held back because militia-affiliated companies had gotten involved. “There’s a danger this slowness could backfire.”

The militia is painting its response on Sadr City walls: “We will be back, after this break.”

The Iraqi Army is painting over it.

Reporting was contributed by Mohammed Hussein, Tareq Maher, Campbell Robertson, Richard A. Oppel Jr. and Alissa J. Rubin.

* * * *

Great article; surprised it was in the New York Times....

Charles M. Grist
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

Iraqis Want a Timetable for Troop Withdrawal

It was only last month that I posted my feelings about why the Iraqis will never permit us to maintain military forces in Iraq over the long term: (http://americanranger.blogspot.com/2008/06/one-day-iraqis-will-send-us-home.html).

The following article was in today's Washington Post:

* * * *

Washington Post
July 8, 2008
Pg. 1

Maliki Suggests U.S. Troop Timetable

Iraqi Premier's Remarks Reflect Political Plight

By Sudarsan Raghavan and Karen DeYoung, Washington Post Foreign Service

BAGHDAD, July 7 -- Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has for the first time suggested establishing a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, a step that the Bush administration has long opposed.

Maliki raised the idea Monday during a visit to the United Arab Emirates, where he spoke with Arab ambassadors about a security pact being negotiated to determine the future U.S. military role in Iraq.

"The current trend is to reach an agreement on a memorandum of understanding either for the departure of the forces or a memorandum of understanding to put a timetable on their withdrawal," Maliki said, according to a statement released by his office. "In all cases, the basis for any agreement will be respect for the full sovereignty of Iraq."

The comments reflect the political dilemma confronting Maliki and other members of his Shiite-led government. Their primary rival in upcoming provincial elections, Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, is a leading critic of the American presence who has long called for a timetable, a position that is widely popular among Iraq's majority Shiites.

The talks on the security pact have also raised concerns across the Iraqi political spectrum -- and the broader Arab world -- about preserving Iraq's sovereignty and preventing a long-term American presence. Framing the agreement as a memorandum of understanding, possibly including a timetable, may make it more politically palatable, analysts said.

Nasar al-Rubaie, a senior Sadrist lawmaker, welcomed Maliki's suggestion of a timetable, saying that Iraq's armed forces could take over security duties within a year. "This is an important step in the right path," Rubaie said.

White House spokesman Tony Fratto characterized the Maliki statement as consistent with the goals of the Bush administration. "The prime minister is reflecting a shared goal that we have, which is that as the Iraqi forces become a more self-reliant force, we'll see reductions in U.S. forces," Fratto said.

The Bush administration has said that a timetable would play into the hands of enemy forces who would lie low until U.S. troops were gone. Instead, top military and administration officials have said that withdrawal decisions must be based on conditions on the ground. Most of the additional "surge" forces sent to Iraq last year are due to pull out by the end of this month, leaving about 140,000 U.S. troops.

Indeed, Sadiq al-Rikabi, a top political adviser to Maliki, said any timetable would be conditioned on the ability of Iraq's security forces to secure the country, something the government has long said. "In that case, American forces should return home," Rikabi said, adding that there were no discussions so far of specific dates for a U.S. withdrawal.

Rikabi and a U.S. official in Baghdad who spoke on the condition of anonymity said friendly negotiations on the security pact were continuing. Still, the proposal of the memorandum of understanding suggested that the two sides were far from reaching a long-term agreement, which U.S. officials had hoped would be signed by the end of this month. A U.N. mandate authorizing the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq expires Dec. 31.

At the Pentagon, spokesman Bryan Whitman said negotiations were being handled by the State Department but reiterated the need for a conditions-based approach. "Timelines tend to be artificial in nature," he said, "and in a situation where things are as dynamic as they are in Iraq, I would tell you that it's usually best to look at these things as they are on the ground."

In recent weeks, Maliki has spoken in strong terms to domestic and regional audiences, only to have his remarks softened for U.S. consumption by his own advisers or U.S. spokesmen. After he said last month that the negotiations were at a "dead end," officials in Baghdad and Washington explained that Maliki was referring to early U.S. drafts that had since been updated.

Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, has said he will decide by September -- when he is due to relinquish his command to Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno -- whether additional withdrawals will be possible before year's end.

The timetable issue is a sharp point of disagreement between the presumptive presidential nominees. Republican Sen. John McCain supports the administration position and has said that a withdrawal timetable would endanger recent security gains in Iraq. Democratic Sen. Barack Obama has criticized the Maliki government for dragging its feet on political reconciliation and said that a timetable would force movement.

Although Obama has long pledged to begin immediately withdrawing combat troops at a rate of one to two brigades a month, completing the process within 16 months, he has recently tempered his position with a promise to consult with U.S. commanders on the ground before taking any action.

The negotiations began in March over two U.S.-drafted agreements that in Iraq have been discussed as a single pact. The first is a status-of-forces agreement that would define the legal protections and responsibilities of U.S. troops; the second is a "strategic framework" that would govern the overall U.S.-Iraq political and military relationship.

Last week, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari said that progress was being made in the negotiations but that many hurdles remained. He said any agreement most likely would last only one or two years and be subject to legislative scrutiny.

If an agreement could not be reached, Zebari indicated that an interim arrangement would be necessary because U.S. troops "cannot stay in Iraq without a legal authorization." It was unclear whether any memorandum of understanding would need approval from Iraq's parliament.

Fratto, the White House spokesman, also said there is a substantial difference between Maliki's call for a timetable and similar calls from congressional Democrats, since the latter would serve to limit the options of Bush as commander in chief.

Bush and Republican lawmakers have regularly condemned any talk of a timetable for a drawdown of U.S. troops.

In remarks last month, for example, Bush praised a new war funding bill because it did not include "an artificial timetable of withdrawal from Iraq."

DeYoung reported from Washington. Staff writer Dan Eggen in Washington, special correspondents Zaid Sabah and Saad al-Izzi in Baghdad and other Washington Post staff in Iraq contributed to this report.

* * * *

We can never forget that it’s not about what America or its leaders want to do; it is about the path the Iraqis choose with regard to their own nation and their own future. (Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is pictured above.)

We may not be pleased with the final agreement with regard to the status of foreign forces in Iraq, but we must accept the wishes of that sovereign government.

After all, isn't their liberty and freedom of choice what we've been fighting for?

Charles M. Grist
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com

Al-Maliki's Speech Shows Courage & Determination

There has been much criticism of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. Most of it revolves around how long it seems to be taking to get some of the laws passed that the American government considers “benchmarks”.

On the other side of the coin, we should remember that al-Maliki is a courageous man to take the mantle of a country that is torn from within. He must walk a daily tightrope between political and religious factions while facing the possibility of assassination each day.

One of my Baghdad friends sent me the following which is the text of a speech made by Al-Maliki on the first anniversary of Iraq’s new government. This speech was on Baghdad’s Al-Iraqiyah Television in Arabic. It is a positive statement from someone who clearly loves his people.

Not surprisingly, I have heard nothing about this speech from our own mainstream media. It is a little long, but so is the task the Iraqis must accomplish:

Iraq's Al-Maliki Reviews Government's Accomplishments on First Anniversary
GMP20070522617001 Baghdad Al-Iraqiyah Television in Arabic 1458 GMT 22 May 07

[Speech by Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki 'on the occasion of the first anniversary of the formation of the national unity government;' in Baghdad; recorded]

"In the name of God, the merciful, the compassionate, dear Iraqi people -- people of the two rivers -- brothers and sisters: God's peace and blessings be upon you. A year has passed since the formation of the first elected government in Iraq's modern history, a government which has won the support of the parliamentary blocs taking part in the political process, which unanimously supported the national plan and granted confidence to the government.

Based on this unanimity, we depended on God and the people's confidence to implement the government's program. This is a task you undoubtedly know is difficult and complicated and is facing huge challenges.

The year 2006 was a real test of the will of the government and people. We were at a crossroads -- either Iraq will remain united and its social fabric cohesive and strong or it will slip into a sectarian war, which is the dirtiest of wars throughout history.

Praise be to God, we have succeeded in avoiding the danger of sectarian war after the holy shrine of the two Al-Askari imams in Samarra was blown up. That ugly crime was committed by the takfiris and their allies the henchmen of the dictatorial regime. The sectarian war which threatened our national unity is now behind us.

The year 2006 also witnessed the end of the dictator and his abominable rule, which dragged the country to wars and reckless adventures. That was a dark era during which we suffered the worst of tragedies and pains and offered hundreds of thousands of martyrs in prisons, detention centers, and mass graves, and in Al-Anfal and Halabjah. The rule of the one party, one faction, and the indispensable leader, and the policy of discrimination, exclusion, and marginalization have ended for ever.

Our success in avoiding a sectarian war and putting an end to the dictator was not without great sacrifices. We have sacrificed blood, shed tears, and faced difficulties. This is a heavy price we are paying today in our fight against terrorism. It is the same price we paid in 35 years. The road to freedom, justice, democracy, and equality cannot but be difficult and tough.

Brothers and sisters: Since the first day of the formation of the national unity government, which I had the honor of heading, I launched an initiative for national reconciliation and dialogue. The initiative was not launched on the basis of political, party, or sectarian considerations, but on a strategic vision to rebuild the state and consecrate the culture of dialogue and tolerance, renounce secondary differences, and close the past chapter.

We have placed the issue of national reconciliation at the top of the government priorities and devoted all resources to it. We said on more than one occasion that national reconciliation is a lifeboat for all Iraqis and it is the only way to overcome the ordeal and cross to the shore of safety. Regrettably, some have rebelled against dialogue and reconciliation. We will deal with them firmly and in accordance with the law.

The national reconciliation initiative led to conferences held by tribes, civil society organizations, political forces, officers, and intellectuals all over Iraq. It also provided the appropriate background to introduce constitutional amendments in which the authority of law has the final word. We did so by presenting the draft law of Accountability and Justice to the Council of Representatives. This draft law guarantees the rights of martyrs and distinguishes between those whose hands were stained with the blood of innocent people and those who were forced to join the dissolved Ba'th Party.

The draft law provides a legal framework and just accountability, and closes the bloody chapter of the past. The law which we want to be an arbiter and ruler does not mean leniency with criminal Ba'thists or ignoring the rights of martyrs and prisoners. It seeks to administer justice and rehabilitate all those who were exposed to injustice, despotism, and oppression.

O honorable Iraqi people, we consider the national reconciliation plan the strongest weapon in fighting terrorism. We were fully confident that this plan would succeed in defeating the takfiris and their allies despite the claims of some political forces, which wagered on turning national reconciliation into a bridge for the return of killers and criminals. It is impossible for this delusion to materialize.

In the new Iraq there is no place for the Ba'th Party, whose history is replete with coups, plots, and leaders of crime and mass annihilation. I will not miss the occasion here to invite the faithful Iraqi tribes and civil society organizations to form national salvation councils in all Iraqi governorates and to stand by the side of our armed forces in order to destroy the epidemic of terrorism, which is targeting Iraq -- land, people, and heritage.

The terrorists are destroying the infrastructure and killing teachers, physicians, engineers, builders, journalists, sportsmen, and artists, in addition to women and children. They are also attacking mosques, churches, and universities. Their blind grudge has reached the historical, civil, and cultural landmarks of Baghdad.

Brothers and sisters: Our war against terrorism is an open and long one. None should think that this war will end today or tomorrow. The security challenges facing dear Iraq are extremely serious. What makes the situation even more difficult is foreign interference, which is no longer a secret to anyone. Some political forces' acceptance of and submission to the influence of a number of countries has led to complicating the security file, which is no longer an internal challenge. This calls for greater vigilance and caution.

The day will come when we reveal the involvement of political groups and personalities in stirring up terrorist acts. We will not hesitate to expose the subversive role some regional and international parties are playing. These parties are not pleased to see Iraq strong and living a democratic experience and determined to establish the state of institutions. These quarters, which we know well, will pay a heavy price from their security and stability if they do not stop the policy of undermining security in Iraq so that the country will remain weak. A strong democratic and pluralistic Iraq is the only guarantee against the return of dictatorship. It is a safety valve for stability and prosperity in the region.

Any Iraqi entity that seeks support from abroad will be making a terrible mistake because this will lead to regional and international forces' conflict in the Iraqi arena. We also call on all those who care for the unity, safety, and sovereignty of Iraq to stop interfering in our internal affairs because the Iraqis alone can protect their country and defend their dignity. Our people, who recorded electoral epics in a record and critical time and established constitutional institutions on the debris of dictatorship, reject the logic of trusteeship and the logic of having others think on their behalf.

Brothers and sisters: Completing the establishment of our armed forces is a central national task we are trying to accomplish at the earliest possible time. This is a process which daily brings us closer to assuming full responsibility for security in the whole country. We have made a large stride in this regard and we are racing time in training, rehabilitating, and equipping our forces with modern weapons and military equipment so that our security services can take the initiative and assume responsibility for protecting the country and citizens, and thus pave the way for the withdrawal of the multinational forces from the country. This task will remain a top priority in our program for 2007.

On this occasion, I call on all honorable Iraqis to shoulder their responsibility and help our armed forces so that these can perform their duty under the sovereignty of the law and respect for human rights. The Law Enforcement Plan, which has entered its fourth month, is an integrated professional plan implemented in stages. We said right from the first day that the plan does not target any entity or sect, but seeks to protect the citizens.

It is an open war against the terrorists. We are determined to strike with an iron fist all outlaws -- terrorist organizations, militias, armed groups, and crime gangs which tamper with the security of the country. We cannot build a state in the presence of militias which have various allegiances, affiliations, and interests. We will give a full chance for those who voluntarily lay down their weapons and return to the national rank. We will exhaust all political solutions before we begin taking military measures, which we hope we will not be forced to take, to impose the authority of law.

Praised by God, we have succeeded in largely reducing the rate of sectarian killings and managed to restore normal life to a number of areas in Baghdad which were under the control of the terrorists. In view of the deliberate confusion some known parties and personalities are making and in view of attempts to undermine the reputation of our armed forces and security services, we call on the judicial authority to pursue these parties and refer their files to justice in order to call them to account for encouraging terrorism and inciting hatred and sectarian strife.

Brothers and sisters: He who thinks that building the state and its institutions and various departments is the job of only the government will be mistaken. We are all responsible for Iraq's recovery, security, stability, and prosperity. There is no doubt that this long and tough mission cannot be accomplished in a short time. It is a gradual historic task requiring solidarity and sacrifice by all.

It is inadmissible for the political forces participating in the political process to take a neutral position or act as bystanders or ones looking for mistakes. We have very regrettably seen this done by some people who placed themselves in the position of observers from a distance instead of putting their hands in our hands to build the new Iraq.

Cooperation among the three authorities takes place in an integral manner without interference by any authority in the affairs of the other authorities. We, together with our partners in the political process, raised the slogan of cooperation, integration, and revision in order to reach the largest possible understanding that is based on constitutional controls with the aim of reviewing programs and laws in a manner that serves the country's higher interests.

In 2006, we established balanced regional and international relations with many countries and succeeded in developing Iraq's relations with these countries in the various domains. Iraq, together with 60 countries and international organizations, signed the International Compact Document in Sharm al-Shaykh.

This document stands for mutual commitments between Iraq and the international community. We expect Iraq to reap good results from this document. This will reflect on the economy and its infrastructure and on the building and reconstruction drive in the country. It will also encourage foreign investments and lead to security and stability.

The government, in cooperation with the Council of Representatives, ratified the investment law, which is considered an extremely important step to promote the economy, rebuild the destroyed infrastructure, and provide job opportunities. The government also approved the largest budget in the history of Iraq. Part of it was allocated to reconstruction. The government also presented an oil draft law. The parliament's approval of this law was a qualitative step in the field of reconstruction, development of the oil industry, just distribution of wealth, and consecration of the unity and sovereignty of Iraq.

Brothers and sisters: Fulfilling your aspirations and hopes is the core of our program and the center of our attention. We have made a pledge to God and to you that we will continue to fulfill them and we will spare no effort to reach that goal. We are aware of your daily life concerns. We follow them up every moment and work hard and perseveringly to improve services and raise the living standards.

Our efforts will continue and the subversive trend of the terrorist gangs will not prevent us from serving you or hearing your concerns and knowing about your suffering. What helps us continue to shoulder our responsibility is our feeling that you are aware of the size of internal and external challenges and dangers facing our beloved Iraq. This increases our insistence on continuing our efforts to build a free, democratic, pluralistic, and federal Iraq.

God's peace and blessings be upon you."

* * * *

Note Al-Maliki's use of the term "takfiri". According to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

Takfiri (from the Arabic word تكفيري) is the person who professes the disbelief of certain individuals or groups within the Muslim society or Islam. They are viewed as "extremists" by some of their opponents, arguing that "no one Muslim can call another Muslim a 'kafir' (infidel)".

Takfiris, on the other hand, exist in every Muslim sect, large or small, and often their fingers point not only to those who supposedly belong to a 'rival' sect, but also to those within their own; an example to that is the clear enmity between the Sufis and Salafi (both groups of which go under the umbrella of Sunni Islam.) Another example of internal 'takfir' is that occuring between pro-Saudi Salafis and the Jihadi Salafis (like Bin Ladin's group, al-Qaeda). Among Shia groups, takfir occurs as is the case toward the followers of the major Shia ayatllah Fadlullah of Lebanon (whose latest published opinions that review many beliefs deeply characteristic of Shia Islam have caused uproar and fierce opposition on the part of other Arab and Iranian clerics). There also exists the example of Twelver Shia declaring the takfir of the Shaykhi Shia small sect (found mainly in Basra, Iraq).

* * * *

Seeing the words of the Iraq prime minister helps us to understand the difficult tasks he must deal with each day.

We removed the dictator Saddam Hussein, but we also dismantled every aspect of Iraqi society from the governmental infrastructure to the army and police. We owe them a chance to work through their internal issues in order to make their government work for all of them.

SFC Chuck Grist
www.AmericanRanger.blogspot.com