Most Popular This Week
- Eve of Destruction (or How to Destroy a Planet Without Really Trying)
- The World Economy Is a Ticking Time Bomb (and The Fuse is Burning)
- 'Beyond Orwellian': Outrage Follows Revelations of Vast Domestic Spying Program
- 'We Are Movement, Not a Moment': North Carolina Peaceful Uprising Continues
- The Bill of Rights Exists: An Open Letter to Dianne Feinstein
- Eve of Destruction (or How to Destroy a Planet Without Really Trying)
- The World Economy Is a Ticking Time Bomb (and The Fuse is Burning)
- Is Enbridge Building a Secret Keystone Pipeline?
- Naomi Klein: 'Anti-Shock Doctrines' Show the Way to Resist
- Victory: Connecticut Becomes First State to Require GMO Labeling
Popular content
Today's Top News
Iraq Deal With US To End Immunity For Foreign Contractors
The US has accepted that foreign contractors in Iraq will no longer have immunity from Iraqi law under a new security agreement now under negotiation, says the Iraqi Foreign Minister, Hoshyar Zebari.
Mr Zebari, speaking to The Independent in Washington, said that if there was a further incident like the one in which 17 Iraqis were killed by workers from the Blackwater security company in Baghdad last September, the Iraqis would arrest and punish the contractors held responsible.
The American concession would have a serious effect in Iraq, where there are an estimated 160,000 foreign contractors, many of them heavily armed security personnel. The contractors, who outnumber the 145,000-strong US Army in the country, have become a vital if much-resented part of the military machine in Iraq.
Mr Zebari, Foreign Minister since 2004 and one of the ablest Iraqi leaders, defends the security deal now being negotiated, in contrast to Iraqi critics who say it turns the country into an American client state. On Friday the Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said negotiations on twin political and military agreements between the US and Iraq had "reached a dead end".
Later, after a phone call from Mr Zebari, Mr Maliki backtracked from his earlier statement. But details of the American proposals, first published in The Independent, have been denounced in Iraq for making the US occupation permanent. Mr Zebari contends that nothing is yet agreed and the American side is showing flexibility under instructions from President Bush. "I am using this example [the ending of immunity for US contractors] to show that talks have not reached a dead end," he said.
The Iraqi Foreign Minister is in Washington for talks about the negotiations on the Status of Forces Agreement (Sofa), covering critical issues of military co-operation between the US and Iraq, and the parallel Strategic Framework Agreement that covers political and other issues.
He is also establishing official contact with the presidential candidates, briefing John McCain on the situation in Iraq, and was due to speak to Barack Obama yesterday. In speaking to Senator Obama he said he wanted to reassure him that the purpose of the Sofa was not to pre-empt different policies that might be adopted by a new president. Mr Obama has told Iraqi officials that, if elected, he will not act precipitately on Iraq and will seek the views of the American military commander on the spot.
Critics of the agreement in Iraq see the powers being demanded by the US, such as the use of 58 bases, the freedom of the US to carry out operations and arrests without consulting the Iraqi government, and the immunity of US troops, as compromising Iraqi independence. They have denounced the deal as ominously similar to the Anglo-Iraqi treaty of 1930 under which Iraq was nominally independent but Britain retained bases and covert control.
Other shifts in US proposals being discussed are a joint Iraqi-American centre to co-ordinate operations against terrorists and the transfer of prisoners, currently numbering 21,000, to Iraqi custody. The Iraqi side has been investigating how other Sofas operate in other countries such as Japan, South Korea and Turkey, but in none of these are US troops involved in combat or the target of armed resistance.
Mr Zebari says Iraq still needs US troops' support. Its security forces number 600,000 but lack training and logistical support. Mr Maliki's government is more confident since it sent forces into Basra, Sadr City and Mosul earlier this year but it is not clear if they would have held their ground without US firepower, air support and advice.
President Bush is pushing for the Sofa and the less important Strategic Framework Agreement to be signed by 31 July.
*A powerful car bomb exploded in a crowded market in Baghdad yesterday, killing 51 people and wounding 75, in the biggest attack in the Iraqi capital in months. The market was in the predominantly Shia neighbourhood of al-Hurriya in north-west Baghdad.
© 2008 The Independent
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

29 Comments so far
Show AllGood!
Citizens Oversight of Blackwater.
http://tinyurl.com/643enq
Congressional Oversight Of Blackwater.
http://tinyurl.com/57y59h
Senate Oversight of Blackwater
Erik Prince
The concession was made becuase Bush and his buddies want the oil and permanent bases -- heaven forbid they don't get what they went their for -- Control of Iraqi oil and control of their air space.
GO Iraq! Don't take shit from America's current dictator.
After five years, billions of dollars and large amounts of US military personnel training these (supposed) 600,000 Iraqi troops, they still can't get along without US logistical and military support?
Of course, Iraqi troops continuously need the backing of the US military. When these troops recently invaded Sadr City, approximately a thousand threw away their arms, ran away or joined the opposing side.
The invasion was only saved when US forces came to their rescue.
As long as the US military is in Iraq, any actions by Iraqi government forces will always lead to large numbers deserting if they are faced with the possiblity of death and destruction.
Many of them mask their faces because they are afraid of retaliation further down the road.
I also noticed the huge number of Iraqi prisoners that have accumulated under the US sponsered Iraqi government. It is a larger number than the amount imprisoned under President Hussein.
Going back to the complete dependence of Iraqi forces taking on any physical risks only when supported by the US military.
We can observe a similar pattern when concerning de- or unregulated investment banks. Their CEOs and lead stockholders will always take enormous, but socially risky, speculative risks.
They know that Uncle Sam will bail them out after they've accumulated their undeserved fortunes and the bubble has burst.
The next big bailout is coming when the speculatory bubble in oil and food commodity prices burst.
We invaded Iraq, they were doing much better before that, even with Sadam in power.
Does this mean that Bush's public army can continue maiming, murdering and raping with impunity? Only a sacrifical few ever even get a scolding. How many thousands of innocent hostages have passed through Guantánamo, Bagram, Abu Ghraib, Diego Garcia and other U.S. torture facilities. How many are still in torture, disappeared or dead?
What are the laws in the states if a Blackwater contractor kills a US citizen?
Do we have the right to refuse orders from private contrators in the states?
YEAH...RIGHT!
HOWEVER...they will require certain emails, paper trails, documents..etc..etc..etc...and then...and THEN...what if they..CAN'T SUE THOSE INVOLVED..AS THE SUPREME "COURT" MAKES DCISIONS RIGHT NOW REGARDING ABUSES OF AMERICAN CITIZENS...
Anyway..th whole FUCKING thing is...RIGGED...is that not.."apperant" to..EVERYONE?
STOP PAYING FOR THE ABUSE..STOP CONTRIBUTING YOUR TAX DOLLARS TO THE SALLERIES OF "PRIVATE CONTRACTORS"....YO PAY..YOU PLAY..COMPLICIT..OR NOT..CHOICE IS YOURS...
The real story is that the US wants to cover its continuing military occupation of Iraq with a bilateral pact once the annually renewed UN resolution runs out on December 31. That is the context in which all other "negotiation" details are subsumed.
Anyone who validates the continuing foreign occupation of their own country, especially one that was brought about by an illegal invasion, is a traitor regardless of the contractual terms and conditions. Any such accomodation of an occupying power that reamins in place is, in and of itself, a total abdication of your country's sovereignty.
Co-opting the UN helped to secure temporary legitimacy to the US occupation. Now the Bush administration is ready to crown its Iraq travesty with a long-term strategy that would turn Iraq's occupation into a lasting one. The US is "negotiating" an "agreement" with Iraq's Vichy government that would replace the UN mandate and legalise the US occupation of Iraq permanently. It would thus pre-empt any future democratic decision or action by Iraqis themselves and that what real sovereignty is all about.
The continued occupation of Iraq is predicated on maintaining huge prison populations, walled up ethnic communities, military check points every few yards and large amounts of money spent on awaking councils so they won't shoot US troops.
Of course, the extremely expensive military and embassey compounds add to the mix.
If the Iraqi people are eventually allowed to move freely, the body count of US killed will, again, immediately rise to the highest levels yet.
There are many who have had family members mistreated, or murdered and they their large network of relatives still haven't avenged them
However, Iraqis have to move freely if their society is going to be a working society.
Yet,they can't be allowed that freedom because they will come after the occupiers.
Of course, the US military can retaliate using our hi-tech murder machines, but the occupying troops, support staff, collaborators and administrators on the ground will take the consequences.
Even if the occupiers totally retreat into their fortress bases, these bases will be attacked time and time again.
And like the Crusader's fortresses, they will eventually fall. The occupier will not continue to possess the resources, manpower, nor will to maintain them indefinitely.
Concept is good, but Iraq is still a US puppet government. Hope it enforces the no immunity for contractors.
Another CD article today (qv) is "Charges Dropped Against Marine Officer In Haditha Case" -- so, really, this is merely lip service. Nothing has changed.
a bone
It's about damn time!!!
Mercenaries have had a free hand maiming and killing for several years now.
It's too bad that Iraqi's will not be able to bring any to trial though, once an unlawful killing takes place, they;ll be rushed out of the country under cover of darkness.
The thought is good though.
"The contractors, who outnumber the 145,000-strong US Army in the country"
Wow wow wow. So the American military machine is now officially a mercinary force?
Well, I wont cry a tear if the contractors get a sword to the wrist. Let's give them a hand, for the great job they're doing.
Jcrumb (1:57pm) The name is so fitting; not only do I find use of the "F" word crude and unnecessary but if you write your comments in solid caps, Samson refuses to read them.
Ken Mitchell (4:25pm) Iraq enforcing no immunity for contractors in itself sounds great. However, it is highly unlikely they'll be able to be held for trial; there will undoubtedly arise something to prevent it using that old ploy, "in the interest of national security"
I, quite frankly, was surprised to find that the number of contractors exceeded the total number of troops that we have there currently.
As to the allegation that our being there is "all about the oil", no one has made that clear to me yet. About a month ago when we were paying maybe $3.75 a gallon for gas, I understood the price for Iraqi citizens was somewhere in the neighborhood of $1.36, although U. S. Military vehicles were charged about twice that.
I think that oil profits in the first quarter for Iraq was way up in the billions, and we're spending billions for the ungrateful so=called leaders incapable of running the place.
What gives with the "for the oil" pitch?
As I was approaching my local Wal-Mart yesterday, I saw the price posted for regular was $3.87. Passing by a woman who was pumping her gas, I mentioned to her that she was paying .21 less than the national average and didn't she feel guilty in doing so?
She didn't get it right away but when I then questioned her sense of patriotism she caught on and gave me a big smile.
I guess the big news is Bush wanting Congress to lift the ban on off shore drilling. He is telling them that it is important.
Why wasn't it important until two days ago when John McCain called for it?
pontificatinpapa,
Someone posted this link and text recently on Common Dreams and I found it quite insightful:
"The Oil Price Bubble
The movement in global prices on the New York and Chicago mercantile exchanges bears no relationship to the costs of producing oil. The spiraling price of crude oil is not the result of a shortage of oil. It is estimated that the cost of a barrel of oil in the Middle East does not exceed 15 dollars. The costs of a barrel of oil extracted from the tar sands of Alberta, Canada, is of the order of $30 (Antoine Ayoub, Radio Canada, May 2008)
The price of crude oil is currently in excess of $120 a barrel. This market price is largely the result of the speculative onslaught.
Fuel enters into the production of virtually all areas of manufacturing, agriculture and the services economy. The hikes in fuel prices have contributed, in all major regions of the World, to precipitating tens of thousands of small and medium sized businesses into bankruptcy as well as undermining and potentially paralyzing the channels of domestic and international trade.
The increased cost of gasoline at the retail level is leading to the demise of local level economies, increased industrial concentration and a massive centralization of economic power in the hands of a small number of global corporations. In turn, the hikes in fuel backlash on the urban transit system, schools and hospitals, the trucking industry, intercontinental shipping, airline transportation, tourism, recreation and most public services.
Inflation
The rise in fuel prices unleashes a broader inflationary process which results in a compression of real purchasing power and a consequent Worldwide decline in consumer demand. All major sectors of society, including the middle classes in the developed countries are affected.
These price movements are dictated by the commodity markets. They are the result of speculative trade in index funds, futures and options on major commodity markets including the London ICE, the New York and Chicago mercantile exchanges.
The dramatic price hikes are not the result of a shortage of fuel, food or water.
This upheaval in the global economy is deliberate. The State's economic and financial policies are controlled by private corporate interests. Speculative trade is not the object of regulatory policies. The economic depression contributes to wealth formation, to enhancing the power of a handful of global corporations
According to William Engdahl;
"... At least 60% of the 128 per barrel price of crude oil comes from unregulated futures speculation by hedge funds, banks and financial groups using the London ICE Futures and New York NYMEX futures exchanges and uncontrolled inter-bank or Over-The-Counter trading to avoid scrutiny. US margin rules of the government's Commodity Futures Trading Commission allow speculators to buy a crude oil futures contract on the Nymex, by having to pay only 6% of the value of the contract. At today's price of $128 per barrel, that means a futures trader only has to put up about $8 for every barrel. He borrows the other $120. This extreme 'leverage' of 16 to 1 helps drive prices to wildly unrealistic levels and offset bank losses in sub-prime and other disasters at the expense of the overall population. (See More on the real reason behind high oil prices, Global Research, May 2008)
Among the main players in the speculative market for crude oil are Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, British Petroleum (BP), the French banking conglomerate Société Générale, Bank of America, the largest Bank in the US, and Switzerland's Mercuria. (See Miguel Angel Blanco, La Clave, Madrid, June 2008)
British Petroleum controls the London based International Petroleum Exchange (IPE), which is one of the world's largest energy futures and options exchanges. Among IPE's major shareholders are Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley.
According to Der Spiegel, Morgan Stanley is one of the main institutional actors in the London based speculative oil market (IPE). According to Le Monde, France's Société Générale together with Bank of America and Deutsche Bank have been involved in spreading rumors with a view to pushing up the price of crude oil. (See Miguel Angel Blanco, La Clave, Madrid, June 2008)"
http://tinyurl.com/3mbm6c
It would be wonderful if Blackwater and other mercenaries were to finally be held accountable for their actions, but I've got such an image of our president scowling like a petulant child, keeping his fingers crossed behind his back. This will be one more agreement disregarded, treaty broken and lied about, all while waving the flag and "supporting the troops".
Hey, leave Blackwater alone. They rule! They support FREEDOM for foreign contractors to plunder relentlessly. Hatred and superiority; that is the only language these foreigners understand. And Blackwater speaks it well. Praise be to Erik Prince. GOD BLESS AMORICA.
We are all fortunate that the Strategic Framework Agreement includes our continued dark hand in all Iraqi affairs.
Pluckistani, are you sure the SFA has that language?
Your opinions are extreme, to say the least.
Ken Nuti
Medford, MA
I thought it was rather encouraging that many in the Iraqi Army refused to invade one of its own cities. That would be seriously against the law in this country. I found it heartbreaking that the US led the newly trained Iraqi army on raids of its own citizens. How will this craziness ever end? Wasn't that Hussein's crime - murdering his own citizens (and you better believe, they were not his supporters, so what's the difference here?).
This "good news" as others have commented is unfortunately part of worse news -- the Iraqi government is signing the deal for the US to remain in country on our permanent bases, not to come up for renewal for a long time. So, Obama's hands will be tied on that issue.
Finally, it seriously was/is about the oil. Not necessarily to get it for ourselves, but to control it so that others did/do NOT get it - namely Russia and France for the drilling contracts, and China and India as the customers. Keeping it in the ground has been very, very good for US oil companies, no? Prices are sky high and gets everyone talking about needing to go drill in Alaska... Those bastards will always find a way to get what they want, no matter who gets hurt in the process.
Check it out for yourself:
http://www.mnf-iraq.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=20263&Itemid=128
NancyH has it right on, and it sounds like the U.S. negotiators are trying to make a small "concession" in order to guarantee complete domination of the country.
It reminds me of back in the early days of the nightmarish regime when the dems thought that they were victorious by cutting Bush's initial demands of 1.6 Trillion in tax cuts for the wealthy to a staggering 1.3 trillion- all of which we didn't have to give away in the first place- but the tactics of "let's just rush it through before anyone can think of it-er um, I mean national emergency" were embarassingly successful and have been ever since. It will come as no surprise when they pull the same tactic here and it works.
No deal on any of it. Run out the clock and negotiate any serious deals later just like the rest of the world is planning to do. Enough with this bulls--t of "courageously" ignoring the will of the mass majority of your populous (see Tony Blair and whoever that clown was that got ousted from power in Spain).
So what! This only matters if the Iraqi gov. can catch the contractors that commet further crimes on Iraqi soil before they retreat to one of the 58 U.S. bases which would be American soil. It is doubtfull that the U.S. would be willing to turn over any contractors once they are on American soil.
The Iraqi gov. would be better off if they said that they didn't want any U.S. contractors in thier country.
The primary bottom line is OIL. Any agreements such as this one are actually moot issues and side dressing or, (tossing a bone.)
The Blackwater troops will be ordered to be more careful with the use of their weapons and if any should commit a murder they will be protected. This is all just bullshit so the Oil companies will have access to what they want, with Blackwater troops protecting their employees who will modernize the oil field facilities and increase oil production.
We will end up with 50 or 60 permanent military bases in Iraq and 160 thousand plus Blackwater troops stationed in Iraq, who reviceve on average, $700 a day in wages, money which comes from our treasury, yours and my tax dollars.
The beat will go on and that will continue, no matter who our president is, because the REAL rulers are those who own or control the oil and mineral rights, the coal and uranium mines.
Meanwhile, we freedom loving Americans will continue to complain about government waste, which will contine to waste and we will demand higher wages, so we can continue to live our life styles as long as possible.
A vast 'minority' will understand what is actually going on and some will contact their elected and give their opinions, which will be shit-canned by an aide, others will also blog comments here and vent their justifiable anger and disgust.
Meanwhile, our president and our Congress, will do what they are ordered to do by the ones who give them the money they need to buy TV time and stay in office.
And that's how it is.
Actually ~ThinkForYourself~, presently there are 106 military bases we control in Iraq, not counting our "magnificent" Green Zone and embassy complex, ___ which we somehow managed to live without for the past 230 some years.
The suggested 58 permanent Iraqi bases are being negotiated, so it will appear as if we are pulling out of Iraq as we shut down the other 48 bases. The Blackwater troops we will leave there, don't count as American troops.
The artfull dodge. This is not a concession, it is a tactic. First you make mountains of ridicoulous proposals as a hedge againt your opposition before entering negotiations with your opponent. Some of these proposals if not most of these are later removed by your opponent as a result of "negotiations". What is left at the table and ultimately agreen on is/are the really important agreement/s. The opponent party goes away thinking it managed to remove 90% to 99% of offending proposals. Well, the opposition has been check mated because the real poison pill is that the most important proposal/s remains. That was the intent all along, any additional agreements are just icing on the cake. Prosecutors, CEOs etc use this time worn tactic all the time. Indeed, often times the opposition knows the game, but operating from a point of disadvantage they are weak. The reason why this racket usually works is that the opposition or weaker party goes to their contituency and proclaim victory ... " you see people, we managed to have them remove 90% to 99% of the offending proposal..... We won" ..........Clap Clap Clap Clap.
good thing our second amendment guarantees us the right to keep and bear arms to protect ourselves and our country againsts a tyrannical dictator.
yes, neocons... the only amendment you seem to protect just might get your ass killed.