US Threatens To Halt Services to Iraq Without Troop Accord
BAGHDAD - The U.S. military has warned Iraq that it will shut down military operations and other vital services throughout the country on Jan. 1 if the Iraqi government doesn't agree to a new agreement on the status of U.S. forces or a renewed United Nations mandate for the American mission in Iraq.
Many Iraqi politicians view the move as akin to political blackmail, a top Iraqi official told McClatchy Sunday.
In addition to halting all military actions, U.S. forces would cease activities that support Iraq's economy, educational sector and other areas _ "everything" _ said Tariq al Hashimi, the country's Sunni Muslim vice president. "I didn't know the Americans are rendering such wide-scale services."
Hashimi said that Army Gen. Ray Odierno, the top U.S. military commander in Iraq, listed "tens" of areas of potential cutoffs in a three-page letter, and he said the implied threat caught Iraqi leaders by surprise.
"It was really shocking for us," he said. "Many people are looking to this attitude as a matter of blackmailing."
Odierno had no comment Sunday, but U.S. Embassy officials told McClatchy that a lengthy list of the sort Hashimi described has been passed to the Iraqi government. Among the services the U.S. provides are protection of Iraq's principal borders, of its oil exports and other shipping through the Shatt al Arab into the Persian Gulf and all air traffic control over Iraq.
The status of forces agreement, which calls for a final withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of 2011, was supposed to resolve a number of contentious issues between the two countries, but its completion 10 days ago has instead provoked a political crisis within Iraq's Shiite-dominated government and between Iraq and the United States.
Fearing a major battle in the Iraqi parliament, Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki solicited proposed amendments from his cabinet and called a meeting to review them Sunday afternoon.
However, the two main Shiite parties, Maliki's Dawa party and the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, were unable to produce their full lists of demands, and he postponed the meeting until Tuesday, other cabinet members said.
Hashimi said that Iran, a longtime backer of both parties, is pressuring Iraq's leaders not to accept the agreement.
The dispute "is real and factual. The government is not manipulating this dispute," Hashimi said. He said he hadn't yet seen the objections to the accord, even those from his own Sunni Iraqi Islamic Party.
Political party heads, including Hashimi, say that Maliki is responsible for the agreement, but Maliki has been unwilling to back the accord unless his Shiite coalition and other party members join him to take the political heat.
An additional complication is the decision of Hashimi's Iraqi Islamic party to suspend all "official communication" with U.S. military and civilian officials until it receives an explanation and an apology following a joint U.S.-Iraqi military raid against party backers in Anbar province in which one man was killed.
It's unclear what will happen when the Iraqi cabinet offers a list of proposed changes and Maliki winnows them down to proposed amendments.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said, "I don't think you slam the door shut" on amendments, but Hashimi said the U.S. is "adamant in saying, 'We close the door, we are not accepting any sort of amendment.' "
He said that if the United States met Iraq halfway and accepted amendments to the controversial articles of the accord, it would make it "rather easy" to submit the agreement to the parliament.
The alternative to a new agreement governing U.S. forces, an Iraqi request to the U.N. Security Council to extend the U.N. mandate, which now expires on Dec. 31, is also highly contentious.
One of the biggest concessions Iraq won from Washington in the negotiations over the forces accord was a stipulation that private contractors such as Blackwater that have been accused of killing Iraqi civilians would become subject to Iraqi law.
Immunity from prosecution for private contractors _ and for all official U.S. entities _ under Iraqi law was promulgated by the U.S. occupation government in June 2004, and ending that order is the subject of another confrontation between Iraq and the United States, Hashimi said. He said the United States insists that it would reject any Iraqi request to change the mandate.
Ironically, Iraqi politicians of practically every stripe agree that the proposed agreement would be a major advance toward restoring Iraq's full sovereignty and a vast improvement over the initial U.S. proposal made last spring.
He credited President Bush with changing the U.S. position as a result of twice-weekly conference calls with Maliki.
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
44 Comments so far
Show AllGeorge C. Brown - What a great way to get our boys and girls home without further carnage - - either withing our ranks or having any more ridiculous and brutal attacks on Iraqi citizens (re: see report of American troops against the war/occupation). The only thing missing would be the needed reparations we should provide after the U.S. unwarranted invasion here by the Cheney/Bush Administration and their contracted private mercenaries.
George C. Brown - What a great way to get our boys and girls home without further carnage - - either withing our ranks or having any more ridiculous and brutal attacks on Iraqi citizens (re: see report of American troops against the war/occupation). The only thing missing would be the needed reparations we should provide after the U.S. unwarranted invasion here by the Cheney/Bush Administration and their contracted private mercenaries.
status of forces agreement demand, or Iraqi politicians will have to drive rather than fly (air traffic control)... Plus no US military protection... Surely the US intel agencies own enough turn coat Iraqis to start erasing politicians by seeming Iraqi domestic terrorist acts. Thereby arriving at their demands while the politicians are compromised by traveling the roads without US support. With actually a US target on the chest of enough of them to submit the rest to continued misgovernance and massive corruption.
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
OK we won't help... but somebody will... Russia... China?
Sure, let's get the hell out of there, and hope we keep our promise.
I can hear US crying! Hey, you can't help them!
Why can't they?
All Obama has to do is wait and see once he has authority...... What is the Rush? the Bush bums Rush.
Poorly written article, all in all, but IMO, it's a positive development and looks like it leads to a withdrawal/expulsion of the occupation forces, OR a much larger increase and deliberate subjugation of Iraq instead of the democratization/corporatization of the country - which will further strain the US military.
The American house comes a-crumblin' down.
Come on people, this article is garbage. If the government of Iraq does not sign the papers then the authorized UN presence expires. If it expires, then yes, we can't do anything else there for them if they are forcing us to leave. It's not blackmail but a simple fact. If they decide for us to leave, then we can't stay there to help.
Logic, It's not that they don't want to sign the agreement they just want serious crimes to fall under Iraqi law. It's the same agreement we have with S. Korea, Japan, Germany, etc. So, to say that it is "blackmail" I agree.
Iraq will most likely go through some type of religious / tribal / political violence whenever we leave. I can understand Iraqi leaders wanting to..needing to... show some type of responsibility towards protecting their people. You would do the same, I think, if you were standing in their shoes instead of sitting in your computer chair.
Yeah right! Push your propaganda somewhere else. When the US leaves, the influence of the US spy agencies will plummet. After you've fought hard to have the empire repelled, when you get what you were fighting for, you RELAX. You don't decide to murder your neighbors aimlessly.
This bogus notion was baseless when it was being pushed in years past. It's baseless now. If we leave Iraq, they're all going to party together to the wee hours of the morning and do so daily for years. They'll be walking around telling each the story of what they did to get the US military to leave.
This won't happen because the Iraqi politicians are part and parcel of the US administration. They weren't elected but hand selected to dominate the Iraqi general populace. Now they're being told their free ride, paycheck and protection is about to sail if they don't comply. They'll comply. Bet.
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
Hmm...let me see the 'Logic' here: You invade your neighbor's home, trash it, cut off the water and electric, put up barb wire between the childrens' bedrooms, bring in your contractor buddy to refurbish the first floor for yourself, and once a week- you order a small Domino's cheese only pizza for the family that is confined upstairs. You OWN them now. They have nothing but the scraps you give them. And then, you present them with an ultimatum: sign over the lease to your home, or else I will leave. Of course, they would love it if you left. But they also know that the children may die before they can extricate themselves from their confinement. "Just sign the paper. It's that easy. Then I will continue to give you your weekly pizza." Looks like a purely logical situation, doesn't it? No blackmail; just simple logic.
Merriam-Webster Dictionary:
blackmail
Pronunciation:
\ˈblak-ˌmā(ə)l\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
black + 1mail
Date:
1552
1: a tribute anciently exacted on the Scottish border by plundering chiefs in exchange for immunity from pillage
2 a: extortion or coercion by threats especially of public exposure or criminal prosecution b: the payment that is extorted
— blackmail transitive verb
— black·mail·er noun
Let's see.... How about 2? Oh, but no. That can't be, since the family would not be publicly exposed, nor criminally prosecuted. And their home is not on the Scottish border. I guess you're right, Logic. No blackmail here. Just the facts.
Oh, but wait a minute. IT says "coercion by threats especially of public exposure or criminal prosecution". Note the word ESPECIALLY. That means NOT exclusively. So, given the threat that, if you suddenly leave the children will very likely die, maybe blackmail IS an appropriate description of the offer. Maybe????? But then, this may all just be flawed logic. If you think it is, please set me straight.
There is no randomness. It is only our ignorance
Your logic fails based on this, you fail to separate the Iraqi Politicians and the Iraqi people. They're entities motivated by very different mechanisms. The people want the empire out. The politicians want the easy life to continue. Do you think the average Iraqi cares about US help with Air Traffic Control? Do you suppose the Iraqi politicians care?
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
Let's see. A million dead Iraqis. Four million displaced Iraqis. Concrete barriers and checkpoints separating neighborhoods. Destroyed schools, hospitals, electric production, water treatment plants, sewage plants. House raids and prisons. Torture. Death squads. Depleted uranium.
Why would they want us to leave? Then we can't "help" anymore.
Exactly, at least one other person in here sees the bigger picture.
Talk about confused. The same people that have been pushing to bring our troops home are already coming up with reasons to complain about them coming home. What would these people do without a soapbox...maybe they'd find a real cause and actually effect positive change in the world instead of feeding on all the hatred they spread. If peace actually broke out all over the world, the authors of this column would write an article about how some poor guy in Fargo lost his pet dog because of it.
Can a leopard change its spots? Yes? No?
Will electing a new leader really change America? What are the things that might bring change? Hint: getting rid of religion, altering the political system, adopting a new economic regime, questioning Manifest Destiny, etc, etc.
Whether America can change its spots is a million dollar question. The issue is discussed on:
www.dangerouscreation.com
“US Threatens To Halt Services to Iraq…”
That’s not the only tool in the US toolbox. Don’t forget about a coup d’eta or murdering the SOFA opponents.
Please, Iraq insist that we leave at the UN. Bu$h the inferior is not above following Shotgun Dick's orders to overthrow the puppet regime.
Maybe if the UN passed a resolution that anyone that killed a
merican soldier or a contractor or such could not be charged with any crime, maybe the U S would go home and leave the world in peace.
Where is MacBush in all this?
He said we might stay for 100 years! Is he irrelevant to the White House, too?
Did they give him a chance to say something?
Is he now irrelevant to both parties and both nations?
And to think Palin will not get a chance to show-off her expensive hairdo while wearing her $150,000 in clothes. I betcha Immelda Marcos is green in envy!
But, maybe this news will distract the public from her "Abuse of Power" Veredict. Can you imagine all the ways a VP could "Abuse Power", ask Chaney.
Maybe that is why Pres Bush nearly shot him to death.
No other site is comparable in concern, topics and, oh yes, the wise comments, except mine, of course. Thanks you all!
MikeSar
Blackmailing is a mild crime compared to genocide, colonialism, and war crimes.
Is America looking for an excuse to get out of Iraq?
Is this the way to win "the hearts and minds of the people"?
In short, are they dumb or crazy?
Is this what McBush means by "Victory" and "Leaving with Honor"?
We could send a fleet of B-52s and carpet bomb all their cities, but why?
Remember, there is no evidence Iraq had anything to do with 9/11.
There is an obvious fact that might, or might not, penetrate their thick skull. Can we really afford to antagonize an oil-rich country, at this time?
What if they retaliate to our retailiation by cutting off all oil sales?
What if other countries, including Saudi Arabia and Iran and Russia, decide that it is time to "teach Americans a lesson on proper International behaviour"? All they would need to do is cut oil production a get filthy rich with dollars.
Don't think for one second that they are not able to think past their gut,
there is much evidence to the contrary and their options are very, very few.
No other site is comparable in concern, topics and, oh yes, the wise comments, except mine, of course. Thanks you all!
MikeSar
MikeSar,
"Can we really afford to antagonize an oil-rich country, at this time?"
Are you kidding? We're aiming to own that danm place, the oil and all.
I don't get it. The Iraqis want us to leave, so they must be prepared to pick up the axe when we drop it. But this article suggests that the Iraqis are surprised at how much we do for them. If it is such a surprise, does this mean there is no transparency in Iraq, and that all the good stuff we do is "secret"?
Unlikely. This is a garbage article.
Def garbage. The Iraqi politician seemingly surprised at all the US does was obviously making the statement for dissemination to the locals there as a means to convince people the US is doing something worthy and not just conducting a few dozen bombing runs every month. It was parroted here to impart confusion as to why the Iraqi politicians wouldn't eject us as immediately as they could. That politician is owned by the CIA and loving up dominating peasants, flying on jets and being protected by satellite surveillance and budgets for goon squads and to pay drill torturing cops.
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
"You don't stick a knife in a man's back nine inches, and then pull it out six inches, and say you're making progress." -- Malcolm X
(Information Clearing House has this statement at the top of their daily news. )
The US has pulled the knife partially out. Why don't the Iraqis see that as progress?
Because they're purists who expect immediate perfection and instant gratification?
Because they would rather sit at their computers and bitch than to recognize that once the US pulls the knife partially out, it's up to THEM to keep up the pressure on the US to pull out the knife the rest of the way?
Just spitballin' here...
The U.S. blackmailing? The very thought is ridiculous!
In the minds of some, America is incapable of doing any such thing. They believe it is incapable of invading sovereign nations to take their resources, the mass murder of civilians, wanton destruction, torture, imperialism, rendition, global vandalism, etc.
Such people, Americans all, are deranged! They need a reality check.
www.dangerouscreation.com
&YYY&
Bring it on. Cut all the services, and the Iraqi people will have to take them over.
A Trap For Barack Obama?
Whatever General Odierno's intention may be, his extortionary refusal to negotiate has set a trap for Barack Obama.
If Senator Obama expresses even the mildest criticism of Odierno's ridiculous and self-defeating intransigence, within minutes an unending parade of Republican politicians and government officials will appear on every cable news outlet, accusing Senator Obama of stabbing the President in the back, interfering in delicate international negotiations, and siding with America's enemies, and that's just the first day. By November 4th, there would be cartoons of surrender monkeys all over Youtube, jingo country musicians like John Rich and Aaron Tippin would be singing the "Surrender Monkey Blues," and three or four percent of the dumbest undecideds might switch to McCain.
Senator Obama is almost certainly too smart to fall into this trap, but it wouldn't take much of a stumble to give the Republican noise machine everything it needs for a howling media circus, and even a little criticism of Odierno's ridiculous posturing from a high-profile Obama campaign adviser might be enough.
Why is this a trap instead of just another blunder? Because the current Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, isn't stupid, and Odierno's crude blackmail is so transparently self-defeating that it suggests the intervention of a devious higher power like Dick Cheney, who has done absolutely nothing to promote the real interests of the United States in the last eight years, and absolutely everything conceivable to consolidate the power of his neo-con clique.
Odierno may have been set up with an obviously bad idea to provide a tempting target for the Obama campaign, and if any of them fall for this gambit, Republican spin-doctors might be able to spin it into the October miracle that McCain and Palin need.
Jacob Freeze
It cannot be a trap. They are not that smart! They think with their gut.
Pres. to be, Obama is much too smart to fall for this trap but, you make a good case, what may be a trap is the invitation by Pres. Bush to bring the largest nations for an Economic Summit, next Januray, before he leaves office!!
What can a President-elect say to disagree on anything?
If he is not invited to attend, why would any leader make committments to a lame duck?
This one does smell like a trap to me. Intended to give the impression that "I am working hard and DOING ALL I CAN", we heard that ditty too many times. Will other nations come if Pres-elect Obama declines?
No other site is comparable in concern, topics and, oh yes, the wise comments, except mine, of course. Thanks you all!
MikeSar
jt lewis the MIC sent bush a memo....it read.....c'mon george, just give us some more time to BLOW UP some more stuff,and give us some more BIG bloated MILITARY CONTRACTS...we are so used to getting...you can't take that away from us.
What is the message when Iraqis are more difficult to scam than Americans?
Is it that we demand our politicians blatantly lie to us? Why are we so willing to be the pawns of corporate gangsters? Have we been conditioned to only play the role of victims?
Iraqis seem to get it. Maybe we do need death, carnage, poverty and concentration camps before we do finally awaken to reality and move to act.
Chief mobster choices offered by "The Party" only guarantee more of the same. We could once count upon government to protect us against criminals... now they ARE the government... and they've got BIG guns.
.How embarrassing for our nation to be exposed in such fashion. I trust the world understands this to be a position unique to the outgoing administration and not ascribe such to the average American.....
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Seems like the ONLY way for our people to get out of there is if Maliki sticks to his conscience and the will of his people (Democracy???) and calls the bullshit bluff.
Scratch Open A Cynic And You Will Find An Angry Idealist.
"Many people are looking to this attitude as a matter of blackmailing."
Imagine that, people that don’t flinch at wars of agression will carry out blackmail! Who would have guessed?
It appears as if the USA's departure from Iraq will overtake Belgium's evacuation of the Congo in terms of chaotic bumbling.
Well hell, our arrival was a chaotic mess, why should our departure be any better?
Included in the services to be halted: the Lincoln Group will no longer use our tax dollars to pay "reporters" to to propagandize the Iraqi people; electricity will be cut from four hours a day to just one; no more free guns for the "Sunni Awakening" or free pallets of "missing" cash; torturing will cease immediately; and we swear we will stop bombing weddings and funerals altogether.
So take that, you ungrateful freedom-haters!
Oh, and, note to the Iraqis: you're not the only ones being blackmailed by CheneyBush Inc: "Treasury Secretary Paulson and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke blackmailed Congressional leaders with a reported forecast that we are “literally days away from a complete meltdown of our financial system.”
It's not extortion! The USA is bringing Republicrat Redistributive Socialism to Iraq. We borrow the money from China, various oil rich Arab states and others, allow outfits like Halloweenburton and Bechtel to steal it, then make the next three, possibly more, generations of Americans pay it back with interest. Yes, it's thievery and villainy . . . but not blackmail. How dare the ungrateful Iraqis say something so slanderous! This is the true meaning of The Surge.
You see, we have to continue to be able to take enormous amounts of wealth from the middle-class taxpayers in the U.S., and transfer it into the pockets of the "defense" contractors and others who get rich from the suffering of the innocent.
But we can't raise taxes on the rich. That would be socialism, and we can't have that!
"It was really shocking for us," he said. "Many people are looking to this attitude as a matter of blackmailing."
No kidding!
I hope they stick with it. New mamagement coming here anyway.
If we can't rape and kill and steal from you without fear of prosecution, we are not going to do it at all. Take that you ungrateful Iraqi barbarians.
I always wondered what the "H" was for.
Jesus was a Moslem like Obama?
And we want our oil!