Under Iraq Troop Pact, US Can't Leave Any Forces Behind
BAGHDAD - The status of forces of agreement between the United States and Iraq is now called the withdrawal agreement, and that's exactly what it is: an ultimate end to the U.S.-led occupation of Iraq.
If Iraq's parliament endorses the agreement, in six weeks American
forces would have to change the way they operate in Iraq, and all U.S.
combat troops, police trainers and military advisers would have to
leave the country by Dec. 31, 2011. President-elect Barack Obama's
campaign plan to leave a residual force of some 30,000 American troops
in Iraq would be impossible under the pact.
Unless the agreement is amended, which would require the formal written approval of both sides, in three years there no longer would be any legal basis for U.S. armed forces or civilian contractors of the Department of Defense to remain in Iraq.
If Iraq wants American forces to leave earlier, it could terminate the agreement with one year's notice. The United States has the option to do the same.
The American military now can come and go as it pleases in Iraq. It raids homes without judicial approval, controls Iraq's airspace, detains civilians without warrants for as long as it wants and conducts unilateral operations against high-value targets, including a recent cross-border attack on an al Qaida in Iraq member in Syria that was condemned by Iraq, the Arab League and Syria.
The agreement forbids attacks on other countries from inside Iraq, and if it were approved, beginning Jan. 1 all U.S. operations would have to be conducted in cooperation with the Iraqi government.
"It is not permitted to use Iraqi land, water and airspace as a route or launching pad for attacks against other countries," the pact says, according to an Arabic copy that McClatchy obtained.
The military also would have to get arrest warrants from the Iraqi government, judicial orders for raids on homes and to consult in advance on every operation, including the attacks on high-value targets that American forces now routinely conduct on their own.
Privately, U.S. military officials worry about sharing sensitive information with their Iraqi counterparts, out of fear of revealing intelligence sources and methods but also because many officials still suspect that some of the Iraqi security forces are working with Shiite Muslim militias or Sunni Muslim insurgents.
All detainees in American custody who are wanted by the Iraqi government would be handed over based on arrest warrants or else released, and anyone detained by U.S. forces during approved operations if the agreement is implemented next year would have to be handed over to Iraqi authorities within 24 hours.
The Green Zone, where American contractors, some military personnel and officials live and work, would come under Iraqi control on the first day of next year. U.S. soldiers currently protect the area in central Baghdad, and checkpoints are manned by Peruvian mercenaries. State and Defense department officials breeze through the checkpoints, while most Iraqis are subjected to long searches.
American Embassy personnel plan to move to a new embassy compound before the Green Zone is turned over to the Iraqis at the end of the year. The embassy staff members already live in the new 104-acre compound, but most of the offices haven't been moved yet.
Control of Iraqi airspace would be transferred to the Iraqis the day the agreement took effect, and after that the Iraqi government would issue annual permits to all U.S. military aircraft. Currently, the U.S. controls all air traffic over Iraq, including civilian flights, and it could shut down Iraq's airspace. Of course, the Iraqi government could seek American or other help with air traffic control and with the protection of the Green Zone.
In provinces that have been turned over to Iraqi control, U.S. troops couldn't remain in cities, villages or towns after the agreement took effect, and as of June 30, all American combat troops would have to be in agreed-on locations outside populated areas. They'd have no right, beginning next year, to venture off their bases and outposts without Iraqi authorities' approval and cooperation.
While the agreement doesn't give Iraqi officials blanket authority to search U.S. mail and cargo, it does give them the right to "ask the U.S. forces, in their presence" to open containers based on viable intelligence.
The Bush administration refused to meet Iraqi demands for legal jurisdiction over American military personnel, but the agreement does give Iraqi authorities the right to prosecute private contractors, and it leaves a remote possibility that a U.S. service member could be prosecuted in Iraq for major and premeditated crimes.
The Iraqi government would have to request jurisdiction by notifying the U.S. in writing within 21 days of the discovery of a crime, and a joint American-Iraqi committee would decide whether the service member was off- or on-duty, and where he or she would be tried.
"I am deeply troubled by the sections of the agreement that could result in U.S. troops facing prosecution in Iraqi courts," Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said in a statement. "I am also troubled by vague language in the agreement that will likely cause misunderstandings and conflict between the U.S. and Iraq in the future."
Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
47 Comments so far
Show AllMe thinks the US will leave Iraq like they left Vietnam - on helicopters from the US embassy roof-top in the green zone with RPG-7 and AK-47 bullets flying.
GOOD!
Anyone that has murdered and massacred over a million innocents and raped and tortured thousands more should go home in a coffin!
TheAZCowBoy
Tombstone, AZ.
ملاحظة هامة. حزب الله في الحكومة الحالية وكل من الحكومة السورية و مقتدى الصدر في الطائفة الشيعية تعارض الاتفاق الأمني من أجل أن تنتهك أمن العراق لاحقا" لتمرير خططهم الرامية إلى زعزعة الأمن في تهريب المخدرات التي هي مصدر تمويل الإرهاب لأنه لا مكان لهم في المجتمعات والحضارات التي تتمتع بالحماية بموجب الدستور لانهم ضد كل ما هو قانوني وشرعي ويعتمد على حكم الشعب ويقوض الدكتاتوريات اللتي تبقى في ظل التطرف
Important note. Hezbollah in the current Government, and Syria and Moqtada Sadr in the Shiite sect opposed to the security agreement in order to violate the security of Iraq later "to pass their plans to destabilize security in the smuggling of drugs, which is the source of financing of terrorism because it does not place them in societies and civilizations, which enjoys protection under the Constitution
Those 'permanent bases' may go afterall, but not under an Obama/Biden White House. It is going to take the burial of the Neo-Con ideology until real progress is made.
Who gave Obama the, "We will have to maintain U.S. Forces in Iraq for years to come?" Zbigniew Brzezinski......one of Barack Obama´s initial foreign relations advisers. Oh, isn´t he the guy that came up with recruiting a "Militant Islamic Force" to destabilize the Afghan government because the Soviet Union was having success with their political and economic program? Yes, and he was proud to say,"Which would you rather have as an enemy, the Soviet Union or the Taliban?"
That force was increased by the CIA and ISI to over 100,000 during the 80's and 90's.
We, the American People, have been lied to so much that we find information like in "Real News", "The Peruvian Mercenaries used by the U.S. Government." Oooopppps,
What in the h.... are we using Peruvian Mercenaries for? We have over 750 bases all over the world......close down half of those bases and turn them over to NATO or SEATO and put those servicemen back in service.......
Can you imagine a company that murdered over 17 unarmed civilians and then blackmarket sold stolen weapons to the enemy.....Yes, that is treason!!!!! Yet, they are covetted and protected by the U.S. State Department and still have contracts worth up to 4 billion dollars......Oh, I forgot, Rob Richer and Cofer Black were big guys in the CIA and given Executive jobs in Blackwater......Ever hear of "Off Books Operations"?
No: Kyoto, Ingternational Court of Law, Geneva Conventions were all trashed for "Preventive War" and "we are better off killing everybody over there.".....Iraq´s Oil is too valuable to the Generals and Corporate Elite.
It's not neo-con ideology. It is neo-liberal ideology.
Of course, that's the same thing with a smiley face.
----------------------------------------
Another world is not only possible, she is on her way.
On a quiet day, I can hear her breathing.
- Arundhati Roy
Revolutions are born of hope, not despair.
- Peter Kropotkin
The Real News has a good segment on this "Withdrawal Agreement". To say the least, each of you should recall all the wonderful treaties signed between the U.S. Government and the Native American Nations. You'll recall we had a perfect record there... of reneging on every single treaty.
The same is going to happen in Iraq, undoubtedly. The Agreement that has been proposed is written half in floral generalities and half in conniving loopholes.
The Real News has more: http://tinyurl.com/5ntuvl
Way Hey! I'm back on!
At least intermittently anyway.
I have to agree with the skeptics here. The military now has WAY too much political power in Washington to let their biggest cash-cow slip away.
The US is turning over the Green Zone? Turning over the bases? When? I'll believe it when it actually happens.
Bush and the Neo-cons really thought that they could force whatever they wanted on Iraq. And they wanted permanent occupation and control of the wealth by their pet corporations. Well, the pre-emptive invasion in violation of our international treaties has resulted in over 1.2 million Iraqi deaths, over 40% women and children. About 5 million Iraqis lost their homes. Their infrastructure is shot. Our military even damaged and destroyed some of the most ancient and famous archeological sites in the world and allowed thieves to cart off priceless antiquities. This was a nation of 26 million people. Compare it to California with over 37 million. Yet, these ancient people, some decendants of the people of Abraham, of the Fertile Crescent and Hammurabi's Code are toughing it out. They want some justice and their rights. So ungrateful.
The Anglo Saxon Diaspora is our planets "Nation of prey" and they have been pretty good at it.
All nations on the planet have felt their burden on their backs
I wonder which group of humans and their Nations they are preparing to feast on next
while they are digest Iraq.
The Anglos are unparalleled in human history in their ability to liberate Indigenous peoples from their lands, on how to exterminate them , national liberation of week countries resources, destroyers of .languages and cultures, entrap of Continents of peoples in suffocating debt.
However I think they now have over reached themselves with greedy by setting about eating their own (debt entrapment of their own masses)
Now they are choking on their own vomit after prolonged periods of gluttonous free-for-all gorging
Will they survive it?
The Future awaits
the usa will never leave without its loot "oil"
We set them free, and this is the way we get treated? Quick somebody give Sadamn CPR!!!
So, why fiddle around any more? Bring everybody home tomorrow.
all that money and if we go with the original reason to be there was to take Saddam out of power. Billions gone, over 4000 dead, 10's of thousands injured or braindead. All this for one man or does it go deeper and we are not talking oil here. I hope Obama wakes up like so many Americans have and just pull out and send aid to the proper people to help rebuild the country.
Just a small fact, before the 1990 invasion of Iraq the #1 problem with Iraqi children was eating to much. Well the US took care of that problem.
Pat Murphy
I hope the pact does preclude leaving any U.S. troops after 2011. We should get the hell out of Iraq and stay out!
What is the source of the claim that "President-elect Barack Obama's campaign plan to leave a residual force of some 30,000 American troops in Iraq would be impossible under the pact."
I've found that Colin Kahl says that the residual force would be 30,000 -70,000 and at other times he's said 60,000-80,000 troops. Am I missing something? Did Obama settle on 30,000 troops, or is the article just using the low end of Kahl's "best guess"?
Let's give credit where it is due:
OBAMA HAS SUCCEEDED IN ENDING THE IRAQ WAR!
Now go celebrate.
.Do you know what the term revisionist history means? Do you know that you have rewritten history before it even happens? Are you aware that Obama isn't even President yet, so how could he affect anything? Did you not hear him, during the campaign, promise to escalate, not end, this war?
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Obama had NOTHING to do with this.
This is due to the strong will of the Iraqi people, and their knowledge and memory of history. The US made promises to leave Saudi Arabia, and didn't. The British had formerly occupied Iraq during the earlier part of last century. Iraq was and is determined not to get into that position again. Obama wants to keep troops in Iraq past the Iraqi deadline to be gone.
Now, keep pressure on Obama to close Guantanamo without opening an identical facility elsewhere, as he's planning. Keep pressure on Obama to prosecute the current administration for it's war crimes, crimes against humanity, and violations against the Constitution, which he's pledged not to do. Put pressure on Obama to cancel the failed and corrupt bank bailouts, and to place regulations on such institution's actions, which he's pledged not to do. Put pressure on Obama to repeal the PATRIOT Act and restore the Bill of Rights, which he's pledged not to do.
Again, this is the will of the Iraqis to end this occupation, which Obama pledged not to do. Don't slavishly try to adorn a paid puppet with rewards due others. Let's end the occupation of the US by corporations and private agenda, which Obama has pledged not to do.
Aloha, salud, lechiem,
- Tobias
http://www.youtube.com/user/tobiasaurusrex
American influence is like a cancer: once it's in your country it's almost impossible to get rid of!
It's a terrible irony that the country that helped to stop Hitler from taking over the world is itself taking over the world using military force and false slogans about spreading democracy.
At least Hitler was upfront about his evil ambitions!
www.dangerouscreation.com
Nothing illustrates the impotence of the Democratic leaders better than the fact that the war in Iraq will be ended by the Bush and El Maliki administrations.
Meanwhile President Elect Obama is chomping at the bit to begin his own brand of warfare in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
From the day when Senator Obama declared his intention to run for the Presidency I have warned that he is an imperialist who will start his own wars.
So this is it, huh? This is the thing that 4500 coalition troops gave their lives for, over 30,000 troops were maimed/wounded for, and maybe a million Iraqis died for.
This is the big shock and awe, surging mission accomplished victory. Wow. I'm underwhelmed.
It looks like a pretty fair agreement; in other words, good for the Iraqis, sucky for the US.
It makes me wonder what is not being said, like what did Iraq have to give up to get such a gift? Couldn't be OIL...
I'd like to know who the Hell cut that deal. Could it be........SATAN!
It's just great how the gang of imperialist crooks keeps on claiming that they must keep their troops (IED fodder) in Iraq until Iraq is stable, knowing full well that the presence of the troops is the biggest cause of the instability. They may be able to continue to fool US rubes, but a sufficient number of highly placed Iraqis are willing to risk it all to say "Enough!"
The Brits, the previous occupiers of Iraq, promised to leave hundreds of times but only did so after 40 years of staying.
Might as well remember, Winston Churchill's RAF gassed the Kurds too--(along with the Bolsheviks in Civil War Russia/USSR.)
These occupiers/interlopers are tenacious.
Dr Wu, the last of the big-time thinkers
I believe the language of this document is much looser then the author suggests. The removal of forces by 2011 is documented as an aspiration just as example.
PK
The Iraqis should have insisted that only two Americans remain behind: George Wanker Bush and Cheesedick Cheney, unarmed but dressed in combat fatigues. They could patrol the streets outside The Green Zone. Bush can ad lib a movie script of heroic derring-do as The Dynamic Duo destroy the heavily armed Republican Guard units protecting the humungous stash of WMD buried a thousand feet underground in a bunker that looks like a set from a James Bond movie. Bush and Cheney accomplish this with their fists only. Thousands of bullets are fired at them but not one hits the mark. Amazing! Then what? After vanquishing the enemy, beautiful women throw themselves at Bush's feet saying, "I love the handsome Amerikaner." And then, just as The Wanker is preparing to take off his pants . . . BOOM!!!!! . . . the IED explodes, vaporizing The Last Two Americans in Mesopotamia and the movie is over. MISSION ACCOMPLISHED.
.Funny indeed, but here is an alternate ending:
Surrounded by terrorists and about to give their lives heroically for their nation, Cheney loads his shotgun preparing for the final battle, and, oops, shoots Bush in the face....
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
They get off too easy.
LOL!! Thanks -- I love this idea!
Having the American military in your country is like having herpes......they never go away.
The Doctor: I don't think herpes can kill you, though it's made some people blind (herpes infection in eye/s).
Do you think it's funny to insult those who would die to protect your freedom?
Call Bush an std, fine, that's funny, but not the military. Have you no shame?
.Do you think it apt to insult those who do not insult soldiers, only the use to which they have been put? Do you think that perpetuating a right wing stereotype about the left, that we do not support our troops, is clever political repartee?
I wonder exactly who it is that does support our soldiers? Is it the right wing who sends them off to fight and die in unecessary wars for profit with limited numbers and insufficient equipment. or is it those who question this war and the motivations behind it?
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Re: "Do you think it's funny to insult those who would die to protect your freedom?"
How is an illegal and immoral invasion of a country that was no threat to me in any way to be considered protecting my freedom?
Furthermore, the imperial adventurism of George Bush has cost over $1 Trillion already and the nation is in deep financial crisis. The greatest threat to my freedom is the destruction of the U.S. Treasury by a criminal mafia in the White House looting the taxpayer and enslaving the public to a debt system that is completely mad.
The quickest way to freedom for Americans is to start to imprison those domestic enemies of America, like George Bush and Dick Cheney, who are ruining this country with their insane imperial schemes.
Joe,
Relax. First, the military is not the embodiment of Christ - it is a tool. Second, the way the US uses the military is the biggest insult to them, not an aside statement on Common Dreams. Third, they aren't dying to protect our freedom. They are dying because they are ordered to, and they are ordered to because our profligate lifestyle demands it.
"All Nature's difference keeps all Nature's peace." Alexander Pope
The fact that Iraq does not want to host American troops a la Germany, Japan, Korea, etc., speaks volumes. A cursory look at the map will explain why, as Iran, Turkey, Syria, Saudi Arabia, & Russia (admittedly on a long distance basis) all have their own reasons to not want a permanent US presence uncomfortably close to their borders and / or sources of income. The Iraq end game will come sooner than the Bush crime family expected and the result will not be what they expected. Now if only we could go back in time & reclaim the lost lives & money!
www.wunderman-comics.com
Actually, polls repeteadly show that Germans, Japanese, Koreans or Phillipinos (and now Poles and Czechs) don't want US troops or military equipment on their soil either.
It is only their governments that get cowed or bribed into allowing the US military on their soil.
---USAn---
I heard or read that there is some provision for US troops to be able to PROTECT property owned by US companies or there was some language that would allow US troops or contractors to stay to protect the OIL.
I have not read the whole agreement and probably will not but I hope someone that can read between the lines does.
Yesterday on National Public Radio, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice referred to this finalized proposed status of forces agreement as another example of American "success after success after success" in Iraq.
Condi Rice is living in a delusional world. It is embarrassing, and potentially dangerous, for the United States to have its foreign policy shaped by people who are not grounded in the reality-based community. Thank God the Bush era ends in January.
Bill from Saginaw
Condiliesalot has been nothing but another sybarite who has sold out America. She has been completely worthless as a Sec. of State and has been the stenographer for the neo con mens agenda. Can anyone name one sagacious or beneficial thing she has accomplished in her 8 years of mendacious, obesiance to mammon?
"Can anyone name one sagacious or beneficial thing she has accomplished in her 8 years of mendacious, obesiance to mammon?"
Yes, she made Madeline Albright's disastrous tenure look good by comparison.
AMEN!
How can any agreement made by a "puppet" gov't of an occupied country be legal under international law?
I'm troubled too;Bring them home now and stop paying the contractors taxpayer money.Tony
By The Telegraph
"And so three years is a long time. Conditions could change in that period of time," said Adml Mullen, adding the United States will continue to talk with Baghdad "as conditions continue to evolve." Asked if the agreement could be changed, he said "that's theoretically possible".
Smells like another Neo-Con Con to me.