Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Iraqis Doubt Security Agreement Will End US Presence
BAGHDAD - Iraqi and American leaders say that a new security pact will have all U.S. forces and military contractors out of Iraq by 2012, but 14th Ramadan Street is skeptical.
An Iraqi army soldier walks in front of Iraqi army vehicles at the scene where a roadside bomb exploded in Sadr City, Baghdad, Iraq, Thursday, Nov. 6, 2008. (AP Photo/ Khalid Mohammed)
"Americans won't leave," said Mazin Ali, 30, a coach driver. "They are
the decision makers in all Iraq. The decision is theirs."
He and others on 14th Ramadan Street, a commercial strip in Baghdad's Mansour district, see too many signs of a long-term American commitment to believe that the U.S. will withdraw on the timetable in the so-called status of forces agreement.
"It is not reasonable, because even if it was true and they would commit to the dates, there are great big loopholes," said Khalid Muhsin Abid, 57, pointing to the sprawling new, nearly $600 million U.S. Embassy compound on the Tigris River as evidence that the U.S. will stay.
Iraqi leaders, however, say that the agreement will end the U.S. occupation of their country that began in March 2003.
"The agreement states that American forces will withdraw from cities and villages by June 30th of 2009, which is a date that cannot be extended, and withdraw from all Iraqi soil, water and space by the 31st of December 2011, which is a date that cannot be extended," Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki stressed in a televised address Tuesday night.
In the Mansour district, however, residents were skeptical of the entire spectrum of politicians working on the deal, from the Americans to Maliki to the treaty's opponents.
"I have no wish to speak to any politician because I know they are not worthy of our trust," said one man who declined to give his name. "From the small things, you can tell. They say 'We'll give you kerosene in the winter,' and they don't. They say they will give you electricity, and they don't. How can they say 'We will give you security?'"
The agreement is now before Iraq's 275-member parliament, which cut off debate on the pact Wednesday during a hectic session at which a treaty opponent allied with radical Shiite Muslim cleric Muqtada al Sadr scuffled with Foreign Minister Hoshiyar Zebari's bodyguards.
"It was an attack against a parliament member inside the parliament member hall by guards who were not allowed to be inside with guns," said the lawmaker, Ahmed al Massoudi, who approached Zebari and was pushed away by the foreign minister's guards.
The Sadrists, who reportedly shouted down a reading of the treaty Wednesday, want an immediate withdrawal of American forces or an agreement to put the withdrawal negotiations before the United Nations, Massoudi said.
Other parties want to amend the pact, although Iraqi law prohibits that. The Iraqi Cabinet approved the agreement on Sunday, and that made the agreement a final treaty between two states. Parliament can approve or reject it, but lawmakers can't modify it.
Nonetheless, several parties are pushing to get their views heard.
The Shiite Fadhila party announced that it wouldn't support the agreement unless its suggestions are considered. A Sunni bloc of parties also wants to amend some provisions in the treaty.
"We still have many notes, such as vague wording," said Noor al Deen al Hiyali from the Tawafuq alliance of Sunni parties. "I think the U.S. will not withdraw in 2011. I think the agreement will not be approved this week."
The treaty would replace the United Nations mandate that allows U.S. forces to operate in Iraq. That mandate is scheduled to expire on Dec. 31, ending the legal justification for the American presence in Iraq.
Many Iraqis consider the pact a done deal despite the parliament vote. They expect the treaty to pass.
"All of them, inside their hearts, they will accept it," said Haji Hattam, 50, referring to the lawmakers who want to scuttle the agreement. "They just show that they don't accept it."
Hattam fled to Mansour three years ago when sectarian violence forced him out of his Saidiyah neighborhood. He's most concerned about sectarian militias returning to power, and he fears that an abrupt exit of American forces would allow violence to spike.
"If they leave at an untimely point, the militias will become worse," said Hattam, who works with Ali the coach driver on 14th Ramadan Street.
Ali, however, would prefer a quicker American exit.
"The security situation will not be stable as long as the Americans are present," he said.
Ashton reports for The Modesto (Calif.) Bee. McClatchy special correspondents Laith Hammoudi and Hussein Khadim contributed to this report.
- Posted in
5 Comments so far
Show AllThe security agreement under Bush might not end our presence, but it will under Obama.
At 2 billion per week, the US can not stay in Iraq. We can stay and collapse financially, or leave before that happens.
Either way, we won't be long there.
snydly
Empire must wait...Gotta go home...Think we hear our Mother calling...
Sometimes it's helpful to make a few observations and see where they take us. The following may seem too simple, or over the top, but consider:
The IPCC ice core data charts, and the same as seen in Gore's Book printed, so it can be studied, show us that there have been about 6 ice age cycles in the last 650ky. We are on the up-swing of a temp/CO2 spike now, with GHGs now well out of historical norms. This begs the questions---What weather phenomenon has defeated and reversed the previous spikes, yet not drastically lowered the mean planetary temp? ---What is the trigger? temp, CO2, other? Obviously, the reversals occurred before the ice caps melted appreciably, otherwise there would be no data to harvest...Is, then, the reversal of our spike immanent, or even, overdue (tipping point)?---When does the ice of an ice age build up? All at once or gradually, as the temp/CO2 decreases? ---How is the atmosphere supplied with the moisture and energy necessary to transfer so much water to the poles as snow and ice? ---What role does methane play as it is released from tundra and the oceans? ---Was there massive methane release during the previous cycles? Or did the reversals act to put the methane back to sleep, so to speak, before it could compound the greenhouse effect? ---There were humans present during the previous cycles, how and where did they survive the reversals? ---What can the paleo-geologic record found in the magnetic striping of the mid-Atlantic ridge tell us about tectonic plate movement and possible, or sudden, volcanic warming of the oceans? ---Is it possible that the mass of melt water transferred to the equatorial bulge would be sufficient to change the angular momentum of the earth enough to tweak the plates into movement? ---Does USGS data show increased activity along plate boundaries that might be a "forcing of the forcings" related to shifting water mass or rising landmass?
The answers to these questions are not hard to compute. The answers dictate the type and intensity of response that is called for. The answers have probably been known for some time, by some people who have the connections and means to respond. The answers demand a change to the status quo, a change from "growth and consumption" to sustainability and survival. Look at the tops of the spikes and decide if we have any more time to dally around with any energy sources that add heat or GHGs to the ecosphere. Coal and oil are out. Nukes and geo-thermal are out. NG, too, even though it's cleaner. The grid has to change. Wealth has to be used in different ways. It's a different game, and we're all in the same boat.
We can have just as much fun surviving with wind and sun, as with burning and consuming---let's do it!
Additionally:
Subjectively, one of the main characteristics of a spike is that everything is relatively normal, until it isn't. We are getting lots of clues now.
The emerging scenario seems to be: rising temp melts land-borne ice along with sea ice. Fresh water disrupts the thermo-halyene circulation of the gulf stream and if we're lucky, that's as far as it goes--an ice age cycle of normal proportions is initiated and technologically enabled civilization is disturbed, but maybe not destroyed.
If ice melts at such a rate as to enhance the above, another scenario might unfold: Land-borne ice melt flows to the equatorial bulge (the planet is not a perfect sphere-it bulges at the equator because of centrifugal force) thus changing the mass distribution and angular momentum of the earth and putting enough pressure on the tectonic plates to start a geotectonic event that would activate the ring of fire and the mid-Atlantic ridge. The resulting undersea volcanism, (not to mention the earthquakes, and worst case, the popping of the Yellowstone magma dome,) would flash heat the oceans. That seems to be the hidden key to how and when an ice age starts, and how it gets the moisture and enough energy to move that much water back to the polar latitudes, forming the glaciers, part of which slide on down around Cincinnati, melt and recede over the next 110,000 years.
Apparently planetary methane has been sequestered for a very long time--dinosaur time. It would be very bad for us to loose enough heat into the mix to stir up the methane. The previous ice age cycle/reversals evidently have occurred soon enough to keep the methane down under frozen tundra and cooled ocean water. An additional factor related to tectonics gleaned from USGS info is that land masses such as Greenland, relieved of the weight of the ice, tend to rise, actually float higher on the magma. National Geog had an article on the mechanics of the melting that is shaping up on Greenland---flows of melt water form surface streams which drop through the thousands of feet of ice to the land surface, creating a layer of slush under incredible pressure. The next dot in that progression is: earth tremor, separation and departure of a largish section of that ice cap which, worse case, might produce a tsunami out into the Atlantic. Or worst case, a chain reaction of tsunamis as some of the crumbling islands in the east Atlantic loose a mountain or two (PBS).
A serious multi-disciplinary approach, including even rogue generalists seems called for.
So…amazing deductions, pseudo-science in prose, or story board for “The Day After The Day After Tomorrow”?
No more time for War.