Nouri al-Maliki, the Iraqi Prime Minister, released a statement today indicating that all US military forces will leave Iraq by the end of the year, as scheduled.
“The agreement on the withdrawal of American forces will be implemented on schedule by the end of the year, and there will not be any bases for US forces here,” Maliki told Al-Ittijah TV channel in an interview to be broadcast later, it said.
Iraqi leaders have approved negotiations with the United States on a post-2011 training mission, but no deal has yet been announced.
This really all depends on the meaning of the word “troops” to Maliki. He has been trying to change the terms, saying that troops will leave but “trainers,” who would be members of the US military, would be allowed to stay to assist Iraqi security forces. Maliki has even said in the past that he could bypass the Iraqi Parliament under such an arrangement, and permit trainers to stay. As noted above, there is a negotiating process underway between Iraq and the US on some manner of training.
It’s important to make this clear: call them trainers, call them troops, they would still be military forces, they would presumably still have guns, and they would still be used in the event of raids or firefights or other dangerous missions. They would be troops in everything but name.
So I would imagine that Maliki is engaging in some sleight of hand here. So was the President today when he spoke to the American Legion and said this:
Thanks to these Americans, we’re moving forward from a position of strength. Having ended our combat mission in Iraq and removed more than 100,000 troops so far, we’ll remove the rest of our troops by the end of this year and we will end that war. (Applause.)
But if you have 10,000 trainers in that country, can the war said to be ended?
More ominously, just last week the Iraqi ambassador to the US told Josh Rogin that “there will be some military presence to help train Iraqi military and police,” and that the request will be made “in our own sweet time.”
Leon Panetta just a few weeks ago told reporters that Iraq had agreed to an extended US presence, but Maliki came out and shot down that statement. He’s under pressure from the Sadrists, who vow to resist any extension.
Everyone seems to be talking past one another. It’s pretty clear that there will be some US military personnel, perhaps as much as 20,000, in Iraq assisting security efforts, just with a different name attached to them, like “non-combat trainers.” The only way this doesn’t happen is if Iraq objects to the request that the trainers not be subject to the Iraqi judicial system. They want the Blackwater deal.




18 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
And the number of trainers is over and above the 5000+ security personnel who will be tasked with protecting the embassy. I’d like to know what embassy in the world needs a security staff of 5000. This is a backdoor army.
Big improvement in my mind. But the Shites are supporting Asad in Syria. Why?
“What’s in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;”- Shakespeare
Trainers, contractors, troops, mercs, it all means continuous occupation of a sovereign nation. The SOFA had established this already and to some degree grants immunity to mercs working for the State(War)department. This isn’t really new just the implementation of the SOFA.
Games with names.
Looks like we finally met Iraq’s price. I think this was a commercial deal from their viewpoint all along. Wonder if we’ll ever find out how cash we paid.
But just like the Free Trade agreements here, some folks are going to read the fine print. And those on the losing side of such agreements will protest.
Boxturtle (In Iraq, protests frequently are done with weapons illegal even in Texas)
10,000 soldiers costs less than 100,000 soldiers, especially at 1 million a piece per year. On the other hand, this is 90,000 soldiers to add to the unemployment roles. There should be a net gain to our economy, yes? Now, if only we could divert some of that savings to re-employing the returning soldiers.
Maliki can’t manage without the US troops so he’s going to call them whatever he has to to keep them. And yes, the war can be said to be over even if US troops are in the country. Unless of course you don’t consider WWII to be over.
Don’t forget to count the troops deployed to Kuwait to work in Iraq. We have troops EVERYWHERE.
Vietnam they were called “advisers” in the fine art of Murder.
If there are not going to be any bases, where are the “advisers” going to stay?
In motels in Sadr City and downtown Fallujah?
I believe that “advisors” were in Vietnam prior to the war, rather than after it.
Also, there is going to be SOME reduction in the number of american troops there. I would be suprised if it’s not getting close to the point that whatever-the-fuck they’re called, if the street shit really hits the street fan, the number of troops there may not be enough to deal with it.
I would point out that the systematic factional bombings have risen sharply in recent months.
In and around Kirkuk, the “joint checkpoints” manned by Kurds and Baghdad government troops are, each of them, small powder kegs.
And i STILL think we should get the hell out and force them to decide:
compromise on the oil distribution, etc., or civil war?
Nothing is going to change on the need for that decision, if we occupy the country for another decade or three.
I agree. If they are hellbent on civil war then we should leave them to it.
One huge logistical question that arises with more drawdowns:
Who is going to stop pissed-off Iraqis of whatever stripe, from turning the Green Zone into the world’s largest and most expensive mortar-training range? Any known concentration of americans, military or otherwise, is going to require “coverage” roughly equal to the range of an 81mm mortar.
With bases in the open desert, that isn’t a big problem; in Baghdad, it assumes that Iraqi forces are going to be ready AND willing to go house-to-house to prevent or catch any freelance piss-tubers.
I am skeptical they will do this.
Also (there are so many of these “also’s”…) most of the oil reserves are in the north and the south, with the south holding…85% of them?
That area is dominated by the Shia. If they decide to start selling oil under the table (again…they were doing it a few years ago…) with no cut for Baghdad, can the Iraqi “government” force them to stop without a major backup from american forces?
If Jefferson Davis Ahmad decides to secede, I again have doubts…about the willingness of the Shias in the government security forces to go in and enforce the edicts of a central government, against their Shia brethren.
I would think that using Kurdish and Sunni troops to try that, would be a guaranteed prescription for civil strife.
If there are even 10,000 american troops in Iraq, much less, 20,000, there are going to be bases. If you cram them into the Green Zone, the target of opportunity will be irresistable to disaffected Iraqis, and since a few hundred thousand Iraqis (minimum) have died in the “liberation”, I think we’re going to find out that there will be lots of disaffected family members left over.
These people live for payback, and this is a payback situation involving all factions, that won’t whoa.
And, since we’re on the subject:
$60,000,000,000 (I think I got the right number of zeros…)
Down the mystery rabbit-hole in Iraq and Afghanistan:
http://apnews.myway.com//article/20110830/D9PEMLOG0.html
Mission Accomplished!
Nope. This is not a “backdoor army,” this is War Incorporated, and General Smedley Butler and President Eisenhower warned us about it in clear and unambiguous terms, and we’ve ignored it because – fill in whatever ‘support the troops’ USA fuck yeah! term fits the current paradigm.
So long as there is money, big, easy, never ending money to make in war profiteering, this is our policy, official, non-official or otherwise.
How is it that the people on our side need endless training and support to do right, but the guys on the other side (same country, same people) can get organized and trained and fight just fine all by themselves?