Iraq has spent the better share of the last 16 years under US military occupation. Despite this, time and again US-Iraqi relations have come to be defined by US hostility toward neighboring Iran, and Iraq’s desire to not get mixed up in that.
So while Iraq’s parliament was already bristling under Pentagon talk of staying in Iraq, and Trump saying that the US was staying in Iraq to “keep an eye on Iran,” the recent escalation of US rhetoric about a war against Iran has sparked action within parliament.
It has been said for awhile that Iraq will be voting on a bill that would aim to expel all foreign troops from Iraqi soil, and singles out US troops in particular as needing to leave. The bill is endorsed by Iraq’s top two Shi’ite blocs, and is expected to pass fairly easily. Exact timing of the vote is unclear, but it is expected to be sooner rather than later.
What happens then is the real question. Iraq’s parliament is already being spun as “pro-Iran factions,” and it’s been a long time since US officials, Pentagon or otherwise, gave any indication that they thought staying in Iraq was up to the Iraqi government.
So while the Iraqi Prime Minister is warning the US that they can’t use Iraq to launch a war on Iran, the US is browbeating Iraq over its government-aligned Shi’ite militias, and doing everything they can to try to portray that Shi’ite-dominated Iraqi government as effectively in league with the Iranians, and subsequently a threat to US interests. No matter what happens, it seems certain US-Iraqi ties will suffer for it.
Bush signed the Status of Forces Agreement in 2008 for all US troops to leave by 2011 and OBAMA agreed to withdraw a further 20K by end of 2011.
Bet Al Sadr, who fought the US to a standstill, would like to know what’s hindering their complete withdrawal.
It was slightly different. SOFA Iraq 2008 clearly allowed negotiations for a continuation after 2011. In that year Obama tried to negotiate a continuation but failed because the Pentagon refused to accept the Iraqi demand that US force members must stand trial in Iraqi courts for certain crimes committed while not on duty. Such a provision is common in all of our SOFA agreements with Western countries where we have members of our armed forces stationed. The Iraqi’s, especially El Sadr, were furious that they were treated differently.
Throw the bums out. No war for Israel.
What an interesting conundrum… supposedly we’ve overthrow a tyrant and built a democracy in Iraq. Will the US then ignore that official process of representation of the Iraqi people, or just declare it a suggestion and do whatever the hell we want in their country… including exterminating their neighbors (again)..? They can’t have it both ways.
How far we’ve fallen, where the safest assumption is that the US govt will undermine representative democracy in order to start another unnecessary war of conquest. It’s like Rambo spraying bullets everywhere because someone looked at him wrong yet somehow managing to get every splinter of shrapnel lodged in his own foot.
I assume that there is a so-called SOFA agreement with Iraq on the presence of our armed forces in that country. Such agreements usually allow either party to terminate the agreement at any time but there is usually also a period defined, commonly one year, which our government has to withdraw our armed forces and their civilian support regardless of which party terminates.
President Obama was faced a similar situation in 2011 when the government of Iraq would not renew the then existing SOFA agreement which had been negotiated and signed by President Bush in 2008 (SOFA agreements commonly have a limited duration hence need renegotiation or else a simple resigning without negotiations). Obama pulled our armed forces out and thereby averted a very perilous situation for our soldiers.
If there exists no SOFA agreement with Iraq now and our administration ignores the demand of the government of Iraq to leave and does not pull out that could be the equivalent of our declaration of war on Iraq. Then every US soldier is a great risk of being made prisoner of war or killed. Then our President will be forced to either pull out in panic or send many more soldiers to Iraq to protect those which are already there.
Or eat crow and call for a conference with the government of Iraq to hammer out a new SOFA. At such negotiations the Iraqi’s have the upper hand.
If our armed forces are today in Iraq without a SOFA agreement that is a very bad situation. Apparently they are there with the tacit but reluctant approval of the Iraqi government to train Iraqi soldiers. That approval appears to be withdrawn soon. The Trump administration had oodles of time to negotiate an agreement. Failure to do so, if that is the case, is inexcusable.
How will this affect the 14 illegal military bases the USA has in Syria? I assume the US special forces enter/exit into Syria via Iraq (and receive most of their air cover via Iraq as well)…will the USA have to give up their bases in Syria?
This vote in the Iraqi Parliament might not be legally binding–but, at the very least, will send a very serious message:
—————-
Laws drafted by parliament that do not originate in the Iraqi cabinet
are generally struck down as unconstitutional, even if approved by the
parliament. Even if a withdrawal bill was passed – and it’s possible
given the numbers that make up the committees – it would likely have no
legal effect.
However, the symbolic impact of a such a parliamentary vote could
still have impact, and would certainly generate headlines
internationally, as happened with similarly struck-down legislation
banning alcohol in 2016.
One Iraqi government official, who spoke on condition of anonymity
because he is not authorised to speak with the media, told Middle East
Eye that diplomats in Baghdad believed that even a non-binding bill
would put pressure on foreign forces.
“It will force the Americans, due to domestic perception of the bill passing in Iraq, to withdraw their troops,” he said.
https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/get-out-iraqi-mps-push-laws-calling-us-troop-withdrawal
—————
That is a very interesting issue. Syria is surrounded by the Mediterranean, Turkey, Iraq, Jordan, Israel, and Lebanon. The entrance and exit of limited numbers of special forces is no problem. They can be flown in from any base in Europe, say Ramstein in Germany.
A bigger problem is the continuous provision of food, clothing, medication, munition, and weapons (the Germans call this “Nachschub”). Yes the route from Basra to Syria is the favorable one because transport to Northern Syria will be through Iraq only.
The Russians control one or two ports on the Mediterranean but there appear to be smaller more Southern ports available. Still, much transport would have to go through unfriendly Syrian territory.
Supply from Israel through the Golan heights is out of the question and so is supply through Lebanon. Jordan? Has no sea port. Israel to Jordan to Syria? I doubt that Jordan wants to get involved because that would need US troops in Jordan to protect transports. Turkey? Turkey has no good ports near Syria and Erdogan is not exactly happy with us.
So you are correct. If our forces have to leave Iraq that may well jeopardize these bases and with it the whole US presence in Syria.
thanks for the info…
Be interesting how this would affect the Kurds in the North of Iraq, too–they have largely broken off from Iraq and have been supported by US forces in doing so. Genie Energy is located there (owned by Rothschilds and Dick Cheney)–so I would expect an intensification of pressure.
Perhaps the bombs which came from Israel yesterday was just the beginning of a new round of violence with the aim of breaking Syria.
Now, if we could only get our own Congress to do the same, and while they’re at it, include Germany, Japan, and South Korea as well. Go Tulsi!
I like Tulsi, but her regular trumpeting of “soldier’s values” is disturbing, particularly given her clear understanding of what those soldiers routinely engage in.
The way the DNC is already blackballing anyone who’s even remotely anti-war is disturbing as well. They seem to be setting it up for another Clintonista clone like Biden to be their top dog.
I’m always amused how the Trump loyalists always point out how Trump was against the Iraq war during his campaign and made Jeb look silly but don’t seem to care that he now thinks Iraq is a staging area for future attacks on Syria or Iran.
wars, You labor under great falsehoods!
Falsehoods? Please elaborate.
And you, Jay, labor under massive conformation bias. Every bit of evidence that Trump is a con man and has bamboozled you big time just can’t possibly be true, can it? Sorry, there’s no medication available for that particular debilitating syndrome.
Iraq also wants to buy the S-400…another sign that Iraq is working for independance.
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/18830/iraq-looking-to-buy-russias-s-400-air-defense-system-report
the day will come soon when the forced exit door will consist of embassy roof tops, like in Saigon 1975.
Message go Iraq — you are with us, or get out of the way! What? How can they get out of their country. They do not want war with Iran. They cannot dismantle Shia militia, as Shia is the majority in Iraq, over 60%. What is going on? Is US really going to restart THE THIRD WAR IN IRAQ? This does not look good, and we are sleepwalking into what can turn out to be a disaster. What a mess.
“it seems certain US-Iraqi ties will suffer for it.
” and so they should, as also will the relations of the USA with other “allies” who are also fed up with the arrogant bullying of the USA in their affairs.
Note to Amerika; This is what Democracy f**king looks like.
So Iraq is going to vote- democratically, mind you- to throw the US out, but we are going to un-democratically stay anyway. What a shining example for others to follow.