The National Security Network held a conference call to discuss American troop presence in Iraq and Nouri al-Maliki’s new opinion on the situation. Colin Kahl, a professor at the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service, explained that back in November, 2007, the Bush Administration and Maliki signed a declaration of principles which outlined a long term partnership of the U.S. with Iraq. Around the same time, the governments also embarked on bilateral negotiations, hopefully to be completed by July 31st, in an effort to codify a relationship and replace the current UN mandate with a bilateral arrangement.
Kahl explained that these negotiations have been very contentious due to rising animosity in different national groups. Because of this, Kahl said that there will most likely not be a long term Status of Forces Agreement or a renewal of the UN mandate, but rather some memorandum that will allow U.S. forces to operate in Iraq for the next year or two with more restrictions. Kahl also explained that Iraqis want a time horizon or time table for the departure of U.S. forces out of a predominantly combative role into a more supportive role.
Marc Lynch, a professor of International Affairs at the Elliot School of International Affairs, said that there is a fair degree of confidence that a new bargaining position has emerged in Iraq. He said that most Americans would have assumed the Iraqi position to be more favorable towards long term, unconditional U.S. support, rather than the actual, almost consensual, visceral opposition to anything that looks like long term American occupation.
Kahl said that Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) is the real outlier when it comes to his position on what needs to be done in Iraq, not the Bush Administration. He explained that McCain would like an almost “Korea style” permanent and enduring presence in Iraq, something that most Americans are not looking for. Kahl said that he believes most Americans are actually more comfortable with Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-Ill.) policy for withdrawal. Kahl explained that Obama is looking for the U.S. to have continue to have some role in Iraq, a supportive role, so that if something does go wrong during a withdrawal, the U.S. will “have their back.” Kahl himself agreed with Obama’s plan and said that if a close look is taken into Iraqi military operations, success is not possible without enablers from the U.S. military. He said that it is important for the U.S. relationship with Iraq to be conditions based on improving political actions by the Iraqi government.
U.S. needs to switch into a supportive role in Iraq
Kahl explained that these negotiations have been very contentious due to rising animosity in different national groups. Because of this, Kahl said that there will most likely not be a long term Status of Forces Agreement or a renewal of the UN mandate, but rather some memorandum that will allow U.S. forces to operate in Iraq for the next year or two with more restrictions. Kahl also explained that Iraqis want a time horizon or time table for the departure of U.S. forces out of a predominantly combative role into a more supportive role.
Marc Lynch, a professor of International Affairs at the Elliot School of International Affairs, said that there is a fair degree of confidence that a new bargaining position has emerged in Iraq. He said that most Americans would have assumed the Iraqi position to be more favorable towards long term, unconditional U.S. support, rather than the actual, almost consensual, visceral opposition to anything that looks like long term American occupation.
Kahl said that Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) is the real outlier when it comes to his position on what needs to be done in Iraq, not the Bush Administration. He explained that McCain would like an almost “Korea style” permanent and enduring presence in Iraq, something that most Americans are not looking for. Kahl said that he believes most Americans are actually more comfortable with Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-Ill.) policy for withdrawal. Kahl explained that Obama is looking for the U.S. to have continue to have some role in Iraq, a supportive role, so that if something does go wrong during a withdrawal, the U.S. will “have their back.” Kahl himself agreed with Obama’s plan and said that if a close look is taken into Iraqi military operations, success is not possible without enablers from the U.S. military. He said that it is important for the U.S. relationship with Iraq to be conditions based on improving political actions by the Iraqi government.