IRAQ:Under pressure to secure the evacuation of foreign forces, Maliki now wants a timetable to be agreed, writes Michael Jansen
THE WHITE House yesterday reasserted opposition to fixing an arbitrary date for withdrawing US troops from Iraq and argued that any evacuation would depend on the situation on the ground.
Spokeswoman Dana Perino also said there was no deadline for the conclusion of agreements under negotiation, dropping an end-of-July deadline.
Differences between the US and Iraqi governments remain great.
The US is pressing for conclusion of a status of forces agreement providing legal foundations for the presence of its forces and for long-term military bases, as well as a strategic framework dealing with political, economic, security, cultural and diplomatic relations between the two countries. Iraq is seeking a short-term memorandum of understanding which will authorise the presence and activities of US troops and set a date for total pull-out.
On Monday Iraqi prime minister Nuri al-Maliki said the aim of the talks was to prepare for "immediate US forces withdrawal" or to set a "timetable for withdrawal".
The draft now on the table includes a formula for withdrawal, he said. "The goal is to end the [foreign troop] presence."
On Tuesday, his security adviser, Mowaffak al-Rubaie, said the government was "impatiently waiting" for the withdrawal of US troops.
"There should not be any permanent bases in Iraq unless these bases are under Iraqi control," he said, insisting on "specific dates for the foreign troops' withdrawal from Iraq".
Mr Rubaie made the remarks after a meeting in Najaf with influential Shia Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, who demands full restoration of Iraqi sovereignty.
The government's current stance amounts to a reversal of its previous rejection of a timeframe for withdrawal and insistence that conditions had to be propitious.
Mr Maliki and his Shia fundamentalist-led government are under strong pressure to secure the evacuation of foreign forces. The negotiations with the US are taking place in the run-up to the projected October provincial elections, which he and his coalition partners are determined to win.
The nationalist rhetoric adopted by Mr Maliki serves both for popular consumption and as a warning to the US that he cannot sign unpopular commitments. On a practical level, he is calling for US withdrawal once security in the provinces is handed over to Iraqi forces. So far, they are nominally in charge of only nine out of 18 provinces, while US forces operate freely throughout the country.
Since Baghdad's army and police are not responsible for the three northern Kurdish provinces, where security is provided by Kurdish militias, the handover has occurred in just six provinces.
The US rather than Iraq decides when transfers take place. Lieut Gen James Dubik, the US officer in charge of training, told the US House of Representatives armed services committee yesterday that "some form of partnership and assistance, consistent with strategic objectives, is still necessary. The Iraqis know this; we should remember it too."
He gave no estimate of how long US forces would stay in Iraq.