Officials: Deal calls for troop pullback in Iraq

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

QASSIM ABDUL-ZAHRA and ROBERT BURNS | August 20, 2008 10:35 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »

U.S. soldiers walk past as a displaced Iraqi family return to their home in the Jihad area of west Baghdad, Iraq, Tuesday, Aug. 19, 2008. Last week the Iraqi army launched a series of raids on the Jihad area, in which they arrested the head of a U.S.-funded Sunni group, aiming to clear the area of suspected insurgents for about 240 displaced families to return. (AP Photo/Karim Kadim)

BAGHDAD — Iraqi and U.S. negotiators have completed a draft security agreement that would see American troops leave Iraqi cities as soon as June 30, Iraqi and American officials told The Associated Press on Wednesday.

In Washington, a senior military official said the deal is acceptable to the U.S. side, subject to formal approval by President Bush. It also requires final acceptance by Iraqi leaders, and some members of Iraq's Cabinet oppose some provisions.

Also completed is a companion draft document, known as a strategic framework agreement, spelling out in broad terms the political, security and economic relationships between Iraq and the United States, the senior military official said. The official discussed the draft accords on condition that he not be identified by name because the deals have not been publicly announced and are not final.

In addition to spelling out that U.S. troops would move out of Iraqi cities by next summer, the Iraqi government has pushed for a specific date _ most likely the end of 2011 _ by which all U.S. forces would depart the country. In the meantime, the U.S. troops would be positioned on bases in other parts of the country to make them less visible while positioned to assist Iraqi forces as needed.

U.S. officials have resisted committing firmly to a specific date for a final pullout, insisting that it would be wiser to set a target linked to the attainment of certain agreed-upon goals. These goals would reflect not only security improvements but also progress on the political and economic fronts.

It was not clear Wednesday how that has been settled in the draft security accord, which the two governments are referring to as a memorandum of understanding. The draft agreement must be approved by the Iraqi parliament, which is in recess until early next month.

On Wednesday evening a second senior U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the two sides have come up with a draft agreement that addresses the issue of the timing of future U.S. troop withdrawals, but the official would not say whether the two sides had agreed on 2011 for a final pullout. The official suggested there would be a series of timelines set, linked to conditions on the ground, and that the draft worked out by the negotiators required more talks at higher levels of the two governments.

The senior U.S. military official said the draft is consistent with U.S. objectives, which include setting a "time horizon" rather than a firm date for the future withdrawal of American forces.

Story continues below
advertisement

"The improved security in Iraq allows us to have conversations with the Iraqis about setting goals for more American troops to come home and for the Iraqis to take the lead in more combat missions," White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe said. "Any dates in an agreement will be based on conditions on the ground because we do not want to lose the hard-fought gains of the surge."

The draft agreement addresses issues that are key points of contention in the U.S. presidential election _ in particular the future U.S. troop presence in Iraq. GOP hopeful Sen. John McCain is opposed to setting any timeline for withdrawals; his Democratic opponent, Sen. Barack Obama, says he would bring all combat troops home from Iraq within 16 months.

An Iraqi official who was involved in the protracted negotiations said the latest draft was completed last week and sent to the two governments.

The official said a compromise had been worked out on the contentious issue of whether to provide U.S. troops immunity from prosecution under Iraqi law, but he did not give details. In Washington, the senior military official said the draft agreement reflects the U.S. position that the United States must retain exclusive legal jurisdiction over its troops in Iraq.

While Iraqi negotiators signed off on the draft, another official close to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said the country's political leadership objected to parts of the text, including the immunity provision.

"There are different points of view," he said. "We have given ours. The other side has given theirs."

He would not elaborate and spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.

A third senior Iraqi official said al-Maliki himself had gone through the text personally and made notes with objections to some undisclosed points. He also spoke on condition of anonymity.

The security deal is to govern the status of the more than 140,000-strong U.S. military force after the U.N. Security Council mandate for its mission expires at the end of this year.

The Shiite-led government has been pressing for some sort of timeline for the departure of U.S. troops, saying that is essential to win legislators' approval.

The decision to refer the agreement to parliament followed demands by the country's most powerful Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, that any formula to keep U.S. troops on Iraqi soil _ even for a limited period _ must have broad political support.

Bush long had refused to accept any timetable for bringing U.S. troops home. Last month, however, he and al-Maliki agreed to set a "general time horizon" for ending the U.S. mission.

Bush's shift to a broad timeline was seen as a move to speed agreement on the security pact.

Talks were supposed to have been finished by the end of last month but differences over immunity and other issues dragged out the process.

___

Burns reported from Washington.

BAGHDAD — Iraqi and U.S. negotiators have completed a draft security agreement that would see American troops leave Iraqi cities as soon as June 30, Iraqi and American officials told The Associa...
BAGHDAD — Iraqi and U.S. negotiators have completed a draft security agreement that would see American troops leave Iraqi cities as soon as June 30, Iraqi and American officials told The Associa...
 
Comments
51
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 Next › Last » (2 pages total)

I honestly dont believe in announcing timelines,cause if u do You just basically tell your enemy when your leaving and they can play the waiting game.I dont agree with this war at all, its all based on lies and rhetoric but now that were there they should keep that stuff behind closed doors when they are leaving, i dont know just my opinion.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:32 PM on 08/25/2008
- omop I'm a Fan of omop permalink


The broo-ha-ha about the announced socalled "pullback" is hype in order not to admit the reality that:

An undetermined number of US Military personnel, probably around 60,000 to 80,000 will be housed in the 14/16 bases already built in Iraq by Halliburton and others. The 60,000 to 80,000 is purely a guess on my part but if its true as reported at least 14 miltary bases were built @ 5.000 per installation then the guess is not too far off.

( The use of words such as "pullback" or "withdrawing all combat troops" need to be followed up with; "pullback to where" and the same witth "withdrawing all combat troops to where".)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:04 PM on 08/22/2008
photo

What a farce this administration is and continues to be--A deal is signed with Iraq for complete pull-out by 2011??? Who do they think they are kidding?? Bush is desperate for a "legacy" to go on his resume. Well bucko, that ain't gonna get it. Because in the end it is ultimately up to PRESIDENT OBAMA --our next Commander in Chief.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:44 AM on 08/22/2008

I read that report.

Troops pulled back "AS SOON AS JUNE 30"?

The writers and negotiators do know that it is now August. Towards the end of August actually. June 30 is almost a year away.

That is not SOON by any definition of the word.

Like Jon Stewart said. You can never reach a horizon.

At any rate the decision will be President Obama's.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:10 AM on 08/21/2008
- JBS I'm a Fan of JBS permalink
photo

Yep. It's always going to be almost a year away.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:55 AM on 08/21/2008

That really worries me.

I am afraid that Bush/Cheney have screwed things up so bad President Obama, no matter how reasoned or intelligent, will not be able to get us out of that mess.

Not without a blood bath.

The utter stupidty of Bush and Cheney has been mind boggling. They are like little children who ruin their "toys."

And then expect the adults to clean up after them.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:33 PM on 08/21/2008

Bush/McCain are surrendering and cutting and running ha ha

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:38 AM on 08/21/2008

Would someone explain to me how this "deal" announcement is not the same thing as a TIMELINE FOR WITHDRAWL?Many otherwise respectable people have been beaten severely about the head and shoulders,pilloried by the press,and otherwise made to seem foolish and even cowardly/unpatriotic,when they have suggested such a thing over the last 4 years.The Nea-Cons have different words as a smokescreen for the same actions.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:42 PM on 08/22/2008

the surege is working,we can now begin to pull our troops out.that's what the head of the military said prior to the 2005 elections.after it he said we had to stop the withdrawl .now they have an 'agreement' to pull troops out,gee before an election. subject to approval by bush,on nov 5th he will not approve it.

funny thing if the surge was working why did he say we had to end it.if something is working you usually step it up or keep at same level,you sure don't end it.

what happened to a timeline is a sign of defeat? the only reasone we are doing this is, iraq demanded it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:26 AM on 08/21/2008
photo

gosh, WE Dems are going to have to stop living in the past on this issue... recognize the success, and recognize the Repubs are defining the situation for themselves -as they always seem to be able to do probably because Dems get hung up on silly, silly arguments...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:23 AM on 08/21/2008

Dear Iraq:

Never forget that you are negotiating with a snake. Lying is Bush's and anyone associated with his administration's nature.

You will reach some agreement and Bush will issue a signing statement that negates everything he wants from the deal and you will be left holding the bag. It will be your credibility on the line, because Bush has none and as John McCain has said he is planning on staying for quite awhile.

Hold out for what you need, make sure it is clear and unambiguous and doesn't have words like horizon, aspirations or goals subject to two understandings.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:20 AM on 08/21/2008

This forthcoming troop WITHDRAWAL agreement and SOF will bolster McBush's campaign. Premier NObama will be seen as WEAK and reinforces the POOR JUDGEMENT label McBush is trying to paint him with. With the Rising Bear threatening a NATO ally, and AFGHANISTAN moving into the forefront of the debate, voters will rely on McBush's experience and proven judgement in foreign policy. The next month doesn't bode well for Premier NObama.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:58 AM on 08/21/2008

you WISH.

McCain's foreign relations = confrontation, threats, antagonism, war

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:35 AM on 08/21/2008
- JBS I'm a Fan of JBS permalink
photo

Can you say "October Surprise" boys and girls? I knew you could.

Look at the headline - The New York Times, Oct. 27, 1972

http://preview.tinyurl.com/37v5o3

Remember, Lincoln said you COULD "fool SOME of the people all of the time."

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:07 AM on 08/21/2008

Seeing is believing. This is a load of BS, mere chit-chat to affect the election.

Promises, promises.

Why don't they withdraw the troops, instead of just talking about it. We need the Iraqis' permission to leave? This is a big pre-November PR show.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:54 AM on 08/21/2008

This withdrawal talk will affect the election. After November, we can watch these withdrawal deals stall out, we can count on military escalations in other areas... oh, and watch the price of gasoline shoot through the roof.

The Repubs and their corporate paymasters keep grabbing and stealing time after time, and the "swing voters" fall for it time after time. They will vote for McCrank not because he's a wisened and tested leader - they'll vote for him because he's a white male, and because Obama is being painted up as the Antichrist.

Out educational system has failed.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:06 AM on 08/21/2008
photo

But, we're way past June 30th. Oh, I get it - next June 30th. Never happen if McIIIrd is elected. He'll say it's "June 30th, 21XX."

Obama08

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:47 AM on 08/21/2008

A general time horizon, give me a break. I can see the staff meeting of a couple of Bush-men in which they struggled to get something semantic to cover their behinds. Al Maliki said for the troops to go home soon but timeline is a forbidden term because Obama has used it. What to do? Call it a general time horizon. Have you ever heard that term used before? No? That's because it is not a term in general usage, at least not where I live. Torture the English language to say it but don't say it, but do what Obama suggested.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:33 AM on 08/21/2008
photo

Jon Stewart says the difference between a timeline and a horizon is that you can always see the horizon but never reach it, because it moves as you do!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:28 AM on 08/21/2008

Had the 'surge" worked, they wouldn't be trying to make all these deals now. They are only doing this because we need the troops in Afghanistan. This is the only way they can take all the 12,000 troops out without showing how wrong there were to put them there in the first place. You would think MC won this war all by himself the way he talks.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:48 AM on 08/21/2008
photo

Busj don' t want to leave !!!!!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:42 AM on 08/21/2008
photo

What happened to the "Tet Offensive" I was promised a year ago when the Surge was having signs of success?

I guess wishing failure on the U.S. doesn't work.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:04 AM on 08/21/2008

Yes 3 triliion for hundreds of thousands dead.. a warn and broken military.. an Islamic shite fundalmentalist theocracy with very strong ties to Iran (also Shite) whose first oil deal is with communist China is kicking their invaders, I mean liberators out..

Is this what we were told was victory/winning and what we got for our money (which we were told would only cost 2 billion and we would be out in months....Oh yes McCain even said that to)?

Money well spent by the deficit party! In the mean time the Reougs have brought back the cold war with Russia (anothe country we now owe 300 billion to), Al Qeada, Bin ladden and the taliban are all alive and well in Pakastan and Afganistan and BUSH has presided over the largest transfer of wealth in the history of mankind and the largest devaluation of the dollar and the worst inflation in 27 years and the fewest jobs created since Herbert Hoover/Great depression...

Long Live the SURGE! VICTORY is ours!!

Regards

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:37 AM on 08/21/2008
photo

" ... when the Surge was having signs of success?"

Define "success".

8

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:36 AM on 08/21/2008
photo

That is exactly what O has to do. If O doesn't define reconciliation, he WILL LOSE this argument. Mark my words.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:25 AM on 08/21/2008
photo

Appropriate screen name, I must say. Your post reaks of marine style grunting and completely lacks a broader understanding of Iraq's inner political struggles. The surge had little or nothing to do with the recent stemming of violence, which could shift at any moment, and would result in the deaths of many more of our soldiers. Idiot.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:30 AM on 08/21/2008

Earth To Metalpipe et al, give it a rest. The surge worked, worked, worked, you and those who think as you do can't stand the idea of success. You're like the little child who attempts to hold his breath unless it has his way. It must be wonderful to believe that your vision and conceptions are the "holy writ" and all else means nothing.Should McCain win I can visualize the planning that currently is going on to explain how the election was stolen. Wake up, as it was said, You can fool all of the people some of the time but you can't fool all of the people all of the time. DEAL WITH IT !

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:52 AM on 08/21/2008

This is not a win for Obama, even though some may see it that way.

This is VICTORY for McCain because of THE SURGE which was, of course McCains idea (which McCain will trumpet and the media will not question).

The media does not want to spin this in any other way than victory, because its in their interest to do so. If the media tries to seel it as anything but victory, that kind of implies Iraq was wrong from the get go and the media doesnt really want to admit they cheerled for a wrong action. So VICTORY it will be.

All hail srgue-meister McCain. All praise to him and his surge. We look forward to the surge on the economy, surge on drugs, surge on abortion.

The word surge will be the new 'truthiness'.

As far as me though, if this comes to fruition and we actually fully leave with a somewhat stable country in our wake that will be enough for me for now. It will never have been worth it and it will always have been wrong and the costs too high, but this will have to be the best of all other options available.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:52 AM on 08/21/2008
Page: 1 2 Next › Last » (2 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in  or  Connect