More

Iraq Troop Withdrawal: Immunity Issue Scuttled Deal, Says Iraq PM

Iraq Troop Withdrawal

REBECCA SANTANA and LARA JAKES   10/22/11 03:09 PM ET   AP

BAGHDAD — For the first time in decades, Iraqis face a future on their own, with neither Saddam Hussein's iron fist nor the United States' military might to hold them together. This has been both their dream and nightmare: They wanted American troops (the occupiers) to go, but they wanted American troops (the protectors) to stay.

Now many fear an increase in violence, growing Iranian influence and political turmoil after President Barack Obama's definitive announcement that all U.S. forces will leave by the end of the year.

In conversations with The Associated Press, Iraqis across the political, religious and geographic spectrum on Saturday questioned what more than eight years of war and tens of thousands of Iraqi and U.S. lives lost had wrought on their country. They wondered how their still struggling democracy could face the challenges ahead.

"Neither the Iraqis nor the Americans have won here," said Adnan Omar, a Sunni from the northern Iraqi city of Kirkuk.

Rifaat Khazim, a Shiite from the southern city of Basra, said, "I do not think that this withdrawal will bring anything better to Iraq or that Iraqi leaders will be able to achieve stability and security in this country. Most of the Iraqis yearn now for Saddam's time. Now, Iraq is defenseless in the face of the threats by the neighboring countries."

Across the country there was a strong sense of disbelief. The Americans, having spent hundreds of billions of dollars, lost nearly 4,500 troops' lives and built up sprawling bases as big as many Iraqi cities, would never really leave, many Iraqis thought. Some celebrated the exit of foreign occupiers and the emergence of real sovereignty. But there was also an apprehension, almost a sense of resignation, that things will get worse.

Though greatly reduced from the depths of near civil war from 2006 to 2008, shooting and bombings rattle Iraqis daily. Significantly all the elements from those darkest days remain: al-Qaida militants, Shiite militias, Sunni insurgents. Resentment still simmers among the Sunni Muslim minority over domination by the Shiite majority, Kurds in the north still hold aspirations of breaking away. Despite years of promises of better government services, most of the country gets by on a few hours of electricity a day.

In the eyes of Iraqis, the Americans were both the cause of those woes and the bulwark against them exploding. Many blame the 2003 U.S.-led invasion for unleashing all the demons kept bottled up by Saddam's dictatorship, and allowing new ones – like al-Qaida – to slip in.

Yet at the same time, U.S. troop reinforcements helped rein them in by 2008. Many feel the powerful American presence prevents Iraqi politicians from dragging the country into the worst of sectarian reprisals and hatreds. Few believe Iraqi forces are up to keeping security or can avoid falling into the same sectarian splits.

"After the American withdrawal, the security in Iraq will definitely deteriorate. More attacks by al-Qaida are likely to happen," said Dhia Abdullah, a Shiite from eastern Baghdad. "The security elements are not loyal to Iraq but to parties and militias therefore the security situation will be very bad after the withdrawal."

Nearly 40,000 U.S. troops remain in Iraq, all of whom will withdraw by Dec. 31, a deadline set in a 2008 security agreement between Baghdad and the administration of then-President George W. Bush.

The Obama administration, concerned over continued violence and growing Iranian influence, for much of this year pushed to keep thousands of U.S. troops here in a significant-sized training mission. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and other Iraqi officials expressed support of the idea, and they negotiated for months.

It was politically delicate for both Obama and al-Maliki, who each faced widespread opposition from their respective publics to continue a war that was never popular in either nation.

But talks ran aground over Iraqi opposition to giving American troops legal immunity that would shield them from Iraqi prosecution. Legal protection for U.S. troops has always angered everyday Iraqis who saw it as simply a way for the Americans to run roughshod over the country. Many Iraqi lawmakers were hesitant to grant immunity for fear of a backlash from constituents.

"When the Americans asked for immunity, the Iraqi side answered that it was not possible," al-Maliki told a news conference Saturday. "The discussions over the number of trainers and the place of training stopped. Now that the issue of immunity was decided and that no immunity to be given, the withdrawal has started."

When Obama announced Friday that all American forces would leave Iraq by the end of the year, he did not mention the immunity issue, portraying the decision as the fulfillment of one of his main campaign promises to end the conflict.

The impression of the U.S. as all-powerful has always permeated Iraqi society, leaving many Iraqis assuming that the decision was purely an American one instead of an Iraqi choice.

Many, both Sunnis and Shiites, were sure the departure of American forces inevitably will lead to a rise in Iranian influence.

"The withdrawal announcement is a message to the Iranians to come and take over Iraq. The Iraqis are the real losers here because they have replaced the U.S. occupation with Iranian occupation," said Adel al-Dulaimi, a Sunni from northern Baghdad.

In an interview released Saturday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that Tehran has "a very good relationship" with Iraq's government that will continue to grow.

"We have deepened our ties day by day," Ahmadinejad said in an interview Saturday with CNN.

To be sure, many Iraqis were happy. Iraqis resented years of having to pull to the side of the road when American troops drove by or putting up with raids of their homes in the middle of the night.

"The Iraqi people are the winner because a few months from now, we will walk in the streets without seeing U.S. troops and this is a source of joy to us because Iraq has restored its full sovereignty," said Saif Qassim, a Sunni from the northern city of Mosul.

Others suspicious of the U.S. questioned whether the American military would ever give up its toehold here.

"I believe that the full withdrawal will be only in the media but there must be secret deals with the Americans to keep some American forces or members of the American intelligence," said Raja Haidr, a Shiite from eastern Baghdad. "They won't leave."

Al-Maliki told reporters he still wants American help in training Iraqi forces to use billions of dollars worth of military equipment that Baghdad is buying from the United States. About 160 U.S. troops will remain at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad to help oversee training plans – a duty that is common at most American diplomatic posts worldwide.

U.S. officials, from Obama to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, stressed that Washington will continue to have a strong diplomatic relationship with Baghdad.

Michael O'Hanlon, an expert at the Brookings Institution in Washington said continued violence in Iraq was a threat whether or not U.S. troops remain.

"But it's true that their frequency may increase absent U.S. help in areas of intelligence and special operations," said O'Hanlon, who had been lobbying for a larger U.S. force to remain behind. "In addition, I do fear the residual risk of civil war goes up with this decision."

__

Rebecca Santana can be reached at http://twitter.com/@ruskygal

Lara Jakes can be reached at http://twitter.com/@larajakesAP

FOLLOW HUFFPOST WORLD

BAGHDAD — For the first time in decades, Iraqis face a future on their own, with neither Saddam Hussein's iron fist nor the United States' military might to hold them together. This has been bot...
BAGHDAD — For the first time in decades, Iraqis face a future on their own, with neither Saddam Hussein's iron fist nor the United States' military might to hold them together. This has been bot...
Filed by Melissa Jeltsen  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 2,458
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (45 total)
  1 of 1  
COMMUNITY PUNDITS
photo
Steamboater 02:15 PM on 10/22/2011
Obama said we can now focus more on terrorism. He said the same in effect when he ran for the presidency the first time around and about focusing more on Afghanistan. and look what happened, with the war spreading into Pakistan with American troops on the ground destabilizing the region even more than under Bush. Few democrats questioned Obama's  judgement then so start now before it's too late again.  Read More...
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sieben13
09:45 AM on 10/25/2011
Good, Cya
10:49 AM on 10/24/2011
This fiasco besides being the worst foreign policy blunder in modern history cost the US taxpayer 10 billion per month for almost 9 years. Add to the upfront cost, the cost of life long medical care for wounded soldiers, the replacement or repair cost of military equipment, the added cost to the US economy because Iraqi oil was not in supply or supply was diminished on the world market, the cost of future aid that would not have been needed, etc. and the total long term cost is estimated at about 3 trillion. Now, what will be the reaction to our action 5, 10, 20, 30 years from now. How will that effect the balance of power in the region? What groups will benefit and will they be an adversary or a friend? Whose economies will benefit at our expense because what so far has happened isn't anything that resembles what we were told from the start or as 'the official story changed' reflects the reality of the current situation. This short sighted 'blunder of all blunders' isn't done costing us treasure nor lives...All of the above is only the cost that requires a calculator which should be secondary in value to all the lives ruined.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sieben13
09:47 AM on 10/25/2011
Good remind the repuglicans, who got us into this mess
06:12 PM on 10/25/2011
They don't want to remember back that far or if they do,at least put the blame on anybody but themselves for voting for the 'dumb ones'.
photo
adamben
yes i said yes i will yes
09:22 AM on 10/24/2011
good. lets leave it to the iranians. mr maliki? you think that your new persian overlords will treat you well? ask your arab brethren across the border. or, even ask the persians within iran who ask for democracy? time for the west to get off of the oil economy and let these mid east regimes throw rocks at each other and not on our dime.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
IMac
08:48 AM on 10/24/2011
All those young men and women killed in Iraq for nothing - the American people were lied to and American blood was shed needlessly - Iraq was never a threat to our country. Now we are shocked that Iraq people want us out of there - and we are only willing to stay for total immunity because we know our troops will kill again if they stay. Ugh - our military needs to be overhauled - they have forgotten how to be Americans.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:21 AM on 10/24/2011
This is a problem with a very, very simple answer.

In exchange for letting us keep 50,000 troops in Iraq that are not subject to Iraqi laws, such as their prohibitions against murder, rape, and robbery, we should offer to allow the Iraqis to post 50,000 troops within our borders, exempt from our laws concerning murder, rape, and robbery. A simple quid pro quo, and the problem is solved!

(OK, sarcasm filter off.)
12:13 AM on 10/24/2011
Iraq was never a threat to US "security", and Vietnam was no threat either. Just think about how many Iraqis and Vietnamese lost their lives for nothing.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:24 AM on 10/24/2011
Besides the 50,000+ dead Americans, we caused the deaths of about one million Viet Cong and North Vietnamese military personnel, and the deaths of millions more Vietnamese civilians. As in most wars, the civilians suffered more casualties than did the various warring factions.
11:29 PM on 10/23/2011
I hope our troops remember to bring back that statue of Bush that the Zionist neocon Richard Perle promised him. Oh, that's right, it was never built. The only kind of recognition Bush 41's idiot son got was a shoe thrown at him.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
charles847
07:39 PM on 10/23/2011
With all the corrupt leaders, it won't be long before civil war erupts in Iraq.
07:33 PM on 10/23/2011
Now that we've match the same dollar amount that was spent in South-East Asia, it's time to leave.

Someone over-heard Burton saying, this KAASH-KOW as been milked dry and it's time to move on.

Will E-Ran be the next stop ???
07:31 PM on 10/23/2011
Well people, could it be we're leaving cuz Burton has declared, this ca$h-Cow has been milked dry ????.
07:28 PM on 10/23/2011
Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it. Looks like the only thing we'll be missing is the last chopper evac picture on the cover of time magazine.
07:11 PM on 10/23/2011
Thank you, Iraq! It's sad we couldn't make that decision on our own! Who in the Hell-o would want to be "occupied"? Especially when the occupiers were immune to the laws of the land? We never even bothered to learn their language, let alone their customs or culture. Murderers and rapists disguised in military clothing, went unpunished. BlackWater thugs killed with impugnity. Really, are we surprised they don't want us there anymore? Are we still waiting for the little American flags to be waived when we walk by? Thank you Iraq! I'm sorry we couldn't make this decision on our own!
11:34 PM on 10/23/2011
Good post. The problem was partly that our GI's never thought of themselves as liberators but as conquerors, and by the time those meatheads had figured out for themselves that Saddam Hussein was not behind 9/11 and that there were no WMD, the damage was done. The rest of the problem is that the American people did not react with fury to those stories of Blackwater electrocuting GI's with their shoddy work, etc.
07:03 PM on 10/23/2011
Bush wanted our troops out by the end of this year. Warbama wants to keep our troops there.
06:44 PM on 10/23/2011
And why should we care?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Don Glenn
Tree Hugging Liberal With Guns
05:58 PM on 10/23/2011
We lost 4500 good men so Haliburton could get a no bid contract.
06:50 PM on 10/23/2011
You forgot to add more than 30.000 injured, half of them no longer useful for military duty (badly mutilated)... So the REAL casualties of USA in Iraq are like 35.000.