Bush-Maliki Agreement Gets Worse; Riddled With Bush Lies and Tricks
Earlier this week I wrote, again, about the Bush-Maliki long term security agreement that Bushites are pushing for by bypassing Congress, the Iraqi parliament, and the wishes of the American and Iraqi people. I said that the agreement was: "absolutely blatant imperial colonialism by the Bush administration."
Now, Gareth Porter weighs in at IPS News weighs in with this: "Two key pledges made by the George W. Bush administration on military bases in its negotiations with the government of Iraq have now been revealed as carefully-worded ruses aimed at concealing U.S. negotiating aims from both U.S. citizens and Iraqis who would object to them if they were made clear.
"Recent statements by Iraqis familiar with U.S. demands in negotiations on the U.S.-Iraq "strategic framework" agreement have highlighted the fact that administration promises that it would not seek "permanent bases" or the use of bases to attack Iran or any other neighbouring countries were deliberately misleading. The wording used by the Bush administration appears to have been chosen to obscure its intention to have both long-term access to Iraqi bases and complete freedom to use them to launch operations against Iran and Syria.
"Another issue on which the Bush administration inserted language in its draft to suggest a major concession to Iraqi political sensitivities while keeping its own freedom of action is the U.S. use of Iraqi bases to carry out military operations against another country. That was an obvious red line for the al-Maliki regime and its ally, Iran. Prime Minister al-Maliki's spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh insisted last January that U.S. troops must "not be used against [Iraq's] neighbours," because, he said, it could put the country's security in jeopardy.
"It now appears that the Bush administration's ambitions to establish a legal framework to legitimise the occupation before the end of Bush's term will be frustrated by strong opposition to the pact from pro-Iranian Shiite political parties on whose support the al-Maliki regime depends."
And from the NYTimes: "Iraq’s negotiations with the United States on a security agreement governing America’s long-term involvement in the country are at an impasse because America’s demands infringe upon Iraqi sovereignty, the country’s prime minister said Friday.
"The comments were the first by the prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, in which he explicitly detailed the main points of contention between the United States and the Iraqi government in the negotiations for the security agreement.
"Mr. Maliki said there were four areas in which proposed versions of the agreement failed to give sufficient deference to Iraqi sovereignty.
“ 'Iraq rejects Washington’s insistence on granting their forces immunity from Iraqi laws and courts,' he said. 'We reject Washington’s demand to have a free hand in undertaking military operations without cooperation with the Iraqi government.'
"He added: 'We cannot give permission to the American forces independent right to arrest Iraqis or execute operations against terrorism. We cannot allow them to use the Iraqi skies and waters at all times.'
"The question of immunity for American contractors accused of killing a number of Iraqi civilians unprovoked is a particularly sensitive point with Iraqis who want to be able to bring the wrongdoers to trial in Iraqi courts.
"During a sermon Friday in the holy city of Karbala, an aide to the Shiite religious leader, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, urged Iraqi negotiators to protect the national interest, The Associated Press reported.
“ 'Iraq’s sovereignty and economy must be protected,' the aide, Ahmed al-Safi, told worshipers.
"Meanwhile, hundreds of followers of the radical Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr — long an opponent of American involvement in Iraq — also rallied in Karbala in protest against the agreement."
Bush and his administration are lying and using ruses to impose imperial colonialism, under the guise of a so called agreement, on Iraq in order to keep US troops there forever. This impasse needs to be permanent and the Bushite assault on Iraq sovereignty objectionably called an agreement should disappear.
However, this criminal Bush administration will probably be working feverishly to
"retire or resign" Maliki and put in a Bushite Iraq flunky in his place to sign a US dictated agreement.
And impeachment should be back on the table.
Now, Gareth Porter weighs in at IPS News weighs in with this: "Two key pledges made by the George W. Bush administration on military bases in its negotiations with the government of Iraq have now been revealed as carefully-worded ruses aimed at concealing U.S. negotiating aims from both U.S. citizens and Iraqis who would object to them if they were made clear.
"Recent statements by Iraqis familiar with U.S. demands in negotiations on the U.S.-Iraq "strategic framework" agreement have highlighted the fact that administration promises that it would not seek "permanent bases" or the use of bases to attack Iran or any other neighbouring countries were deliberately misleading. The wording used by the Bush administration appears to have been chosen to obscure its intention to have both long-term access to Iraqi bases and complete freedom to use them to launch operations against Iran and Syria.
"Another issue on which the Bush administration inserted language in its draft to suggest a major concession to Iraqi political sensitivities while keeping its own freedom of action is the U.S. use of Iraqi bases to carry out military operations against another country. That was an obvious red line for the al-Maliki regime and its ally, Iran. Prime Minister al-Maliki's spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh insisted last January that U.S. troops must "not be used against [Iraq's] neighbours," because, he said, it could put the country's security in jeopardy.
"It now appears that the Bush administration's ambitions to establish a legal framework to legitimise the occupation before the end of Bush's term will be frustrated by strong opposition to the pact from pro-Iranian Shiite political parties on whose support the al-Maliki regime depends."
And from the NYTimes: "Iraq’s negotiations with the United States on a security agreement governing America’s long-term involvement in the country are at an impasse because America’s demands infringe upon Iraqi sovereignty, the country’s prime minister said Friday.
"The comments were the first by the prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, in which he explicitly detailed the main points of contention between the United States and the Iraqi government in the negotiations for the security agreement.
"Mr. Maliki said there were four areas in which proposed versions of the agreement failed to give sufficient deference to Iraqi sovereignty.
“ 'Iraq rejects Washington’s insistence on granting their forces immunity from Iraqi laws and courts,' he said. 'We reject Washington’s demand to have a free hand in undertaking military operations without cooperation with the Iraqi government.'
"He added: 'We cannot give permission to the American forces independent right to arrest Iraqis or execute operations against terrorism. We cannot allow them to use the Iraqi skies and waters at all times.'
"The question of immunity for American contractors accused of killing a number of Iraqi civilians unprovoked is a particularly sensitive point with Iraqis who want to be able to bring the wrongdoers to trial in Iraqi courts.
"During a sermon Friday in the holy city of Karbala, an aide to the Shiite religious leader, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, urged Iraqi negotiators to protect the national interest, The Associated Press reported.
“ 'Iraq’s sovereignty and economy must be protected,' the aide, Ahmed al-Safi, told worshipers.
"Meanwhile, hundreds of followers of the radical Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr — long an opponent of American involvement in Iraq — also rallied in Karbala in protest against the agreement."
Bush and his administration are lying and using ruses to impose imperial colonialism, under the guise of a so called agreement, on Iraq in order to keep US troops there forever. This impasse needs to be permanent and the Bushite assault on Iraq sovereignty objectionably called an agreement should disappear.
However, this criminal Bush administration will probably be working feverishly to
"retire or resign" Maliki and put in a Bushite Iraq flunky in his place to sign a US dictated agreement.
And impeachment should be back on the table.
Comments