Needlenose

From the Associated Press today:

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki dug in his heels Monday on the future of the U.S. military in Iraq, insisting that all foreign soldiers leave the country by a specific date in 2011 and rejecting legal immunity for American troops.

. . . Last week, U.S. and Iraqi officials said the two sides agreed tentatively to a schedule that includes a broad pullout of combat troops by the end of 2011 with the possibility that a residual U.S. force might stay behind to continue training and advising Iraqi security services.

But al-Maliki’s remarks indicated his government was not satisfied with that arrangement and wants all foreign troops gone by the end of 2011.

. . . President Bush has long resisted a timetable for removing troops from Iraq, even under strong pressure from an American public distressed by U.S. deaths and discouraged by the length of the war that began in 2003.

Last month, however, Bush reversed course and agreed to set a “general time horizon” for bringing troops home, based on Iraq’s ability to provide for its own security. But the Iraqis insisted they want a specific schedule.

“We find this to be too vague,” a close al-Maliki aide told The Associated Press on Monday. “We don’t want the phrase ‘time horizons.’ We are not comfortable with that phrase,” said the aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the negotiations.

Another top al-Maliki aide, also speaking on condition of anonymity for the same reason, said the Iraqi government had “stopped talking about the withdrawal of combat troops. We just talk about withdrawals,” including trainers and logistics troops.

The AP story carries a tone of partial disbelief that Maliki and his anonymous aides could actually mean what they say, suggesting on one hand that “al-Maliki is playing to a domestic audience” and “seeking to bolster his nationalist credentials ahead of provincial elections,” but also acknowledging (appropriately, in my opinion) that “The prime minister’s strong statements in support of an end to immunity and for a firm withdrawal timetable would make it difficult for him to accept an agreement that falls short of his public demands.”

I think the better analysis of what’s going on came from the AP’s Robert Reid in a story I analyzed here a month ago:

With the talks bogged down, the Iraqis sensed desperation by the Americans to wrap up a deal quickly before the presidential campaign was in full swing.

“Let’s squeeze them,” al-Maliki told his advisers, who related the conversation to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.

Maliki’s statements today, and the associated leaks from his advisers, seem like the “squeeze” is continuing — and I’m not surprised.  When I noticed the recent stream of news stories (nearly all driven by Iraqi government sources) claiming a troop agreement was near, I wondered when this other shoe would fall.

Isn’t that a classic haggling technique in any society?  Let the other side know you’re oh-so-close to a deal, encourage them to make a few concessions to close the gap… and just as they do and reach for the pen, pull back and say, “Wait, there’s one more thing you need to agree to.”

You’d almost think they’re having fun toying with the Bushites at this point.

Stumble it!

Tags: Iraq, Maliki, Shiites, SOFA

This entry was posted on Monday, August 25th, 2008 at 1:52 pm by Swopa and is filed under Shiite Showdowns. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.