Here in the US, the right wing blogosphere declared yesterday Victory in Iraq Day (no links) and many even on the left have been celebrating what as been reported as the finalization of the SOFA, but Iraqis are not ready to celebrate – and perhaps not ready to sign.
The US press has been reporting on the Iraqi parliament debate of the text – but as far as I could tell only one US paper, the Mankato Free Press, noticed that an English version has not been made available here as well:
The administration has declined to make public the 20-page agreement, leaving U.S. experts on these things to use only a rough English translation of the Iraqi agreement.
Some members of Congress are decrying the secrecy as “incredible” and “bizarre.” Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee Howard Berman, D-Calif., told Reuters: “There is something bizarre about the text being disseminated to the Iraqi people and we are being told we cannot distribute the English language version of the agreement.”
On Saturday we learned that the vote in Iraq will be delayed until Wednesday even as more reports begin to surface that passage is not assured. In fact the Speaker of Parliament, Mahmoud al-Mashhadani, said it has only a “50-50” chance of passing. A close vote will not meet Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani’s warning that the agreement must have a "national consensus" demonstrated through passage by “a big majority.”
Maliki’s government is ratcheting up pressure for passage – Abdel Qadar Jassem Mohammed al-Obeidi “Iraq’s defense minister warned Saturday that the government would declare a state of emergency if there was no agreement to keep U.S. forces in the country past the end of the year.” He followed this warning with another which is rather creative:
“Coalition forces are currently protecting the Gulf, and our navy will not receive its first ships until April 2009,” Abdel Qader Jassem Mohammed al-Obeidi told a press conference in Baghdad. If those forces “withdraw precipitously, our gulf will become like the Gulf of Aden, where there have been 95 acts of piracy,” he said. …. The minister did not enlarge on his remarks or explain how the Gulf would become prey to pirates when one of its littoral states, Bahrain, is home to the US Navy’s Fifth Fleet.
The Gulf, which supplies the bulk of world oil imports, is also bordered by Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Oman and Iran, all of whose navies patrol the waterway.
While the SOFA debate and warnings continue, the security of Christians in Mosul remains precarious. Maliki’s government has made a show of sending additional security forces to the region, three more Christians have been
killed:The mother of two sisters killed in Mosul last week has died from injuries sustained during the attack on her family home. The funerals were celebrated yesterday.
November 12th last, a band of armed youths stormed the Siro-Catholic family’s home in the Alqahira quarter of the city killing the sisters Lamia and Walàa Sobhy Salloha. They then turned on the mother with a knife. The father and another son who escaped during the moment of the attack are safe. Initially the wounds sustained by the mother, Selma Giargis did not appear to be grave. But in the hospital in Mosul her condition worsened also because of a lack in basic medicine.
The situation of Mosul’s Christians is increasingly tragic. In the month of October 16 faithful were killed and 2 thousand families forced to flee their homes. Over the past few day san estimated 700 families have returned, reassured by government promises of improved security. 52 year old Imad Hanna, told Ankawa, that he had fled to Karakosh, Kurdistan, 50-60 km north of Mosul. “What made me return – he said – wasn’t the security situation, but material need”.
Meanwhile, US President George W Bush “said in a pre-recorded interview broadcast on a Japanese television network on Sunday” that “ the Iraq war has been successful and (he) is "very pleased" with what is happening there.
"People have been able to take their troops out of Iraq because Iraq is becoming successful. I’m very pleased with what is taking place there now," he said… "So there will be a US presence for a while there at the request of the Iraqi government… The United States is willing to continue to help. Most countries there within a very broad coalition have come home but we want to help this government," he said without further elaborating.
Maybe George has been reading Little Green Footballs again?
Related posts:





Spotlight







Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

Hello and thank you, Siun.
“Iraq War a Success” You have to be kidding me! Bush may be “Declaring” a Success but this is no success by any means! Great post Suin.
If it’s so damn safe and we need a US presence there, maybe George would like to go himself?
He’s going to have some free time on his hands soon.
Aloha, Siun!
Great idea Jane … I’d buy his plane ticket!
The Aswat news is so wonderful and I really hope folks watch Dana’s youtube – he’s quite the reporter!
Thanks, Siun.
I doubt if I am alone in thinking the odds of it passing are considerably lower than 50/50.
My feeble mind can’t seem to grasp why the ‘official’ English version of the SOFA is not made available…? To anyone outside of the Maladministration at least… 8-(
Ok Pups DiGG is open! Please Digg this post so we can get more citizens to protest what Bush is trying to foist on us!
I have the feeling only the U.S. government could afford such a ticket.
Is this legael? I mean how can Bush sign a treaty without the Senate Approving it?? Or is this just more Fuckery by Bush who will decree it by Presidential signing???
Has anyone checked out the digs at Obama’s new change page? Can we create groups there? Maybe we should start a group.. demanding access to an english version of the SOFA agreement?
That’s a very good question.
More Fuckery by Shrub… Of course! Did you expect otherwise? ;-)
Maybe George will have a parade like his Daddy did. That was some parade after Gulf War One, let me tell you. My peacenik DC friends dragged me to it, saying there’d never be another parade like it, ever. Bet Georgie can prove them wrong!
And, Siun, your Digg counter is working, finally!
It’s wrong that there’s no official English version. But there isMcClatchy’s unofficial one for your reading–er–pleasure.
Astonishing! I did seem to have a real Digg gremlin for oh so long.
here ya go-signed oct 13th 2008
http://74.125.45.132/search?q=…..=firefox-a
here’s the google search page so you can get the pdf-
http://www.google.com/search?q…..=firefox-a
bbl-getting ready to go out of town.
Ladybird of Roads to Iraq has been on it from the get-go, too…! ;-)
By April Blackwater ought to have all the Skull and Bones flags they need to start doing business.
AAArgh Matey, pass the booty over here and no one gets hurt, ain’t that right Dick?
just glanced–but i noticed there is language not ’specified’….throughout the document.
I Dugg yer Digg, nahant
Heh, if the SOFA does pass, Blackwater will need to take to the High Seas… Since they lose their immunity…!
The impression I got from the discussion with Mohammed Ibn Laith last week is that opposition to any SOFA among the Iraqi populace is nearly unanimous. Has Maliki really amassed so much power that he could steamroll the Parliament into passing it?
So does anyone have an idea of what it is that our government is trying to hide from us by not releasing an English translation of this very important document that could obligate our country to keep military forces in Iraq–in harm’s way–for a considerable time to come?
On Saturday we learned that the vote in Iraq will be delayed until Wednesday, the day before Thanksgiving, the holiday on which most Americans travel, when DC is empty and no one will be paying attention until the following week.
Excellent
I don’t think we know … the reports from various political groups are really all over the place. We know – and Mohammed Ibn Laith made it very clear – that the Sadrists are seriously against it. Some of the Shia groups are backing Maliki but it’s not even clear his own DAWA party will fall in line. The Kurds – who are already importing their own arms illegally – are all for it. SIIC – hard to tell as Iran’s position seems mixed. Amongst the Sunnis, I’d say opposition is high and the Assoc. of Muslim Scholars are against as strongly as Sadr’s trend (with whom they are on rather good terms.)
Maliki is twisting arms.
At the same time, Sistani is demanding a consensus vote with a high proportion approving as a sign of community approval – without that he’s opposed.
And if it passes the Parliament, it goes to the 3 presidents and there are rumbles that one may use his veto power.
So much for all the “oh boy SOFA” talk.
They probably want to finish assembling a pop-up version of the agreement for Bush before releasing the text version to grown-ups.
Jett – good point though I take the delay to say more about the lack of definite support for a yes vote within Iraq.
The most likely bits they do not want us to see involve Iraqi control of all future missions for US forces inside Iraq and the Iraqi right to prosecute US soldiers – though that is severely limited in reality since the agreement calls for a panel of US and Iraqis to approve prosecution under Iraq law.
I should note that there was a mention – not totally clear – of the US forces starting to get “warrants” prior to kicking in doors in the future … we’ll see.
hello siun and thank you. i appreciate your reminder @ moon earlier. i have been following ladybirds posts regarding the sofa @ RTI.
Sounds like an incredible long shot. Sistani seems to be hedging his bets by giving an outward appearance of being neutral, knowing that the odds of any agreement passing by overwhelming consensus are incredibly small.
Hey Annie
I’ve been raving about b’s great posts on the logistics of Afghanistan – superb work.
And it was too late/early for me to find the pirate link so the reminder had to do last night but I thought the MoA team would enjoy it.
Ladybird has great info though at times with a specific interpretation I’m not always sure of so I try to verify with friends in Iraq – fyi.
perhaps all of this posturing is an attempt by the shrublords to try to shore up their dear leader’s legacy a by trying to make at least iraq end on a little bit of a (fabricated) endnote by his reign. They hope to make SOFA shrub’s success and then when thugs fall apart again, after 1/20, they’ll get their buddIes at Faux and among the usual rightsing watercarriers to try to paint it as Obama’s fault. Keep all the dirty problems with he agreements and he politics thatnunderly it secret and out of the public eye while they know full well that the compromises they’ve made to make this thing stick result in a hopelessly fragile peace.
As Siun pointed out, it’s how far Shrub capitulated on the agreement that they’re covering up…! I suspect they fear the Neocon’s backlash at all the concessions as opposed to what you fear…!
ugh.. sorry for all the typos. iphone’s autocomplete feature is a bit of a joke
Typos or not, I think you’re right that they want some “closure” that George can celebrate.
The problem I have with the whole thing is that it provides legal cover for the war/occupation – see George’s reference to being their at Iraqi invitation in his ain’t it all great comments.
The simple idea of ratifying such an agreement is granting the US forgiveness for the violation of Iraqi sovereignty in my book.
A SOFA might give them a single thread to work with but I am confident the Bushniks are prepared to make a legacy for him out of whole cloth, in addition to blaming all the problems he caused on his successor.
From McClatchy’s translation:
And the gist of Article 4:
Thanks Laura!
I wonder how often the exclusion for “actual combat” will come into play.
Somehow I cannot really imagine US troops quietly sitting behind the permanent base walls …
siun, these pirate allegations seem extremely far fetched. reminds me of AQ. how come the pirates and AQ all seem to point to the need for the US presence?
if i didn’t know any better i’d think they were connected at the hip. timing and all that.
I wonder how this compares to agreements we have with other countries that house U.S. troops? I imagine our other “allies” insist on having something in writing to the effect that we won’t kick down doors are detain citizens of Germany, South Korea, Japan, etc.. Seems like it would really put the kibosh on the way we’ve conducted our “mission” in Iraq, though.
speaking of pirates the black agenda has a good report.
It does have an odd ring to it …
yep, and I’m afraid that the shrubbies are going to use this “achievement” not only to shore up their village idiot’s legacy but to argue the legitimacy of their whole PNAC/neocon/unilateral theory of US foreign policy. When things inevitably fall apart in Iraq, they’ll blame it on Obama’s return to a multilateral/multipolar/consensus-base theory of foreign policy… this whole thing may just be an attempt by the neocons to buy some more life for their discredited approach.
what are the chances some somalian ‘pirates’ are going to be visiting the gulf? nada if you ask me. however, the ‘pirates’ mentioned in the black agenda..doesn’t it seem if we were really concerned about them, we could simply make an agreement to float about somewhere on the gulf and protect iraq from the sea. if that is, we were really interested in protecting iraq from outside sources. we could start by protecting iraq from us, by simply leaving.
I do know for a fact that while I was serving in Germany, I couldn’t go kick in a German’s door…! Korea, too… ;-)
the link i posted at 18 for ctuttle is just the document, from afsc-quakers’ site.
http://www.afsc.org/
Ian has a new post upstairs
Odd, isn’t it? McClatchy translates it (my link at 16), AFSC translates it, but no official version. What a government.
this being said, I’m sure prospective pirates read the papers and watch CNN like the rest of us. If piracy in Somalia yields booty and guns and ransoms, then I’m sure there will be lots of copycats near other lawless hotspots sooner rather than later.
I don’t think that’s the latest after the Iraqi cabinet had submitted their ‘clarifications’ from Shrub…!
i don’t know blub, the somalians are motivated in protecting their waters. not so sure iraq having those sorts of copycats would be such a bad thing.
this whole fiasco w/not having a ‘real’ version of the sofa in english reminds me of that ceasefire agreement wrt russia/georgia where rice was supposed to deliver it to russia and they wouldn’t sign it until the other side had. turns out the versions were different.
something very fishy.
I have to admit, I envy the world travel so many of you guys have done.
I suspect the Iraq SOFA was patterned after agreements we have with other nations, just seems like it would make it pointless to be there (I know, it gives me a headache… being there was ALWAYS pointless). Either the U.S. abides by the agreement and we’re only there to back up the Iraqis in the event of civil war, OR we don’t abide by the agreement, which will cause increased anti-American sentiment (if that is possible)…
yeah, i thought that odd, too. tried to get one on a search, but no pot of gold at the end of the gov’t tunnel..supposedly this one was the one that was signed, i’m wondering if they were trying to release a revised/redacted edition later, or not release it until it’s passed, knowing this one isn’t going be.hmm.
there is also the issue of clarity wrt if the cabinet approved version is the same parliament will approve. and then the parliament approves one thing and the americans approve the cabinet version.
all sorts of room for weirdness. if it were on the up and up, why is it being withheld from our congress?
heh, supposedly it’s the one., see my 56.
oh I agree… I’m just saying that we shouldn’t be surprised if reality imitates art as a result of continuing problems in the region. Even in pirates do appear in the Gulf, we need toake sure that the focus is on why US policy abets the creation of lawless hotspots, not on how the existence of lawlessness justified ever more bellicose behavior from neocon jerks.
or, they abide by the agreement, but claim the agreement allows for a different interpretation.
the chances “we’re only there to back up the Iraqis in the event of civil war”?
zilch. our military is not designed to be a humanitarian organization.
here’s another partial one from an iranian translation
http://www.roadstoiraq.com/200…..a-version/
i don’t have time to compare them right now, it’s from roads to iraq website. also a somalia and pirates article on main page.
Your version seems most likely.
by ‘we’ do you mean you and me and the anti war movement. because if you do, i would reframe the message to:
‘we need to make sure that the focus is on why US policy abets the creation of lawless hotspots, AND on how the existence of lawlessness justified ever more bellicose behavior from neocon jerks.’
however if by WE you mean, the US ptb:
‘we need to make sure that the focus is NOT on why US policy abets the creation of lawless hotspots, not on how the existence of lawlessness justified ever more bellicose behavior from neocon jerks.
siun, i also wanted to thank you for the excellent thread last sunday. i got here too late to comment but it was a treasure.
found it-it’s on this page-toward the bottom, pdf…think it’s the one that the link starts out with ‘assets’
i hit open link so many times not positive which download was which, looks like the one i posted earlier., but didn’t compare closely yyet……
http://usasearch.gov/search?v%…..+with+iraq
Thanks annie – we’re doing ongoing coverage on Gaza … I’m working on an update soon.
badger has an excellent post up. in the comment section he translates a section of the sofa
in this case, one could interpret that the US will turn over iraq’s security, but not it’s defense. IOW the US would remain ‘responsible’ for defensive actions. ie: the ability to have bases for the ‘protection’ of iraq ie: the ability not to attack from within iraq per se, but to defend it.
does this include pre emptive attacks?
also, don’t miss Haifa Zankana’s text in badger’s post. excellent.
thanks siun
No, I think the answer is that our government is so embarrassed by the terms that they don’t really want Americans to know what the terms were. What I’ve heard so far is stuff like after Dec. 31, any military actions will have to take place under Iraqi command (not US, which would place U.S. troops under foreign command– something I’m not sure we allow even in NATO exercises), and that Iraq will have full legal jurisdiction over any illegal acts carried out by Americans on Iraqi soil (Thanks, Blackwater, for setting such a sterling example), and stuff like that, which if Obama had proposed, would be widely condemned as appeasement.
Bob in HI
Oops, Siun, you beat me to my comment @ 69. I yield to the accuracy of your summary. And I owe you the beverage of your choice. May I suggest a cool glass of Iranian Doogh? I’m sure the Arabs have the same thing, but I don’t know what they call it.
Aloha,
Bob in HI
“Typos or not, I think you’re right that they want some “closure” that George can celebrate. “
Yeah, I think he wants to use that “Mission Accomplished” banner one more time.
Bob in HI
That seems to be quite a comprehensive summary.
If it is as so, I think we need Obama, and to support Obama, to end this mess ASAP.
Once installed, I’m hoping Obama will move in an evac ASAP sitch, fast.
If not, I too, will have issues with him. Until then, I’ll waid.
Thanks Siun . . . good read you posted . . .
Hello sailor, whatcha doin up this late? lol
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNmULx6sMo4
*G*
Good morning, just got here, haven’t read the post. Here is an unofficial translation of SOFA from McClatchy FYI
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/hom…..56116.html
Some notes:
The SOFA appears vital to give coverage for GWB’s ass those days from 1 Jan to noon 20 Jan when UN paper quits covering it in respect to War crimes, Crimes against humanity, etc. stemming from the invasion and occupation of Iraq. The UN will not renew its coverage, SOFA is the only thing left. If it is not in place, each day brings a reiteration of the criminal charges (IANAL) upon Bush’s head. Obama, will face the same unless immediate action is taken to withdraw ALL forces, which might buy him some grace time.
Any pirates appearing in the Gulf will be Blackwater (or kindred) servicing their masters orders. An International “Shoot on Sight” should be issued in respect to their appearance.
In view of deeper Bush/Cheney regime’s desire to run the clock out and get outta town Jan.20,2009 to avoid any retreat debris fallout. In view of Bush/Cheney regime desires to escape any of many “gettin’outa Iraq” boobytraps that await Obama WH. In view of likely Rethuglican desires to be in position to optimally play “who lost Iraq” games in 2010/2012 The Decider should be “very pleased” indeed.
This guy is a real piece of work. George H. and Babs Bush really turned out a hybrid with little George Junior. Thanks G.H. and Babs. Thanks alot.