Advertising

The Seattle Times Company

NWjobs | NWautos | NWhomes | NWsource | Free Classifieds | seattletimes.com

Nation & World


Our network sites seattletimes.com | Advanced

Originally published October 30, 2008 at 10:31 AM | Page modified October 30, 2008 at 1:29 PM

Print

Hope for security deal fades; Iraq wants U.S. totally out by 2011

The Bush administration's hopes for sealing a security deal with Iraq while in office are fading as Iraqis demand changes to a draft text that some U.S. officials consider unacceptable.

Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON —

The Bush administration's hopes for sealing a security deal with Iraq while in office are fading as Iraqis demand changes to a draft text that some U.S. officials consider unacceptable.

"The window for any kind of discussions, negotiations is rapidly coming to a close," State Department spokesman Robert Wood said Thursday.

Wood said officials continue to review the Iraqi proposal for changes, but he repeated the administration's insistence that the existing draft is a "good text."

U.S. spokesmen insist that an agreement governing American troops in Iraq is still possible by the end of the year. At the same time, administration officials are troubled by the proposed Iraqi amendments to a text U.S. negotiators had thought was complete. Those amendments include broader Iraqi jurisdiction over U.S. forces and the elimination of a clause that would let them stay after a tentative 2011 deadline.

Even if compromises can be found on those issues, there is still no guarantee that the Iraqi parliament will approve the so-called Status of Forces Agreement. Failure to bridge the gaps would leave two options: Extend the U.N. mandate beyond its Dec. 31 expiration date or suspend all U.S. operations in Iraq.

"I do think it will be hard for Iraq to pass it," White House press secretary Dana Perino said, referring to Massoud Barzani, the president of the semiautonomous Kurdish region in northern Iraq. Barzani told The Washington Post he was doubtful an agreement would be passed by the Iraqi cabinet and parliament by the end of the year.

"If it was easy, it would already have been done," Perino said. "If you stick around, I'm sure by tomorrow you'll have a different Iraqi politician or leader with a different sentiment. So a lot of this is being played out in the public on the Iraqi side."

She said the administration remained hopeful and confident that it will be able to reach an agreement with the Iraqis, but that it will not compromise underlying principles of the pact. Asked when the administration will decide to move forward to get an extension of the U.N. mandate, she replied: "I'm not going to forecast any alternatives, because our sole focus is working on this."

The White House, State Department and Pentagon on Thursday all refused to discuss possible alternatives to securing a deal, saying they are still reviewing Iraq's proposed amendments received Wednesday.

But officials bristled at suggestions that negotiations, which ran from May until earlier this month, could be reopened. They also insisted that they are not yet looking at extending the United Nations mandate.

"Once we have something to say on it, we will," Wood told reporters. "But for the moment, we're just taking our time in reviewing it to make sure that we've got a good sense of what it is the Iraqis have put forward."

Defense Department spokesman Bryan Whitman declined to discuss details of the Iraqi proposal and said it would take "more than a couple of days to review the recommended changes."

advertising

But privately, U.S. officials briefed on the Iraqi amendments are growing pessimistic about the chances to reach an agreement.

One official said there was a chance that some of the four main points of contention - the withdrawal deadline, demand for inspections of U.S. arms shipments, a ban on using Iraqi territory for attacks on neighboring states and Iraqi demands for more jurisdiction over American soldiers - could be "finessed." But Iraqi demands for more control over American troops likely crossed a "red line" for the administration and Congress.

On Thursday, an Iraqi lawmaker close to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said Iraq wants to remove language from the agreement that would let U.S. troops stay after 2011 and wants a joint U.S.-Iraqi committee to decide whether U.S. soldiers accused of crimes off base were really on authorized missions.

"The Iraqi side wants to remove any mention of a possible extension of the U.S. troops, fearing the existing clause might be subjected to misinterpretation or could bear different meanings because multinational forces might demand an extension depending on their evaluation of the security forces or the incomplete readiness of the Iraqi forces," Ali al-Adeeb said.

"One amendment demands formation of a joint Iraqi-U.S. committee to decide whether an accused soldier was on a combat mission or not," he said.

Copyright © 2008 The Seattle Times Company

UPDATE - 10:01 AM
Rebels tighten hold on Libya oil port

UPDATE - 09:29 AM
Reality leads US to temper its tough talk on Libya

UPDATE - 09:38 AM
2 Ark. injection wells may be closed amid quakes

Armed guards save Dutch couple from Somali pirates

Navy to release lewd video investigation findings

Advertising

Video
Marketplace

Advertising