• June 4, 2008 – The UK Independent publishes an exposé headlined: Revealed: Secret plan to keep Iraq under US control. The American MSM ignores the revelation.
According to the article, "A secret deal being negotiated in Baghdad would perpetuate the American military occupation of Iraq indefinitely, regardless of the outcome of the US presidential election in November."
"The terms of the impending deal, details of which have been leaked to the Independent, are likely to have an explosive political effect in Iraq. Iraqi officials fear that the accord, under which US troops would occupy permanent bases, conduct military operations, arrest Iraqis and enjoy immunity from Iraqi law, will destabilise Iraq's position in the Middle East and lay the basis for unending conflict in their country."
• June 4. 2008 - A majority of the Iraqi parliament writes to the US Congress rejecting a long-term security deal with Washington if it is not linked to a requirement that U.S. forces leave.
• June 7, 2008 - Prime Minister Maliki arrives in Iran for talks aimed at improving relations between the two countries. The following day he publicly assures Iran's President Ahmadinejad that Iraq will not allow its territory to be used to attack Iran.
• June 8, 2008 – The cat is out of the bag. A leading Iraqi Shiite cleric states that the status of forces agreement between Washington and Baghdad could lead to an uprising in Iraq. He says, "It is not to the benefit of the U.S. as a major power to lessen the sovereignty of Iraq. This treaty is humiliating to the Iraqi people, and might cause an uprising against it and those who support it,"
• June 9, 2008 – Bush tries to avert the total breakdown of the talks. He concedes for the first time that the United States may not finish a complex security agreement with Iraq before leaving office. US officials also try to soften the flashpoint phrase, 'permanent bases,' by stating that " the proposed agreement would allow U.S. troops or personnel to operate out of U.S., Iraqi or joint facilities through either short or long-term contracts." A rose by any other name is till a permanent base.
• June 10, 2008 – McClatchy News Services report that Iraqi lawmakers say the United States is demanding 58 bases as part of a proposed 'status of forces" agreement that will allow U.S. troops to remain in the country indefinitely. Leading members of the two ruling Shiite parties claim that "… the Iraqi government rejected this proposal along with another U.S. demand that would have effectively handed over to the United States the power to determine if a hostile act from another country is aggression against Iraq." They fear this power would drag Iraq into a war between the United States and Iran. Wonder why Iran objects so strongly to this pact.
• June 10, 2008 – Despite "a storm of rising' opposition from Iraqi lawmakers, David Satterfield, the State Department's top adviser on Iraq expresses 'confidence' that a deal will be finalized between the US and Iraq by July. As usual, US arrogance reigns supreme.
• June 11, 2008 – More opposition is voiced by Iraqi officials who denounce the intention of the US to maintain 60 US military bases in their country. They call for a radical reduction of the U.S. military's role here after the U.N. mandate authorizing its presence expires at the end of this year.
• June 13, 2008 – Prime Minister al-Maliki announces that talks with the United States on a new long-term security pact are deadlocked.. "We have reached a deadlock," Maliki says, "because when we started the talks, we found that the U.S. demands hugely infringe on the sovereignty of Iraq, and this we can never accept.
According to the article, "A secret deal being negotiated in Baghdad would perpetuate the American military occupation of Iraq indefinitely, regardless of the outcome of the US presidential election in November."
"The terms of the impending deal, details of which have been leaked to the Independent, are likely to have an explosive political effect in Iraq. Iraqi officials fear that the accord, under which US troops would occupy permanent bases, conduct military operations, arrest Iraqis and enjoy immunity from Iraqi law, will destabilise Iraq's position in the Middle East and lay the basis for unending conflict in their country."
• June 4. 2008 - A majority of the Iraqi parliament writes to the US Congress rejecting a long-term security deal with Washington if it is not linked to a requirement that U.S. forces leave.
• June 7, 2008 - Prime Minister Maliki arrives in Iran for talks aimed at improving relations between the two countries. The following day he publicly assures Iran's President Ahmadinejad that Iraq will not allow its territory to be used to attack Iran.
• June 8, 2008 – The cat is out of the bag. A leading Iraqi Shiite cleric states that the status of forces agreement between Washington and Baghdad could lead to an uprising in Iraq. He says, "It is not to the benefit of the U.S. as a major power to lessen the sovereignty of Iraq. This treaty is humiliating to the Iraqi people, and might cause an uprising against it and those who support it,"
• June 9, 2008 – Bush tries to avert the total breakdown of the talks. He concedes for the first time that the United States may not finish a complex security agreement with Iraq before leaving office. US officials also try to soften the flashpoint phrase, 'permanent bases,' by stating that " the proposed agreement would allow U.S. troops or personnel to operate out of U.S., Iraqi or joint facilities through either short or long-term contracts." A rose by any other name is till a permanent base.
• June 10, 2008 – McClatchy News Services report that Iraqi lawmakers say the United States is demanding 58 bases as part of a proposed 'status of forces" agreement that will allow U.S. troops to remain in the country indefinitely. Leading members of the two ruling Shiite parties claim that "… the Iraqi government rejected this proposal along with another U.S. demand that would have effectively handed over to the United States the power to determine if a hostile act from another country is aggression against Iraq." They fear this power would drag Iraq into a war between the United States and Iran. Wonder why Iran objects so strongly to this pact.
• June 10, 2008 – Despite "a storm of rising' opposition from Iraqi lawmakers, David Satterfield, the State Department's top adviser on Iraq expresses 'confidence' that a deal will be finalized between the US and Iraq by July. As usual, US arrogance reigns supreme.
• June 11, 2008 – More opposition is voiced by Iraqi officials who denounce the intention of the US to maintain 60 US military bases in their country. They call for a radical reduction of the U.S. military's role here after the U.N. mandate authorizing its presence expires at the end of this year.
• June 13, 2008 – Prime Minister al-Maliki announces that talks with the United States on a new long-term security pact are deadlocked.. "We have reached a deadlock," Maliki says, "because when we started the talks, we found that the U.S. demands hugely infringe on the sovereignty of Iraq, and this we can never accept.
~ more... ~
No comments:
Post a Comment