Iraqi Parliament to Vote Today on "Status of Forces Agreement"

| Wed Nov. 26, 2008 7:40 AM PST

The Iraqi Parliament is expected to vote today on the "Status of Forces Agreement" (SOFA), a document that, if passed, will establish guidelines for US forces in Iraq and, more importantly, set a timetable for their withdrawal. Washington and Baghdad signed on to a draft of the agreement earlier this month. If it is accepted today by at least 138 of the 275 members of Iraq's parliament, the document will then go to the Iraqi presidential council for final approval. SOFA, which the Iraqis are already informally calling "the withdrawal agreement," mandates that US forces pull out of Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009, and leave the country entirely by December 31, 2011, effectively ending the US occupation of Iraq.

According to Peter Galbraith, a senior diplomatic fellow at the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, who has written extensively on the American occupation for the New York Review of Books, the agreement represents "a stunning and humiliating reversal of course by the Bush administration, which had vehemently opposed any timetable for withdrawal from Iraq." But things change, and especially with Barack Obama's impending inauguration, SOFA is perhaps more acceptable to the current administration than leaving the timetable for withdrawal entirely in the hands of its successor. "The signing of this agreement, along with the election of a new president who ran on a platform to end the war in Iraq, suggests that anti-Iraq efforts have not been in vain," says John Isaacs, executive director of the Council for a Livable World. "The agreement reflects the views held by the majority of Iraqis and Americans that it is time for US combat forces to start getting out of Iraq."

Still, not all Iraqis are eager to see US forces leave. A Sunni bloc within the Iraqi Parliament, joined by a few renegade Kurds, are said to be holding out on ratification of SOFA. Their primary concern is "how they'll be treated by the Shiite government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki" once US forces depart, according to today's Wall Street Journal. Iraqi Sunnis formed the bulk of the insurgency in past years, but have more recently become partners in the American occupation, primarily to counter the ascendance of Shiite parties. US and Iraqi officials have been negotiating for Sunni support in the final hours leading up to today's vote.

Galbraith shares in the Sunnis' concern. "For the last two years, President Bush has pretended that Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is a democrat and an American ally," he says. "In fact, Maliki is a sectarian Shiite politician who heads a government dominated by pro-Iranian religious parties. The US presence is now no longer serves the interests of Iraq's ruling Shiite religious parties or their Iranian allies, so we are now being asked to leave."

UPDATE: The Iraqi parliament has decided to put off the vote until tomorrow morning, allowing more time for SOFA's backers to persuade opponents of the agreement.

Continues Below

Continued From Above

Get Mother Jones by Email - Free. Like what you're reading? Get the best of MoJo three times a week.

Comments

Why are you not doing articles on the fact that Obama has stopped talking about taking our troops out of Iraq. Just today the Iraqi Government voted to keep US troops until 2012. Didn't Obama promise change? Didn't he tell all you liberals that he would take the troops out day 1???
Change? What does that mean? You all were LIED to. And the liberal media never asked Obama a damn question!!!! Fools!

When are morons going to realize that Obama isn't President yet, never promised to load our troops on the next plane and boat out of Iraq, and hasn't broken a single fucking campaign promise yet.

I know people really want to stir the turd, but it's customary to wait until one is dropped.

Obama did indeed promise to get our troops out of Iraq. In fact he promised to do so when things were not going well in Iraq. Now that things are better in Iraq, he's forgotten all about it. Bush got the time he needed to make the situation on the ground in Iraq better and now there's practically no one screaming for us to get out anymore. Now that the SOFA agreement has been signed, the credit for the US leaving Iraq will go to Bush. He timed this perfectly so that he can now say that he was the one who made the agreement with Iraq about how and when our troops leave Iraq. Obama will have to tear up the SOFA to get them out sooner and he's not going to do that because he won't want to be accused of tearing up the agreement. Plus, now he has hired Clinton and Gates, both proponents of the Iraq war. Ames Tiedeman is correct, Obama lied to us.

The Democrat and Republican choices were accurately described as Bush-Lite and Bush-Clone.

Why feign surprise when the one we voted in turns out to look and act a whole lot like Bush?

jon comments: Obama ... hasn't broken a single f'ing campaign promise yet.

That's because he never got specific enough to actually make one.

All we got was a bunch of generalities, and a chant of "The Change We Need".

OK, so Robert Gates and Hillary Clinton are "The Change We Need", according to Barack.

Whoop-De-F'ing-Do!

SCANDALS!

Barack Obama will conscientiously address issues related to the withdrawal of troops. LONG LIVE PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA! Barack Obama is a great president! Speaking of Barack Obama: Barack Obama is a racial-minority individual and does not like racism: And Michelle Obama is a racial-minority individual and does not like racism: CONSTRUCTIVE WORLDWIDE DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION RELATING TO SCANDALS: (I) I do solemnly swear by Almighty God that George W. Bush committed atrocious, racist, hate crimes of epic proportions and with the stench of terrorism which I am not at liberty to mention. Many people know what Bush did. And many people will know what Bush did—even until the end of the world. Bush was absolute evil. Bush is now like a fugitive from justice. Bush is a psychological prisoner. Bush often worries. In any case, Bush will go down in history in infamy. (II) It is opined that Bill Clinton committed terrifying, racist, hate crimes during his presidency, and I am not free to say anything further about it. ‘Be sure your sins will find you out’ (Numbers 32:23). (III) What if basically all racial-minority people would subscribe to the interpretations that George Herbert Walker Bush committed monstrous, racist, hate crimes while he was the President of the United States? It will eventually come out: it is only a matter of time. (IV) I know it may be hard to believe. However, Ronald Wilson Reagan committed horrible, racist, hate crimes during his presidency. Respectfully Submitted by Andrew Wang, J.D. Candidate B.S., Summa Cum Laude, 1996 Messiah College, Grantham, PA Lower Merion High School, Ardmore, PA, 1993 (I can type 90 words per minute, and there are thousands of copies on the Internet (by March 29, 2009) indicating the contents of (I), (II), (III), and (IV). And there are thousands of copies in very many countries around the world.) “BAD NEWS FROM THE UNITED STATES: ON THE RACIST HATE CRIMES AND ETERNAL INFAMIES OF GEORGE W. BUSH, BILL CLINTON, GEORGE H.W. BUSH, AND RONALD REAGAN” BLOG OF ANDREW WANG badnewsfromtheunitedstates.blogspot.com _______________ ‘If only there could be a ban against invention that bottled up memory like scent & it never faded & it never got stale.’ Off the top of my head, it came from my Lower Merion High School yearbook.

Post new comment

Alternately, you may login to or register an account
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <ul> <ol> <li> <blockquote> <img>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

Photo Essays

When you dial a 1-900 number, who picks up the phone?
Meet the KKK's seamstress of hate couture.
The other side of Gitmo.
A photographer’s year at Angola Prison.