Pat Dollard | Young Americans

Iraq Media:

Baghdad, May 31, (VOI) – A Sadrist official called on all Iraqi political parties and blocs to reject the long-term Iraq-U.S. agreement, which, he said, would “grant immunity for the U.S. army”.

“The agreement involves several problems because it grants immunity for the occupying U.S. forces. This treaty is an extension of the decision by former U.S. civil administrator, Paul Bremer, to grant these forces immunity,” Sadrist leader Falah Shanshal told Aswat al-Iraq – Voices of Iraq – (VOI).

“We have to benefit from the experiences of other countries that signed agreements similar to the long-term Iraq-U.S. agreement like Japan and Germany, which still pay the price for these agreements.

After World War II, the United States signed long-term deals with Korea, Japan and Germany sanctioning the presence of military bases in those countries.

“There is great national consensus at the Iraqi parliament over the rejection of this agreement if passed,” Shanshal indicated.

A declaration of principles was signed between U.S. President George W. Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki in December 2007. The declaration was planned to be ratified on July 31, 2008 to be effective as of January 1, 2009.

The agreement governs the U.S. forces’ presence in Iraq after the year 2008. This presence currently relies on a mandate by the UN, renewed annually upon the request of the Iraqi government.

The agreement should not be effective except after endorsement by the 275-member Iraqi parliament, which comprises five political blocs, the Fadhila (Virtue) Party and the Sadrist Bloc, or Iraqis loyal to Shiite leader Muqtada al-Sadr.

During the Friday prayers sermon yesterday, a representative of top Shiite cleric Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani slammed the agreement, which, he said, would “needlessly add further burdens on the Iraq people”.

“We don’t want Iraq to be further burdened by problems and obligations that could impinge on the nation’s sovereignty as well as the coming generations,” Sayyid Ahmed al-Safi said during the Friday prayers’ sermon in the holy Shiite city of Karbala.

U.S. Media:

BAGHDAD (AP) - Tens of thousands of mostly Moqtada Al Sadr supporters showed up for rallies arranged by the Mahdi Army in several cities Friday against a proposed U.S.-Iraqi security agreement.

Although U.S. officials insist they are not seeking permanent bases, suspicion runs deep among many Iraqis that the Americans want to keep at least some troops in the country for many years.

“We denounce the government’s intentions to sign a long-term agreement with the occupying forces,” Asaad al-Nassiri, a sheik loyal to anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, said during a sermon in Kufa. “Our army will be under their control in this agreement, and this will lead to them having permanent bases in Iraq.”

President Bush and Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki signed a statement last December on the future of U.S.-Iraqi relations, saying they planned to finalize a new security agreement by July 31 - in time for Iraq’s parliament to approve the deal before a U.N. mandate expires at the end of the year.

U.S. and Iraqi officials began negotiations in March on a blueprint for the long-term security agreement and a second deal, to establish the legal basis for U.S. troops to remain in the country after the U.N. mandate runs out.

Rallies in Baghdad and several other Iraqi cities followed Friday prayer services and were the first in wake of a call by al-Sadr for weekly protests against the deal, even though few details of the talks have been released.

On Thursday, the head of the country’s biggest mainstream Shiite party, Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim, said some unspecified points under negotiation “violate Iraq’s national sovereignty,” adding that a “national consensus” was emerging against the proposed agreement.
Al-Hakim is al-Sadr’s main rival in the majority Shiite community and maintains close ties to the country’s main Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani. Aides to the powerful ayatollah say he also has reservations about the deal.

Some congressional Democrats are also insisting that Congress should authorize any agreement that would obligate the United States to defend Iraq.

Before the Friday protests, al-Sadr’s office in Baghdad issued a statement branding the negotiations as “a project of humiliation” aimed at turning Iraq “into a small stooge of the United States.”

U.S. officials have declined to comment on the talks until the draft is completed.

Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari said two weeks ago that “we are making progress” although other Iraqi officials acknowledged there were many unresolved issues, including how many Americans would remain and what they would do. American soldiers now enjoy full immunity from the Iraqi legal system.