In what was yet another sign that the Iraqi government is able to establish its authority over an increasingly bigger part of the country, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki said in an interview published Monday that British forces were no longer needed in the south of the country.

“We thank them for the role they have played, but I think that their stay is not necessary for maintaining security and control. There might be a need for their experience in training and some technological issues, but as a fighting force, I don’t think that is necessary,” he told The Times, a London-based newspaper.

Nouri al-Malike, Iraq Prime Minister. Photo: Times of London

Christopher Prentice, the British Ambassador, said: “It will be good to move out of the artificial relationship in which military aspects had prominence and into a more natural partnership. We fully intend to develop a broad-based relationship with the whole of Iraq. I hope that we will see that happen in the course of next year.”

Maliki agreed with that sentiment saying that “[t]he Iraqi arena is open for British companies and British friendship, for economic exchange and positive cooperation in science and education.”

Although Iraq’s Prime Minister was generally positive about the British, he did criticize them for Basra. As known, the British declared Basra to be safe, withdrew, and Shiite extremists took over the city. The Iraqi army was forced to attack the city earlier this year, causing the first major battle between government troops and insurgents.

“They stayed away from the confrontation, which gave the gangs and militias the chance to control the city,” Maliki said about the strategy the British used in Basra. “The situation deteriorated so badly that corrupted youths were carrying swords and cutting the throats of women and children. The citizens of Basra called out for our help . . . and we moved to regain the city.”

Despite the mistakes the British made, Maliki called their contribution significant and emphasized that his government would not have been able to become as relatively successful as it is now without their help. Allied troops fought the insurgents when the Iraqi army was little more than a group of renegade unemployed individuals who were torn between fighting for the central government and for a sectarian militia that ruled their neighborhood, village or city.

That army, however, has changed dramatically ever since the surge started and ever since the U.S. and Iraqi governments decided to use a new strategy towards militants and those supportive of them. The Iraqi government appears to have come to the rather logical conclusion that it could not establish peace and order without the help of Sunnis. Slowly but surely Maliki and others have accepted the growing influence of Sunnis, and their role in the new Iraqi society. This has helped the country as a whole a lot.

Interesting about the Iraq and Afghanistan debate is that the situation in both countries and thus the debate have changed dramatically in the last year and a half. Iraq was the problem child, Afghanistan is that child now. The Iraqi government seems to have its act together, whereas the Afghani one is making a mess and is unable to do anything about militants. Iraq is increasingly signalling it is ready and willing to take its fate in its own hands, while Afghanistan is becoming increasingly dependent on foreign troops to hang on to power.

The situation in Iraq is changing rather rapidly. It could very well be that three years from now, we’ll conclude that this country is one of the most stable and progressive ones in the Middle East.