Iraqi Parliament OKs Plan: U.S. 3 More Years in Iraq

November 27th, 2008 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

After fierce debate, which took many months, the Iraqi parliament agreed to a deal on Thursday that enables U.S. troops to stay in the country for three more years.

The deal came just in time: if it would have taken the two sides a little bit longer the United Nations’ mandate for Iraq, under which the U.S. occupation of Iraq is legal, would come to an end and the U.S. presence would be deemed illegal under international law.

As such, the deal is a winner for George W. Bush and those Iraqis who fear that their country will return to massive chaos if the U.S. were to withdraw its troops suddenly.

What is seldom mentioned at blogs, however, is that the deal is also good news for president-elect Barack Obama. He knows that the U.S. cannot withdraw prematurely from Iraq. Yet, he promised especially the liberal base of his party that troops would be withdrawn within 16 months. He can now defend himself by arguing that the decision was not his to take; a 3-year deal was forced upon him by the Bush and the al-Maliki administration.

The agreement makes sense: the U.S. will withdraw its troops from Iraq’s cities before June 30, 2012, and from the country as a whole by the end of that year. In addition to this, Iraq will finally be firmly on its way to full sovereignty: it will have strict oversight over all U.S. forces.

And so, the war in Iraq continues to be a good source of good news for the Bush administration; ironically, the war that stood at the foundation of the destruction of Bush’s presidency is also the war that may very well cause historians to judge George W. Bush more kindly than many thought only one year ago. He made a lot of mistakes during his presidency, but the decision to implement the now famous surge may very well have a tremendous influence on his legacy.

Meanwhile, president-elect Barack Obama will inherit a more stable Iraq and an economy in recession. The man who first presented himself as the anti-war candidate now has to transform himself into a foreign policy realist and economic miracle worker.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.