Iraqi Communists: Pact with U.S. must be amended, or ‘we’ll be the first to reject it’

Iraqi Communists: Pact with U.S. must be amended,
or ‘we’ll be the first to reject it’

People's Weekly World Newspaper, 11/11/08

The latest version of the Iraq-U.S. agreement is “unacceptable” and must be changed to “secure for the Iraqis their legitimate national rights,” the leader of the Iraqi Communist Party told a public meeting of 1,000 people in Baghdad Oct. 31.

“Our party is seeking, with others, to amend the agreement, because it is unacceptable in Iraqi society in its current draft,” Hamid Majeed Mousa, secretary of the party’s central committee and a member of the Iraqi Parliament, said. “It will also not pass in the Parliament in this format, and we will be the first to reject it.”

The U.S. occupation was internationally legitimized through UN Security Council Resolution 1483 against the will of the Iraqi people, Mousa said.

Therefore, “it is not a question of whether not or there should be an agreement,” he told the crowd. “There has to be an agreement that ensures the evacuation of the foreign troops … their evacuation cannot take place by total rejection. It must be regulated by an agreement between the two sides. In all countries, regardless of the situation where there are foreign troops, their exit does not take place by only ignoring mutual dialogue and talks, but through an agreement. What matters, therefore, is the content of such an agreement, and what the principles and basis were for concluding it. This is the correct approach.”

Iraq’s Communist Party, he said, is “trying, along with other national forces, inside and outside the political process, to reach an agreement that governs the withdrawal of foreign forces and their operation during the interim transitional period. This was the demand of the patriotic forces from the outset: i.e. scheduling the withdrawal of foreign forces. Scheduling means, among other things, that there should be a document regulating this process; this movement and this withdrawal, and the gradual transfer of authorities and responsibilities to the Iraqi national side. We strive to ensure that this document reflects the will of Iraqis and their aspiration to see a clear end, unequivocally, of the foreign presence, without delays, procrastination and cumbersome conditions.”

Several parties bear responsibility for the imposition of foreign occupation on the Iraqi people, “first of which is the dictatorship that led Iraq into this mess and the subsequent repercussions,” the Communist Party leader said,

“Then comes the UN Security Council and the resolutions it issued as a result of the hegemony of the unipolar order and the United States.

“Finally, we have the Arab countries that brag and shout against the agreement, and consider its signing to be a ‘violation’ of Iraqi sovereignty — yet, many of these countries have signed agreements that are more problematic than the present agreement.”

“We want a clearly-defined agreement,” one that “does not involve any ambiguity, or ambiguous language,” Mousa said. “The contents of its clauses must not be open to various interpretations, contradictory or contradicting each other. We want the terms of the presence of foreign forces to be set out clearly. They must not have absolute powers, without bounds and regulations, and not subject to inspection and control by the Iraqi forces and authorities. Their movement and operations must all be conducted in coordination with the Iraqi side, supervised by it, and liable to Iraq’s national decisions, contrary to what the situation is today.”

Mousa sharply criticized the notion that an extension of the UN Security Council mandate would be preferable to a negotiated Iraq-U.S. agreement. Under the UN Security Council resolution, “the foreign forces are in command militarily and in charge of security matters, with the Iraqi forces being part of the ‘coalition forces,’” he said. “An extension of the mandate would mean complete control by foreign forces and the subordination of Iraqi forces to them. What is required, however, is an agreement that sets a clearly-defined timetable for the departure of foreign forces.”

Returning to the UN mandate “means a return to square one,” he said. “The UN resolutions do not have a specified time limit, and do not adhere to a clearly-defined timetable for the evacuation of foreign troops; and therefore do not speak about restoring sovereignty.”

Although negotiations with the U.S. have produced some improvements over earlier versions of the agreement, he said the Communist Party had submitted to the Iraqi government additional changes it considers essential to any agreement. Iraq’s Council of Ministers has endorsed a memorandum incorporating the Communist Party’s proposals and those submitted by other Iraqi groups, as a basis for further negotiations with the U.S., Mousa said.

He spelled out a list of specific necessary changes to the draft agreement. They include:

• Specifying an end-date for the agreement. The current draft leaves the agreement in force open-endedly, unless one of the two parties submits a written notice to the other party requesting termination. “There is concern,” said Mousa, that this “may be used to circumvent the timetable of the Agreement on the temporary presence of foreign forces.”

• Deleting language that allows for extending the stay of U.S. forces in Iraq.

• Deleting language that “allows an open-ended increase of the installations and areas used by the US forces, without limitation.”

• Clearly defining who is subject to Iraqi laws and jurisdiction.

Mousa charged that “the American side spares no effort and does not refrain from using illegitimate and sometimes deceitful means to put pressure on the Iraqi side, to compel it to sign the agreement as it is, or to accept the fewest possible and formal amendments.”

The reactions of the Bush administration to the negotiating process have been “mostly negative,” he said, “with some going as far as implicit threats, others being explicit, saying that Iraq would revert to the state of chaos; would lose a lot as a result of not signing the agreement; would lose aid, support and arms; and its funds abroad would be plundered. But a careful analysis of things and a correct knowledge of the prevailing balance of forces at the concrete moment, especially with regard to the American side, allows the conclusion that the threatening and escalation is nothing but ‘hollow drums’ intended to intimidate and influence the Iraqi negotiators to force them to relent and submit to the demands and conditions of the American side.”

At the same time, he noted, statements issued by some American officials indicate they will “listen to the Iraqis’ point of view.”

The issue of how to deal with the presence of U.S. forces in Iraq is “a sensitive issue” in the United States, Mousa said. “The demand for the need to reduce the U.S. presence in Iraq and for the scheduling of the withdrawal is a pressing factor in the presidential elections and for the American position. Obama’s program, which he put forward regarding the military presence in Iraq, is perhaps closer and more appropriate, but we must not lose sight of our objective … for the policy in the U.S. is not decided by this president or that, and the president-elect does not necessarily adhere to his pledges.” U.S. policy is the product of “diverse interests and contradictory interests,” he observed.

The Iraqi Communist leader was also critical of some “Arab and regional players.” With varying motives, these players, he said, “have used various means to exert pressure and psychological warfare on the Iraqi side and the Iraqi negotiators, instead of providing positive support to strengthen its position and act as brothers or allies so as to help improve the negotiating position of the Iraqi side.”

Within Iraq, he said, “the higher interests of the country must be the basis and criterion in determining the position towards the agreement, rather than the differences between the parties of the political process. It is therefore essential, first and foremost, to support the efforts that help Iraq to get a fair and balanced agreement that secures its legitimate rights in accordance with international law, in the forefront of which is to exercise its right to self-determination, build the system of its choice, and regain its full sovereignty and independence.”

“We are not among the supporters of absolute acceptance or absolute rejection. We are for the option of insisting on amending the current draft of the agreement” and there are real possibilities” to achieve that if public opinion is heeded and mobilized, Mousa said.

“We will not accept any secret agreement or secret annexes,” the Communist leader concluded. “Everything must be presented to the people.”

Source: People's Weekly World Newspaper, 11/11/08
http://pww.org/article/articleview/13985/

Iraqi CP considers Provincial Elections Law unfair to minorities

Iraqi Communist Party considers Provincial Elections Law
unfair to minorities

Mufid al-Jazairy, Member of Parliament, said that the Iraqi Communist Party did not support the proposal of some political blocs to allocate only 6 seats for minorities in the provincial councils, during the parliament session last Monday, 3-11-2008.

Jazairy, who is a member of Iraqi CP's Political Bureau, said in a statement given to the party central organ "Tareeq Al-Shaab" (People's Path), that "the party considered the proposal to be unfair to small national and religious components of the Iraqi society."

He explained that the party had called on the parliament to adopt the proposal put forward by the United Nations, describing it as being balanced. He said that the UN proposal "ensures fair representation for the national and religious minorities in the provincial councils of Baghdad, Mosul and Basra."

Jazairy added that "the supporters of the adopted proposal refused to give the representatives of minorities 12 seats out of about 450 seats, as they considered that to be too many, and instead cut the number by half."

The head of the UN Mission in Iraq (UNAMI), Staffan de Mistura, had made a proposal that there should be 12 seats allocated to representatives of minorities in provincial councils.

Jazairy expressed his regret that proposal put forward by Iraqi CP leader Hamid Majeed Mousa (also a member of parliament) was not adopted during consultations between the political blocs. He said: "In an attempt to address the problem, comrade Mousa proposed that the 12 seats, allocated to representatives of minorities, be considered additional seats, excluded from the number already allocated to each provincial council."

Jazairy explained that the Iraqi CP's rejection of the proposal approved by the Parliament stems from its consistent position, in support of the minorities and their cultural and administrative rights. "It is a position that has always been adhered to by the Party, throughout 75 years of its history," he said.

Source: "Tareeq Al-Shaab" (People's Path), central organ of the Iraqi Communist Party, 5-11-2008.

Iraqi President receives delegation of Iraqi Communist Party leadership

Iraqi President receives delegation of Iraqi Communist Party leadership

3-11-2008

The Iraqi President Jalal Talabani received yesterday, Sunday 2-11-2008, a delegation of the Iraqi Communist Party leadership, headed by comrade Hamid Majeed Mousa, the Secretary of its Central Committee.

The two sides discussed recent political developments, especially regarding the Iraq-US security agreement and the anticipated American response to the amendments demanded by the Iraqi government.


Talks during the meeting also dealt with the developments concerning the relationship between the Federal Government and the Kurdistan Regional Government, and the work of the committees that had been formed to address outstanding issues.

The two sides discussed the relations with neighbouring countries, and agreed on the need to care for, maintain and develop these relations.

The Iraqi CP delegation included comrades Raid Fahmi, Hassan Akif, Izzat Abu al-Timman and Jassim al-Hilfi. The meeting was also attended by Latif Rashid, Minister of Water Resources, and Saadi Peerah, member of the Political Bureau of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, and Nizar Mohammed Saeed, director of the President's office.

Source: "Tareeq Al-Shaab" (People's Path), the central organ of the Iraqi Communist Party (3-11-2008).

Media reports about Iraqi Communist Party meeting in Baghdad on the Iraq - U.S. Agreement

Media reports about Iraqi Communist Party
meeting in Baghdad

on the Iraq - U.S. Agreement

• U.S. using deceitful methods to pass the Security Agreement

• Iraqi Communist Party calls for amendments to the Agreement

• Draft agreement does not fulfil the aspirations of the Iraqi people

• Fundamental objective is evacuation of foreign troops and regaining sovereignty and independence

31/10/2008

The Iraqi Communist Party organised a big meeting in Baghdad on Friday 30-10-2008 to present its position on the proposed Iraq - U.S. Agreement. The meeting, attended by about 1000 people, was addressed by Hamid Majeed Mousa, the Secretary of the Central Committee of the party. The following are excerpts from media coverage of the event as reported by news agencies:

The leader of the Iraqi Communist Party, Hamid Majeed Mousa, announced the party's position, rejecting the security agreement in its present form, and calling for amendments to it, in addition to scheduling the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.

Mousa said the party will not agree to pass the Agreement with the U.S. unless the recent amendments demanded by the Iraqi government are made. He added that the American side is using illegitimate and deceitful means to pass the agreement as currently drafted.

Mousa, who is also a member of the Iraqi parliament, said that the present draft agreement with its articles "does not fulfil the aspirations of the Iraqi people, and contains a lot of vagueness and uncertainty."

"We must always demonstrate a high sense of responsibility with regard to the consequences of the agreement and its applications, in order to achieve the fundamental objective sought from it: the withdrawal or evacuation of foreign troops, and the Iraqi people regaining their sovereignty and independence. The armed forces must be qualified and provide the alternative to foreign troops. We are therefore facing an urgent and grave task that requires providing the prerequisites for an agreement that enables the Iraqis to secure their rights."

The Iraqi CP leader stressed the need to have open and transparent negotiations as well as relying on the mobilization of the masses when demanding to amend the terms of the draft agreement, pointing to the lack of parity between the Iraqi and American negotiators.

He criticized what he described as the media campaign, by American and Arab media that dealt with agreement. "There has been a huge publicity campaign by U.S. media claiming that Iraq will return to the state of chaos that prevailed after the fall of the former regime in 2003, and that it would lose the aid and support given to it in the area of arming and training Iraqi security forces, and other matters, in an attempt to undermine the Iraqi side in the negotiations."

Mousa described these threats as "nothing but hollow drums designed to force the Iraqi side to sign the security agreement with Washington against its will."

He said: "If you have followed the U.S. media, you would be amazed by what has been said. Unfortunately, many of the Arab and regional media have also behaved in a similar manner, despite having different intentions. But they have exerted pressure, in various ways, on the Iraqi side and employed psychological warfare against the Iraqi negotiators."

He drew attention to the need "to amend the terms concerning control over the American mail entering Iraq so that the Iraqi side has the authority to control and inspect it." In addition, "the powers of U.S. troops on Iraqi territory need to be specified." The agreement need to include "protection for Iraqi funds in all countries of the world, and not to be confined to Iraqi funds in U.S. banks.”

The Iraqi Communist Party leader pointed to the ratification by the Council of Ministers in the past few days of a memo that contained the demands of Iraqi political forces to amend the terms of the draft agreement, so as to form the basis for its conclusion. He called at the same time on the Iraqi parties to take a unified position through which a fair agreement can be secured without coercion or pressure directed on the Iraqi side.

IRAQ SEEKS PACT LIMITS

IRAQ SEEKS PACT LIMITS

October 30, 2008
BAGHDAD (AP) - Iraq wants a security agreement with the United States to include a clear ban on American troops using Iraqi territory to attack Iraq's neighbors, a government spokesman said yesterday, three days after a dramatic US raid on Syria.
Government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said the proposed amendment was among several forwarded to Washington, where President Bush said negotiators were analyzing them. "We obviously want to be helpful and constructive without undermining basic principles," Bush said.
Al-Dabbagh said the Iraqis want the right to declare the agreement null and void if the United States unilaterally attacks one of Iraq's neighbors.
US troops launched a daring daylight attack Sunday a few miles into Syrian territory, killing senior al Qaeda figure Abu Ghadiyah.
Al-Dabbagh said other amendments sought by the Iraqis include a clear definition of "duty" when cases arise involving crimes committed by American troops off base.
These GIs would be tried under Iraqi jurisdiction. The Iraqis also want to inspect all US military shipments entering or leaving Iraq. The agreement must be approved by the end of the year, or the US military would have to suspend all operations in Iraq.

Iraq plans to cut 2009 budget by $13 billion

Iraq plans to cut 2009 budget by $13 billion

31-10-2008
BAGHDAD (AP) — Iraq plans to cut its 2009 draft budget to $67 billion in light of falling world oil prices, finance ministry officials said.
Iraqi authorities set the original draft budget last month at around $80 billion, based on expectations that the average price per barrel of oil would not drop below $80.
But prices have slipped sharply since summer highs. On Friday, oil for December delivery was down $1.44 to $64.52 a barrel in electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange by midmorning in Asia.
That drop has forced Iraq, which is dependent on oil revenues for more than 90 percent of its national capital budget, to revise its 2009 draft budget, Finance Ministry spokesman Adnan Abdul-Rahman said Friday.
A day earlier, Finance Minister Bayan Jabr said after a meeting with IMF officials in Amman, Jordan, that the ministry had decided to cut $13 billion from the planned 2009 budget.
"An agreement was reached to consider $67 billion as the 2009 budget instead of the recently set draft budget of $80 billion," he said in comments broadcast on Al-Sharqiya television.
Jabr said the revised budget is based on an assumed oil price of $62 per barrel, lower than the original estimate of $80.
He added that "many sectors" will be affected by the cuts, but did not specify.
Ministry spokesman Abdul-Rahman said officials were slated to meet Saturday to discuss the budget, but that it was not clear when a final draft would be ready.
Iraq is home to vast oil reserves with a proven 115 billion barrels. Its daily production stands near 2.4 million barrels a day.

Iraq gov't wants all US troops gone by end of 2011

Iraq gov't wants all US troops gone by end of 2011

30-10-2008
BAGHDAD (AP) — Iraq wants to eliminate any chance U.S. forces will stay here after 2011 under a proposed security pact and to expand Iraqi legal jurisdiction over U.S. troops until then, a close ally of the prime minister said Thursday.
Those demands, which were presented to U.S. officials this week, could derail the deal — delivering a diplomatic blow to Washington in the final weeks of the Bush administration.
Failure to reach an agreement before year's end could force a suspension of American military operations, and U.S. commanders have been warning Iraqi officials that could endanger security improvements.
The current draft, hammered out in months of tortuous negotiations, would have U.S. soldiers leave Iraq by Dec. 31, 2011, unless the two governments agreed to an extension for training and supporting Iraqi security forces.
But Ali al-Adeeb, a member of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's inner circle, said the government wants that possibility excluded by language adding finality to the end of 2011 date.
"The Iraqi side wants to remove any mention of a possible extension of U.S. troops, fearing that the existing clause might be subject to misinterpretation or could bear different interpretation," he told The Associated Press.
Otherwise, he said the U.S. might demand an extension "depending on their evaluation" of the security situation and the state of readiness within Iraq's army and police. U.S. officials have privately suggested 2012 is too early for Iraqi forces to be truly ready to maintain order.
The draft also gives Iraqi courts limited jurisdiction over U.S. troops, allowing them to be prosecuted by Iraqis only if they are accused of major crimes committed off post and off duty.
Al-Adeeb said the Iraqis want to add a provision for a joint U.S.-Iraqi committee to decide whether U.S. soldiers accused of such crimes were really on authorized missions.
Planning Minister Ali Baban, a Sunni, added that the Iraqis want jurisdiction over all U.S. soldiers and contractors unless they are carrying out joint military operations approved by Iraqis — a subtle but significant change to the draft that U.S. authorities may find unacceptable.
Iraqi officials have said the changes must be made in the draft agreement before it can be approved by parliament in time for the Dec. 31 expiration of a U.N. Security Council mandate under which coalition troops operate in Iraq.
Without an agreement or a new U.N. mandate, the U.S. military would have to suspend all operations in Iraq after that.
"We are waiting for a response from the U.S. negotiators on how much they can accommodate," Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari told CNN. "I think both sides here have reached the moment of truth. The time window is closing, and a decision has to be made as soon as possible."
But the Bush administration's hope to secure the deal while in office was fading with the new Iraqi demands, despite White House assurances that an agreement was still possible.
Al-Maliki, meanwhile, met with a leading Shiite politician late Thursday to discuss the deal. Government television quoted the prime minister as describing the agreement as a framework for the pullout of U.S. forces and the regulation of "their activities within the rest of the time they're here."
"We don't call it a security pact but an agreement to withdraw the troops and organize their activities during the period of their presence in Iraq," al-Maliki was quoted as saying.
U.S. officials in Washington refused to discuss possible alternatives to securing a deal, saying they were still reviewing Iraq's proposed amendments that were received Wednesday.
But officials bristled at suggestions the negotiations could be reopened and said the U.S. was not yet considering asking the Security Council to extend the U.N. mandate.
"Once we have something to say on it, we will," State Department spokesman Robert Wood told reporters in Washington. "But for the moment, we're just taking our time in reviewing it to make sure that we've got a good sense of what it is the Iraqis have put forward."
Privately, however, U.S. officials were growing pessimistic about chances for a deal. Failure to seal a deal with Iraqi politicians who owe their position to the 2003 U.S.-led invasion would be a huge embarrassment to President Bush, whose administration was largely defined by the war.
In Baghdad, U.S. military officials have urged the Iraqis to consider what could happen here if the U.S. suspended military operations, warning that the security gains won by the blood of American and Iraqi soldiers would be at risk.
Violence is down sharply after the Sunni revolt against al-Qaida in Iraq and the routing of Shiite militias in Baghdad and southern Iraq last spring.
But U.S. and other coalition forces also provide considerable help to Iraqi ministries in infrastructure and quality of life projects that would have to stop — along with control of the airspace and protection of Iraq's oil export facilities in the Persian Gulf.
"There's really no area that we as a coalition ... operate in that is not governed by legal authority," the U.S. military spokesman, Brig. Gen. David Perkins, told reporters.
He said the American military presence enables other international organizations, including the United Nations, and private groups to do their jobs.
"These things are all interrelated," Perkins said. "You pull one pillar out, you seriously degrade the efforts of others."