Haider al-Abadi Is Succeeding At The World’s Hardest Job !

[DinarThug]

Why do not you leave Iraq?

 

 

 

2017/12/19 05:18:48 PM 
The United States has stepped up its contacts with Iraq to maintain its military presence despite defeating a reluctant organization in Iraq. Both countries seem to want not to repeat the 2011 decision to withdraw US troops from the country.

The United States and Iraq did not specify the size and composition of the force, which could change over time, according to US officials who did not want to be identified because they were not authorized to discuss the talks in public.

Officials said no decision had been reached on the US presence in Iraq, nor was the formation of a follow-up force to be determined by the Iraqi government.

James Jeffrey, the US ambassador to Iraq, continued the issue of the US presence and said, "It's going on as we were looking forward in 2011." It is not clear that the United States will be able to avoid some of the political pitfalls in Baghdad that killed the deal in 2011.

Americans have so far said Iran has a major political role in Iraq, considering both countries are predominantly Shiite and surrounded by Sunni Muslim neighbors. "The big issue is whether there is pressure on the Iranians to leave or not," Jeffrey said.

Jeffrey, a researcher at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said: "The size of the force is likely to be much lower than it is now and the number of 5,500 US troops."

Geoffrey said the task of having troops in the future would be similar to what US forces are currently doing: training Iraqi forces and helping intelligence and surveillance. They do not participate in direct combat.

And on the presence of US advisers, they will support the Iraqi army and avoid the disaster of 2014 when the gunmen attacked the city of Mosul in that year. Since then, US-backed Iraqi forces have broken a tight grip on the territory they controlled.

James Matisse said last month, "Despite these successes, the battle is not over yet." Without the physical terrorist group, it is still a threat to the stability of the newly liberated areas as well as their homelands. "

It is not permissible for Daash to keep the land, but terrorism can provoke bombings in Iraq and by conspiring and inspiring armed groups throughout Iraq, according to observers.

The Iraqi government recognizes the threat and believes it needs more US military assistance. Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi said he had won a protest earlier this month but stressed that "terrorism is still a constant enemy."

US officials echoed US Today's need to organize themselves to be ready for a long-term commitment to building the capabilities of military partners.

In 2011, talks on keeping US troops in Iraq on the issue of ensuring legal protection for the United States were stopped until they were prosecuted for crimes. The Iraqi government has rejected the deal amid political opposition to a long-term US presence.

This time, US and Iraqi officials hope to avoid political confrontation. Instead of a formal agreement that will need parliament's approval, the US military said it could operate under a memorandum of understandingbetween the two countries, a US official said.

The memo has been in place since 2014, when US advisers in Iraq were deployed to help local forces organize a rally. "Any agreement aimed at keeping US advisers in Iraq will provide an opportunity to expand Iranian influence in Iraq," Jeffrey said.

Shortly after the emergence of a hasty organization, the Iranian government rushed to provide assistance and support to the Shiite factions volunteering to fight against Da'ash. Iran has continued its support and influence on political leaders in Baghdad.

link

[DinarThug]

 

 

Washington and Baghdad are negotiating a long-term US presence in Iraq

Translated by Hamid Ahmed 

The United States and Iraq have recently intensified their talks to keep a section of US troops permanently in the country following the expulsion of armed militants.

Both countries want to avoid repeating what happened in 2011, when US forces withdrew from Iraq after they successfully curbed al-Qaeda's threat and reduced violence in the country. But three years after that withdrawal, the Iraqi army collapsed in the face of the march of armed militants. 

According to US officials, who declined to be named because they were not authorized to speak publicly, the United States and Iraq have yet to decide on the size and composition of the force that would remain, which could change over time. 

The two officials said no decision had yet been made on a long-term presence and that the force's composition would be determined by the Iraqi government. 

"What is happening now is similar to what we were looking for after 2011," said James Jeffrey, a former US ambassador to Iraq who is close to the issue in an interview with USA Today. 

The US newspaper says it is not clear whether the United States will be able to avoid some of the political obstacles in Baghdad that have derailed the agreement to keep troops in 2011, and that Iran, which opposes the presence of US troops in the country, has strong political influence in Iraq. 

"The big problem is that if there is pressure from the Iranians to leave the United States from Iraq," Jeffrey said. 

Jeffrey, who is now an analyst at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said the size of the force is likely to be less than the current strength of 5,500 US troops in Iraq. He pointed out that the task of any force that will be in Iraq in the future will be similar to what is currently done by US forces, namely, training Iraqi forces and assistance in the intelligence and reconnaissance and will not have any direct combat role. 

The presence of American advisers and other means of support will help boost the Iraqi army's ability to avert a catastrophe such as the one that occurred in 2014 when gunmen stormed Mosul, cities and other villages as many Iraqi soldiers pulled out of their positions. 

Since then, US-backed Iraqi forces have managed to break a tight grip on the occupied territories and have managed to expel the militants and the rest of them have fled to the desert areas bordering Syria. 

"Despite these successes, our battle is not over yet, even after the breakdown of the organization's succession, both physically and structurally, the organization remains a threat to stability in the newly liberated areas and also a threat to our countries," US Defense Secretary Jim Mats said last month. 

He may not be able to occupy territory yet, but he can create terrorism through bombings in Iraq or by planning and inciting attacks around the world. 

The Iraqi government is aware of this threat and believes that further assistance is needed from the US-led coalition. Prime Minister Haider al-Abbadi declared the final victory over a preacher earlier this month but said terrorism was still considered a "continuing enemy." 

"I think we have to prepare ourselves to be prepared to commit ourselves to a long-term presence in Iraq to strengthen our partner's ability to face any threat," General Paul Funk told USA Today in October. 

In 2011, it was not possible to reach an agreement to keep part of the US troops because of the problem of securing legal protection for US forces not to be held accountable for any crime resulting from the use of their military power. The Iraqi government then rejected the deal because of political opposition to the principle of a long-term US presence. 

At present, US and Iraqi officials hope to avoid a similar political hurdle. According to a US official, instead of approving a formal agreement that may require approval by the Iraqi parliament, the US military says it can operate in Iraq in accordance with the current memorandum of understanding between the two countries. 

The memo is still in force since 2014, when American advisers were deployed in Iraq to help local forces fight a coup. 

Jeffrey said any agreement to keep American advisers in Iraq would provide a brake on increasing Iranian influence in Baghdad.

 link

[DinarThug]

http://www.almaalomah.com/2017.....20/265962/

What did Trump's new strategy for Iraq include ?

11:47 - 20/12/2017  

 

US President Donald Trump's national strategic security document underscored the US's continued long-term strategic partnership with Iraq.

The 66-page document, which Trump addressed to its broad lines at a news conference, sometimes contained contradictory signals to China and Russia.

"We have renewed our friendships in the Middle East and shared with the leaders of the region to help drive out terrorists and extremists and cut off their funding and discredit their evil ideologies," Trump said in the foreword to the White House strategy.

"We will strengthen our long-term strategic partnership with Iraq as an independent state and seek a settlement of the Syrian civil war that will create the conditions for returning home and rebuilding their lives in peace," the document said.

"We will help regional partners strengthen their institutions and capabilities, including in the area of law enforcement to counter terrorism and counterinsurgency efforts," she said.