Agreement Respects Iraqi Sovereignty, Allows U.S. Operations

GramCleric · #1 (**permalink**) 11-20-2008, 09:37 AM

By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

Quote:

WASHINGTON, Nov. 19, 2008 – The status of forces agreement that U.S. and Iraqi leaders initialed earlier this week respects Iraqi sovereignty while allowing U.S. servicemembers to continue operations, Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell said here today.

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Marine Gen. James E. Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, are briefing Congress today on the provisions of the agreement, Morrell told Pentagon reporters.

The agreement does not have to be ratified by the U.S. Congress, but Gates has briefed representatives and senators throughout the process. In Iraq, the Council of Ministers has agreed to the terms, and it now is before the Council of Representatives. Morrell called on the council to pass the measure as soon as possible.

All U.S. defense leaders have confidence in the agreement, which will be released tomorrow, Morrell said. “If we had concerns [about the agreement], trust me, Secretary Gates and General Cartwright would not be up explaining this and supporting this to members of Congress,” he said.

Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of U.S. Central Command, and Army Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, commander of Multinational Force Iraq, have signed off on the agreement, saying it provides the necessary protections for American servicemembers in Iraq. Morrell said President George W. Bush also supports the agreement.

“We believe this is an agreement that respects Iraqi sovereignty, which was paramount here, but at the same time provides us with the authorities to do the work we still need to do in Iraq – going after terrorists that remain, and training and equipping Iraqi security forces,” Morrell said.

The agreement calls for all Americans to be out of Iraq’s cities and villages by the end of 2009 and out of the country by the end of 2011. That allows enough time to train Iraqi security forces so they can take over primary responsibility for defense of the nation, Morrell said.

Thirteen of 18 provinces have returned to Iraqi control, and the goal is to return the rest as soon as conditions permit, Pentagon officials said. Coalition forces are in overwatch operations in those provinces, and engage only if requested by Iraqi commanders.

U.S. forces have been drawing down since September 2007, Morrell said. Fourteen U.S. brigade combat teams are in Iraq, down from 20 in mid-2007. “As the secretary's fond of saying, ‘The direction was determined then. It is now a question of pacing,’” Morrell said.

The drawdown is continuing, with a brigade combat team coming out of Iraq without replacement by Christmas. It originally was due to come out in January.

“We hope to be able to do it at even better pace between now and the end of this agreement,” Morrell said.

Shiva_TD · #2 (**permalink**) 11-20-2008, 10:42 AM

I want to know how an agreement between two nations doesn't qualify to be a treaty requiring Senate approval. This is completely bogus IMHO and a violation of the US Constitution.

GramCleric · #3 (**permalink**) 11-20-2008, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shiva_TD

I want to know how an agreement between two nations doesn't qualify to be a treaty requiring Senate approval. This is completely bogus IMHO and a violation of the US Constitution.

Sounds to be more of a contract, as opposed to a treaty. A way for Iraq to get what they want, without the fear of the US senate voting against it. Pacta sunt servanda

MrRelevant · #4 (**permalink**) 11-20-2008, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shiva_TD

I want to know how an agreement between two nations doesn't qualify to be a treaty requiring Senate approval. This is completely bogus IMHO and a violation of the US Constitution.

SOFAs are executive agreements.

Shiva_TD · #5 (**permalink**) 11-20-2008, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrRelevant

SOFAs are executive agreements.

In otherwords this agreement has no bearing upon the US after Obama replaces Bush? The agreement is not between the United States and Iraq but instead is is merely an agreement between Bush and Iraq which has no meaning after Bush is no longer President, true? Obama may choose to honor it or may not, correct?

Because if it obligates the United States or is an agreement between the United States and Iraq then it is a treaty and must be approved by the Senate.

MrRelevant · #6 (**permalink**) 11-21-2008, 06:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shiva_TD

In otherwords this agreement has no bearing upon the US after Obama replaces Bush? The agreement is not between the United States and Iraq but instead is is merely an agreement between Bush and Iraq which has no meaning after Bush is no longer President, true? Obama may choose to honor it or may not, correct?

Because if it obligates the United States or is an agreement between the United States and Iraq then it is a treaty and must be approved by the Senate.

Not the way it works.

Executive agreements transcend admins and are would be binding only to Bushs admin.

Obama could push for it.I suppose Obama could fight history but I dont think he'd win given the precedence.Perhaps renegotiate w/ the Iraqis but given the cluster(*)(*)(*)(*) this negotiation is shaping up into,I think he'll live with the fair and wise agreement on the verge of being approved presently.

The joint res for use of force in Iraq justifes the military presence in Iraq,the SOFA dictates the status and role of that force.Got approval for the use of force ,doesnt need it to negotiate the actual status of the forces.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
UPDATED Another reason to Vote for Fred: he Respects the Second Amendment	DiscerningBlog	Political Blogs	0	01-17-2008 10:19 PM
Counter intelligence operations in the US then or now.	noetsi	History & Past Politicians	3	05-19-2006 06:00 AM
Do You Believe? Islam respects human rights	Cream	Human Rights	50	07-15-2004 07:10 AM
Iraqi Sovereignty -- Boondocks Style	Beagle66	Current Events	2	06-09-2004 12:53 AM
New Iraqi Gov't Will Have "Limited Sovereignty"	marybeth77	Diplomacy & Conflict Resolution	11	04-23-2004 01:53 AM