Will Pres.Elect Obama Allow Bush to Set the Terms for Iraq Withdrawal?

[bigtree]

November 21, 2008

With Iraq’s parliament poised to pass the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) next week, it’s time for the president-elect to say where he stands on the withdrawal timetable


What does President-elect Barack Obama mean when he says he will end the war in Iraq?

For all practical purposes, the nearly 140,000 U.S. troops in Iraq today perform something closer to a peace-keeping mission than an all-out war with major combat operations. Indeed, it has been a while since we’ve heard of a substantial mobilization of forces inside the country, while casualties on the American side have declined to the lowest levels since the war started.

With Al-Qaeda in Iraq largely incapacitated, and the pro-Iranian militias, such as the Mahdi Army, all but contained, the so-called war in Iraq appears to be morphing into an extension of the broader war on terror. So when Obama says he plans to end the war, the question is, first: whom does he identify as “the enemy” in the soon-to-end war? And second: is he willing to end this war even if “the enemy” decides to resume fighting and the country veers, again, toward civil war?

So far, the President-elect has made no substantive comment on the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), which Iraq’s cabinet approved last Sunday, and which is now undergoing a third reading in parliament. Although the SOFA timetable differs very little from the plan Obama proposed during the campaign, he has yet to say he would honor the agreement. So much for campaign slogans.

To be fair, however, circumstances on the ground have prompted both Obama and Bush to adjust their withdrawal plans to the point where there is little difference between the two. So Obama may be content to let the Bush administration make a deal. The notion of leaving Defense Secretary Robert Gates in his job under a new administration, for a few months at the very least, suggests that Obama has no intention to rock the boat on the Bush plan . . .

read more: http://www1.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2008-11-21/will-obama-really-end-the-iraq-war/2/

[yurbud]

1. since the longer timeline was forced on Iraqis by Bush, it would be easy for Obama to renegotiate

If both parties to a contract or treaty want different terms, what is the obstacle to renegotiating?

[bigtree]

2. I don't see an obstacle to that

In fact the agreement has a provision that acknowledges the fact that the U.S. can alter the timetable (I assume that it means backward as well as forward).

The question is whether Pres. Obama will significantly alter what's laid out before him or will he basically just follow the path Bush and Gates are laying out for him?

[Winterblues]

3. We call it "The Status of Forces Agreement", everyone else in the world calls it

"The Iraqi Withdrawal Accords"

[bigtree]

4. right. Bush doesn't have the same designs for withdrawal that Obama does.

I believe Bush wants to try and tie Obama to whatever 'legacy' commitment and outcome in Iraq he and Gates can manage. I don't see why Obama should associate himself with any of that.