Zal Khalilzad, the US viceroy in Baghdad, has been putting his own spin on his failure to break the unity of the UIA bloc by speaking to the WaPo’s David Ignatius and claiming it was a victory for his diplomacy, after all.
Ignatius wrote that Khalilzad told him that “the Iranians ‘pressured everyone for [former UIA candidate Ibrahim] Jafari to stay'”, whereas the reputation of the now-confirmed UIA candidate for PM, Nouri (formerly Jawad) al-Maliki is of “someone who is independent of Iran.”
Yeah, right. Whatever. But by casting matters in that light, Zal is able to keep alive his reputation in Washington as someone who– to quote Ignatius– “has been a match for the Iraqis in his wily political wrangling.” As opposed to, for example, being seen as someone who tried hard but failed to break the basic unity of the UIA bloc.
David does concede, however, that, “Maliki is a tough Arab nationalist who will work with the United States in the short run but will want the United States to withdraw its forces from Iraq. His authentic Iraqi credentials could help pull the country together.”
Meanwhile, I see that Maliki has faced one challenge already: He had to turn up at a hastily arranged meeting with Condi Rice and Don Rumsfeld who “just happened” to make a swing through Baghdad today.
That report, from AP, notes this:
- Rumsfeld said the United Nations Security Council resolution that forms the legal basis for U.S. operations to stabilize and rebuild Iraq is to expire at the end of the year so there will have to be talks with the Iraqi government on arrangements beyond this year.
Right. Negotiating the terms and timetable of the US withdrawal from their country really is one of the main responsibilities this new Iraqi government will have. The other two are tying down the last unfinished details of the country’s Constitution— and the small matter of governing the country.
First, though, Maliki has to form his government. I imagine that trying to make sure he understands Washington’s views on that topic was the main reason Condi and Rummy rushed over so fast to meet him.
Envoy to Iraq Predicts U.S. May Need to Stay in Region for Years
April 25, 2006
By Borzou Daragahi / Times Staff Writer
BAGHDAD — The U.S. ambassador here on Monday urged war-weary Americans to dig in for the long haul: a years-long effort to transform Iraq and the surrounding region, now one of the world’s major trouble spots. “We must perhaps reluctantly accept…
http://www.latimes.com/services/site/premium/access-registered.intercept
needs login
His mission just start for long team say 50+ years
So…. new job, name change, a new future for Iraq? I guess we’ll see…
Over at AiB I’m talking about history, as a marker for the future?
For those of you lacking history about Iraq, please check out my post, where I provide a little insight into a perhaps more infamous Nuri, Nuri al-Sa’id, former Prime Minister of Iraq under the monarchy, and orchestrator of the Anglo-Iraqi treaty leading to Iraq’s initial independence from Britain in 1932.
Those of you with some history, Reidar, Helena, and particularly those of you *from* Iraq-Salah, Shirin(?), what are your thoughts about my assertions?
Also from Iraq, what is the word on the street about the new Nuri, do Iraqis recognize his name change as symbolism in any way? I’m waiting to hear from my other contacts in Iraq, and I’ll let everyone here know if I hear something…
Check it out here….
Nuri, Nuri, on the wall…
They’re Staying in Iraq
Brian,
Nuri al-Sa’id caught on the border to Jordan cover himself by Al-Abaya (Iraqi Black Cover) hide himself as a woman
What you call it independent during Nuri al-Sa’id time it’s as same as the Sheikh Paul Bremer III handover sovereignty to Iraqis in 2004, the real player is the invader.
I don’t know these guys if US leave Iraq which I doubt it, how they can hide and what they use to hide.
But there is nice OP in Al Sharq Al Awasat few days back about Al-Maliki, he was the only one from the opposition guys rejecting the invasion and the war as a tool for Regime Change in Iraq this go back to 2003 a few months before 2003.
شاعر العراق معروف الرصافي :
علـمٌ ودستورٌ ومجلسُ أمة
………………………. كل عن المعـنى الصحيح محرّفُ
أسماءُ ليس لنا سوى ألفاظُها
………………………. أمّـا معانيهـا فليست تُعرفُ
من يقرأ الدستـورَ يعلم أنه
………………………. وفقـاً لصكّ الاحتلال مصنّفُ
من ينظرُ العلمَ المرفرفَ يلقهُ
………………………. في عزّ غيرِ بني البـلادِ يرفرفُ
من يأتِ مجلسنـا يصدّق أنه
………………………. لـمُرادِ غير الناخبين مؤلّـفُ
أفهكذا تبقى الحكـومة عندنا
………………………. كلَماً تمـوَّهُ للورى وتُزخرَفُ
كثُرت دوائرُهـا وقلّ فعالها
………………………. كالطبلِ يكبرُ وهو خالٍ أجوفُ
كـم ساءَ منها ومن وزرائها
………………………. عمـلٌ بمنفعةِ المواطنِ مُجحِفُ
تشكو البلادُ سـياسةً ماليةً
………………………. تجتـاحُ أمـوالَ البلادِ وتُتلِفُ
وسبحان الله ما اشبه اليوم بالبارحة..
It seems to me most interesting that binLaden should
reappear in the narrow confines of our attention in
order to remind us that he is after us– RIGHT AT
HOME– and not after our soldiers in Iraq. Suddenly
after him, Zarqawi comes forward and tells us that we
are defeated and that he is pressing on to annihilate
the Shi’ia regime heading Iraq. Most noteworthy is
that never before did Zarqawi deem it important to
exhibit himself in carne instead of maintaining his
spirit status and to do so upon the heels of a
binLaden address to us. Let us recall that binLaden
made it abundantly clear that his goals never changed:
America; similarly, Zarqawi reiterated his target: the
Shi’ia regime heading as a unity government.
I feel great optimism in what looks like a fundamental
Jihad split over targets– the essence of both
operations. This bespeaks the urgency of getting Iraq
to form a unity government that will not allow the
Kurds to break free (if they do that the Sunnis will
break out of the coalition; already Sadr’s militia are
moving into Kirkuk on behalf of the Arab nation) so
that we can start pulling out our troops and allow an
integrated Sunni-Shi’ia-Kurd army to go after Zarqawi
while sealing the borders with American help.
Nevertheless, Rice and Rumsfeld were sent to do a
political photo-op for Bush in Baghdad, another
reckless maneuver by a totally political
administration. Does it not occur to them that the
more Baghdad seems to be ours, the weaker the union
amongst our friends and the stronger the rage of our
enemies? We must BEGIN to withdraw so ALL sides will
know we are serious. To quote my old hero, Kissinger:
peace is at hand!
Daniel E. Teodoru
DE, was your post meant as satire? If not, it is completely absurd.
It looks as though DE has just cut and pasted in here something posted elsewhere. Also, it has no or very little relevance to the subject of the main post. I’ll cut or delete it when I can.