Condi in Baghdad: YES on a timetable (aspirational)

AP tells us that at a joint appearance with Iraqi “Foreign Minister” Hoshyar Zebari in Baghdad today, Condi Rice agreed that, regarding a troop withdrawal plan,

    We have agreed that some goals, some aspirational timetables for how that might unfold, are well worth having…

You can bet that with the US/NATO deployment in Afghanistan now in serious trouble and NATO itself in the most severe crisis it’s seen in its 59 years of existence, there will be “timetables” for a US pullout from Iraq.
A linguistic note: An “aspirational timetable” is still not the same as a fixed timetable. But I would say it signals something noticeably more definitive than the “aspirational time horizon” that was the administration’s previous position on this. (With a horizon, the more you try to get close to it the more fades further away from you… )

8 thoughts on “Condi in Baghdad: YES on a timetable (aspirational)”

  1. As US war-makers have said from the beginning, it is the “facts on the ground” that will determine US military presence in Iraq, and “aspirations” don’t cut it. The current exercise is whitewash.
    In spite of all the crowing that the surge was a success, General Petraeus has recently said that any gains are fragile, even with the continuing huge US military and civilian presence and a significantly improved Iraqi army. He’s right, and a new US president committed to force as his predominant foreign policy instrument (as both McCain and Obama are) will not be able to, or want to, withdraw troops.
    The current facts are that the Shi’ite Maliki government, instead of seeking reconciliation with Sunni factions, is attacking them, and relations with the Kurds and Sadrists are also worsening. There is no end in sight after more than five years, as many predicted long ago.
    There are two important factors that will continue to drive this war, Iran and money.
    I think that we have to accept that the Iraqi government, Maliki and his Badr Brigades, is under Iranian control, and will do whatever serves Iranian goals. This, in spite of the fact that both the Iraqi and American populaces want a US military exit. So the idea that the US government is in control, and is able to determine timetables of any sort, is fallacious in my view.
    War is a racket, and a lot of people are getting very, very rich from the current wars. This includes not only Americans, but also their acolytes. Why be eirenic when you can be rich? Dick Cheney, for example, now lives in a $2.9m house, bought with blood-money Halliburton dividends. Thank you very much, dead GI’s, you didn’t die in vain.

  2. On a lighter note:
    WASHINGTON, Aug. 21, 2008 – A group of American Humvees seized by Russian forces in Georgia this week should be returned immediately, a Defense Department official said today.
    “We’ve certainly expressed our position over the fact that these Humvees are U.S. property and should be returned. It’s that simple,” Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said.
    http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=50890
    McCain: “I say nuke’em if they don’t return our trucks!” (I made that up.)

  3. Actually if you look at the language closely, there’s been very little change.
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7573928.stm
    “Iraq’s foreign minister has said Iraq and the US are “very close” to a deal on the future of US forces in Iraq.
    Mr Zebari said officials had hoped to conclude the negotiations earlier, but he cited internal political factors for the delay.
    “Really, we are very, very close to closing this agreement, and as we said from the beginning, there is no hidden agenda here,” he said. ”
    You’d expect Zebari, a Kurd, to come out with warm remarks. But they’ve been saying that for months. And Maliki has not signed.
    The aspirational timelines are all US language, and it’s not new; the Iraqis don’t talk that way. In fact nothing at all has changed.
    The question is : what has changed that is going to make Maliki sign? Apart from a visit to Baghdad by Rice today. If they’re really so close, why wasn’t the agreement signed today? They’ve had time.
    I would say there’s a good chance that the negotiations are in fact stalled.

  4. there will be “timetables” for a US pullout from Iraq.
    This very shallow reading of all invasion of Iraq by war costing 3billion of dollars simply saying that a US pullout from Iraq!!
    What is clear now coming to the surface that US troops will draw outside the Iraqi cities!!! Ahhaaa that’s my long standing question here why US troops running whiled on all the streets of Iraqi cites and residential area….?
    Ok let forgot that and back after more than five years spending billions of dollars on US military based no one know how many and how big what in it but some very small leakage saying it’s like a small US cities on land of Iraq!!! the mission of Nation Building almost done by making the fights between Iraqis and Iraqi killing Iraqi and criminals run the show with assassinations and killing continue daily but not targeting US troops and those US small cities ready to move in so now we hear Dr. All In Black saying:
    We have agreed that some goals, some aspirational timetables

  5. Reports suggest that U.S. and Iraqi negotiators have agreed on a text for a SOFA (now called a “Memorandum of Understanding,” or MOU), which will be attached to a broader Strategic Framework Agreement. The agreement still has to get approved by Maliki and then the Iraqi parliament, so it’s a long way from being finalized–and maybe it won’t happen at all. But when reading the leaked details of the agreement, Dr. iRack took note of a key date: June 2009

    Apparently, the SOFA/MOU will call for U.S. combat forces to be out of Iraqi cities by the end of June 2009. Dr. iRack does not think this means that U.S. forces will actually be completely out of Iraqi cities by that date. Rather, he suspects it means that U.S. combat outposts and joint security stations will be handed over to Iraqi security forces by that date

  6. This is all a game. Nothing more than a game. Helena, with all your knowledge and sophistication, I cannot believe that you take this even a little bit seriously.
    As for Condi, her presence pollutes Baghdad – or what’s left of it – and the uber-opportunist Zebari is as obsequious as always.

  7. Here we go, Ali Al-Dabag saying all the timings and dates that talking about US troops in Iraq or withdraw them are represents the view and wish of Iraqi government!!
    He added there are no written clauses in the agreement telling these dates and time tables.
    Helena, How are you now feel good with your hot air setting in your comfort zone talking about Iraq and Georgia get down from you horse Helena.
    قال على الدباغ المتحدث باسم الحکومة العراقية يوم الخميس ان مشروع اتفاق بين الولايات المتحدة والعراق لا يتضمن تواريخ محددة لانسحاب القوات الأمريکية لکن العراق يود ان ترحل القوات القتالية بنهاية عام 2011 .وقال الدباغ “مشروع القرار لا يتضمن تواريخ محددة.”
    واضاف قوله ان المفاوضين العراقيين يقترحون ان تنهي القوات الامريکية دورياتها في المدن والقرى العراقية بحلول منتصف العام القادم وان تغادر القوات الامريکية القتالية العراق بنهاية عام 2011 وان ترحل کل القوات الامريکية بعد ذلک بثلاث سنوات.
    واستدرک المتحدث بقوله ان هذه التواريخ لم تصبح قاطعة بعد وانها تعبر عن الموقف التفاوضي للحکومة وليست نصا متفقا عليه. وقال “هذه وجهة نظر الحکومة العراقية وما تريده الحکومة.”
    http://iraqshabab.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=9322&Itemid=1
    “It’s not a treaty, so it would not require Senate ratification or anything like that,” White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe told reporters at a ranch in Crawford, Texas, where President George W. Bush is spending his holiday.
    http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-08/22/content_9599823.htm
    Helena do you or any who writing about this whatever name given to its have read the draft paper or draft copy what actually in it?
    Did Iraqis know what this agreement included?
    We all here bits and pieces form their and here in fact no one knows what this agreement all about and what in it, that make it very suspicious and damming agreement isn’t Helena.

Comments are closed.