You can imag­ine the U.S. media frus­tra­tion with Bush’s failed poli­cies and judg­ments after his mis­cal­cu­lated tour in the Mid­dle East to rally the Arab states against Iran that ended with pro­tect­ing the Iran­ian president.

Although the Amer­i­can occu­pa­tion mil­i­tary said: Ahmadine­jad pro­tec­tion is the respon­si­bil­ity of the Iraqi forces, Alkhaleej edi­to­r­ial says this is “nonsense”:

[Ahmadine­jad] Last minute chang­ing plan from enter­ing Iraq cross the bor­ders by cars into arriv­ing to Bagh­dad Inter­na­tional Air­port [offi­cially under the Amer­i­can secu­rity pro­tec­tion] by air­plane would never hap­pen with­out pre-discussion with the Americans.

Iran can not guar­an­tee the secu­rity of its pres­i­dent with the pres­ence of the Amer­i­can forces, with­out receiv­ing firm assur­ances from the Amer­i­can side, and Wash­ing­ton would not accepts Ahmadinejad’s visit with­out receiv­ing “some­thing” in return.

The same view is shared by Moham­mad Akoush from Al-Arab Al-Youm:

This visit may be approved by Pres­i­dent Bush, hop­ing to calm secu­rity sit­u­a­tion, but it also shows that The U.S. — Iran are shar­ing Iraq at the costs of the Iraqi peo­ple and Arab countries.

You can also dark­ness in Nahidh Hatar’s arti­cle “Bagh­dad receives its first Iran­ian gov­er­nor”:

This indi­cates the con­tin­u­a­tion of the con­flict, not the end, the begin­ning of the Iran­ian occu­pa­tion after the demise of the Amer­i­can occupation.

Al-Qabas agrees:

Ahmadine­jad came to cul­ti­vates what the Amer­i­can started five years ago ben­e­fit­ing from the Amer­i­can mistakes.