Sistani conditionally approved the security agreement

One thing need to be men­tioned, Accord­ing to alkhaleej news­pa­per, Arab League spokesman denied reports of send­ing Arab forces to Iraq, no fur­ther details about who reported this, but few days ago Haikal said that in a period of two years Arab coun­tries will send their mil­i­tary forces to Iraq, so I don’t if this is what the spokesman meant.

There are reports (quot­ing Al-Hakim) say that Sis­tani rejected the U.S. — Iraq secu­rity agree­ment [see Elaph link below], this is very mis­lead­ing, the real­ity is Sis­tani (quoted by al-Hakim) refers to four point con­di­tional approval of the agree­ment, as you see on Buratha web­site it says: “Sis­tani put four points con­di­tions”.

Iraqi par­lia­ment defense com­mis­sioner revealed one point about the Amer­i­cans ask for 50 mil­i­tary bases in Iraq, and Elaph added more dis­pute points between Maliki’s gov­ern­ment and the Americans:

- The agree­ment does not men­tion Iraq’s removal from the sev­enth chapter.

- The Amer­i­cans do not guar­an­tee to pro­vide any pro­tec­tion to Iraq against for­eign aggres­sion, unless the Amer­i­cans are con­vinced of the aggression’s nature.

- Full con­trol on the Iraqi airspace.

- U.S. forces and for­eign con­trac­tors enjoy full immunity.

- U.S. forces allowed arrest­ing any per­son believed to pose a ter­ror­ist threat on its secu­rity under the Amer­i­can Anti-Terrorism law as defined by U.S. ter­ror­ism law.

- Amer­i­can mil­i­tary equip­ment and army hard­ware can enter Iraq with­out pre­vi­ous ref­er­ence to the government.

- Retain the rights to bring armies into Iraq within the “multi­na­tional forces” with­out refer­ring to the Iraqi government.

-