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.
-
claims that details of the long term deal for maintaining US troops in Iraq sought by the Bush administration (the Security Framework agreement and associated Status of Forces Agreement) have leaked to the Independent. Similardetailshave emerged in Arab media in recent days as well. Nevertheless, to be taken with a grain of salt and all: Under the terms of the new treaty, the Americans would retain the long-term use of more than 50 bases in Iraq. American negotiators are also
claims that details of the long term deal for maintaining US troops in Iraq sought by the Bush administration (the Security Framework agreement and associated Status of Forces Agreement) have leaked to the Independent. Similardetailshave emerged in Arab media in recent days as well. Nevertheless, to be taken with a grain of salt and all: Under the terms of the new treaty, the Americans would retain the long-term use of more than 50 bases in Iraq. American negotiators are also
[…] :: Article nr. 44601 sent on 05-jun-2008 07:35 ECT http://www.uruknet.info?p=44601Link: http://www.roadstoiraq.com/2008/06/04/sistani-conditionally-approved-the-security-agree me…:: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not […]
[…] 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 […] […]
[…] http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/…8_06/013855.phphttp://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/mi…rol-840512.htmlhttp://www.roadstoiraq.com/2008/06/04/sist…rity-agreement/ ——————– opinions were like kittens, i was giving them away […]