Iraqis are divided over the US withdrawal, afraid it might mean the country unravels, writes Saif Nasrawi Obama's plan to withdraw 90,000 US troops from Iraq next year will be a tough test for the Iraqi government. According to the US-Iraqi joint security agreement, US troops were supposed to be pulled out by the end of 2011. The early withdrawal, some say, may unleash a cycle of violence in the country. Speaking to a US base in North Carolina last Friday, Obama promised that the US would end its "combat operations" in Iraq by 31 August 2010. The US president said that between 35,000 and 50,000 troops would remain in Iraq for training, protection, and limited anti- terror operations. Obama reassured the Iraqis that the US has no demands over their land or resources. The Obama plan had the support of Defence Minister Robert Gates, Joint Chief of Staff Michael Mullen, Central Command Chief David Petraeus, and Commander of US forces in Iraqi Ray Odierno. The US commanders, however, made it clear that Obama's plan to reduce the number of combatants, now at 142,000, by two- thirds may need to be reversed if the situation deteriorates in the country. Speaking to the CNN last Sunday, Mullen said that he was comfortable with the decision and supported it. The president, he said, listened to the views of the military on the matter. In remarks to Fox News on Sunday, Mullen said that the circumstances had changed considerably since last July. The military situation has improved due to the surge, and the capabilities of Iraqi troops have also been enhanced, he added. The Iraqi reaction was mixed. Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki reassured the Iraqis on Friday that "US troops were prepared to take on the security mission from the Americans." Sadeq Al-Rekabi, the prime minister's adviser for political affairs, was more worried. He told Radio Sawa on Friday that Baghdad wants US troops to stay till the end of 2011, in keeping with the US-Iraqi joint security agreement. The Iraqi army, still lacking in air forces and heavy equipment and dogged by sectarian divisions, may not be up to the task, some say. The spokesman for the Iraqi Defence Ministry, Mohamed Al-Askari, tried to play down the fears. "The Iraqi army is at Level 2 of preparedness now and will reach Level 1 next year as our air capabilities improve and the ability to manage logistic operations grows," he told Al-Ahram Weekly. Al-Askari dismissed claims that the army was divided along sectarian lines. "We have built a professional and patriotic army, one that is only loyal to Iraq." Asked if the Iraqi army was prepared to defend the country against foreign aggression, Al-Askari declined to answer. However, he added that the army was "ready to confront domestic perils". The army has a few helicopters and fixed wing planes that are not exactly equipped for offensive external missions. The Iraqi army, which used to be one of the mightiest in the region, is also short of tanks and armoured vehicles. The Iraqi army last month said that it has signed an agreement to buy military equipment costing $3.5 billion over the next two years. Iraq submitted in September a request to buy 36 US F-16 fighter planes, but the request is still in congress. One sign of ethnic division in the army was when more than 500 Iraqi troops refused to take part in the military campaign waged by the Al-Maliki government against the strongholds of the Shia Mahdi Army in Basra in March 2008. The troops were mostly Shias from the Sadr Current. Reports say that the success of Al-Maliki's military campaign in March-May 2008 against the Mahdi Army and Al-Qaeda cells was due to US and UK air cover. Furthermore, there is a lack of US security coordination with neighbouring countries, especially Iran and Syria. Iran has been accused of arming Shia militia and Syria was said to be allowing militants to cross to Iraq through its borders. But Obama promised to help Iraqi leaders resolve their differences and to engage all the countries of the region in talks, including Iran and Syria. Iran's reaction to the news of troop withdrawals was largely sceptical. Speaking following talks with Iraqi President Jalal Talabani in Tehran, Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei said on Saturday that "the occupiers are planning for a long and permanent stay in Iraq, and the leaders of Iraq should understand this threat." Over the past two years, the US and Iranian ambassadors in Baghdad held several rounds of talks about security arrangements in Iraq. But Iranian officials said last month that there was no further need for consultation with Washington on the situation in Iraq. Obama has said repeatedly that the US is willing to engage Tehran in dialogue over its nuclear programme, Iraq, Lebanon, and the Palestinian territories. Washington accuses Iran of supporting Hamas and Hizbullah, and of supplying Iraqi insurgents with money and weapons. Syria hasn't yet responded to the Obama plan. But Abbas Al-Bayyati, a member of the Committee on Security and Defence in the Iraqi parliament, told the London-based newspaper Al-Hayat that intensive exchanges will be held in Iraq with senior Iranian and Syrian officials with regard to the new US withdrawal plan. "We need to make arrangements with Iran and Syria to control the borders and to work together for our common security." Al-Bayyati said that Syrian Prime Minister Mohamed Naji Al-Utri was coming to Baghdad soon for talks on cooperation, especially in security. It is likely, however, that Damascus will wait to see how its relations with the new administration play out before deciding on its strategy on Iraq. An Iraqi official speaking on condition of anonymity said that Syria would play all its cards, including the Iraqi one, at any future talks with Washington and Israel over the Golan Heights or the situation in Lebanon. Damascus is actually planning to host a conference for the opponents of the Al-Maliki government on 7 March. The conference will be attended by senior opposition members, including Jaafar Dia, who was involved in Iraq's nuclear programme under Saddam Hussein, and Abdel-Amir Al-Anbari, former Iraqi ambassador to France and the UN. Recent reports suggest that Washington may be considering the appointment of a new ambassador in Damascus. And the Obama administration has just allowed Boeing to export aircraft spare parts to Syria, in what may be a partial lifting of the embargo on that country. Last week, Hillary Clinton said that it was "premature" to speak of a thawing in relations with Syria. She added that Syria should stop aiding "terrorist" organisations first. The US State Department last Thursday summoned Syrian Ambassador to Washington Emad Mustafa to discuss claims by the International Atomic Energy Agency that traces of uranium were found in a site bombed by Israeli planes in September 2007. The main threat to Iraq remains mostly domestic. During his Friday speech, Obama said that the withdrawal of US troops sends a clear message that the future of Iraq is Iraq's own responsibility. But Kurdish leader Masoud Barzani warned last month that an early US withdrawal may "touch off a civil war in the country." The Kurds are worried about the future of Kirkuk, Mosul and Diyala. And they fear that Al-Maliki's recent electoral gains may turn him into a tougher negotiator, or even encourage him to send the army against the Kurdish troops of the northern region, also known as the peshmerga. The Sunnis, too, are less than happy. Adnan Al-Duleimi, a leading figure in the Reconciliation Front, the largest Arab Sunni bloc in parliament, branded Obama's plan as reckless. "An early withdrawal at this time would give Iran the opportunity to occupy Iraq on the pretext of filling the security vacuum left behind by the withdrawal of US troops," he said.
