|
Maliki the Nationalist?
By Robert Dreyfuss
26/08/08 "The
Nation" -- Iraq's
Prime Minister
Nouri al-Maliki continues to make headlines by posing as
an Iraqi nationalist. Don't buy it.
Unfortunately, much of the media
has swallowed Maliki's posturing without questioning it. The
usually astute Leila Fadel, writing for
McClatchy,
has
an article today
headlined: "Maliki Demands 'Specific Deadline' for US Troop
Pullout," which says:
Maliki said that the United
States and Iraq
had agreed that all foreign troops would be off Iraqi soil by
the end of 2011. "There is an agreement actually reached,
reached between the two parties on a fixed date, which is the
end of 2011, to end any foreign presence on Iraqi soil," Maliki
said.
Other newspapers and electronic
media pick up Maliki's statement that Iraq wants all US
forces out, not just combat troops. The Times
headlines
its story: "Maliki Pushes for Troop Withdrawal Date," and it
barely questions Maliki's sincerity, though it does glancingly
take note of the nationalist pressure on the Iraqi leader,
reporting that "graffiti can be seen on the walls in Shiite
districts of Baghdad saying, 'Iraq for sale: See Maliki.'" The
Post headline ("Maliki Demands All U.S. Troops Pull Out
by 2011") says as much, too, portraying Maliki as resolute and
unyielding in talks with the United States over a security
accord.
But underneath the radar, the
Iraqi government and Maliki are sending another signal. The
Post
makes a greater
effort to report the real story, making clear that
the tough stand by Maliki is political showmanship designed to
play to a nationalist Iraqi public that is tired of the US
occupation:
Underlying
Maliki's remarks is the political reality that he must sell the
accord to a fractious political establishment and the Iraqi
public, which to a large extent views the
U.S. military
presence as an occupation that should end as soon as
possible.
"The agreement will be met with
significant public discomfort," said an aide to Maliki. "So
Iraqi officials will resort to using the dates mentioned in the
agreement to sell it to the public, even though they might be
intended to be used in a guidance way."
Note the reference to Maliki's
need to "sell it to the public," even though the 2011 date will
be used only as "guidance."
The reality is that there isn't
much daylight between the
Bush
administration's position, which says that US forces will
stay in Iraq
until "conditions" allow a withdrawal, and Maliki's proposed
2011 date. Iraqi officials are making it clear that even the
2011 date is flexible and subject to conditions-based
reevaluation. The Post quotes an Iraqi official: "If you
ask the prime minister, 'What happens if the situation on the
ground changes before 2011?' then he would obviously say that
the dates might need to be changed."
Of course, that's equally true
of Barack Obama's Iraq policy, though
Obama
(like Maliki) would suffer enormously from the domestic
political reaction if he wavered on his commitment to withdraw
US forces.
Click on
"comments" below to read or post comments
Comment
Guidelines
Be succinct, constructive and
relevant to the story.
We encourage engaging, diverse and meaningful commentary.
Do not include personal information such as names, addresses,
phone numbers and emails. Comments falling outside our
guidelines – those including personal attacks and profanity –
are not permitted.
See our complete
Comment
Policy and use this link
to notify us if you have concerns about a
comment. We’ll promptly
review and remove any inappropriate postings.
Send Page To a Friend
In
accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this
material is distributed without profit to those
who have expressed a prior interest in receiving
the included information for research and
educational purposes. Information Clearing House
has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator
of this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
|
