US military to quit Iraq's cities

AMERICAN military forces will be withdrawn from Iraqi cities as soon as 30 June next year, according to a draft agreement on the future status of US forces in the country.

Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, flew into Baghdad yesterday for an unannounced visit in an effort to move forward negotiations on the agreement and a wider pact on future relations with Iraq.

"We have agreed that some goals, some aspirational timetables for how that might unfold, are well worth having in such an agreement," Ms Rice told reporters after meeting Iraqi officials, including Nouri al-Maliki, the prime minister.

The long-awaited pact will allow US forces to stay in Iraq beyond the end of this year, when a UN Security Council mandate enacted after the US-led invasion in 2003 expires.

Replacing the UN mandate with a formal US-Iraqi pact is seen as a milestone in Iraq's emergence as a sovereign state, giving Baghdad direct say over the presence of foreign troops on its soil for the first time since the fall of Saddam Hussein.

But the deal's terms are politically sensitive in both countries, with Mr Maliki determined to show that the 144,000 US troops will not stay longer than needed, and George Bush, the US president, keen to avoid a firm schedule for them to leave.

Iraq's chief negotiator, Mohammed al-Haj Hamoud, said a draft of the agreement was complete and would be presented to Iraqi political leaders to approve and send to parliament.

Other issues that need to be tackled include immunity for US troops from Iraqi law and the status of prisoners held in Iraq by US forces. They hold some 21,000 prisoners they deem dangerous, but have not charged them with any crime.

Hoshyar Zebari, Iraq's foreign minister, asked about fears expressed by neighbouring countries over such a pact, said: "This decision (agreement] is a sovereign one, and Iran and other neighbouring countries have the right to ask for clarifications … There are clear articles (that] say that Iraq will not be used as a launching pad for any aggressive acts against neighbouring countries, and we already did clarify this."

Ms Rice showed some caution in the news conference with Mr Zebari. "Obviously the American forces are here, coalition forces are here, at the invitation of the Iraqi government," she said.

"What we're trying to do is put together an agreement that protects our people, respects Iraq's sovereignty … But the goal is to have Iraqi forces responsible for the security of Iraq," she added. "That is the goal, and that has been the goal from the beginning."

Ms Rice said the military surge had worked and "we are making progress together in the defeat of Iraq's enemies of all stripes. We're not sitting here talking about an agreement to try to get out of a bad situation".

She called the agreement one that "builds on the success we have had in the last year. This agreement is based on success".

Mr Zebari conceded that officials had hoped to conclude the pact earlier, but said that "it has taken us more time", citing internal political factors.

Followers of Muqtada al-Sadr, the anti-American Shiite cleric, criticised Ms Rice's visit.

Luai Smeisem, head of the political bureau in the Sadr movement, said: " We reaffirm our stance of rejecting the long-term agreement. We demand the Iraqi government, and on the highest levels, not to sign this unjust agreement, and we demand the withdrawal of the government as soon as possible."

BACKGROUND

IN ADDITION to spelling out that US troops would move out of Iraqi cities by next summer, the Iraqi government has pushed for a specific date – most likely the end of 2011 – by which all US forces would leave the country. In the meantime, the US troops would be positioned on bases in other parts of the country to make them less visible while still being able to assist Iraqi forces as needed.

There are about 140,000 US troops in Iraq. US officials have resisted committing to a date for a final pull-out, insisting that it would be wiser to set a target linked to the attainment of agreed-upon goals. These goals would reflect not only security but also progress on the political and economic fronts.