Iraq for Referendum: Will US Terror Military Quit?

-  By Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

*****

1.  Do Iraqis Really Need Sovereignty?

With foreign invaders destroying the nation for securing the energy resources of the region aided by some anti-Saddam Iraqi rogues, Iraq is in shambles now. Baghdad, earlier known as one of most beautiful cities around, is now a US "“led imperialist battle-field to churn out Iraqi dead bodies and atmospheric disorder. Still the global state terrorists (GSTs) or ISTs refuse to quit Iraq. Media reports suggest that Iraqi puppet premier Nouri al-Maliki' plans for a referendum to determine if the people want to retain the devilish GST terrorists from the West to continue to kill Iraqis in a sustained manner or to oust them from Iraq.  U.S. troops could be forced by Iraqi voters to withdraw a year ahead of schedule under a Iraqi government backed referendum, creating a potential complication for American commanders wanting to divert the global attention and are thus "concerned" about rising violence in the country's north.

Nouri al-Maliki's move appeared to disregard the wishes of the US government, which has quietly lobbied against the plebiscite. American officials fear it could lead to the annulment of an agreement allowing U.S. troops to stay until the end of 2011, and instead force them out by the start of that year. If Iraqi lawmakers sign off on Maliki's initiative to hold a referendum in December or January on the withdrawal timeline, a majority of voters could annul a standing U.S.-Iraqi security agreement, forcing the military to pull out completely by January 2011 under the terms of a previous law.

The Pentagon/CIA officials, who effectively control the policy decisions of the White House, no matter who is the custodian of it, though President Obama fights with the evils taking them by horns, say they have no way to know how the referendum would turn out, but they worry that many Iraqis are likely to vote against the pact. Maliki billed the withdrawal of U.S. forces from urban areas at the end of June as a "great victory" for Iraqis, and his government has since markedly curbed the authority and mobility of U.S. forces. The acceleration would still be much slower than if the referendum nullified the agreement. Still, senior Pentagon officials played down Maliki's announcement, saying it was an expected part of Iraq's political process. Senior Iraqi officials did not raise the possibility of the referendum with Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates when he visited the country earlier this month.

The so-called American "liberators", who fooled "“ they still fool- the world with vague notions of democracy, regime change and new Mideast, have militarily destabilized Iraq and Afghanistan with terror activities, encouraged corruption and ignored in these countries the legitimate requirements of a human society. Those rogues who said would liberate the Iraqis are now killing them in vengeance, while the UN and UNSC and other global bodies, including legal institutions, play fiddle rather intensively and seriously. Arab nations and other Islamic nations are offering all possible support to the neo-imperialists in democracy uniforms. Although public uproar is increasing in Pakistan about US-led GST terrorism destabilizing Pakistan, the leadership at Islamabad is interested only in its self promotion and their own wealth stabilization. 

It is unclear whether parliament, which is in recess until next month, would approve the referendum. Lawmakers have yet to pass a measure laying the basic ground rules for the 2010 Jan. 16 national election, their top legislative priority for the remainder of 2009. Before signing off on the U.S.-Iraqi security agreement last year, Iraqi lawmakers demanded that voters get to weigh in on the pact in a referendum that was to take place no later than last month. Because it did not happen, American officials assumed the plebiscite was a dead issue.

The occupying US-led GST has enabled Nouri al-Maliki to raise his wealth, even though not at par with other neighboring Arab leaders. The Maliki government's announcement came on the day when the top U.S. general in Iraq proposed a plan to deploy troops to disputed areas in the restive north, a clear indication that the military sees a continuing need for US forces even if Iraqis no longer want them here. After all, US strategists argue, Iraqis don't have to decide if American terrorists should be there or not!

 2. Have you got Terror Troops? "“ USA needs them.

Controversies surrounding the real intentions of the occupiers are still ripe. Senior Pentagon officials said that US probably will make an announcement later  next week the accelerating the withdrawal of U.S. forces, which now stand at 130,000, by one or two brigades between now and the end of the year. Each brigade consists of about 5,000 troops. As the Iraqi government took steps to force U.S. troops out earlier than planned, the US would like to deploy American forces to villages along disputed areas in northern Iraq to defuse tension between Kurdish troops and forces controlled by the Shiite Arab-led government in Baghdad. "We're working very hard to come up with a security architecture in the disputed territories that would reduce tension. They just all feel more comfortable if we're there." Scores of Iraqis have been killed in recent weeks in villages along the 300-mile frontier south of the Kurdish region. The local leaders have traded accusations to bolster their positions on whether specific areas should be under the control of Baghdad or the autonomous government of Kurdistan.

A referendum on the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) between the United States and Iraq will be held in Iraq on 16 January 2010 together with parliamentary elections; it was originally meant to be held before 30 July 2009, but on pressure from Washington bosses, the issue has been put on hold. The Agreement was necessary as the legal authority for the presence of the United States' troops - the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1790 - expired on 31 December 2008. If the referendum result is against the SOFA, the Iraqi government will give notice to end the agreement and US troops will be required to leave Iraq within one year.^[7] "If the Iraqi people reject the pact in the referendum ... the government of Iraq will be committed, according to the law, to the result of the referendum and will convey this will to the American administration. The pact will be annulled.

Under the agreement, the US Army must withdraw from all cities by mid-2009 and from Iraq altogether by the end of 2011. Iraqi courts will be able to try crimes committed by off-duty soldiers outside their bases. The United States would not be allowed to use Iraq as a base to attack any other state - a response to a recent bombing of Syria  - and the Iraqi Army would have control over the operations and movements of the United States' army.

The only way the Maliki government managed to get the Iraqi Parliament's narrow approval for the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) that gave the US a legal basis to remain in the country beyond January 1 of this year was to promise a referendum, to be held no later than July 30 of this year. That date is rapidly approaching and parliament has set aside the money to fund the vote. Maliki's cabinet has sought to delay the pact, but has been rebuffed by parliament. It was expected then that by the end of July, a vote could be held which would hand the legality of the continued US military presence over to the Iraqi voting public. But the vote has been delayed, if not deferred. The SOFA requires a year of advanced notice to cancel, so even if the vote fails the US would have until 2010 to complete its withdrawal of 131,000 troops from the nation. There has been no publicly released polling data on the likelihood of the referendum to pass, but a failure would at the very least seriously inconvenience President Obama's desire to keep 50,000 troops in the nation "indefinitely."

According to impressions gained from the popular attitudes, many Iraqis say they would vote for a speedier withdrawal. "We want to get rid of the American influence in Iraq, because we suffer from it politically and economically," they rightly reason. "We will vote against foreign occupation so Iraq will be in the hands of Iraqis again."  Sunnis and Kurds consider the presence of the U.S. military a key deterrent to abuses of power by the Shiite-led government. "After six years of Shiite rule and struggle, we still have no electricity, so what will happen if Americans leave?" said a government employee in Najaf. "The field will be left to the Shiite parties to do whatever they want with no fear from anybody." They argue the departure of American terrorists would strengthen Iraqi state terrorists. A Shiite lawmaker from the Sadrist movement, the most ardently anti-American faction, said she was pleasantly surprised that the government is backing the referendum. "I consider this a good thing," she said. "But we have to wait and see whether the government is honest about this or whether it is electoral propaganda."

But, in order to make their illegal stay in Saddam Hussein's nation more comfortable, the US terror forces, as usual strategy, have badly split the Musims along Sunni "“Shii'a lines. The Sunni Arab coalitions, the Iraqi Accord Front and the Iraqi National Dialogue Front were reported to be concerned that the departure of the United States' Army would allow the Shi'ite majority to dominate them. They called for the end of the prosecution of Baath party members, the abolition of the Supreme Iraqi Criminal Tribunal and that the agreement be put to a referendum the following year. In the end the Maliki government agreed to the referendum and the two groups dropped their other demands.

Iraqi terror military is fully controlled by the Pentagon for joint operations every where in the country by espousing the non-state "terror threats". Gen. Ray Odierno said American troops would partner with contingents of the Iraqi army and the Kurdish regional government's paramilitary force, marking the first organized effort to pair U.S. forces with the militia, known as the pesh merga. Iraqi army and Kurdish forces nearly came to blows recently, and there is deep-seated animosity between them, owing to a decades-long fight over ancestry, land and oil.

 Obviously, the most of the Iraqis want to be free from all forms of foreign neo-imperialist occupation. All opinion polls require the occupiers to quite voluntarily. Interestingly, a poll commissioned by the U.S. military earlier this year found that Iraqis expressed far less confidence in American troops than in the Iraqi government or any of its security forces. About twenty percent of Iraqis polled said they had confidence in U.S. forces, while 72 percent expressed confidence in the national government.

3. An Observation

True, Iraq vote could oust US Terror troops early and as referendum on SOFA looms large, the US terror rogues and their Iraqi supporters are getting nervous about the out come of such pro-Iraqi judgment by people themselves. The Iraqis are fresh off of a national holiday celebrating US withdrawal from their cities, but US officials have been extremely dismissive of concerns about the massive death toll. While US troops having shifted to the outskirts of cities may somewhat relieve opposition to their presence, the prospect of well over 100,000 foreign troops remaining well into 2010 might not sit well with some.

The war's unpopularity in the US and increasing international disquiet over the disputed election are likely to make further escalation a tough sell, though President Obama seems intent on making a massive land-war in Central Asia the centerpiece of his foreign policy. Pentagon and CIA have created big contingents of US agents in Iraq to work for Washington and its terror allies. Most Iraqi have lost their balance and commonsense over recent years of US occupation. It is shameful that many MPs left the country to go on the annual Hajj pilgrimage to Mecca with foreing forces occupying Iraq and killing Muslims for fun and energy reosurces.

Pentagon-CIA combine is keen to keep the facts and figures about Iraqi (civilian plus) casualties.  In fact, the Obama Administration's controversial decision to block the release of detainee abuse photos was at least in part influenced by the prospect of anti-US sentiment affecting the referendum. The US seems to be going out of its way not to make public contingency plans for a faster pullout, but very soon they could be left with a stark choice between leaving and admitting once and for all that the Iraqi people never had any real control over the presence of the occupation force.

NATO does not abide by international law in invasions and genocides and so they can still ignore the referendum by Iraqis. But if they do ignore and continue to kill Muslims by their prolonged stay, stage would be set for a devastating popular resistance plus civil war to oust the GST rogues by force.  With the situation in Afghanistan continuing to deteriorate, the massive escalation of the war by the Obama administration , which is being continued in spite of polls suggesting that a majority of Americans oppose the war, is no longer enough for many top commanders in Afghanistan; they want more and they want it now, though they know well that, eventually, they all will face disastrous end in Iraq as well.

So, was the troop withdrawal a White House drama enacted by the new administration, a complete farce? If so, is the proposed referendum also another farce? But whom they want to fool, when none could stop the illegal foreign invasions in Iraq and Afghanistan so far?

 -----------------------

Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

Specialist on State Terrorism

Independent Researcher in International Affairs, The only Indian to have gone through entire India, a fraud and terror nation in South Asia.