The Future of U.S. Troops in Iraq

It’s a bit like extending the “sell by” date on milk after it’s already turned sour. On 31 December, the UN mandate for keeping U.S. troops in Iraq runs out. Now there’s a plan for an “American-Iraqi Security Pact” in the works that is supposed to regulate the relationship between Washington and Baghdad after the first of the year. It’s presently being debated by both sides.

The overriding question is: how little sovereignty can Iraq cope with in the near future? It goes beyond timetables for U.S. troop withdrawal. Above all, there’s no agreement on the rules by which 150,000 American troops would be regulated in Mesopotamia. But an occupying army doesn’t like anyone peeking at its playing hand despite all the talk about an American-Iraqi partnership. Because of that, the United States still insists on de-facto immunity for American forces there. According to their plan, only the most serious crimes committed by troops off-duty and outside their fortified positions would fall under Iraqi jurisdiction. But what American soldier would ever go sightseeing in Baghdad in his free time? The Iraqis, on the other hand, want to include a greater number of offenses to be addressed by their courts. A compromise is difficult, especially since Baghdad is also in the midst of election season. Parliamentary elections in the provinces are scheduled for the end of January. It goes without saying that no Iraqi political party wishes to be linked to an extension of the U.S. mandate.

The neighboring states, and above all Iran, are also skeptical about any likely security pact. Logical: The continued presence of American troops in Iraq makes it a regional matter. Tehran’s fear that the U.S. will attack Iran from Iraqi territory is as well known as Iranian influence in Iraqi politics.

The development of a security pact may take quite a while yet. That opens up at least the theoretical possibility that the incoming U.S. President will assume power without a mandate to remain in Iraq.