Dinar Daily
Welcome to Dinar Daily Discussions.

Logging in with your USERNAME allows you to participate in discussions, see what has recently been posted, and other options. Guests can post but they do have limited abilities.

We are NOT a guru forum. We are a dinarian forum. The opinions expressed on the forum do not reflect the of opinion of Dinar Daily specifically, but rather reflect the views of the individual posters only.

Disclamer:

We are in compliance with, "Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use."


Get Daily Updates of the NEWS & GURUS in your EMAIL
CHECK YOUR EMAIL for VERIFICATION

Enter your email address:

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations DinarDailyUpdates?bg=330099&fg=FFFFFF&anim=1

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations

Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations Empty An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations

Post by claud39 on Sat May 16, 2020 9:43 am

[size=39]An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations[/size]
May 16, 2020





An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations 2020-05-10T000000Z_1869624541_RC2NLG9KIXGL_RTRMADP_3_IRAQ-POLITICS-PROTESTS










On April 7, 2020, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo called for a "strategic dialogue" between the United States and Iraq to discuss the future of the relationship between the two countries. The dialogue, which will be a series of meetings between senior American and Iraqi officials, aims to put all aspects of the US-Iraqi relationship at the dialogue table.



In order to understand what the strategic dialogue might yield, it is necessary to understand what are the interests of both the United States and Iraq - as well as Iran and other interested parties - as Iraq and the United States look to restructure their relationship.



It is also necessary for the United States to move beyond its previous focus on ISIS, and the challenge posed by Iran today, which has characterized the US-Iraqi relationship over the past few years. The two sides should also take advantage of the opportunity for serious dialogue and consider instead how the United States and Iraq can map out a sustainable strategic relationship - one that serves their strategic interests and helps to bring peace and stability to the region.



American interests in Iraq




Before dealing with what the United States may ask of Iraq in the strategic dialogue, it is important to discuss the reason why Iraq is important to America, as some believe that the United States should simply reduce its losses in Iraq and withdraw from it. The answer to this proposal is simple: Iraq has great strategic importance for the United States in order to ensure stability in the Gulf, supply the global economy with oil, and reduce the risk of an outright war with Iran.



A US withdrawal from Iraq would enable the hard-line Iranian regime, regional terrorism and extremism, to do great harm to US national security. And just as the 2011 US withdrawal from Iraq proved to be a costly, indeed fatal, mistake, the United States' withdrawal of its forces in the future and its support for the Iraqi government - and in particular the support of the Iraqi security forces - would have major repercussions for US interests in the Middle East.



American strategic interests in Iraq can be divided into four main categories: the threats posed by Iran; Threatening ISIS or another similar group; A divided Iraq and its repercussions on the region; And competition between the superpowers. Hence, the United States must continue to focus on these four interests, or Iraq will become a major concern for them in the future.



An American withdrawal from Iraq would enable the hardline Iranian regime, regional terrorism and extremism

Iraq is considered essential to the US strategy of containing the expansion and influence of the current Iranian regime. No country in the Gulf region is currently more important than Iraq to the United States in its endeavor to contain the plans of the Supreme Leader, militant revolutionaries, and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard. 



If the United States is able to help Iraqi leaders build a stable and strong Iraq, this will be an important addition to deter Iranian ambitions and the military pressure exerted by the Islamic Republic in the Gulf region.



Iraq is currently facing a period of dysfunction in governance, deep internal divisions and serious economic problems. However, it possesses enormous oil resources in addition to an educated and large segment of the population. And if Iran manages to use Iraq’s problems to control it, that will dramatically increase its power. 



But any Iranian endeavor aimed at dividing Iraqi politics or domination completely will face significant opposition from many Shi'a, Sunni, and Kurdish Iraqi Arabs. It will also fuel sectarian, ethnic and regional tension and is highly likely to lead to another civil war in Iraq.



A similar civil conflict would lead to serious problems in the region and encourage terrorism and extremism. The presence of an unstable Iraq will also strengthen Sunni and Shiite extremism in Iraq and the rest of the region as a whole, and help the return of ISIS and extend beyond the Iraqi borders. 



Moreover, Sunni Arabs may consider ISIS the lesser of two evils if they clash with a largely Shi’ite sectarian government that Iran pressures to exclude them and deny them any political voice in Iraq. This is what happened after the US withdrawal in 2011 and there are not many reasons to believe that this trend will not be repeated. It is a scenario that is difficult for the United States to ignore and will require a US military commitment to contain it.



The United States should indeed refocus its concerns on ISIS in the short term as well, since issuing a political statement stating that the organization was destroyed after losing its strongholds is tantamount to ignoring facts on the ground. The organization is still present and active in Iraq, and it is in fact participating in an active gang campaign in the predominantly Sunni areas of Iraq, a campaign that has intensified in recent times . ISIS is now much stronger than Al Qaeda in Iraq when US forces left in 2011.



And the Iraqi army remains relatively weak after receiving a triple blow to its capabilities when politics in Iraq in the United States prompted the withdrawal in 2011, and Nouri al-Maliki stripped Iraqi forces of competent officers and replaced them with political followers who responded to him. This facilitated mass desertions of soldiers and the destruction of units in the war against ISIS.



The training and support provided by the United States to the Iraqi army is now essential to keep the Iraqi security forces on the path to renewal. It is still weaker than the “Popular Mobilization Forces” as many Shiite units line up with Iran, and allowing Shiite militias to dominate the Iraqi security sector will help ISIS to regain its strength and will not help defeat it.



If Washington were able to help Iraqi leaders build a stable and strong Iraq, this would be an important addition to deter Iranian ambitions and the military pressure exerted by the Islamic Republic in the Gulf region

Finally, the United States has a strategic interest in Iraq in order to counter Russia and China’s efforts to extend their economic and political influence in the country. Mainly, the Russian and Chinese governments are making strenuous efforts to strengthen their influence in Iraq at the expense of the United States. And American financial investments in Iraq could fail if Chinese or Russian companies replace the US. 



Likewise, a picture that the United States will abandon Iraq on behalf of the Russians and the Chinese will have repercussions beyond the Iraqi border. This would be a sign to other countries in the region that the United States is a reliable friend.



The bottom line with regard to US interests in Iraq is that America has a great and compelling interest in having a stable, prosperous, and politically balanced Iraq, especially in view of the downsides of the alternative. And if the United States withdraws from Iraq before achieving these goals, it will be forced to deal with an Iraqi disaster that may cost the United States much more than it needs to be.



At the same time, staying in Iraq requires major changes to politics, governance and development in Iraq. It cannot be said that the problems of Iraq started with the US invasion in 2003. Some of them date back to the history of the establishment of the state and others to its development since the fall of the monarchy, and many of them are the products of Saddam Hussein's actions. Also, today's problems are mostly the product of Iraq's current leaders. Only the United States can help Iraq help itself.



Iranian interests in Iraq




Iran is the primary external player in American calculations about Iraq, which makes it very important for Iran to ensure that Iraq does not once again pose a security threat to its eastern neighbor. 



It is worth noting that Iran seeks to use Iraq to strengthen Tehran's strategic authority in the region and to preserve and develop Iraq as a market for Iranian goods and services. And the current security elite in Iran, whether reformists, militants or others, will not abandon Iraq as long as it is weak and divided. Iran's rulers realize that they do not have the luxury of thinking about it, even as an option.



After a years-long war in the 1980s against Saddam Hussein, Iran decided that the best way to neutralize the grave threat to its national security of Iran's current regime was to hold its "leaders" in Baghdad. 



Iran's leaders assume that outside powers, especially the United States, will seek to weaken pro-Iranian Shiite blocs in Iraq. Likewise, there are many Iraqis, especially the Sunni Arabs, the Kurds, and even the nationalist Shiite Arabs, who do not want to see pro-Iranian parties dominate Iraqi politics.



The worst possible outcome for both Iraq and the region is a strategic dialogue between the United States and Iraq that fails to establish a stable relationship between the two countries

And controlling Iraq serves a broader regional purpose, which is to establish a land bridge between Iran and Lebanon, and Iraq is an essential part of that strategy, in light of its effective control by "Hezbollah". 



Consequently, control of Iraq is a way to expand Iran's influence in the Middle East, while working to secure its positions against potential regional competitors.



Finally, Iraq is essential for Iran, as it is an important market for Iranian goods and services . This is the case now more than ever, as Iran is reeling under the weight of sanctions imposed on its economy. Iraq is a market for Iranian unlicensed goods, in other words, for Iranian goods that do not find other markets. 



Pro-Iranian Shiite politicians have made this possible for the Islamic Republic, despite the negative repercussions for Iraq’s producers and consumers. Iranian imports to the Iraqi market have resulted in unemployment and inflation in Iraq and have profoundly angered the Iraqi street.



Iraqi interests in the country's future




The most difficult issue in organizing a meaningful strategic dialogue between the United States and Iraq and establishing a lasting strategic relationship between them is what Iraqis want for their country. Iraq is now a country largely divided and experiencing instability in politics, governance and the economy. And not to mention the clear divisions in Iraq between Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds, these same people live internal divisions. The Iraqi political institutions that were established in the wake of the US invasion in 2003 contributed to the exacerbation of these divisions, and they are considered a major factor in the political paralysis in Iraq.



It is worth noting that two major and comprehensive issues in Iraqi politics dominate all other issues: the balance between the United States and Iran regarding foreign policy and the local level, and how to create a stable and sustainable system of government that brings prosperity to Iraq and strengthens the legitimacy of the government and comes to power with Iraqi politicians serving the people Which is the source of their political strength. These two issues now greatly limit Iraq’s ability to emerge from its current political crisis and have the ability to destroy the country and prevent it from being an effective state in its affairs.



The balance between the United States and Iran is a thorny problem for Iraqi politics because the political camps in Iraq depend on the patronage of both countries or on the balance function that they perform. Some prominent Iraqi Shiite parties consider Iran a political role model and a source of funds and expertise that help it gain political advantage in Iraq, while other Iraqi Shiite nationalists either seek to balance Iran and the United States or to push both powers out of Iraqi politics. 



On the other hand, Sunni Arabs and Iraqi Kurds are waiting for the United States to balance Iran's authority in Iraq, and they fear that in the absence of the American presence, the pro-Iranian sectarian parties will seek to do what they did in 2011, i.e. marginalizing the Iraqi Sunnis and Kurds.



Currently, Iraq adopts a policy-making system that provides representative bodies with representatives from different Iraqi communities and gives each factional leader a specific political authority that these leaders often use to serve their own interests. This system has led to the establishment of a clientelistic political system in which the political parties are more concerned with dividing the spoils of power than by moving the path of affairs in the country to find solutions to important political issues.



Iraq urgently needs the United States and Iran not to exacerbate these aspects of its current crises. This country needs a solid foundation in order to move forward and create a future for itself and the region that does not involve permanent conflicts and competition between sects.



What the American-Iraqi strategic dialogue may carry




Regardless of all the major considerations discussed above, the timing of the call for strategic dialogue - which came after a series of attacks on US forces in Iraq by Shiite militias allied to Iran - highlights that the immediate reason for such inter-governmental talks is to ensure safety American forces in Iraq. 



Given that the Trump administration's patience with the situation in Iraq, specifically about Iran's influence and authority in the country, has begun to be implemented, it is highly likely that these meetings will be used as an opportunity to raise an important set of questions and requests to the Baghdad government.



The US requests / questions that the United States will ask the Iraqi government may include:



:diamonds: Request that the Iraqi government guarantee the safety of the American forces, the American embassy in Iraq, American civilians, and American companies operating in Iraq.



:diamonds: When and how will Baghdad commit to controlling the power of Shiite militias allied to Iran and putting them physically under the authority of the central government?



:diamonds: What reliable steps will Iraq take to restore its energy independence from Iran?
Iraq is central to the United States' strategy of containing the expansion and influence of the current Iranian regime

:diamonds: What reliable steps will the Iraqi government take to reduce the sectarian nature of Iraqi politics, especially the dominance of pro-Iranian Shiite political forces in the country?



:diamonds: What steps will the Iraqi government take to reduce endemic corruption and provide basic services to the people?



:diamonds: What level does Iraq want in terms of US forces, civilian and military assistance, and what will it do to demonstrate its ability to unite, govern and organize to use that aid effectively?



While knowing the questions or requests that the American side might ask the Iraqis is a separate issue, looking at what the United States might offer - or threaten to do - based on the answers or actions it will get in response to those questions / demands is another issue. 



If Iraq is not ready to give the United States an appropriate response and define an appropriate strategic relationship with it, it is likely that the tendency to reward the balance of reward and punishment toward punishment or the withdrawal of the United States will end up. Given the high cost of the "Covid-19" pandemic on the American economy, Iraq should not expect American aid to be as generous as it was in the past.



The worst possible outcome for both Iraq and the region is a strategic dialogue between the United States and Iraq that fails to establish a stable relationship between the two countries. A similar result could lead to the withdrawal of American armies from Iraq, the cessation of all American aid, or even the imposition of US sanctions on Iraq.



However, the Iraqi economy suffers from decades of chronic mismanagement and a historical decline in oil prices and the "Covid 19" epidemic. And an American decision to cut aid entirely or impose US sanctions on Iraq can push the Iraqi state into extreme poverty and inability to provide the lowest basic jobs.



Moreover, the inability to reach a practical strategic relationship may result in a set of negative repercussions on the United States, which may enhance Iranian influence. Moreover, Iran's increasing Iranian resources and workforce to pressure its influence in Iraq may be seen as unnecessary if the United States leaves Iraq. Iran may not feel obligated to direct those resources towards Iraq, which would lead to more Iranian resources remaining at home to support the regime or transfer it to other pro-Iranian allies in the region.



The importance of realistic expectations




While the above detailed results of a failed strategic dialogue seem to be the worst scenarios, they are plausible outcomes unless the US government and the political forces in Iraq have no realistic expectations from each other.



In this context, the Iraqi political elites must realize that the current situation in the country will not last in the long run. At a minimum, these elites must be able to make a promise to ensure the safety of US military forces and American citizens in Iraq. 



Likewise, these elites must prepare a political model that is not based primarily on sectarian identities in a contest that is neither overpowered nor defeated. There is no doubt that it is easier said than done, but it is clear that Iraq is heading towards economic and political failure if its political model does not change to become a model that prioritizes Iraqi identity and interests over subnational agendas.



The United States cannot expect Iraq to have to make a clear decision and choose between Iran and America

At the same time, the US government must set realistic expectations of what the Iraqis can actually provide. It is logical and correct to expect the Iraqi government to protect the American forces and citizens present in the country. It is also reasonable to expect that the United States' assistance to Iraq in the fight against corruption will not evaporate. But putting Iraq on the path to forming an effective and clean government takes time to accomplish, as its leadership works to push the country toward an effective government.



In this context, the United States can play an important role in nurturing an effective government in Iraq by maintaining its current course of combating corruption and helping to develop infrastructure, police work and other endeavors that build the future of Iraq. Training and educating the next generation of politicians, security forces, and bureaucrats in Iraq is an essential American task.



More importantly, the United States cannot expect Iraq to have to make a clear decision and choose between Iran and America. A democratic Iraq cannot choose one side or the other without this option significantly destabilizing it. Given Iraq's demographic and geographic characteristics, it is unrealistic to ask him to get rid of Iranian influence. The US government should accept an Iraq that has good relations with both the United States and Iran.



Despite the challenges, it must be noted that Iraq and the United States have a workable framework within which they can conduct a strategic dialogue through which they are based on existing agreements between the two parties. The "Status of Forces Agreement" and the "Strategic Framework Agreement" between the United States and Iraq, signed in December 2008 and implemented in January 2009, cover nearly all areas of potential cooperation between the two countries and address many of these issues. 



These two agreements constitute a good starting point for the resumption of dialogue between them regarding expectations and mutual obligations. Iraq needs a United States committed to its security, and the United States needs an Iraq that it considers both a partner and a friend. In any case, the strategic dialogue is considered the ideal starting point, and the two sides have every good reason to map out a new relationship that can lead to a permanent strategic partnership.
[size=12]Source: Fikra Forum[/size]



[size=12][size=27][size=27]Dagher's savior
[/size][/size]
[/size]
[size=12][size=27]An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations Dagher
[/size][/size]






claud39
claud39
VIP Member
VIP Member

Posts : 14190
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations Empty Trump's advisor reveals to "information" the pivots of the June meeting and confirms that Al-Kazemi will not allow the Americans to leave

Post by claud39 on Sat May 16, 2020 1:14 pm

Trump's advisor reveals to "information" the pivots of the June meeting and confirms that Al-Kazemi will not allow the Americans to leave


16/05/2020




An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations %D9%85%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%B4%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B1%D8%A6%D9%8A%D8%B3-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A3%D9%85%D8%B1%D9%8A%D9%83%D9%8A-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B4%D8%B1%D9%82-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A3%D9%88%D8%B3%D8%B7-%D8%BA%D8%A8%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%A7%D9%84-%D8%B5%D9%88%D9%85%D8%A7-696x435



Information / private ...

The adviser to the American President in the Middle East, Gabriel Soma, revealed on Saturday the axes of the meeting that will be held between the Iraqi government and the United States of America next June to discuss the strategic agreement between the two countries, while stressing that the new Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kazemi will keep the American forces in Iraq and will not allow their departure.

“There are two agreements between the Iraqi government and the first United States of America, which is the strategic agreement and relates to bilateral relations between Baghdad and Washington in terms of political, diplomatic, commercial, financial, energy and judicial issues, as well as services, science, culture and the environment. Either other agreement is the strategic framework agreement,” Suma said. And that relates to security between the two countries, "pointing out that" the strategic framework agreement determines the nature of the American presence in the region and the withdrawal from Iraq . "

He added that "the security agreement known as the Strategic Framework Agreement expired since December 31, 2011 after the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq, but the Iraqi government reactivated the agreement in 2014", noting that "the negotiations that will take place in June between Iraq and America relate to the agreement to keep these agreements in effect." .

Will the strategic agreement with America be canceled?

With regard to the cancellation of the strategic agreement with America, Soma commented, "The cancellation of the agreement with America is unlikely."

He continued, "There is an intention by the Iraqi government to keep the agreements with Washington in effect."

Regarding Al-Kazemi’s relationship with the United States .. Will he ask for the withdrawal of American forces? Soma stated that “the new Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kazemi will keep the American forces in Iraq and will not allow them to leave because of the terrorist threat of ISIS ,” explaining that “ ISIS is still strong in Iraq and threatening its security.”

And he added that "the danger of ISIS will push Al-Kazemi to the continued survival of American forces in Iraq and will not demand their withdrawal."

He continued, "The United States decided to grant Iraq three-month exemptions from the sanctions imposed on Iran to import gas used to run electric energy as part of America's support for the Al-Kazemi government," explaining that "the US administration will support Al-Kazemi by holding early elections."

He pointed out that "Al-Kazemi has the support and support of the American administration, and he must confine arms to the state and separate the armed forces from the Iraqi army and security forces."

The Cabinet had decided, last Saturday, in the first session, to form a crisis cell of specialists in foreign affairs and international relations to conduct discussions with the American side on reviewing the strategic agreement between the two countries.

 It ended 25 T.



claud39
claud39
VIP Member
VIP Member

Posts : 14190
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations Empty Deputy: America will extend the stay of its forces in Iraq, and Al-Kazimi will agree

Post by claud39 on Sat May 16, 2020 1:17 pm

Deputy: America will extend the stay of its forces in Iraq, and Al-Kazimi will agree




05/16/2020





An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations %D8%A7%D9%85%D8%B1%D9%8A%D9%83%D8%A7123-696x435



Information / private ...

Independent MP Basem Khashan confirmed on Saturday that the United States is not serious about withdrawing from Iraq in compliance with the House of Representatives decision to remove them from the country voted on during the government of former Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi , while indicating that Al-Kazemi would agree to the survival of American forces.

Khashan said in a statement to "Information", that "the cabinet decision to form a team to review the strategic agreement with the United States of America is a show and not serious in removing American forces." Noting that "Al-Kazemi spoke about the schedule of the exit of American forces and not commitment to the decision of the House of Representatives to remove them." Immediately, this position is regressive and weak. ”

He added that "America is not serious about withdrawing from Iraq in compliance with the decision of the House of Representatives to remove them from the country voted on during the government of former Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi and its discussions that will take place in next June formally and will not achieve anything." The American withdrawal will agree to extend the stay of the American combat forces in Iraq . ”

The adviser to the American President in the Middle East, Gabriel Soma, revealed to the agency / Information, today, Saturday, the axes of the meeting that will be held between the Iraqi government and the United States of America next June to discuss the strategic agreement between the two countries, while stressing that the new Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kazemi will keep the forces American in Iraq and will not be allowed to leave.

 It ended 25 T.



claud39
claud39
VIP Member
VIP Member

Posts : 14190
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations Empty Five files to be presented by Baghdad during its dialogue with Washington

Post by claud39 on Fri May 22, 2020 1:20 pm

[size=35]Five files to be presented by Baghdad during its dialogue with Washington[/size]


2020-05-22



[size=35]An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations Doc-P-346014-637257605511117329
[/size]


Member of the Foreign Relations Committee in Parliament, Ala Talabani, confirmed that five files will be raised from Baghdad during its dialogue with Washington, stating that any agreement with the United States of America must maintain the balance of relations between Washington and Tehran in a way that serves the Iraqi interest.


Talabani said in a press statement followed by Alsumaria News, that Iraq will present five files during his dialogue with Washington in the middle of next June, indicating that "these files are the military and security coordination, the future of the American presence in Iraq, the arming and training of the Iraqi army, and the economic side, as well as Cultural issues, explaining that the understandings between the two countries will be military, economic and cultural. "





 
She added, "The idea of ​​a strategic dialogue between Baghdad and Washington is not new, but dates back to the period before the popular movement began in October 2019, which saw visits by high-level American officials to Iraq and their meeting with Iraqi officials, and presented them with the idea of ​​holding joint meetings and writing a new agreement based on mutual cooperation. In several areas, in order to organize the post-salvation phase of terrorism. "
 
Talabani added, "However, some political circumstances, regional tensions and possibly differences caused the postponement of the issue that was raised again before the formation of the current government, when the American ambassador in Baghdad delivered an official message from the US administration requesting the start of negotiations."

 
She drew a member of the Parliament's Foreign Relations Committee that "there are controversial points that may accompany the dialogues, especially with regard to the previous decision of Parliament to remove all foreign forces from the country, stressing the difficulty of agreeing on some issues."
 
She indicated that "the Iraqi Ministry of Foreign Affairs is not able to negotiate with the Americans alone without cooperating with the relevant authorities, because the ministry is in charge of implementing the policy that is drawn in the Council of Ministers," explaining that "the current Iraqi policy does not bias to a state against another, but seeks to maintain balance with everybody".
 
And she added that "any agreement with the United States of America must preserve the balance of relations between Washington and Tehran in a way that serves the Iraqi interest," stressing the need not to deal with this file with affection.




https://www.alsumaria.tv/news/%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%A9/346014/%D8%AE%D9%85%D8%B3%D8%A9-%D9%85%D9%84%D9%81%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%B7%D8%B1%D8%AD%D9%87%D8%A7-%D8%A8%D8%BA%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%AF-%D8%AE%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%84-%D8%AD%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%B1%D9%87%D8%A7-%D9%85%D8%B9-%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%B4%D9%86%D8%B7%D9%86
claud39
claud39
VIP Member
VIP Member

Posts : 14190
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations Empty Washington on the line of the economic crisis in Iraq .. And Al-Kazemi's team is on a date with the test!

Post by claud39 on Sun May 24, 2020 1:25 pm

Washington on the line of the economic crisis in Iraq .. And Al-Kazemi's team is on a date with the test!



2020.05.24


An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations 7ccaaf5b9-31456-202005241253


Baghdad - people 
 
Al-Sharq Al-Awsat newspaper said that US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo paved the way for the upcoming strategic dialogue between Washington and Baghdad, through a phone call, which the newspaper considered to be meaningful as he held it with Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kazemi.
  
The newspaper pointed out in a report, which was viewed by "people" (May 24, 2020), that the dialogue between Baghdad and Washington should be transformed from a political-security dialogue to an economic-investment dialogue, and “here it will test the ability of Al-Kazemi and his government team and the intentions of the Iraqi political forces ruling In the political process. " 
 
  
The following is the text of the report:
  
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo paved the way for the upcoming strategic dialogue between Washington and Baghdad, with a meaningful phone call he made with Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kazemi. 
 
Pompeo, according to the statement issued by the US State Department, discussed with Al-Kazemi «the economic crisis in Iraq, and the next strategic dialogue between the United States and Iraq».
  
The statement added that «the minister urged Prime Minister Al-Kazemi to follow the real reforms while working with international institutions, to provide financial assistance to Iraq».
  
If the State Department statement focused on the economic crisis, as a first priority that the Iraqi government should address, including the trend towards international institutions to provide assistance to Iraq, the statement issued by the Information Office of the Prime Minister of Iraq did not go away on the essence of Iraqi-American priorities, including In that upcoming dialogue between the two countries, described by both of them as strategic dialogue. 
 
According to what political observers see in Baghdad, the prospective dialogue is linked from the viewpoint of the parties close to Iran, particularly the armed factions, to the American military presence, which must end with the departure of the American soldiers from the bases in which they are located, starting from "Ain al-Assad" in western Iraq. , To a "silk" base in Kurdistan in northern Iraq.  

The Iraqi government, which finds itself between several pathways and anvils, has not yet disclosed the nature of this dialogue, and what it might include.
  
For its part, the political parties that make up the Iraqi parliament are divided among themselves, who reject the survival of the Americans, who are the majority of the Shiite forces, and support for their survival, namely the Sunnis and the Kurds.
  
In this context, American support for al-Kazemi comes as a reliable and worthy prime minister. In return, Iran is still declaring its support for Al-Kazemi without reservation of any step I take, knowing that Al-Kazemi’s priorities now are how to pay the salaries of employees that amount to more than two billion dollars per month. In this context, there is an equation that seems very imbalanced, and that is a complete openness to Saudi Arabia by Al-Kazemi, with the beginning of a strategic dialogue with the Americans in light of the ambiguous relations between the Iranians and the Americans.  

Member of the Committee on Foreign Relations in the Iraqi parliament, Dr. Dhafer Al-Ani, trying in his speech to "Al-Sharq Al-Awsat" to try to solve the mystery of this equation, saying that "Al-Kazemi's government was born amid the complexities of the Iraqi scene economically, security and health; Indeed, even internationally, according to Iraq, according to its current capabilities, Iraq is unable to face these conditions without external assistance.  

Al-Ani added: "The government, which is based on an initial positive external impression on it, is trying to invest this in overcoming its plight through a wide openness to countries that are characterized by assistance, in order to consolidate the pillars of the new government and push it towards rational rational decisions." 
 
Al-Ani explained that “the Arab Gulf states, especially the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the Emirates and Kuwait, have ties of Arabism and neighborliness with them, and have previously helped Iraq in previous years, and they are at the forefront of countries that will initiate Iraq to seek aid to support its stability, driven by a certain awareness that the stability of Iraq is stability For the entire region, and that strengthening the new government is an important factor for restoring Iraq’s independence and sovereignty. ”  

With regard to Iran, Al-Ani says that "Iran continues to interfere in Iraq to steal its sovereign decision, through direct sabotage action economically, security and culturally, and indirectly through the armed factions loyal to it in Iraq." Regionally and internationally, it is continuous and wide, to send enough assurances that it is determined to take serious steps towards consolidating the independence and unity of Iraq.
  
As for the professor of national security, Dr. Hussein Allawi, he sees in his talk to "Al-Sharq Al-Awsat" about the strategic dialogue between Baghdad and Washington, that "both countries are ready for dialogue in an open manner without reservations or red lines; As it is time for Iraq to make the right choices without Iranian pressure or local investment by armed factions.  

Allawi adds that «the position of Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kazemi represents today the forces of national moderation, the government apparatus, and society, in terms of dialogue with the Americans.  

Allawi explained that «the fate of the American forces will remain in the light of the advisory and coordination work, training, information exchange, and maintenance of American equipment in the ranks of the armed forces, through American companies, and this was determined in the light of the strategic relocation plan in the Iraqi military bases, at (Ein Al-Assad base) And the (Harir) base, and if the Iraqi government requests further than that, the American response will be through the International Alliance and NATO. 
 
Allawi pointed out that «the dialogue must be transferred from a political-security dialogue to an economic-investment dialogue, and here it will test the ability of Al-Kazemi and his government team and the intentions of the Iraqi political forces ruling in the political process», explaining that «the back rooms of the Iranian-American negotiations are capable of dismantling The complex of the American-Iranian conflict, but Al-Kazemi wants to launch relations towards a comprehensive and parallel path, in order to preserve Iraqi national interests, since Al-Kazemi is closer to the protest forces that reject Iranian influence over the Iraqi political-economic decision, but want a normal relationship without interference, which is what He made the Iranians realize this through decision-making systems that showed a clear retreat, which makes them focus on interests, markets and trade between Iran and Iraq, with the parallel line of aid continuing to their friendly parties in Iraq.  

claud39
claud39
VIP Member
VIP Member

Posts : 14190
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum