Dinar Daily
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

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 - Page 2 DinarDailyUpdates?bg=330099&fg=FFFFFF&anim=1

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

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty While hosting the government's negotiating team with The United States. Al-Kaabi chairs a meeting of the heads of parliamentary committees to discuss the details of the strategic dialogue with the United States

Post by claud39 on Tue Jun 16, 2020 2:21 pm

[ltr]While hosting the government's negotiating team with The United States. Al-Kaabi chairs a meeting of the heads of parliamentary committees to discuss the details of the strategic dialogue with the United States[/ltr]





[ltr] 16/06/2020[/ltr]



[ltr]An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 WhatsApp-Image-2020-06-16-at-17.16.16-800x445[/ltr]



[ltr]Al-Kaabi to the Iraqi delegation: Your dialogue is based solely on the sovereignty and interests of Iraq and its people[/ltr]



[ltr]Mr. Hassan Karim al-Kaabi, First Vice President of the House of Representatives, on Tuesday, June 16, 2020, chaired a meeting with a number of heads and representatives of the parliamentary committees to discuss the details of the Iraqi-American dialogue, which was launched a few days ago and to learn about the steps and principles on which the delegation was based on security , economic and other aspects.[/ltr]



[ltr]During the meeting, which was devoted to hosting the government negotiating team with the United States headed by the senior undersecretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Mr. Abdul Karim Hashim Mustafa, and the presence of Mr. Mohammed Haj Hammoud, and a number of other figures within the delegation, where the meeting heard a detailed presentation from the head of the delegation and members of the government about the details of the discussions and issues raised during the strategic dialogue that began on June 11, 2020, while the present delegation confirmed that the round of discussions was "good" and successful and came in accordance with the same resolutions. The link issued by the legislative and executive branches, stressing that the date of the next dialogue with Washington will start in July and all the ideas put forward by the members of the House of Representatives will be taken today.[/ltr]



[ltr]Al-Kaabi stressed that the issue of the withdrawal of American troops should be the first priority of all dialogues and joint agreements in the future, addressing the Iraqi delegation: Your dialogue is based on the sovereignty and interests of Iraq and its people only, expressing his hope that the dialogues managed by the negotiating team will be successful, and that these efforts will be successful in achieving the desired goals that the people and their representatives aspire to , calling on all political forces to be "one body" in the face of the challenges, especially the issue of securing sovereignty and control of the atmosphere, as well as economic and financial control. In light of the corona pandemic crises and the drop in oil prices.[/ltr]



[ltr]The members of the House of Representatives focused on a number of priorities that should be included in future dialogues with the U.S. side, including "security, economic, financial, culture, tourism, antiquities, foreign relations, investment and higher education."[/ltr]


[ltr]Information

Office of the

First Vice-President of the House of Representatives 2020/6/16[/ltr]



[ltr]An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 WhatsApp-Image-2020-06-16-at-17.16.09-1024x682[/ltr]



[ltr]An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 WhatsApp-Image-2020-06-16-at-17.16.16-1-1024x682[/ltr]




[ltr]https://ar.parliament.iq/2020/06/16/%d8%ae%d9%84%d8%a7%d9%84-%d8%a7%d8%b3%d8%aa%d8%b6%d8%a7%d9%81%d8%aa%d9%87-%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%81%d8%b1%d9%8a%d9%82-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%ad%d9%83%d9%88%d9%85%d9%8a-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%aa%d9%81%d8%a7%d9%88%d8%b6/[/ltr]

claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty Pompeo reaffirms Washington's respect for Iraqi sovereignty and declares the desire to continue the strategic dialogue

Post by claud39 on Tue Jun 16, 2020 8:15 pm

[size=36]Pompeo reaffirms Washington's respect for Iraqi sovereignty and declares the desire to continue the strategic dialogue[/size]




 16/06/2020




An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 131552019_3698523






Baghdad - Mawazine News

, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo reiterated his country's respect for the sovereignty of Iraq, affirming the support of Mustafa Al-Kazemi’s government and expressing his hope for the continuation of the strategic dialogue between Baghdad and Washington.


Pompeo discussed, during a telephone conversation with his Iraqi counterpart, Fouad Hussein, ways to develop joint cooperation between Iraq and the United States. 


"The Foreign Minister Fouad Hussein received a phone call from his American counterpart, Pompeo, and discussed ways to develop joint cooperation between Baghdad and Washington in various areas, including encouraging investment in all sectors," Foreign Ministry spokesperson Ahmed al-Sahaf said in a statement that Mawazine News reviewed a copy of. Including: the oil sector, infrastructure, and urging investors to work in Iraq.


The statement quoted Pompeo as confirming that "the United States is happy with the initial results of the strategic dialogue, and expressed his hope to continue for the purpose of completing these dialogues."
He also affirmed "the respect of the American government for the sovereignty of Iraq, its support for the government of Mustafa Al-Kazemi, and the provision of economic support."


The two sides agreed on "the necessity of encouraging investment in all sectors, including: the oil sector, and infrastructure, and urging investors to work in Iraq." 


The statement also stressed the assertion of Foreign Minister Fouad Hussein that Iraq "seeks to build balanced relations with all countries of the world, and to adopt the principle of non-interference in internal affairs, respect for the sovereignty of Iraq, realization of common interests, and independence of the Iraqi decision."


The Minister referred to the "expected visit of the Prime Minister to Washington if health conditions permitted it," stressing "the government's insistence on taking future steps to work, and proceeding with the success of its government program."



 M hn
ended








https://www.mawazin.net/Details.aspx?jimare=105561


Last edited by claud39 on Wed Jun 17, 2020 1:48 pm; edited 1 time in total
claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty A. Abdel-Hussein Al-Anbuge *: Request of economic advisors from the Americans ... Implementation crisis or counseling crisis

Post by claud39 on Wed Jun 17, 2020 11:26 am

A. Abdel-Hussein Al-Anbuge *: Request of economic advisors from the Americans ... Implementation crisis or counseling crisis


06/16/2020



An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Abdulhussain-image-new1A






The intellectual shift makes a person see the side of the truth and act accordingly, and the Iraqi negotiator today, as he reviews the strategic framework agreement with the Americans, seems to have not read what was written and produced by Iraqi economists. And not only do they not read. For years, most politicians and parliamentarians used to want a four-word phrase (we do not have economic plans) or (we do not have economic visions). And I ask them frankly, how much economic and financial research and how much study and report pertaining to the Iraqi economy you have read in the last ten years? Mostly nothing. Perhaps they hear some superficial debates and pick up some naive quotes and inaccurate numbers they echo without scrutiny.

 

Do you know, gentlemen, that I am one of the Iraqi economists, and I am not the best of them, and in a consultative position for the Prime Minister, I was the first to write about economic reform in 2008 and it was an integrated and comprehensive curriculum, and I have brought it to all decision-makers, begging to take it, even that one of them marginalized the executioner (A blessed effort preserves you!) He did not read it and did not even keep it.

 

If it had not been for the United Nations and its presentation at a workshop, they would have liked it. Generally, the book was printed in 2009 at the expense of the United Nations.[1] Attachment submission[2] (At the end of the article) clarifies the size of the scientific effort exerted until they considered it a reference for economic reform in Iraq and took it to their headquarters in New York, so they agreed to allocate $ 32 million to the economic reform program in Iraq, and more than 500 Iraqi and international experts became working as a beehive for two years that was the result following:

 


  • A road map for restructuring public companies

  • Tax roadmap

  • A roadmap for land management for investment purposes

  • A road map to amend economic legislation

  • Integrated energy strategy

  • Manufacturing strategy in Iraq

  • Private sector development and support strategy

  • Social Economic Dialogue Strategy

  • Draft PPP law

  • Draft economic reform law and the council he leads

  • Setting the macro economic model and training the cadres of the Ministry of Planning

  • A study to assess the Iraqi economy

  • The feasibility of Iraq joining the World Trade Organization (WTO)

  • Putting a vision for banking reform in Iraq

  • Investment strategy in Iraq

  • Study and analyze the reasons for not implementing investment projects in the governorates

  • And many other sub-topics

  • Five-year plans that were issued by the Ministry of Planning and we were members of it.

  • International Covenant Report

  • Hundreds of research and studies of various economic problems of Iraqi specialists published in dozens of sites, including the Iraqi Economists Network.



 

All these tremendous efforts and juices of marriage between Iraqi experts and the best foreign experts from the World Bank, the United Nations, the United States Agency for International Development, the German Agency, the Swedish Agency and others have produced more than 16 strategies, plans and maps, and most of them have been approved by the Council of Ministers since 2010 and 2011. I headed two teams: the public companies team and the tax reform team, and we carved rocks for years to implement our product in vain, as a broken queue stood up to us, and it favored us and entered us into paper and routine corridors that made us fall into a deep solution.

 

In 2010, the Council of Ministers approved the road map for structuring state-owned public companies by Resolution (314 of 2010). The legal advisor at the time, whose prime minister had considered his opinion to be a Qur’an, because he practiced adapting the laws for personal purposes and he was the fawn who had worked as a consultant in the former regime of Hussein Kamel and Saddam Hussein, promised me that the decision would not be allowed to be implemented so he put a phrase in the decision (after reviewing it in Economic Committee). He chased him to the committee in which he was a member and cooperated with him in obstruction, the head of the National Investment Commission, who does not know anything about investment, he is a chemist, and I was also a member of that committee, which is chaired by the Deputy Prime Minister and membership of a number of ministers of various specialties except for the economy, so he persuaded the ministers The members of the committee are easy because the companies are affiliated with their ministries and have interests in them. The map should be circulated to the ministries to know the opinion of public companies, and at that time, there were 173 companies. Whereas the reason lies in the companies and general managers who are under control, and since it has become a means of corruption in an atmosphere of chaos and a means of further appointments in the hands of the ministers to satisfy their parties, the answers were not completed consecutively until after two years, so the Economic Committee transferred it again to the team that I head to take the companies ’notes, that is, return us Commission to square one. Indeed, the introduction of company notes means that we do not have any structure and that the situation remains as it is.

 

The companies were mostly losers and paid the salaries of their employees from the general budget, the budget was burdened with deficits and the number of employees increased in companies, and the cabinet went to address the error with more error, so he decided to finance the salaries of employees of public companies from borrowing from Al-Rashid and Rafidain Bank, which are also (two public companies) and are supposed to work according to Trade standards: How can they lend to companies in order to pay salaries and have no return that guarantees payment. Public companies were in debt and the liquidity of Al-Rashid and Al-Rafidain bankers ran out.

 

In the first cabinet meeting of the Abadi government, the two banks announced bankruptcy and stopped lending to companies, so the ball returned to my stadiums again and headed a team and developed a study in only 3 months entitled (Restructuring of state-owned companies), approved by the Cabinet of Resolution (67 of 2015) and received praise from organizations International. It was shown in Paris and garnered with the support of OECD in 2015 and its experts indicated that for the first time they are realizing a clear and specific path to address the situation of public companies.

 

The study included time limits for implementation, specific tasks and specific responsible parties. And I stayed for a whole year trying to beg the Prime Minister’s Office to issue a Diwani order to form a team that would carry out the study. After one meeting, they found me insisting on implementation, so I was excluded from the team and put a simple spatial employee who did not know anything about the whole issue, so the reformist direction deviated, and they merged companies only to reduce their number as it is merging and not merging and provided a number of general managers only and he is not present in the study at all.

 

The companies ’problems increased and the reform turned to sabotage, so they had to transfer the companies’ salaries from self-financing to central financing from the budget so that the salaries of their employees amounted to more than 30 trillion dinars until 2018 and the companies did not count the salaries within their costs as if they were downloaded from the sky, so they disbelieved with all economic criteria, Time is lost, the task of restructuring has become more difficult, the implementation gap has widened, and the Iraqi economy is eating its flesh with its decayed molars. The funny thing is when the government of Mr. Adel Abdul-Mahdi came to the aid of some ministers asking for the dissolution of the companies and I did nothing but confirm my notes four years ago in which I opposed the merger and explained its disadvantages. And so we went back in closed circles of paper and administration, pulling us, every year, down.

 

Yes to the bottom, and this is one example that all other stories look like, down at a steady pace, and our economy has become more fragile. When we invaded Corona, we had no funds or sovereign funds and the economy did not diversify to compensate for the absence or retreat of oil revenues so that we can stone people in homes and distribute aid that satisfies their needs to keep them at home with dignity, and we did not invest that revenue in creating real development such as building and operating hospitals that accommodate the injured to face The pandemic.

 

Today, the negotiator comes to play the same pro, which has become crude and free, which is (we want to consult and we lack the vision), and they expand the consultation space and cannot narrow the implementation gap because it is associated with administrative failure, weak decision-making, weak law enforcement, preoccupation with provisional gratifications and short-term punitive measures for political and electoral purposes and evading strategic work . Therefore, we have accumulated strategies and plans without implementation, and when they became in the long term after 17 years of the new system, we reached the bottom and reveals the political system’s defects and the performance booms. Temporary measures were no longer effective or even calming the pain, and the gap of distrust of any government action by the public widened and the public became He behaves in reverse, even with the virus, treating him as if he were a government lie.

 

At a time when the impersonator attributes a physician to the risks and deaths of individuals directly, the impersonator of the economic character causes the death of a nation indirectly showing its accumulated effect with time. And here we are reaping what politicians have caused, they have failed and drowned all the boat with them.

 

(*) Adviser to the Prime Minister for Economic Affairs

 

Copyright reserved for the Iraqi Economist Network. Republishing is permitted provided the source is indicated. June 16, 2020

http://iraqieconomists.net/

 

[1]See a quick review of the book Economic Reform in Iraq: A Theoretical Feasibility of the Transition to a Market Economy (Baghdad: Iraq Center for Studies, 2008) at the Iraqi Economists Network website:



An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Book-cover-264x346

[2] Submission by the United Nations Development Program - Iraq.

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Thumbnail-1-284x346

 

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Logo1-3

editors






http://iraqieconomists.net/ar/2020/06/16/%d8%a3-%d8%af-%d8%b9%d8%a8%d8%af%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%ad%d8%b3%d9%8a%d9%86-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%b9%d9%86%d8%a8%d9%83%d9%8a-%d8%b7%d9%84%d8%a8-%d9%85%d8%b3%d8%aa%d8%b4%d8%a7%d8%b1%d9%8a%d9%86-%d8%a7%d9%82/
claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty Fouad Hussein reveals a forthcoming visit of Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kazemi to Washington

Post by claud39 on Wed Jun 17, 2020 1:50 pm

Fouad Hussein reveals a forthcoming visit of Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kazemi to Washington




7 Hours ago





An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 %D9%81%D8%A4%D8%A7%D8%AF-%D8%AD%D8%B3%D9%8A%D9%86-768x432










Foreign Minister Fouad Hussein revealed a prospective visit of Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kazemi to Washington if the health conditions allowed.




Fouad Hussein confirmed, during a telephone conversation with his American counterpart, Mike Pompeo, that Iraq seeks to build balanced relations with all countries of the world, and to adopt the principle of non-interference in internal affairs, respect for the sovereignty of Iraq, realization of common interests, and independence of the Iraqi decision, stressing the government's insistence on taking steps Future work, and to continue the success of its government program.




For his part, Pompeo confirmed that Washington is happy with the initial results of the strategic dialogue, expressing his hope to continue for the purpose of completing these dialogues, as well as the American government’s respect for the sovereignty of Iraq, its support for the government of Mustafa Al-Kazemi, and the provision of economic support.




The two sides agreed on the need to encourage investment in all sectors, including the oil sector and infrastructure, and urged investors to work in Iraq.




https://altaghier.tv/2020/06/17/%D9%81%D8%A4%D8%A7%D8%AF-%D8%AD%D8%B3%D9%8A%D9%86-%D9%8A%D9%83%D8%B4%D9%81-%D8%B9%D9%86-%D8%B2%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%A9-%D9%85%D8%B1%D8%AA%D9%82%D8%A8%D8%A9-%D9%84%D8%B1%D8%A6%D9%8A%D8%B3-%D9%85%D8%AC/
claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty The Minister of Foreign Affairs affirms that Iraq seeks to establish balanced relations with all, based on the principle of achieving common interests

Post by claud39 on Thu Jun 18, 2020 7:57 pm

[size=34]The Minister of Foreign Affairs affirms that Iraq seeks to establish balanced relations with all, based on the principle of achieving common interests[/size]




16/06/2020







An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 %D9%88%D8%B2%D9%8A%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AE%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%AC%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%85%D9%8A%D8%B1%D9%83%D9%8A-%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%8A%D9%83-%D8%A8%D9%88%D9%85%D8%A8%D9%8A%D9%88-1024x803












Foreign Minister Fouad Hussein received a phone call from his American counterpart, Mike Pompeo, on the occasion of his assumption of office as Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Iraq, wishing him success and success.

The Minister affirmed that Iraq seeks to build balanced relations with all countries of the world, and to adopt the principle of non-interference in internal affairs, respect for the sovereignty of Iraq, realization of common interests, and independence of the Iraqi decision.

The Minister referred to the forthcoming visit of the Prime Minister to Washington in the event that the health conditions allowed.

Stressing the government's insistence on taking future steps to work, and to continue the success of its government program.

For his part, Mr. Pompeo confirmed that the United States is happy with the initial results of the strategic dialogue, expressing his hope to continue for the purpose of completing these dialogues.

He also affirmed the respect of the American government for the sovereignty of Iraq, its support for the government of Mustafa Al-Kazemi, and the provision of economic support.

The two sides agreed on the need to encourage investment in all sectors, including: the oil sector, and infrastructure, and urged investors to work in Iraq.











https://www.mofa.gov.iq/2020/06/?p=14996
claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty Washington confirms its commitment to the results of the strategic dialogue with Baghdad

Post by claud39 on Thu Jun 18, 2020 9:58 pm

[size=32]Washington confirms its commitment to the results of the strategic dialogue with Baghdad[/size]




3 Hours Ago




An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 AFP_1QT6K7-341x341



The United States affirmed its commitment to the results of the recent strategic dialogue with Iraq, via closed-circuit television, while expressing its support for the new Iraqi government, headed by Mustafa Al-Kazimi, who is expected to visit Washington soon, "if health conditions permit."

And the Iraqi Foreign Ministry, in a statement yesterday, quoted US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo as saying, during a telephone conversation with his Iraqi counterpart, Fouad Hussein, that "the United States is happy with the initial results of the strategic dialogue," expressing his hope to continue for the purpose of completing these dialogues. The statement added that Pompeo "affirmed the American government's respect for the sovereignty of Iraq, its support for the government of Mustafa Al-Kazemi, and the provision of economic support."

The Iraqi Foreign Minister, Fouad Hussein, affirmed that his country seeks to "build balanced relations with all countries of the world, and adopt the principle of non-interference in internal affairs, respect for the sovereignty of Iraq, realization of common interests, and independence of the Iraqi decision." Turning to the upcoming visit of the Prime Minister to Washington, "if health conditions allow it," he stressed "the government's insistence on taking future steps to work and proceeding with the success of its government program."

The two sides agreed on the need to encourage investment in all sectors, including the oil sector and infrastructure, and to urge investors to work in Iraq. Last week, Iraq and the United States held a first round of strategic dialogue between the two countries.

Although many political forces welcome the initial results of the dialogue, especially the United States' assertion of the importance of preserving Iraqi sovereignty, Washington's announcement that its withdrawal from Baghdad is contingent on eliminating ISIS has led to negative reactions from parties near Iran.

In the same context, the Iraqi authorities are tightening the noose on the armed factions responsible for firing Katyusha rockets at the American embassy in the Green Zone, the Taji camp, or the vicinity of Baghdad airport, where the American soldiers are located. A security source told Asharq Al-Awsat that "intelligence has begun to come close to identifying the elements that carry out such actions that violate Iraqi sovereignty, through information obtained."

The security source did not reveal any more details, but he stressed that "the coming period will witness access to the sources of those launching Katyusha rockets; Especially after the emergence of entities with different names, none of which belong to the well-known armed factions that adhere to the armistice, pending the results of the strategic dialogue, which aims in the end to guarantee the sovereignty of Iraq and the exit of American forces from Iraq within a clear road map.

To that, the first deputy speaker of the Iraqi parliament, Hassan Karim Al-Kaabi, called on political forces to "cooperate to preserve the sovereignty of Iraq and secure its airspace." He said, in a statement, that he held a meeting with a number of chairmen and representatives of the parliamentary committees "to discuss the details of the Iraqi-American dialogue that started days ago, and to know the steps and principles on which the delegation relied on security, economic and other aspects."

He added that «the meeting was dedicated to hosting the governmental negotiating team with the United States, headed by the Senior Undersecretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Abdul Karim Hashem Mustafa, and the presence of Muhammad al-Haj Hammoud, and a number of other personalities, within the delegation. The present delegation emphasized that the round of talks was good and successful and came in accordance with the relevant decisions of the legislative and executive branches.

Al-Kaabi revealed that the next round of dialogue with Washington will start next month. He believed that "the issue of the withdrawal of American forces should be placed in the first priority of all future dialogues and joint agreements."

The Iraqi political researcher Dr. Hussein Allawi assured to "Al-Sharq Al-Awsat" that "the strategic dialogue is very important for the two parties. The United States has sought through this dialogue to establish convictions, change convictions, and expand mutual understanding towards a map of action that begins with a tactical dialogue in several stages and ends with an agreement to activate the joint committees in The strategic agreement signed in 2008 ».

He added that "the focus in the current stage was on the strategic files that represent a priority, such as finance, higher education, defense, interior, central bank, oil and health." He explained that "Al-Kazemi dealt with this dialogue accurately from the perspective of the forces supporting and opposing the dialogue," noting that "a series of future dialogues between the two parties will be discussed through joint work in more influential areas in Iraqi-American relations."

He believed that "Al-Kazemi's wisdom, calmness and the ability of his negotiating team resulted in achieving good results, which were not achieved by the forces of arms and the wrestling rhetoric between the various parties."

Middle east


https://rawabetcenter.com/archives/111607
claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty Prof. Karim Salem Al-Ghalbi *: Commenting on the article of Dr. Abdel-Hussein Al-Anbuge, "Economic consultants asked the Americans ... the implementation crisis or the crisis of advice."

Post by claud39 on Fri Jun 19, 2020 10:16 am

@claud39 wrote:
A. Abdel-Hussein Al-Anbuge *: Request of economic advisors from the Americans ... Implementation crisis or counseling crisis


06/16/2020



An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Abdulhussain-image-new1A






The intellectual shift makes a person see the side of the truth and act accordingly, and the Iraqi negotiator today, as he reviews the strategic framework agreement with the Americans, seems to have not read what was written and produced by Iraqi economists. And not only do they not read. For years, most politicians and parliamentarians used to want a four-word phrase (we do not have economic plans) or (we do not have economic visions). And I ask them frankly, how much economic and financial research and how much study and report pertaining to the Iraqi economy you have read in the last ten years? Mostly nothing. Perhaps they hear some superficial debates and pick up some naive quotes and inaccurate numbers they echo without scrutiny.

 

Do you know, gentlemen, that I am one of the Iraqi economists, and I am not the best of them, and in a consultative position for the Prime Minister, I was the first to write about economic reform in 2008 and it was an integrated and comprehensive curriculum, and I have brought it to all decision-makers, begging to take it, even that one of them marginalized the executioner (A blessed effort preserves you!) He did not read it and did not even keep it.

 

If it had not been for the United Nations and its presentation at a workshop, they would have liked it. Generally, the book was printed in 2009 at the expense of the United Nations.[1] Attachment submission[2] (At the end of the article) clarifies the size of the scientific effort exerted until they considered it a reference for economic reform in Iraq and took it to their headquarters in New York, so they agreed to allocate $ 32 million to the economic reform program in Iraq, and more than 500 Iraqi and international experts became working as a beehive for two years that was the result following:

 


  • A road map for restructuring public companies

  • Tax roadmap

  • A roadmap for land management for investment purposes

  • A road map to amend economic legislation

  • Integrated energy strategy

  • Manufacturing strategy in Iraq

  • Private sector development and support strategy

  • Social Economic Dialogue Strategy

  • Draft PPP law

  • Draft economic reform law and the council he leads

  • Setting the macro economic model and training the cadres of the Ministry of Planning

  • A study to assess the Iraqi economy

  • The feasibility of Iraq joining the World Trade Organization (WTO)

  • Putting a vision for banking reform in Iraq

  • Investment strategy in Iraq

  • Study and analyze the reasons for not implementing investment projects in the governorates

  • And many other sub-topics

  • Five-year plans that were issued by the Ministry of Planning and we were members of it.

  • International Covenant Report

  • Hundreds of research and studies of various economic problems of Iraqi specialists published in dozens of sites, including the Iraqi Economists Network.



 

All these tremendous efforts and juices of marriage between Iraqi experts and the best foreign experts from the World Bank, the United Nations, the United States Agency for International Development, the German Agency, the Swedish Agency and others have produced more than 16 strategies, plans and maps, and most of them have been approved by the Council of Ministers since 2010 and 2011. I headed two teams: the public companies team and the tax reform team, and we carved rocks for years to implement our product in vain, as a broken queue stood up to us, and it favored us and entered us into paper and routine corridors that made us fall into a deep solution.

 

In 2010, the Council of Ministers approved the road map for structuring state-owned public companies by Resolution (314 of 2010). The legal advisor at the time, whose prime minister had considered his opinion to be a Qur’an, because he practiced adapting the laws for personal purposes and he was the fawn who had worked as a consultant in the former regime of Hussein Kamel and Saddam Hussein, promised me that the decision would not be allowed to be implemented so he put a phrase in the decision (after reviewing it in Economic Committee). He chased him to the committee in which he was a member and cooperated with him in obstruction, the head of the National Investment Commission, who does not know anything about investment, he is a chemist, and I was also a member of that committee, which is chaired by the Deputy Prime Minister and membership of a number of ministers of various specialties except for the economy, so he persuaded the ministers The members of the committee are easy because the companies are affiliated with their ministries and have interests in them. The map should be circulated to the ministries to know the opinion of public companies, and at that time, there were 173 companies. Whereas the reason lies in the companies and general managers who are under control, and since it has become a means of corruption in an atmosphere of chaos and a means of further appointments in the hands of the ministers to satisfy their parties, the answers were not completed consecutively until after two years, so the Economic Committee transferred it again to the team that I head to take the companies ’notes, that is, return us Commission to square one. Indeed, the introduction of company notes means that we do not have any structure and that the situation remains as it is.

 

The companies were mostly losers and paid the salaries of their employees from the general budget, the budget was burdened with deficits and the number of employees increased in companies, and the cabinet went to address the error with more error, so he decided to finance the salaries of employees of public companies from borrowing from Al-Rashid and Rafidain Bank, which are also (two public companies) and are supposed to work according to Trade standards: How can they lend to companies in order to pay salaries and have no return that guarantees payment. Public companies were in debt and the liquidity of Al-Rashid and Al-Rafidain bankers ran out.

 

In the first cabinet meeting of the Abadi government, the two banks announced bankruptcy and stopped lending to companies, so the ball returned to my stadiums again and headed a team and developed a study in only 3 months entitled (Restructuring of state-owned companies), approved by the Cabinet of Resolution (67 of 2015) and received praise from organizations International. It was shown in Paris and garnered with the support of OECD in 2015 and its experts indicated that for the first time they are realizing a clear and specific path to address the situation of public companies.

 

The study included time limits for implementation, specific tasks and specific responsible parties. And I stayed for a whole year trying to beg the Prime Minister’s Office to issue a Diwani order to form a team that would carry out the study. After one meeting, they found me insisting on implementation, so I was excluded from the team and put a simple spatial employee who did not know anything about the whole issue, so the reformist direction deviated, and they merged companies only to reduce their number as it is merging and not merging and provided a number of general managers only and he is not present in the study at all.

 

The companies ’problems increased and the reform turned to sabotage, so they had to transfer the companies’ salaries from self-financing to central financing from the budget so that the salaries of their employees amounted to more than 30 trillion dinars until 2018 and the companies did not count the salaries within their costs as if they were downloaded from the sky, so they disbelieved with all economic criteria, Time is lost, the task of restructuring has become more difficult, the implementation gap has widened, and the Iraqi economy is eating its flesh with its decayed molars. The funny thing is when the government of Mr. Adel Abdul-Mahdi came to the aid of some ministers asking for the dissolution of the companies and I did nothing but confirm my notes four years ago in which I opposed the merger and explained its disadvantages. And so we went back in closed circles of paper and administration, pulling us, every year, down.

 

Yes to the bottom, and this is one example that all other stories look like, down at a steady pace, and our economy has become more fragile. When we invaded Corona, we had no funds or sovereign funds and the economy did not diversify to compensate for the absence or retreat of oil revenues so that we can stone people in homes and distribute aid that satisfies their needs to keep them at home with dignity, and we did not invest that revenue in creating real development such as building and operating hospitals that accommodate the injured to face The pandemic.

 

Today, the negotiator comes to play the same pro, which has become crude and free, which is (we want to consult and we lack the vision), and they expand the consultation space and cannot narrow the implementation gap because it is associated with administrative failure, weak decision-making, weak law enforcement, preoccupation with provisional gratifications and short-term punitive measures for political and electoral purposes and evading strategic work . Therefore, we have accumulated strategies and plans without implementation, and when they became in the long term after 17 years of the new system, we reached the bottom and reveals the political system’s defects and the performance booms. Temporary measures were no longer effective or even calming the pain, and the gap of distrust of any government action by the public widened and the public became He behaves in reverse, even with the virus, treating him as if he were a government lie.

 

At a time when the impersonator attributes a physician to the risks and deaths of individuals directly, the impersonator of the economic character causes the death of a nation indirectly showing its accumulated effect with time. And here we are reaping what politicians have caused, they have failed and drowned all the boat with them.

 

(*) Adviser to the Prime Minister for Economic Affairs

 

Copyright reserved for the Iraqi Economist Network. Republishing is permitted provided the source is indicated. June 16, 2020

http://iraqieconomists.net/

 

[1]See a quick review of the book Economic Reform in Iraq: A Theoretical Feasibility of the Transition to a Market Economy (Baghdad: Iraq Center for Studies, 2008) at the Iraqi Economists Network website:



An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Book-cover-264x346

[2] Submission by the United Nations Development Program - Iraq.

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Thumbnail-1-284x346

 

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Logo1-3

editors






http://iraqieconomists.net/ar/2020/06/16/%d8%a3-%d8%af-%d8%b9%d8%a8%d8%af%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%ad%d8%b3%d9%8a%d9%86-%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%b9%d9%86%d8%a8%d9%83%d9%8a-%d8%b7%d9%84%d8%a8-%d9%85%d8%b3%d8%aa%d8%b4%d8%a7%d8%b1%d9%8a%d9%86-%d8%a7%d9%82/



Prof. Karim Salem Al-Ghalbi *: Commenting on the article of Dr. Abdel-Hussein Al-Anbuge, "Economic consultants asked the Americans ... the implementation crisis or the crisis of advice."


19/06/2020



An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Kareem-Al-Ghalibi-image-2






I saw


The decree “The request of economic advisors from the Americans .. A crisis of implementation or a crisis of advice”, and although I agree with what the author of the article went, I would like to say that his proposals came late (and they are certainly better than not) and had it not been for the negotiating team to ask for advisers, perhaps He had not seen the light, and I would have liked to announce this problem from earlier and say that the role of professional economic advisors has been diminished by political elites and decision makers and replaced by non-specialist advisers who are partisan loyal to them. This ruling political class that suddenly moved towards luxury and luxury by their acquisition of areas of political and authoritarian influence, and politics became first ”and the economy comes to serve the interests and interests of politicians and their parties or political fiefdoms, Where are they from wasting resources, looting, wasting opportunities, stopping growth, widespread poverty, increasing unemployment rates, floping in futile decisions, failing economic policies (if any) and successive financial crises from time to time? At least in order to hear and what is said about (failure) of the advisors recently, although we are aware of what is happening between the corridors of politics and the executive.




Yes, the problem of Iraq is not that there are no economic advisors .. the country is rich in economic competencies and with experience and advice (inside and outside the country), and it diagnosed the problems of the Iraqi economy, but rather put solutions and remedies to develop it .. However, the influential political elites do not take the views of the two economies seriously, And exclusively by imposing their visions as though they are the most knowledgeable and no one else knows? From here, we also understand the phenomenon of proliferation of speech in matters of economics in the language of politics, not in the language of economics. Rent and from the rentier state.




The problem lies in the absence of any Iraqi tendencies to discuss Iraqi policy to discuss possible alternatives to reform economic conditions, as evidence of the stifling financial crises that follow the Iraqi economy and its rentier feature, and the lack of seriousness in setting economic programs and policies based on specific priorities, the economy retreated to the post-policy level , By an active act, in order to be in line with the service of political decision-makers and meet their ambitions and personal and partisan benefits in light of a state of financial and administrative corruption that has become a political phenomenon with a minor and explicit economic content, and this explains to us why the financial-monetary entrance was chosen as a framework to address the problems of the economy? There are those who see it as the easiest approach to take the most effective measures in absorbing the tools of controlling the problems of inflation and unemployment, and they did not go to the real problematic of the structural imbalance of the economy by adopting a policy to rebuild the economic structures in a way that convinces the people of the correctness of government approaches,

What happened is a deliberate neglect of the economy against the background of the goal of achieving financial and monetary stability, and this matter finds its confirmation of the widespread financial waste that occurred after the sharp rise in oil prices and the resultant (precipitation) of huge oil resources on the budgets of oil in which there is a rate of 90 % -95% of its revenues, while the ruling and influential elites did not manage to dispose of them as expected.




     Going first , I agreed with the counselor on the results of the efforts of Iraqi and foreign experts from the World Bank, the United Nations, the United States Agency for International Development, the German Agency, the Swedish Agency and other production of more than (16) strategies, plans, and a road map, and the question that poses the fate of these studies And the strategies in which he put more effort, money, time and experience? And the importance of the studies, I will present only three of them, to show the reader how useful and important each study is:




[list="font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 0rem; padding: 0px 0px 0px 1.25rem; box-sizing: border-box; border: 0px; font-family: DroidKufi, Lato, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-rendering: optimizelegibility; list-style-position: initial; list-style-image: initial; counter-reset: li 0; color: rgb(68, 68, 68); text-align: right; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"]
[*]Private Sector Development Strategy (2014-2030), this strategy came after intense discussions that lasted for more than (18) months between the Prime Minister’s Advisory Committee and representatives of the ministries of planning, industry and the private sector, as well as the support provided by the United Nations Development Program, and was aimed at Achieving growth and job creation through diversification of the private sector's fields of work. The resident representative of the United Nations Development Program and the Deputy Special Representative of the United Nations Secretary-General in Iraq, Ms. Liz Grande, said: “The new strategy has the potential to put the country on a path of sustainable long-term, irreversible growth. It is to protect Iraq from external shocks. ”This strategy translates a long-term vision, resulting from a participatory process between the public sector and the private sector, and it goes through three stages, leading to achieving full partnership with the private sector and includes enabling it through support and rehabilitation.



[*]The Industrial Strategy in Iraq until 2030 : Issued in July 2013 and prepared by a working group from the Ministry of Industry, Minerals and the Private Sector with the support of the advisory board as well as technical support from experts of the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) and the US Agency for International Development aiming to achieve the required diversity Through the contribution of industry in achieving sustainable development of the Iraqi economy and is part of a broader process of economic reform in Iraq (the National Development Plan, Energy Strategy, etc. ...) focuses on reviving the industry in Iraq and paying attention to putting the Iraqi economy on a promising path of development until 2030.



[/list]

This strategy means organizing the performance of the industrial system in all its aspects, including the industrial sector, the business environment, and the governance system, to maximize the chances of its success.




[list=3]
[*]National Strategy for Integrated Energy ( the Integrated the National the Energy Strategy ) prepared in 2013 by the International Advisory Office and supported by the World Bank and under the supervision of a committee of the board of advisers in the Council of Ministers and in cooperation with a number of ministries and funded by the re - fund the reconstruction of Iraq, aims to develop the energy sector in Iraq and the industries value The additive (petrochemicals, fertilizers, iron and aluminum production), and includes ambitious plans to adopt reforms and attract investments in the oil, gas and electricity sectors that contribute to achieving great financial returns and is expected to create approximately (10) million new job opportunities in the economy by 2030, as well as increase the sector's participation Private sector and its investments in the energy sector and related industries.



[/list]

Not to mention the national development plans (2010-2014), (2013-2017), (2018-2022), in which a lot of effort, money and time were drained, and that once the hard work was finished preparing them, they were left as an official document in the shelves of the Ministry of Planning Library to benefit Including them in later plans and as a source for students and researchers, and you have never seen the light. ”




Where is the problem?




Here, I agree with the author of the article that it is an implementation crisis and not a crisis of advice. The problem lies in the political quotas that govern the ministries, including the ministries of energy (oil, electricity, and industry) and the related internal and external agendas that hinder the implementation of these strategies as well as the unstable security conditions, especially those that witnessed Iraq after mid-2014 by the ISIS terrorist entity, which lasted until 2017 and the absence of an independent national decision.




The question now? Is it possible to address the situation and return first to these studies and strategies and put them into practice and application after their revision and scheduling of their programs?




The answer is yes, if there is sincere national will, political will, and independent self-determination, then we will be able to reform and put things right.




It became impossible to postpone this entitlement to address the deteriorating economic and financial situation. Iraq needs independent national policies that distance itself from the method of waste and loss, and we need an efficient economic administration that is far from the sinister tendencies of political administration, and here it must be remembered that any economic reform must be preceded by reform. A politician and a real war on financial and administrative corruption, because with their presence he will not be able to pass any reform policy and he has not been able to put these plans, studies and strategies into practice and follow-up.







(*) Professor of Economics at Al-Qadisiyah University / College of Administration and Economics

Copyright reserved for the Iraqi Economist Network. Republishing is permitted provided that the source is indicated. June 19, 2020

To download the article as a PDF, click on the following link






claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty Al-Kazemi aspires to obtain political support during his visit to Washington

Post by claud39 on Wed Jun 24, 2020 2:11 pm

[rtl]Al-Kazemi aspires to obtain political support during his visit to Washington[/rtl]



6/24/2020




An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Story_img_5ef326d360308



[rtl][Baghdad_Yan][/rtl]
[rtl]
Al-Arabi Al-Jadeed newspaper reported on Wednesday that Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kazemi is seeking political support from Washington during his scheduled visit to the United States next month.
[/rtl]

[rtl]In a report, the newspaper quoted an official in the Prime Minister’s Office as saying that “the visit, tentatively scheduled for after the twentieth of next July, is being prepared with the American side, and there is a willingness to prepare the files that will be discussed with the Americans, most notably the American military presence in Iraq, and a file Security cooperation, the general political situation, and economic support for Iraq, which Al-Kazemi aspires to obtain from the Americans.[/rtl]
[rtl]
The Iraqi official affirmed that "the Iranian-Iraqi rapprochement is sure that he will not be absent from the Americans' table," noting that "a government team is preparing for the visit, which may be postponed or advanced according to the changes in Iraq."
[/rtl]
[rtl]
He pointed out that "the delegation will include Iraqi ministers, advisers and military and security leaders, and it is scheduled to meet US President Donald Trump and other officials."
[/rtl]





claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty Foreign: Al-Kazemi will visit Washington next month

Post by claud39 on Wed Jun 24, 2020 2:15 pm

Foreign: Al-Kazemi will visit Washington next month




21 hours ago





An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 18236202055295_3425235345



Foreign Minister, Fouad Hussein, confirmed today, Tuesday, that Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kazemi will visit Washington next month on the sidelines of his meeting with the representative of the Secretary-General of the United Nations and head of the United Nations Assistance Mission in Iraq (UNAMI), Jenin Hennes-Blackshart.

The ministry said in a statement by Al-Mirbad that "the two sides discussed a number of issues related to international organizations working in Iraq."

Hussein stressed "the importance of respecting the country's sovereignty by neighboring countries, enhancing the principles of good neighborliness, and following diplomatic channels to face challenges and resolving crises," expressing his "rejection and denunciation of any breach or attack on Iraqi territory, and calling for the necessity of stopping such violations from the Turkish side, usually because it is Contradict international instruments and laws. "

He pointed out that "the government is keen to pursue a balanced policy in establishing relations with all, especially the neighboring countries," revealing that "his first foreign visits will be to Tehran and Riyadh to strengthen bilateral relations and open horizons for cooperation in order to achieve common interests."

The two sides also discussed the strategic dialogue round that was held between Iraq and America, and its importance in promoting the interests of the two countries, and its reflection on the security and stability of the region, "noting that" the Prime Minister's visit next month to Washington, DC, to complete the dialogue.

The statement added that the two sides discussed a number of regional issues, including: the Palestinian issue, and the Minister renewed the expression of Iraq’s consistent position to achieve peace and security, ending the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories, and the right of the Palestinian people to establish their independent state.



claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty The New Strategic Dialogue between the United States and Iraq: Experts' Perspectives from Both Sides

Post by claud39 on Wed Jun 24, 2020 6:01 pm

[size=39]The New Strategic Dialogue between the United States and Iraq: Experts' Perspectives from Both Sides[/size]


June 24, 2020







An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 000_1T74OT










“On June 12, The Washington Institute held a hypothetical political forum with Savior of the Dagger, Barbara Lev and Bilal Wahab. Dagher is one of the prominent political analysts in Iraq and a consultant to senior government and party officials. Lev is a Lapidus fellow at the institute, and previously held the position of Deputy Assistant Secretary of State For Iraq affairs, in addition to many other positions in the region, Wahhab is a "Wagner Fellow" at the institute where he focuses on governance in the "Kurdistan Region" and Baghdad. Below is a summary of their assessments.


The savior of Dagher



The bilateral strategic dialogue was launched at a time when the new Iraqi government is under intense internal pressure, facing demands to end the American military presence and participating in various other political debates. Although Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kazemi did not have the advantage [of chairing] a large parliamentary bloc to support his agenda, he has emerged as a compromise candidate to lead Iraq toward a more practical political system.


New poll data from the region provide information about the extent to which Al-Kazemi can benefit from public support as he talks and negotiates with US officials. In one of the polls, about 63 percent of the Iraqi respondents expressed their support for [the way he ran the country during] his first month in office.


 The results contradicted those obtained by his predecessor, Adel Abdul Mahdi, who had only 36 percent support during his first month in office. It is still too early to make a true assessment of Al-Kazimi's performance, but the figures reflect the people's confidence in his ability to meet the challenges facing Iraq.
Iraqis must first help themselves by showing enough political will to implement effective reforms and at the same time reduce Iranian influence
The attitudes of the Iraqi people toward Iran and the United States have changed significantly over the past three years, indicating a new phenomenon in the Iraqi political scene. Iran’s favorable views declined from 50 percent in 2017 to 15 percent today, while US support remained steady at around 30 percent.


 Likewise, while 74 percent of Iraqi respondents listed Iran as a reliable partner in 2017, that percentage has fallen to only 14 percent this year.


There is no doubt that the US-Iraqi dialogue focuses on the ways in which the two governments can reduce the rate of corruption in Iraq, because the people expressed great dissatisfaction with this issue during the mass demonstrations that the country witnessed before Al-Kazemi took over as prime minister.


 Economic reforms designed to ensure transparency and sustainable growth can only be achieved through enhanced stability, and US officials can play a vital role in this regard as well. 


However, they must draw lessons from past Iraqi efforts to combat corruption; Repeating mistakes made by the "Coalition Provisional Authority" and previous Iraqi governments will only undermine the support that Al-Kazemi receives and harms the prospects for actual reform.


In this sense, the Iraqis must first help themselves by showing enough political will to implement effective reforms and at the same time reduce Iranian influence.
 American support will largely depend on the ability of the Al-Kazemi government to meet Tehran's goal of strengthening its domestic spheres of influence.


Barbara Lev



The "Zoom Through Dialogue" launched on June 11th is a successful and necessary step in the political field. As a reminder, the Iraqi political context has been feverish, at least since January, due to the targeted assassination of Qassem Soleimani and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the symbolic vote in the Iraqi parliament to expel US forces, numerous failed attempts to form a new government in Baghdad, and the pandemic "Covid-19" , And the subsequent decline in oil prices. 


In Washington, anger prevailed over the continued targeting by Iraqi militias that led to the withdrawal of NATO staff and the massive consolidation of the US military presence, not to mention the impending US presidential elections and the long-standing pressure to return American forces to their homeland.


Despite all these problems, the pandemic compelled understandably the officials to limit dialogue to some basic economic and security issues.
 For the Iraqis, this dialogue helped defuse the flaming policy surrounding the idea of ​​organizing a bilateral event. He also focused on the priority countries place on economic support for Iraq. 
The Prime Minister should focus on professionalizing and modernizing the banking sector with the aim of creating an environment that prevents the spread of corrupt practices
For Americans, the dialogue helped to bolster the legitimacy of the US military mission by citing the original language of the bilateral "Status of Forces Agreement" and recently exchanging diplomatic notes for 2014 on this issue, focusing on emphasizing the responsibility of the Iraqi government to ensure the security of this mission. 


The event also sent a clear message to the Iraqi people through repeated US support for the elections and government accountability. From this standpoint, the two sides can describe the essence of the dialogue as a "victory".


Nevertheless, officials from both sides are still keen to see Al-Kazemi visit Washington as soon as possible, partly because of the possibility that such a trip will push each government to fulfill its promises and help resume military talks for the new era. 


Incorporating the US security assistance program as part of a larger effort by NATO will be more palatable politically, but coalition members will first want to know whether the US training mission is sustainable and under what conditions.
 Likewise, the international community will react negatively if militia attacks continue and if US policy stimulates a troop withdrawal.


On the issue of corruption, the Prime Minister should focus on professionalizing and modernizing the banking sector and modernizing it with the aim of creating an environment that prevents the spread of corrupt practices. 
The question is no longer whether the government is ready to acknowledge the problem, but rather whether it can muster sufficient political will to make controlling corruption a top priority.


Bilal Wahab



While Iraq is increasingly focusing on internal affairs to resolve local disputes, Al-Kazemi is in a good position to bridge the deep rift with the Kurdistan Region over oil and natural gas management. Doing so would be a major step towards placing the Iraqi energy sector on a more convincing basis from a legal standpoint. 


The United States can help by staying focused on strengthening ties between Erbil and Baghdad. Further deterioration may harm the mission of the United States to defeat the Islamic State and may provoke greater hostility within Iraq, further exacerbating the harmful use of identity-based policy for political gain.


Dollar auctions are another hotbed of domestic corruption, as it has become a platform for money laundering and support for Iranian interests
Another prominent point in the official statement of the strategic dialogue is Iraq's recognition of the need for reforms and the United States' offer to provide technical assistance in this area. However, the new government must show more political will than it did in the past. 
The reason why successive governments were unable to enact such reforms was because the country's patronage system limited its ability to mobilize the required collective action. Fortunately, the culture of patronage politics began to fade after the younger generation grew more resentful of its implications - corruption and incompetence. 
This system "succeeds" only when oil prices are high, and even then, political parties can only employ many people in an essentially bloated bureaucracy.


In the next stage, Al-Kazemi will have to use his popular support and draw momentum from the dialogue to lay the foundation for deep reforms. His first priority is to organize credible elections for next year. 


More broadly, tackling corruption must be more than a slogan - it must be seriously considered, planned and conceived, and monitored faithfully. 
This means prioritizing the reform of the banking sector, as Iraq’s economy remains almost entirely cash-based. Dollar auctions are another hotbed for domestic corruption, as it has become an arena for money laundering and support for Iranian interests. 


Finally, the government should reform the services sector by subjecting party finances to exposure and accountability. With the help of the United States, this step alone can go a long way toward reducing Iran's influence.


This summary was prepared by China Catx. The policy forum series was implemented thanks to the generosity of the "Florence Family and Robert Kaufman".


Source: Fikra Forum

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Dagher

The savior of Dagher
An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 LeafBarbara900x600

Barbara A. fiber
An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 WahabBilal

Bilal Wahab
Twitter
The opinions and opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or official policies of the Middle East Broadcasting Network (MBN).


https://www.alhurra.com/different-angle/the-new-us-iraq-strategic-dialogue-expert-views-from-both-sides
claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty How Iraq and the United States Can Further the Strategic Dialogue

Post by claud39 on Wed Jul 01, 2020 12:14 pm

[size=36]How Iraq and the United States Can Further the Strategic Dialogue[/size]


Shukur Khilkhal

Shukur Khilkhal is a researcher and a journalist. He works for Middle East Broadcasting Networks–Washington. Specializing in Middle East current affairs and cultural studies. Khilkhal has also worked on TV productions, writing and producing numerous television programs and documentaries.



An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 USArmyIraqLogistics-630x420





Also available in Arabic




July 1, 2020



The United States and Iraq officially launched the bilateral strategic dialogue on June 11 as an opportunity to mend relations under the newly formed Iraqi government. While Iranian backed forces hoped for the initial meeting to produce dramatic results vis-a-vis the future of U.S. presence in the region, the first round of talks instead focused on the diplomatic protocols necessary to lay the groundwork for forthcoming negotiations. 


Establishing a foundation is a necessary first step, but if both sides intend for the dialogue to probe successful, each must adjust its attitudes towards the other. In particular, it remains to be seen whether the United States will be able to initiate mutual agreements and collaborative projects from this theoretical framework.  



The joint statement issued at the end of the first session included a section about U.S. intent to “continue reducing forces”—worded in such a way as to mollify Iranian backed groups inside of Iraq while remaining noncommittal. This phrasing reflected the contentious nature of the dialogue, as pro-Iranian actors mounted a media driven, counter campaign in the days before the dialogue objecting to its nature and agenda.



 They demanded that the first round of talks include a clause on the removal of foreign troops from Iraq, and the undramatic contents of the initial statement suggested that their media campaign was ineffective. 


While armed Iranian factions are dissatisfied with the results of the first round of talks, it is unlikely that they will be able to escalate the situation in Iraq, though the recent arrests of Kata’ib Hezbollah figures suggests an attempt to do so. In fact, evidence points towards a decline in their ability to do so given that they no longer have the political cover that they enjoyed under the government of Adil Abdul-Mahdi. 



The Fatah Alliance, which is comprised of groups involved with the Popular Mobilization Forces and led by Hadi Al-Amiri, has begun to fracture as its current leadership continues to diverge from its original objectives. The tightening of U.S. sanctions has also weakened Iran's influence in the media space; its organizations, newspapers, and cultural centers have started to reduce staff and cut spending.


Yet while the inauguration of Mustafa Al-Kadhimi and popular frustration with Iran suggest that Iran’s grip on Iraq is weakening, the United States must not be too quick to declare the initial round of talks a “victory.” Historically, Iran does not surrender easily but rather adjusts its plans based on events and circumstance.



 Because the primary U.S. objective in Iraq is to neutralize Iran's spheres of influence, the Iraqi government’s abilities to affect U.S. policy comes primarily from its utility in countering the Iranian threat. The current Iraqi administration may consider this objective a vulnerability of the U.S. position and will most likely exploit it as a bargaining chip and pressure point.

As such, following the first U.S.-Iraq strategic dialogue session, there are a number of pertinent questions that remain. What has led the Iraqi government to take the risk of rejecting the Parliament's resolution to expel foreign troops from the country? Why does the Iraqi government risk angering a neighboring country with whom it shares a long border and is bound to politically, economically, and socially? And what drives it to risk confrontation with armed factions, which threaten to breach the civil peace?


U.S. diplomats must be able to answer these questions and understand the incentives they can provide Iraq if the strategic dialogue is to be successful. Currently, the United States lacks a well-defined, strategic plan in Iraq that would make it possible to build more productive talks in the future.



 Mixed messages from the United States about the presence of its troops in Iraq has left ordinary Iraqis frustrated. From the Iraqi perspective, their country is viewed by the United States as nothing more than a forward operating base to counter Iranian influence. During the most recent talks, the United States expressed interest in "helping Iraq deal with its crises... providing economic advisers," but Iraqis see this as merely diplomatic rhetoric.


 Moreover, the apparent U.S. willingness to consider withdrawing from Iraq gives the impression that it has little interest in the actual country and the wellbeing of the Iraqi people. As such, the United States must adopt a clearer policy towards Iraq with demonstrable follow-through if it wants Iraqis to help implement the U.S. objective of combating Iranian Influence. 
 

With the exception of its role in the War on Terror, the United States has not carried out any major projects in Iraq during the past ten years. Prior to its 2011 troop withdrawal, the U.S. administration had developed a project to assist in the reconstruction of Iraq.



 This plan consisted of numerous small-scale investment projects—such as building sports stadiums, health clinics, and improving the water and sewage infrastructures in a number of Iraqi governorates—which have had a positive impact on many Iraqis. But this type of aid has not been visible to most Iraqis since the troop withdrawal almost ten years ago. 


The joint statement issued after the first round of talks illustrated a good measure of the needed political pragmatism. However, it remains limited to a theoretical framework that has yet to be translated into well-defined plans and projects. To realize these objectives, the Iraqi government must understand that neutralizing Iran's influence in their country should not only be a U.S. goal but an Iraqi goal. Iraq must recognize that Iranian influence is behind a large share of its political, economic, and security-related problems.



 On the U.S. side, it must deliver a comprehensive plan that transforms the theoretical talk of "helping Iraq address its crises" into a tangible reality that can win over Iraqis and refute the arguments of political actors who oppose an Iraqi-partnership with the United States.


https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/fikraforum/view/Strategic-Dialogue-Iraq-USA-Iran-Security-Middle-East
claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty A U.S.-Iraq Strategic Dialogue: A Question of Interests and Expectations

Post by claud39 on Wed Jul 01, 2020 12:32 pm

[size=36]A U.S.-Iraq Strategic Dialogue: A Question of Interests and Expectations[/size]



Karl Kaltenthaler

Karl Kaltenthaler is a Professor of Political Science and Director of Security Studies at the University of Akron. He specializes in international security issues, violent extremism, and the politics of the Middle East and South Asia. He has served as a consultant to the US State Department, the US military, and other government agencies on issues related to US policy in the Middle East and South Asia.

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Dagher-85x128

Munqith Dagher

Munqith Dagher is the CEO of the Baghdad-based Independent Institute for Administration and Civil Society Studies (IIACSS).

Anthony Cordesman

Anthony H. Cordesman is the Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at CSIS. He directed the CSIS Middle East Net Assessment Project and codirected the CSIS Strategic Energy Initiative.




May 14, 2020


An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 USArmyIraqPatrolRoadArrest-630x420




Also available in Arabic







May 14, 2020



On April 7, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo called for a “Strategic Dialogue” between the United States and Iraq on the future of the bilateral relationship. The dialogue, meant to be a series of meetings between high-level U.S. and Iraqi officials, is intended to put all aspects of the U.S.-Iraqi relationship on the table. 

In order to understand what said strategic dialogue may entail, and what results it might produce, it is crucial to understand what the United States and Iraq—as well as Iran, as the other major interested party—see as their interests as Iraq and the United States look to restructure their relationship.

It is also necessary in defining the dialogue’s goals to look beyond the United States’ past focus on ISIS and the present challenge from Iran that have characterized the U.S.-Iraqi relationship over the past few years. Both parties should use the opportunity of a serious dialogue on the state of bilateral relations to consider how the United States and Iraq can shape a lasting strategic relationship—one the serves both their strategic interests and helps bring peace and stability to the region.

U.S. Interests in Iraq


Before addressing what the United States may ask of Iraq in the strategic dialogue, it is important to understand why Iraq matters to the United States. Some have argued that the United States should simply cut its losses and pull out. But the response to this suggestion is simple: the stability of and relationship with Iraq is of major strategic importance to the United States in ensuring the stability of the Gulf, the flow of petroleum to the global economy, and limiting the risk of a major war with Iran.

Withdrawal from Iraq would empower both Iran’s hardline regime and regional terrorism and extremism—carrying serious repercussions for U.S. national security. Just as the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq in 2011 proved to be a costly and, in hindsight, grave mistake, a future U.S. withdrawal of its forces and support for the Iraqi government—particularly support for Iraqi security forces—would have a major impact on U.S. interests in the Middle East.   

The importance of a continued U.S. relationship with Iraq can be distilled further into threats from four broad categories: those posed by Iran, extremist groups such as ISIS, the regional and domestic impact of a divided Iraq, and great power competition. The United States must keep focused on all four interests, or Iraq will become a major source of concern for the United States into the future.
 
Iraq is central to the U.S. strategy of containing the expansion and power of Iran’s current regime. No country in the Gulf region is currently more important to the United States in trying to check the designs of Iran’s Supreme Leader, hardline revolutionaries, and the IRGC. If the United States can help Iraq’s leaders build up a stable and strong Iraq, this would would be a critical addition to deterring Iranian ambitions and Iranian military pressure on the Gulf region.

Iraq is now facing a period of governance dysfunction, deep internal divisions, and serious economic problems. However, it has a tremendous amount of oil resources and a large and educated population. If Iran is able to exploit Iraq’s problems to exert control, this would be a tremendous force multiplier for Iran. But such an effort to divide or completely dominate Iraqi politics will face significant opposition from many Shia Arabs, Sunni Arabs, and Kurdish Iraqis. The pressure will in heighten sectarian, ethnic, and regional tensions—very possibly leading to another Iraqi civil war. 

Such a civil conflict would in turn foster serious regional challenges and encourage terrorism and extremism. An unstable Iraq would help foster both Sunni and Shia extremism throughout the region, in particular aiding in the resurgence of ISIS and already hinted at with the groups increasing activating inside of Iraq. Moreover, were a highly sectarian, Shia Iraqi government pressed by Iran to exclude Sunnis from a political voice, Sunni Arabs might well find ISIS the lesser of two evils—repeating what happened following the U.S. withdrawal in 2011. The United States would be hard pressed to ignore such a scenario, suggesting that the deterioration of Iraqi sovereignty would likely lead to a new U.S. military commitment.

The United States should actually refocus its concerns on ISIS in the short-term as well. Making a political declaration that ISIS is destroyed because it no longer holds territory ignores the facts on the ground. ISIS is still very much alive and active in Iraq. In fact, it is engaged in an active guerilla campaign in Iraq’s Sunni-dominated areas, which has recently intensified. ISIS is currently much stronger in Iraq than Al Qaeda was when the United States left Iraq in 2011. 

Moreover, the Iraqi army is still relatively weak after the triple punch to its capabilities that came when Iraq’s politics pushed the United States to withdraw in 2011. In the subsequent period, Nouri al Maliki gutted Iraqi forces of competent officers and replaced them with compliant political lackeys. This atrophy in leadership helped lead to the mass desertions and units destroyed in the war against ISIS.
 
U.S. training and support for the Iraqi army is now the key to keeping Iraqi security forces on the path to regeneration. Iraq’s official military remains weaker than the Popular Mobilization Forces, where many of the Shia units are aligned with Iran. Allowing Shia militias to dominate the Iraqi security sphere will help ISIS to regain strength, not defeat it.

Finally, the U.S. has a strategic interest in Iraq to counter efforts by Russia and China to gain economic and political influence there. Both countries have already made significant efforts to increase their influence in Iraq at the expense of the Unites States. On the private side, U.S. financial investments in Iraq could be cut short if Chinese or Russian firms come to replace U.S. firms. The appearance of the United States abandoning Iraq to the Russians and Chinese would also have regional implications, signaling to other countries that the United States is a fair-weather and ultimately unreliable partner.

The bottom line when it comes to U.S. interests in Iraq is that America has a strong and compelling interest in a stable, prosperous, and politically balanced Iraq, especially given the downsides of the alternative. If the United States withdraws from Iraq before those objectives are achieved, the U.S. will ultimately face a catastrophe in Iraq that is likely to be more costly than its current investments in the country.

At the same time, staying in Iraq requires major changes in Iraqi politics, governance, and development. Iraq’s problems scarcely started with the U.S. invasion in 2003. Some date back to its creation as a state, others to its development since the fall of the monarchy, and many are the product of Saddam Hussein. Today’s problems are also all too much the result of its present leaders. The United States can only help an Iraq that helps itself.

Iranian Interests in Iraq


Iran often acts as a central counterpoint to U.S. interests in Iraq, with its central aims boiling down to making sure that Iraq never again poses a security threat to its eastern neighbor. Iran also looks to use Iraq as a way to add to the former’s strategic power in the region while maintaining and growing Iraq as a market for Iranian goods and services. Iran’s current security elites, whether reformist, hardliner, or otherwise, will not abandon Iraq as long as it remains weak and divided. Iran’s rulers know that they do not have that luxury.

After a years-long war in the 1980s against Saddam Hussein, Iran has decided that the best way to neutralize a potential grave national security threat to Iran’s present regime is to have “their people” running the show in Baghdad. Iran’s leaders do not think this is easily accomplished; they assume that foreign powers, particularly the United States, will seek to weaken the hand of the pro-Iranian Shia blocs in Iran, and that many Iraqis—Sunni Arabs, Kurds, and nationalist Shia Arabs—do not want to see pro-Iranian parties dominating Iraqi politics. 

Control of Iraq also serves a broader regional purpose, part of a land bridge between Iran and Lebanon—with its de-facto control by Hezbollah. Thus, controlling Iraq is a means to expand Iranian power and influence in the Middle East, while also securing their position against potential regional competitors.

Finally, Iraq is central to Iran because it is an important market for Iran’s goods and services. This has never been more the case than now, with Iran reeling under the impact of sanctions on its economy. Iraq is a market for distressed Iranian goods—goods that can find no other markets. Pro-Iranian Shia politicians have facilitated this dumping despite the toll it has taken on Iraq’s own producers and consumers. However, Iranian imports into Iraqi markets have resulted in unemployment and inflation in Iraq and have deeply angered the Iraqi street. 

Iraqi Interests in the Future of the Country 


The most difficult issue to address in shaping both a meaningful strategic dialogue and a lasting Iraq-U.S. strategic relationship is what Iraqis want for their own country. Iraq is now a deeply divided country with unstable politics, governance, and economics. Aside from the obvious divisions of Iraq into Shia, Sunni, and Kurdish populations, those populations themselves are riven by cleavages. Iraqi political institutions, set up in the wake of the U.S. invasion in 2003, have amplified these divisions and are a major factor in Iraq’s political paralysis. 

There are two large, over-arching, issues in Iraqi politics that dominate all others: the balance between the United States and Iran in terms of foreign policy and, on a domestic level, how to create a sustainable governance system that brings Iraq prosperity, increases government legitimacy, and leads to Iraqi politicians serving the people as the source of political power. These two issues now sharply limit Iraq’s ability to move out of its current political crisis; both also have the potential to destroy Iraq as a functioning country.  

The balance between the United States and Iran is such a thorny issue for Iraqi politics because the two issues are interconnected—Iraq’s political camps in Iraq depend on the patronage or balancing function performed by the two countries. Some major Iraqi Shia parties look to Iran as a political model as well as a source of funds and expertise to help them gain political advantage in Iraq. Other, nationalist, Shia Iraqis seek to either balance Iran and the United States, or to have both powers leave Iraqi politics. In contrast, Sunni Arabs and Kurdish Iraqis look to the United States to balance the power of Iran in Iraq. They fear that without the presence of the United States, pro-Iranian sectarian parties would seek to do what they did in 2011: marginalize and subjugate Sunni and Kurdish Iraqis. 

Right now, Iraq has a policy-making system that involves bringing representatives of various Iraqi communities into representative bodies. These bodies give each factional leader a degree of political power, which they often use to serve their own interests. These bodies have fostered the creation of a patron-client based political system where political parties are more interested in dividing the spoils of power than on moving the country forward on important political issues.

Iraq desperately needs for the United States and Iran to not exacerbate these aspects of Iraq’s current crises. The country needs a stable foundation for moving forward and creating a future, for itself and the region, that does not involve conflict and constant inter-communal competition.

What the U.S.-Iraq Strategic Dialogue May Entail


Aside from all of the major considerations discussed above, the timing of the call for strategic dialogue, which came after a series of attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq by Shia militias allied with Iran, suggests that the most immediate reason for such intergovernmental discussions is to deal with the security of U.S. forces in Iraq. It is also very likely, given the Trump administration’s waning patience with Iran’s significant influence and power inside Iraq, that the meetings will be used as an opportunity to pose a very significant set of questions and demands to the Baghdad government.

Likely U.S. demands and questions for the Iraqi government include:


  • A demand that the Iraqi government guarantee the security of U.S. forces, the U.S. embassy in Iraq, and U.S. civilians and firms working in Iraq

  • When and how will Baghdad commit to reigning in the power of Iran-aligned Shia militias and truly put them under central government authority?

  • What credible steps will Iraq take to gain energy independence from Iran?

  • What credible steps will the Iraqi government take to reduce the sectarian nature of Iraqi politics, particularly the dominance of pro-Iranian Shia political forces in the country?

  • What steps will the Iraqi government take toward curtailing rampant corruption and providing basic services to the population?

  • What level of U.S. forces along with civil and military aid does Iraq want, and what will Iraq do to show it can unite, govern, and organize to use that aid effectively?


[size]
While it is one thing to know what questions or demands the U.S. side may pose to the Iraqis, it is another thing to consider what the United States may offer—or threaten—depending on the answers or actions it gets in response to these points. If Iraq is unprepared to give the United States a suitable response and define a suitable strategic relationship, it is possible that the balance of carrots and sticks may end up weighted toward the stick—U.S. withdrawal. Especially given the staggering cost of the COVID-19 pandemic to the U.S. economy, Iraq must already expect that U.S. aid will be less generous than it has been in the past.

Yet there are plenty of reasons to engage. The worst possible result for both Iraq and the region would be a strategic dialogue between the United States and Iraq that results in a failure to create a stable relationship. Such a result could entail withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq, cutting off all U.S. aid, or even imposing U.S. sanctions against Iraq.

The Iraqi economy is reeling from decades of chronic mismanagement, record low oil prices, and the COVID-19 pandemic. A U.S. decision to end aid completely or an imposition of U.S. sanctions against Iraq could push the Iraqi state into outright destitution and the inability to provide the most basic functions. 

On the other hand, a failure to reach a functional strategic relationship could also result in a set of counter-productive consequences for the United States. Such an outcome could result in an increase in Iranian power. Moreover, Iranian resource and manpower expenditure to press its influence in Iraq may be seen as unnecessary if the U.S. presence were gone from Iraq, allowing those resources to be redirected in order to bolster the regime at home or divert to other pro-Iranian allies in the region.

The Importance of Realistic Expectations


While the outcomes of a failed strategic dialogue outlined above seem like the worst cases scenario, these outcomes are very much a possibility unless the U.S. government and Iraq’s divergent political forces each maintain realistic expectations of each other.

Iraqi political elites must realize that the status quo in Iraq is not tenable over the long run. At a minimum, these elites must be able to promise and deliver security for U.S. military forces and civilians in Iraq. Iraqi political elites must also work to move toward a political model that is not based primarily on communal identities in zero-sum competition. This is easier said than done, but it is clear that Iraq is heading toward economic and political failure if its political model is not changed to one that prioritizes Iraqi identity and interests over sub-national agendas.

At the same time, the U.S. government must develop realistic expectations of what the Iraqis can actually deliver. It is reasonable and correct to expect that the Iraqi government will protect U.S. forces and civilians in the country. It is also reasonable to expect that U.S. aid to Iraq does not disappear into a rabbit hole of corruption. But both expectations will need time to fulfill, as its leadership works to get Iraq on a path toward effective and clean government. 

Here, the United States can play an important role in nurturing effective government in Iraq by staying on its present course in calling out corruption, helping with infrastructure development, good policing, and other endeavors that can help build Iraq’s future. Training and educating Iraq’s next generation of politicians, security forces, and bureaucrats is a critical U.S. function. 

Most importantly, the United States cannot expect Iraq to make a clear choice between Iran and the United States. The reality is that a democratic Iraq cannot definitively choose in a way that that would not fundamentally destabilize Iraq. The demographics and geography of Iraq are such that asking Iraq to expunge Iranian influence from the country is unrealistic. The U.S. government must accept an Iraq that has good relations with both the United States and Iran. 

Despite the challenges, Iraq and the United States do have a viable framework for a strategic dialogue that they can build upon existing agreements. The joint U.S.-Iraq Status of Forces Agreement and the Strategic Framework Agreement signed in December 2008 and implemented in January 2009 cover nearly all fields of possible cooperation between the two countries and address many of these issues. 
These agreements would be a good place to re-start a dialogue between the two countries as to respective expectations and commitments. Iraq needs a United States committed to its security and the United States needs an Iraq that views the United States as a partner and friend. In any case, a strategic dialogue is the place to start and both sides have every reason to define a new relationship that can lead to a lasting strategic partnership.


https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/fikraforum/view/Iraq-Strategic-Dialogue-United-States

[/size]
claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty Al-Kazemi heads the second round of strategic dialogue in the White House

Post by claud39 on Tue Jul 07, 2020 1:56 pm

Al-Kazemi heads the second round of strategic dialogue in the White House





2020/07/07







An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 %D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%A7%D8%B8%D9%85%D9%8A








Shafaq News / A spokesman for the Prime Minister, Ahmed Mulla Talal, revealed that the second round of strategic dialogue between Iraq and America will be held in America, headed by Mustafa Al-Kazemi.
Mulla Talal said in a press conference held after the cabinet meeting attended by Shafaq News, that "the first round of strategic dialogue aimed to reach a clear vision about the withdrawal of US forces as well as other files," noting that "the second round will start when the White House opens its doors. There is a visit by Mustafa Al-Kazemi to Washington in this regard. "
The strategic dialogue between the United States and Iraq started with its first round on June 11, through the video conference system due to the measures to prevent the epidemic, and discussed organizing relations between the two countries at various levels, especially the security side.




https://shafaaq.com/ar/%D8%B3%DB%8C%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%A9/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%A7%D8%B8%D9%85%D9%8A-%D9%8A%D8%AA%D8%B1%D8%A3%D8%B3-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AC%D9%88%D9%84%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AB%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D9%85%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AD%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%AA%D9%8A%D8%AC%D9%8A-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A8%D9%8A%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A3%D8%A8%D9%8A%D8%B6/
claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty Ambassador Tueller Speaks About the Upcoming Strategic Dialogue

Post by claud39 on Sat Jul 11, 2020 10:04 am

Ambassador Tueller Speaks About the Upcoming Strategic Dialogue



https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=622520748474145





https://iq.usembassy.gov/
claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty Concluding treaties in Iraqi legislation

Post by claud39 on Sun Jul 12, 2020 4:39 pm

[size=36][rtl]Concluding treaties in Iraqi legislation[/rtl][/size]




Tuesday 07 July 2020





An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Alsabaah-39421










Dr.. Ali Mahdi *
 

Prior to the start of bilateral negotiations between the Iraqi government and the government of the United States of America about the joint strategic framework agreement on June 10, many questions and questions were raised about the nature of these negotiations and the results that will result from them, and the most ambiguous ones.



Focusing on the composition of the Iraqi negotiating delegation and its level of performance, and the demands of some to reconsider its composition and the importance of its representation for some institutions and sectors, which created a state of confusion and confusion among large sectors of followers and those interested in political affairs.



In order to clarify the conclusion of treaties systematically and scientifically, this article was prepared which deals with the nature of the treaties and the stages of their conclusion and the main trends of the authorities competent to conclude and ratify them, as well as to identify the comparative law, and focus on concluding treaties in Iraq.



 

What is a treaty?



The treaty: means every international agreement concluded between two or more countries in writing and subject to international law, whether it was done on one or more documents and whatever the name given to it ([1]). As for the Iraqi Treaty Contract Law No. 35 of 2015, he defined the treaty as matching the wills Editorially proven whatever its designation is between the Republic of Iraq or its government and another country or countries or its governments or an international organization or any person of international law recognized by the Republic of Iraq for the purpose of causing legal effects subject to the provisions of international law regardless of the name of the document or the number of documents that are written It contains the provisions of compatibility, such as a treaty, agreement, agreement, protocol, covenant, covenant, common record, memos, letters, exchanged books, or any other designations.



To them in this law in the treaty.



The international treaty consists of four basic elements:



1. It is an agreement between two or more persons of public international law.



2. This agreement must be in writing.



3. To be concluded in accordance with the provisions of international law.



4. That the aim of its conclusion be to create or arrange legal effects. 



The jurists considered international law as the basis of the validity of the treaty is the consent of all parties and their express expression of acceptance, approval or signature, and the non-permissibility of any treaty without the acceptance and affirmation of its parties without the coercion of one party to another, and the treaty must be valid and signed on legitimate things, otherwise it will be null and It must be fulfilled, and this offer and acceptance requires that it be issued by countries that have the capacity to dispose of the international treaties and interests they conclude ([2]).
 



Stages of treaty making and procedures
The treaty passes through several stages, which are negotiations, then editing the text, then ratification and then registration and publication, and here is some information for each of them:



1) Negotiation: It is an exchange of views between representatives of two or more countries with the intention of reaching an international agreement between them ([3]), and these negotiations may be through personal interviews or official meetings, and heads of state may negotiate directly, 
But most often this is done by the Minister of Foreign Affairs or their representatives to countries or organizations
Internationalism.



2) Editing and signing the treaty: When the negotiations are successful, a written text of the treaty is edited and subject to signing, the treaty is edited in the language of the parties involved in the negotiations, and for national considerations the treaty is written in the language of each party, and after the completion of the treaty editing, the representatives of the negotiating countries sign it to be carried What was agreed upon among them, and the names of negotiators may be signed in full or in the initials of the names, in the event that they are not provided with the necessary authorization to sign or in the case of wanting to return to their governments for consultation before the final signature ([4]).



3) Ratification: It is not sufficient for a state to adhere to a treaty once its representatives have signed it. Rather, it must be accompanied by or following it, which indicates the state’s final acceptance of association with the treaty. It is not just a formality, but a very important act, and it is intended to ratify the treaty by the internal organs of the state, in a way that obliges the state at the international level. [5]



It is worth noting that many countries of the world make ratification the prerogatives of the legislative and executive powers, and this method means the competence to ratify treaties. The head of state shall have the condition that he first obtain the approval of Parliament.



4) Registration of the international treaty: The registration of the international treaty is a system aimed at achieving openness in the field of international relations, according to which states parties are required to deposit copies of treaties with a special international body with a view to enabling it to record it in a special record, and then publishing it periodically. Article 102 stipulates From the Charter of the United Nations of 1945, the agreements concluded by the members of the United Nations must be registered in the Secretariat of the United Nations General Assembly, and in the event of non-registration, that treaty cannot be adhered to, and that agreement is before any branch of the United Nations.
 

Treaty authorities



There are three directions regarding granting powers to the authorities to conclude and ratify treaties:
 The first direction: It gives full powers to the executive authority, and it was prevalent under the absolute rule of property, as it is within the jurisdiction of the executive and embodied in the head of state, as well as in dictatorial systems, as the head of state in these systems is unique in ratifying treaties 
([6]).



One of the justifications for this trend is that the conclusion of treaties requires complicated procedures that are fast, and this is what the parliaments could not perform, and this trend does not represent a constitutional trend that can be relied upon or adopted, since the singularity of the executive authority in foreign affairs without the participation of Parliament may lead to the possibility of submission This authority for inclinations and trends does not serve the interests of the state. One example of this trend is France under the constitution of 1852 and Japan in the constitution of 1889.



The second direction: It is the direction that singled out the legislature for ratifying treaties as representing the people, and the role of the government is limited to negotiation and signing without ratification, the Soviet Constitution of 1977, and the Chinese Constitution of 1982, as it stipulates in accordance with (Article 67, paragraph 14) that the decision on ratification The important treaties and agreements concluded with foreign countries and their abolition shall be within the competence of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress. On the basis of this trend, democracy requires the participation of representatives of the people in concluding treaties.



The third direction: this trend takes place by sharing both the executive and legislative powers of approval and ratification, and this method is used by most of the constitutions of the countries of the world at the present time ([7]), including the effective Iraqi constitution, and the owners of this trend see granting jurisdiction to ratify treaties to the head of state as Head of the executive branch, subject to the approval of Parliament. This method was adopted by the French Constitution of 1875 and the subsequent French constitutions, which granted the executive authority to present the treaty or international agreements to the legislature for the purpose of approval. 



Conducting negotiations and signing agreements is within the jurisdiction of the executive authority, yet requires the approval of the National Assembly in order to be binding, however there are some international agreements of a technical, administrative or executive nature that do not need the approval of Parliament, and in this same context, some constitutions are binding on the president of the authority The executive must offer the ratification of the treaty to the legislature when it is concerned with the following matters:



1. Peace treaties.



2. Alliance treaties.



3. Trade treaties.



4. Navigation treaties.



5. Treaties that entail amendment in state lands, or that relate to their sovereignty rights.



6. Treaties that burden the state’s budget and carry the state’s public treasury expenses not included in the budget.
 

In Comparative Law (Federal Germany)



The German Basic Law of 1949 organizes the conclusion and ratification of treaties by granting legislative authority and in particular the Federal Parliament (the Bundestag) broad powers to manage Germany's federal relations with foreign countries ([8]). It has provided a set of articles on organizing relations with the foreign state and international organizations, The federation is the one that manages relations with the outside, taking into account the interests of the states within it, as the states participate with the union in discussing the texts of the treaty that the union holds whenever this treaty affects its residents, if the constitution requires consulting the state before the conclusion of this treaty, and the states have already expressed their opinion in many Of the treaties, for example, (North Rhine-Westphalia) participated in the discussion of the texts of the Treaty of the European Coal and Steel Group held in 1952, as this treaty directly affected it, and this state was able to oblige the Union to amend some of its texts, as it found them inconsistent 
And its interests ([9]).



The Basic Law has organized the competent authorities to manage the file of relations with other countries. According to Article (59), the president of the federation was granted the right to represent the federation in matters of international law and conclude treaties with foreign countries in the name of the federation, and usually the president of the federation empowers the foreign minister, minister of state or the German ambassador for the purpose of doing this on his behalf, and then ratifies them.



The party responsible for concluding treaties is the president of the federation, but the foreign policy itself is within the jurisdiction of the federal government, but the practical reality indicates that the president does not exercise this jurisdiction except in theory, as the foreign minister has in effect concerned the authority to contract and conclude treaties, and he will be responsible for That treaty when questioned in the Federal Parliament 
(The Bundestag).



The Basic Law obligated the Federal Parliament (the Bundestag) to form a committee to follow up on the Union's foreign affairs ([10]), and the treaties concluded by the Federal President and with the signature of a neighbor by the Minister of Foreign Affairs must be approved by the Federal Parliament, so the Federal Parliament was given an important role in Ratification of the treaties concluded by the government, and may be done by both houses together and with the consent of the absolute majority, and this may be done by the parliament (the Bundestag) only 
([11]).
 

The organization of treaties in Iraq



The Iraqi legislation regarding the conclusion of treaties dealt with the authorities concerned with concluding treaties, signing, agreeing and ratifying, and determining the authority with the competence to diagnose the negotiating delegation and the authorized signatories, as well as identifying issues of fateful nature for the state that need a special majority in order to agree and conclude international treaties and agreements.



These legislations have given the right to negotiate and agree to the Council of Ministers to conclude treaties. Either ratification is a common competence between the Head of State and the House of Representatives.
 

• The conclusion of treaties






The Iraqi constitution defines the powers of the Council of Ministers in Article (80): to plan and implement the country's general policy and general plans, as well as to negotiate and sign international treaties and agreements. 



The internal system of the Council of Ministers No. 2 of 2019 stipulated in Article (2) that defined the functions of the council as follows: drawing and signing foreign and economic, trade and financial policy, negotiating and signing international treaties and agreements or whoever authorizes it, as well as agreeing to accept grants, aid, gifts, and donations Submitted by foreign governments to the Iraqi government 
The official authorities and vice versa according to the law. Of these two texts, the Council of Ministers is concerned with setting the foreign policy of the state and concluding international treaties and agreements.



Regarding the procedures for concluding treaties, the Cabinet is concerned with expressing opinion on any negotiations after studying by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and checking the State Consultative Council according to the following text: The competent authorities present the draft of the bilateral treaty before negotiating its conclusion within an appropriate period to the relevant bodies of the treaty and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs To study it, express an opinion on it, and present it, along with the views of the relevant authorities, to the State Consultative Council to give legal advice on this matter, and then submit it to the Council of Ministers for its opinion, (Treaty of Contracts Article, Article 4, 
First). 



The law authorizes the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in accordance with Article (25) that: Based on the approval of the Council of Ministers, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs undertakes the preparation of negotiation credentials, authorization to sign, ratification or approval documents, credentials for the exchange of ratification documents, minutes of exchange of certificates documents, notes supporting ratification or approval and accession documents for the purposes specified in this Law.



It is worth noting that the internal system of the Council of Ministers has set for some issues a special majority, which is approval by three-fifths when making its decisions, regarding some issues of greatest importance, and this is what it referred to (Article 7, III):



1 - That decisions be taken by a majority of three-fifths of the number of votes of those present, including the president, on the following issues:



A- Of a strategic nature.



B- Related to national sovereignty, including the presence of foreign forces in Iraq, and how to organize their work.



C- Regarding the international borders of the Republic of Iraq and strategic international relations.



From this text: The approval of any agreement whose articles include these subjects needs a ratio other than the majority of those present who are usual to take it in cabinet decisions, and it was determined by a majority of three-fifths, and this reflects the importance of the general agreement when making decisions with a fateful dimension 
To the state.



The designation of the negotiating delegation is the prerogative of the Council of Ministers, and the Prime Minister and the Minister of Foreign Affairs participate in the negotiating delegation without the need to show the credentials, by virtue of their positions, either the other people who participate in any delegation regarding the conclusion of a treaty, it is necessary to show the authorization document that Issued by signature of the Prime Minister and the Minister of Foreign Affairs. (Treaty of Contracts Law, Article 1-4).



Among these texts is that those concerned with negotiations, preparing the text of the treaty and signing it, and specifying the negotiating delegation, from the powers of the Council of Ministers, through the Prime Minister, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, or any employees in the state, are appointed by the Council of Ministers according to a document representing the Republic of Iraq in the negotiation that is issued With the signature of the Prime Minister and the Minister of Foreign Affairs (Treaty Law No. 35 of 2020, Article I, VI), that is, the right to negotiate is the exclusive jurisdiction of the Council of Ministers, and not from other parties, and that talking about demanding the participation of others within the negotiating delegation, which took place in The media prior to the start of the strategic dialogue between Iraq and the United States, with the importance of representation for the House of Representatives or from the regional government or governorates that are not organized in a region, as well as for some social institutions or segments, these claims do not have a constitutional, legal or regulatory basis, and they are in one way or another Weakening the position of the Iraqi negotiating delegation in front of the party’s delegationThe other is the negotiator.
 

Ratification of the agreement



First: The approval of the House of Representatives



After agreeing to the treaty and signing it by the executive authority, the procedures for ratification must be implemented in order to take effect. That constitution was drawn up when it stipulated the powers of the President of the Republic: ratification of international treaties and agreements after approval of the House of Representatives, and it is considered ratified after fifteen days have passed since the date of its receipt (Article 73bis).



 This is what the Treaty of Contracts Law referred to (Article 27, Fifth): After signing the treaty, the concerned party sends it with the authorization document to negotiate and sign to the General Secretariat of the Council of Ministers to obtain its approval and send it to the House of Representatives to organize the process of ratification.



The law of concluding treaties stipulated for the purpose of approval of the House of Representatives an absolute majority of its members, except for international treaties and agreements that affect the fate of the state where in order to obtain approval there must be a two-thirds majority of the number of members of the House of Representatives. The following:



First: Border treaties and treaties that affect the territorial sovereignty of the Republic of Iraq.



Second: Peace and Peace Treaties.



Third: Alliance political, security and military treaties.



Fourth: Treaties of establishing or acceding to regional organizations ([12]).



Fifth: Ratification of the President of the Republic.



In order to ratify the treaty, it stipulated (Article 27, Sixth): 



The Presidency of the Republic shall ratify the treaty after the approval of the House of Representatives.
After the approval of the House of Representatives to conclude the treaty according to the required majority, the President of the Republic will ratify it, and it shall be considered ratified after fifteen days from the date of its receipt.



Thus, the ratification of the President of the Republic is of a formal nature, as the original by ratification is the House of Representatives that has the real power to pass a contract
Treaty.



The Iraqi legislation gave the ministry full powers to conclude and sign treaties, in terms of defining the delegation, negotiating, preparing the text and signing it, while specifying certain proportions when making the decision for some crucial issues, and for this there is no legislative basis for some votes demanding reconsideration of the nature of the negotiating delegation As for ratification, these legislations have adopted the approval of the House of Representatives and the formal ratification of the President of the Republic, with specific rates set for passing some of the treaties of a fateful nature to the Iraqi state, which is the trend 
Which was adopted by most democratic countries with a parliamentary system.
 



* Vice President of the Baghdad Development Center
Legal and economic
______________
 

([1]) Vienna Treaty of 1969, Article Two, First Paragraph Item (A).



([2]) Dr. Ali Sadiq Abu Haif, Public International Law, previous reference, p. 428.



([3]) Dr. Ali Khalil Ismail Al-Hadithi, World International Law, Part One, Arab Renaissance House, 2010, Cairo, p. 34.



[4] Article 12, paragraph 1, 2 of the 1969 Vienna Convention.



([5]) Article 14 of the Vienna Convention Law of 1969.



([6]) Charles Rousseau, International Law International, translated by Shukrallah Khalifa and Abdel-Hassan Saad, eligibility for publication and distribution, Beirut, 1982, p. 48.



[7] Charles Rousseau, Public International Law, op. P. 48.



([8]) Article 31 of the German Basic Law of 1949.



([9]) Robert R. Bowie and Carle.Friedrich - Studies in Federalism-Published by Liter-Brawn and Company- Boston, Mass-1954. p. 385



([10]) Article 45 of the German Basic Law of 1949



([11]) Al-Mirblichka: The Contemporary Government of Germany, translated by Muhammad Hakki, The Egyptian Anglo Library, Cairo, 1973, p. 100.



([12]) Article 17 of Treaty Law No. 35 of 2015.









claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty Iraq Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kadhimi in danger of failing Iraqis and the US

Post by claud39 on Sun Jul 12, 2020 4:42 pm

[size=37]Iraq Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kadhimi in danger of failing Iraqis and the US[/size]

July 05, 2020


An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Khadimi



Mustafa Al-Kadhimi’s Iraqi government is two months old and his Cabinet is still incomplete, there is an Iran problem, a militia problem, a Daesh problem, a financial crisis, an epidemic, and there is a revolution at Baghdad’s gates. Al-Kadhimi has high expectations from the US and even higher ones from the Iraqi people — so far, he is failing both.


US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo expressed those concerns to the new prime minister back in May and pledged to support him to “deliver on his bold agenda for the sake of the Iraqi people.” Al-Kadhimi will visit the US this month to continue the strategic dialogue between the two countries.


 He needs Washington to continue to support Iraq financially and continue to provide training and equipment to the compromised Iraqi security forces, in which militias tied to Iran have primacy and control over Iraq.


Iraq’s protesters have great expectations and they are skeptical that Al-Kadhimi’s interim government can change things. The real power lies with the Council of Representatives, where parties tied to Tehran make up the majority and will decide on whether to hold new elections. These are the very same parties whose militias are killing protesters and attacking the US’ Baghdad mission to ensure the enduring defeat of Daesh.


Qais Khazali, who heads an Iranian-backed terror militia group, warned the PM to stay in his lane just days after counterterrorism forces last month conducted a raid against a Kata’ib Hezbollah cell. Khazali reminded Al-Kadhimi that he is only an interim prime minister and that he should focus on holding new elections — elections that Khazali will not allow to happen.


If the parties tied to Tehran do decide to hold new elections, they will lose power. They are not likely to do that; instead they are focused on killing the protest movement, attacking Americans, and threatening Al-Kadhimi to push the US out or else. While these militias flex their muscles, Daesh is taking advantage of their distraction.


Attempts by Iran’s proxies to crush the peaceful, unarmed protest movement have failed. After more than 600 were killed and tens of thousands injured, it became clear the uprising was pressing forward, insisting on radical reforms and chanting “Iran barra, Iraq hurra” (Iran out, Iraq free).


Al-Kadhimi is Iraq’s interim prime minister because the parties and militias tied to Iran accepted him. He “succeeded” in forming a government with the support of Qassem Soleimani’s replacement, Esmail Ghaani, the new commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ Quds Force, and Hassan Nasrallah of Lebanon’s Hezbollah. That means something: Iran has its compromise candidate that is constrained by a Council of Representatives dominated by parties that favor the Islamic Republic over Iraq and Iraqis.


Al-Kadhimi was a face acceptable to the West. The PM must be accepted by the West in order for Iraq to get financial relief and allow its current trade with Iran to continue.


 The truth is that Iran needs Iraq to have a financial relationship with the US that it can exploit. Iran’s proxies have primacy over Iraq’s political, security and economic sectors. But the US can make this painful for Baghdad and Iran. In order to save Iraq, the US needs to disfavor Baghdad.




The new PM has an opportunity to break out of Iran’s control, but only if he is given solid support by the US. 

Michael Pregent




The June strategic dialogue was a mere effort to secure talks in July. This month’s talks should be a warning to Baghdad that, if it continues choosing Iran over its people, the US will end its relationship with a corrupt and Iran-aligned Baghdad and look to support the people of Iraq. The new PM has an opportunity to break out of Iran’s control, but only if he is given solid support by the US. 


Washington is losing patience with Iraq. The Trump administration is looking for options ahead of the July strategic framework talks. The US should not continue the previous status quo relationship with Baghdad, which continues to incubate existential threats and leave US forces to deal with threats Baghdad chooses to ignore or even grow.


Daesh is exploiting the current situation, where an unpopular government — beholden to Tehran — is focused on putting down a Shiite youth movement. Its security forces are unwilling to take on the militias that are killing protesters and moving rockets and missiles on Iran’s behalf into Syria to threaten the Levant and Israel.


The US is wondering whether or not it has a partner to ensure the enduring defeat of Daesh and that is a bulwark against Iran. At the moment, the White House does not have a partner and last month’s raid against a Kata’ib Hezbollah cell in Baghdad’s Dora neighborhood was an example of this. All terrorist detainees were released within 48 hours of their arrest. 


The US will need to assess the extent to which the new Iraqi government is constrained and dominated by political parties, leaders and militias tied to Iran.


 If there is a genuine move away from that domination, it should be supported and encouraged. Otherwise, it should reassess continued US support to a corrupt system that operates as a bypass for American funds and Iraqi resources that get into the hands of the Islamic Republic of Iran.


The protesters’ chants give the US and the wider international community an opportunity to get this right. Voters’ remorse and a motivated electorate can change Iraq forever. The majority of Iraqis are under the age of 30, and now a majority of them are fed up with the lie they have been fed from political parties tied to Tehran; and, yes, disgusted by continued US support to an oppressive government that happens to be in violation of its own laws, namely the Leahy Law and Global Magnitsky Act. 


The US should support the people’s calls for early elections based on a new election law that is not rigged in favor of the parties and militias tied to Iran.


 Washington should make demands of Baghdad to disqualify leaders and political parties complicit in the killing of Iraqi protesters and those who have allowed Iran’s militias to kill Iraqis and attack US and Iraqi forces. 


The turnout in the 2018 election was about 25 percent, maybe lower. If there were new elections, there would be a greater than 65 percent turnout and the corrupt parties tied to Tehran would come in way behind a party that represents the youth movement across Iraq. These people represent all the Iraqis wanting a better relationship with the US and the international community, and wanting Iran’s grip on Iraq broken.


If the US continues to support the status quo in Baghdad, we will once again have found a way to betray the Iraqi people.





  • Michael Pregent, a former intelligence officer, is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute.


Disclaimer: Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not necessarily reflect Arab News' point-of-view




An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 1721951-michaelpregentjpg1
July 05, 202016:38


https://www.arabnews.com/node/1700366
claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty The future of the strategic dialogue between Baghdad and Washington and the position of the Iraqi negotiator

Post by claud39 on Sun Jul 12, 2020 4:54 pm


The future of the strategic dialogue between Baghdad and Washington and the position of the Iraqi negotiator

Analytical report



Friday 11 July 2020


An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 5f097b26b01e7










Prepared by: Al Furat Center for Development and Strategic Studies, with the participation of a group of experts and those interested in Iraqi affairs and international relations



Foreclosure


On the tenth of June - June 2020, the first round of the strategic dialogue rounds between Iraq and the United States of America headed by Mr. Abdul Karim Hashem Mustafa, the oldest Undersecretary of the Iraqi Ministry of Foreign Affairs and membership of a number of experts and officials on the Iraqi side, and headed by Mr. David Hill, Undersecretary of the State Department for Political Relations, headed And the membership of a number of officials on the American side and through a closed television circle, in which a comprehensive review of the relations between the two countries is expected, in particular the situation of the American military forces inside Iraq, and defining the appropriate foundations for the path of their future relations.

 It appears from the official statements announced by both sides that these rounds of dialogue may lead to the signing of a comprehensive and organized agreement for the relationship between Washington and Baghdad.

The move comes after months of tension in the Middle East, and Iraqi soil was its main artery. To settle accounts and review between local, regional and international opponents, their climax was in December of last year and January of this year, when it witnessed an attempt to storm the American embassy from some Iraqi political forces, then Washington responded with a bold assassination of each of the leaders Iraqi Abi Mahdi, the engineer and the most prominent Iranian general, Qasim Suleiman, and the ensuing Iranian missile strikes on two American military bases in the Iraqi provinces of Erbil and Anbar.

The importance of the strategic dialogue between Baghdad and Washington in these circumstances, and the results that may result in it may reflect on the interests of Iraq for a long time in the future, pushing all research institutions and decision-making centers in the world, including the Euphrates Center for Development and Strategic Studies, to pay attention to it; To analyze it in all its dimensions and put the appropriate recommendations in front of the decision maker, especially the Iraqi one, to benefit from it in charting the course of the talks between the two sides.

Therefore, the main objective behind preparing this report was to explain the point of view of the Iraqi interlocutors, and to determine the ground on which it stands to reach either to serious negotiations ending to an agreement of some kind, or its negotiations are merely an effort and time that does not lead to specific positive results.

Based on the foregoing and in view of the pandemic circumstances as a report 19, this report was prepared through social media platforms in connection with a leading elite of experts and specialists in Iraqi affairs and international relations, who were asked to express their opinion on the subject, especially in the first and second axes of this report, as follows:



The first axis - the goals of Iraq from the strategic dialogue




In this axis, a specific question was asked to experts and specialists, which is (What are the goals of Iraq in entering into a dialogue with the United States of America?), And the purpose of this question was to find out the clarity of the goals for Baghdad at this stage as it tries to chart a new path for its relations with Washington From the lack of clarity of objectives, it is possible to judge the failure of this dialogue, and the responses were as follows:

Dr. Elaf Rajeh:

It has become difficult for the Iraqi decision-maker to determine the objectives pursued with high accuracy from dialogue with the United States of America, for example, that the Iraqi government is fully aware of the importance of cooperation with the international coalition to fight ISIS, which is led by the United States and which constitute the largest part of its funding sources and military operations, especially With regard to flights, and at the same time, it is compelled to listen to the demands of some local political forces and take into account the pressures of armed groups regarding the removal of American and multinational forces from Iraq. Therefore, the government may work to schedule a complete withdrawal according to the requirements of the war on terror and the necessities of armament and training.



On the other hand, Iraq is surrounded by a stifling financial and economic crisis, in order to face it, which needs external support, whether through international institutions or in a bilateral manner, and again, the United States of America represents a cornerstone of the global economic and financial system and its support is a key link necessary to obtain the required international support on Form of loans and grants.



In light of the spread of the Corona virus epidemic and the challenges it represents for Iraq, Iraq needs international technical and logistical support to face this crisis, and to help in this area, the United States has allocated nearly $ 30 million to help Iraq cope with the pandemic and implement an emergency plan in the public health sector , Prepare the necessary large laboratories, and more. There is a need for long-term US investment in Iraq, which amounts to more than $ 70 billion in total US aid in the past twenty years, including nearly $ 4 billion in the health sector.



And perhaps one of the most important goals of Iraq is to avoid the language of sanctions that may affect the import of oil derivatives and electrical energy from Iran, so the Iraqi side is seeking to obtain an extension of the deadline for exclusion from the sanctions imposed on Iran at least until the end of this year, under the promises that Iraq will seek to find alternatives Which may include foreign investment in energy or link it to regional energy networks. The Iraqi negotiator also seeks to reduce the American pressure on Iraq regarding security reform and confront armed groups, as the government seeks to send reassurance messages about its ability to protect American and Western interests in general - missions, embassies, and people - from the risk of being targeted by missiles or any other form of threat . Therefore, the Iraqi negotiator seeks to avoid any inclusion of Iraqi figures or entities in the US sanctions list or the list of foreign terrorist organizations.



Among the most important files that the Iraqi negotiator should highlight is the United Nations Special Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI), because the United States is the pen holder of this file in the Security Council, so the parties need to review the mission’s mandate and work out a timetable to end the mission within a period of time. Determined by the Iraqi side. Finally, we can point to an important goal, which is that Iraq is a neutral party in the game of conflict between the United States and Iran, to distance itself from the arena of confrontation and its repercussions, and to maintain balanced relations with all parties concerned.

Dr. Wathiq Al-Saadoun:

Determining the goals of a country's foreign policy towards any issue depends on several factors, the most important of which is that decision-makers in that country have a unified vision of the country's interests in that issue, and that they take a unified position and discourse on that issue. 

These two factors were not present in the bag of the Iraqi negotiator when he was heading to the dialogue session with the United States, because the decision-making and decision-making process in Iraq currently does not follow the traditional mechanisms, as there are at present several decision-making centers in Iraq, all of which are equivalent by force. And influence, and the decision of a section of them linked to an external decision. These various centers had different visions about the reality and future of Iraqi-American relations, as well as their differing views on the nature and nature of the American military presence in Iraq, and it is known that the issue of the American military presence in Iraq was the spur of this dialogue and the cornerstone of it.

It is possible that these advances, which preceded the dialogue session, prompted the Iraqi negotiator to set two main goals in mind (and we are talking here within the framework of analysis and supervision, not documented information):

1- An attempt to end the security and political tensions regarding the American military presence in Iraq, or at least reduce its pace, by raising the issue of the American military withdrawal from Iraq in a format that is acceptable (albeit at a minimum) to those who reject the American presence from decision-makers in Iraq on the one hand, and on the one hand Others, the formula is acceptable to the Americans and does not provoke them. We all remember US President Trump's statement in early January 2020 after the decision of the Iraqi Council of Representatives to compel the Iraqi government to request the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq, where Trump said, "If the Iraqis compel us to withdraw, we will issue economic sanctions against them that are more severe than the sanctions imposed on Iran." Therefore, the joint final statement of this dialogue included the vocabulary of "reducing the American forces in Iraq" and "there are no permanent American bases in Iraq" and "the Iraqi government is committed to protecting the military forces of the coalition."

2- After the first goal was passed successfully and without obstacles, it is certain that the Iraqi negotiator was eager to move to the second goal, which is how to invest the historic opportunity in the presence of a strategic dialogue that brings Iraq to a great country (politically, security, economically) like the United States, and how to achieve the greatest amount It is possible from the real "pure" interests of Iraq from this dialogue. The understandings and pledges that came in the closing statement came about the future prospects for cooperation between the two countries in the fields (security, counter-terrorism, economic, educational, health, etc.).

Certainly, Iraq's ability to achieve any progress in joint cooperation with the United States within the areas of the second goal of this dialogue, and to convert American promises and outputs of dialogue into practical steps and political, economic and security gains, depends mainly on the course of events and interactions in the issue of the first goal of this dialogue Here, the necessity to rationalize political discourse towards the relationship with the United States is part of a realistic, logical approach centered on the interests of Iraq and its people.

Dr. Adel Bedewi:

Many Iraqi leaders still view the American presence as vital to its security. Collaboration with it is important to fight the terrorist organization ISIS, provide air cover, intelligence, logistical and advisory support to Iraqi forces, as well as training and raise the level of readiness and efficiency of the security forces. Iraq is also receiving military aid to rebuild its army, train the police, and provide the stability necessary for reconstruction after decades of war and economic mismanagement. Since the emergence of ISIS in 2014, the US State Department has provided Iraq with $ 1.2 billion in foreign military financing to finance the Iraqi security forces. Meanwhile, the US State Department has provided Iraq with $ 4.2 million for international military education and training. 

In addition, the US Department of Defense provided $ 4 billion to the Internal Security Forces to fight against ISIS through the former Iraq Training and Equipment Fund and the current ISIS training and equipment fund. The US Congress authorized training and equipping programs for Iraq until December 2020, to allocate more than 6.5 billion dollars to US military training and equipping programs for Iraqis. There is a real and necessary military need that calls for establishing this dialogue to sustain cooperation.

In addition to that Iraq needs to be a reliable partner of the United States, especially in the economic aspect, Iraq cannot obtain international cooperation, especially from international organizations such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank except through the United States, as well as the assistance and economic cooperation that the states can provide 

The United States to Iraq, especially if these relations are linked to contractual frameworks that regulate that cooperation and raise the level of partnership. Moreover, Iraq’s bias in the conflict axis may force the United States to take sanctions against it that could lead to an economic collapse, including preventing or restricting access to a US-based account where Baghdad maintains oil revenues that feed 90 percent of the national budget. The Central Bank of Iraq account was established in the Federal Reserve in 2003, and according to Resolution No. 1483 issued by the United Nations Security Council, all proceeds from Iraqi oil sales go to this account, to this day, the returns are paid in dollars in the Federal Reserve account daily, And every month or so, Iraq pays between one and two billion dollars in cash from this account for official and commercial transactions.

 Therefore, imposing sanctions means that the government will not be able to perform daily jobs or pay salaries and that the Iraqi currency will fall in value. And "this will mean the collapse of Iraq." And if the US exit is accompanied by sanctions, it means that Iraq will be exposed to the imminent danger of slipping back into the devastating isolation that it lived during the days of the previous regime. Iraq also needs to attract American investments in the energy field, as Iraq is one of the most promising markets for the energy market.

The success of the strategic dialogue is considered a platform for the friends of the United States from the Group of Twenty or other coalition countries against ISIS (81) members, to establish economic partnerships, investments and jobs in the private sector, as well as political and military support, and withdrawal will lose Iraq this opportunity.
Uday Asaad Khammas:

The goals of Baghdad from the strategic dialogue are to support the new Iraqi government, which faces internal and external challenges, as it came in exceptional circumstances by various standards. And strengthening the strategic partnership with the United States of America, in a manner that guarantees achieving Iraqi interests and preserving national sovereignty.

 Cooperation in the fight against terrorism, whether within the framework of the international coalition or through bilateral relations between the two countries, especially after the increase in attacks by ISIS militants in a number of regions to target security forces and the popular crowd, in addition to conducting joint military operations in several other areas, including training, provision With weapons, improve the Iraqi defense and offensive capabilities. In addition to opening the door for American companies to invest in infrastructure in Iraq, especially in the liberated areas and the rest of the Iraqi cities in the areas of education, energy, transportation, health, construction, and others.

And discussed the possibility of cooperation in the economic fields for the current period, which witnessed a decline in oil prices, and the impact of all economic sectors on this decline, which prompted the Iraqi government to take decisions that could reflect negatively on large sectors of the Iraqi people. 

It also supported the efforts of the Iraqi government in the field of fighting Corona virus in particular, and that Iraq is currently witnessing an increase in the number of infected people in various governorates, except for the high death rate. And the possibility of providing support in the health field, including medical assistance, exchanging experiences between specialists and sending specialized cadres to Iraq at the present time, and access to developments in research and studies on finding a vaccine or treatment for the Corona epidemic and other areas of cooperation in this sector. 

Not to mention taking advantage of the strategic relationship with the United States of America by addressing Turkish violations within Iraqi territory, given that Turkey is a member of NATO or in the event of any aggression from others.


SUIT....


Last edited by claud39 on Sun Jul 12, 2020 5:05 pm; edited 1 time in total
claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty Re: An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations

Post by claud39 on Sun Jul 12, 2020 5:01 pm

Suit...



Dr. Hussein Ahmed Al-Sarhan:

To start with, it must be realized that the call for dialogue came from the United States of America, and by its Foreign Minister Mike Pompeo last April. Thus, the goals of the United States are the most obvious and come after political and security developments that have left their effects on the Iraqi scene and the roles of regional and international actors, the most important of which are the parties to the conflict, the United States of America and Iran. Iraq has an opportunity at this stage to develop its goals in the foreseeable future and in the long term. The lack of clarity on the part of Iraq on the nature of relations with the United States came because of the lack of a national vision consistent with what Iraq wants from this relationship and in what serves the interests of Iraq, due to the extreme dependency of Iran by “some Shiite forces”, and the limited horizon - which is limited to sectarian ranges - Which clearly emerged in demanding the withdrawal of foreign forces from Iraq after the assassination of Qasim Soleimani in Baghdad in the beginning of January 2020. Accordingly, I see an opportunity available to Iraq in light of an American insistence on finding a stable pattern for US-Iraqi relations that is not affected by the ideological tendencies of internal parties that impose their vision and ideological implications on the government and the rest of the authorities. So there are three main frameworks that should serve as general frameworks for Iraq in its relationship with the United States:

- The political framework, the positive relationship with the United States, and that Iraq is an important ally of the United States in the region, is important for Iraq at this stage. Also, the sovereignty of Iraq and not affecting the Iraqi sovereign decision is important. Although this can be guaranteed by the United States, it remains difficult to achieve by Iran, which is relatively influential in the political, security and economic affairs in Iraq. Without ensuring this, the protection of the American diplomatic presence and the military presence that will be agreed upon cannot be guaranteed.

- The security framework, in light of the increasing security exposures against the Iraqi security forces in the areas previously liberated from ISIS, the bombing by Turkey and Iran in northern Iraq, the difficulties facing efforts to confront a pandemic like 19-19, and the suffocating financial crisis, we see that the security framework Traditional and unconventional is one of the most important doors for dialogue with Washington in particular, and relations with the United States in general, in accordance with the 2008 Strategic Framework Agreement.

- The economic framework, the structural economy crisis in Iraq, which produces from time to time financial crises, is still a threat to Iraqi national security, unconventional. Although economic policies are a national, local decision, there are mechanisms for international support represented in experiences and communication with international financial institutions and financial support. Therefore, the urgent need arises to develop a national economic vision and translate it into economic programs and policies at the level of public finance, monetary policies, trade policies, investment policies, the energy sector, industry and agriculture, as well as the need for international support to modernize the banking system and build databases that serve the customs sectors Taxes and social protection network.

The above frameworks are essential, but they are not the only ones. The sectors of education, education and health have become an urgent necessity in the current stage, especially the health sector in light of facing the Corona pandemic.

Dr. Ali Al-Jubouri:

Raising this topic requires touching on three important titles: The first title is the objective conditions and timing of the dialogue. The second title is to understand the functional role of Iraq in the US strategy in the region. The third title is outputs and conclusions.

With regard to the first title, the circumstances surrounding the timing and timing of the dialogue have positive aspects that must be invested or employed by the Iraqi interlocutor, especially since this dialogue is shrouded in (America) circumstances that are said to be less than positive for the most important reasons:

A- The tensions and chaos that the American interior witnessed against the background of the demonstrations and acts of violence after the incident of the killing of the American citizen (George Floyd) and its expansion, and the entry of the Democratic Party into the crisis line; To hire her electorally after the bad way in which the Trump administration handled.

B- The difficulties and surprises that the Trump administration faced in managing important, crucial and vital files for US interests (the Syrian file / the Iranian file) in the face of the important gains that the Russian Federation began to bear fruit in these files.

As for the timing of the dialogue, the other is not good for the United States, especially as it searches for victory or progress in an important file that could be a positive material in the Trump administration's campaign. Therefore, it will be a favorable opportunity for the Iraqi negotiator to achieve the interests of Iraq; Because the American negotiator is under pressure and perhaps he will be more willing to show flexibility in most of the files on the Iraqi agenda for the benefit of the Iraqi negotiator.

Finally, regarding Iraq’s awareness of its functional role in the US strategy in the region, it must be emphasized that the United States deals with countries in the region on the basis of three characteristics: an ally country, a strategic partner, and a friendly country. Each of these descriptions is in fact functional roles that these countries play to provide conditions, requirements and features that qualify them to perform any of these roles. And the role of Iraq in the American strategy can be defined as that of the friendly country. This is because it is not the role of Saudi Arabia, Turkey, or even Israel, nor the role of Jordan, Egypt, and other Gulf states.

This realization is supposed from the Iraqi negotiator to be more objective and realistic in his vision of Iraqi interests in exchange for the interests of the United States and to proceed with negotiations on the basis of this understanding, meaning that he does not expect that things will be easy and easy, but rather he must evoke the experience after 2014 and how the United States acted with Iraq when ISIS terrorist gangs invaded the Iraqi provinces when Washington did not fulfill its expected role in compliance with the strategic framework agreement signed between the two countries.

Accordingly, the outputs or conclusions that we come up with are: It is possible to prioritize the Iraqi negotiator to reach a better agreement or develop the strategic framework agreement referred to above through the following levels:

1 - At the political level, it is necessary to ensure the continued support of the United States to Iraq in order to consolidate the pillars of its political system and address the mistakes that contributed to faltering its launch towards development and positive development and formulate good relations to manage mutual vital interests while emphasizing Iraq’s continued adherence to the importance of the American role in the success The Iraqi experience in governance. It should also work through negotiations to push the United States to work to stop the negative roles pursued by some of its allies in the region against Iraq politically, security and economic. As for the American military presence, we suggest that the behavior of the Iraqi negotiator be towards persuading the United States of the necessity of setting an agreed timetable for withdrawing the American forces or gradually reducing their number and increasing the communication between the two countries through escalating economic relations, such as the strong entry of American companies in the Iraqi investment market, as well as in the development of economic sectors The other Iraqi.

2-On the economic level, Iraq is still mainly dependent on oil revenues to finance government spending in the form of operating and investment, so the role of the United States in maintaining this important resource must be either by helping to maintain reasonable prices for oil or excluding Iraq from the production reduction plan.

3- As for the effects of the regional factor, we find that one of the goals of the United States of America for a strategic dialogue is (undermining the so-called Iranian influence and cutting Iran’s arms in the region), and it seems better for the Iraqi negotiator to urge the United States to adopt a new approach with Iran that may achieve Its goal is or is close to achieving it, which is positive engagement with Iran through a dialogue that addresses all outstanding issues between the two countries and expressing Iraq’s willingness to enter as a mediator to achieve this purpose instead of the policy of escalation and sanctions that did not lead to positive results, on the contrary, knowing that this new path It will lead to solving many problems for the United States and for Iraq together. 

The United States will reach a political and strategic approach with Iran through these negotiations. It will lead Iraq to reduce the role of armed factions in Iraq, which will be reflected on the Iraqi scene in a way that liberates the Iraqi government from important pressures that hinder its work. The idea of ​​securityThe comprehensive regional will involve all countries in the region, including Iran, to dismantle the tension and correct Iran's relations with the allies of the United States, and this matter will be reflected in the state of stability that the United States is looking for in the Middle East.

Dr. Salim Kata 'Ali:

The American-Iraqi strategic dialogue represents an opportunity to frame relations between the United States of America and Iraq according to a new vision, or for the purpose of activating the strategic framework agreement between the two countries that was agreed upon in 2008, especially after the state of decline and deterioration in bilateral relations, and reaching its lowest levels in The era of former Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi, as the United States of America is losing its confidence in the new Iraq, and that it does not represent an effective partner, and that it is part of the Iranian axis vis-a-vis the United States.

Accordingly, the strategic dialogue between the two countries that started in mid-June 2020 is an opportunity to organize and lay down new principles and foundations for US-Iraqi relations, taking into consideration the interests of Iraq as a sovereign country, and away from the policy of regional and international axes and alignments. Here, the goals of the Iraqi negotiator can be determined from the dialogue with the United States of America with several goals and on more than one level:

1- The political level, as foreign policy in all its channels does not differ from other policies, as it aims to achieve specific goals, affected by their nature, the objective and subjective capabilities available to the state at a particular time and its quality, and its implementation is affected by the extent of self-preparedness to invest state resources, as well as The extent of their acceptance of sacrifice and adventure.

Accordingly, the goals of Iraq from dialogue with the United States of America must start from a focal point, which is the necessity of the United States respecting Iraq as a sovereign country, and that its foreign policy stems from the Iraqi national constants, and it is not a dependent or supporter of any of the regional and international axes, And that Iraq, with its objective and subjective capabilities and capabilities, cannot be part of any dispute or conflict in the region, such as the US-Iranian dispute, and that the conflicting parties must understand the new role of Iraq, far from the policy of axes and alliances, whatever their nature, and that Iraq is keen on the multiplicity of its relations Foreign affairs and the permanence of those relations, which contribute to preserving the supreme interests of Iraq at the regional and international levels.Therefore, the Iraqi negotiator should focus on putting forward priority issues for Iraq, defending them and not conceding to the American side, while working to show a degree of flexibility in other issues that are less important to achieving gains from dialogue, as well as employing the difference between the US-Iranian contradictions, And managing the helm of dialogue in line with the goals of Iraqi foreign policy.

2- The security level, as the goals of the Iraqi negotiator from the dialogue are determined by the necessity of working to reorganize the foreign military presence, especially the American one in Iraq, as the survival of the American forces in Iraq is the closest scenario, according to some data, as the exit of these forces will have repercussions And many political, economic and security costs on the Iraqi side are difficult to face, especially in light of the political, security, economic and health challenges facing the Iraqi state.

Therefore, the American forces will remain stationed in Iraq with specific military bases, even with the continued pressure and threats facing these forces, whether from the armed factions or from Iran, and therefore the goals of the Iraqi negotiator will revolve around the limits of the work of these forces and their numbers in the framework of international efforts to organize ISIS terrorist, not removing it from Iraq. Perhaps this is supported by the United States of America deploying the Patriot air defense missile system in Iraq at Ein Al-Assad Air Base and the military base in Erbil, which indicates the United States' pursuit of ensuring and protecting its forces from any future military attacks. .

In addition, setting security priorities in the relationship between the two parties will also be one of the goals of the Iraqi negotiator, and through it the American position on the PMF can be discussed as being official Iraqi forces, as well as strengthening and developing the Iraqi military forces by providing logistical assistance and security and military support, And in a way that guarantees the security and sovereignty of Iraq as an independent country, and away from the regional and international influences and intersections in the region.

3- The economic level, economic factors constitute one of the most important manifestations of political instability in Iraq, especially after the repercussions of the Corona virus crisis, and the drop in global oil prices, which indicates that the continued fragility and weakness of the Iraqi economy and the absence of economic reforms, will lead to the stage of economic collapse In all sectors. Hence, the goals of the Iraqi negotiator on the economic level are determined by ensuring the support and assistance of the United States of America economically to Iraq, and enabling it to face economic crises by employing elements of the economic power of the United States of America, either internally through the provision of American economic assistance to Iraq, or externally by employing a role and impact The United States is in international financial organizations in a way that achieves the Iraqi interest in reforming the economic environment of Iraq, diversifying sources of income, improving the investment environment, fighting corruption, and achieving economic independence for Iraq and not affiliating with neighboring countries.

Dr. Diyari Saleh:

I see that the United States is stuck at the heart of the Iraqi dilemma, and it cannot afford the heavy cost of staying in Iraq, nor is it ready to withdraw completely; Because she believes this will be interpreted as a major victory for Iran. For Americans, moving troops to the military bases of the Kurdistan region without real arrangements with Baghdad would not be a logical choice. The truth that no one can conceal is: If the United States resorted to this decision, it would implicate its Kurdish allies in many problems that could not be solved easily. The fragile geopolitical balance in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq will not be able to withstand these developments.

From the military point of view, many observers assert that the United States has already lost Iraq. So it must now focus on how to maintain its security, political and economic ties with this country. This is what must be discussed seriously in the next strategic dialogue to find long-term understandings between these parties.
 All this critical scene may turn into an important opportunity for Baghdad - Erbil - Washington to work to correct the mistakes committed in post-2003 Iraq. The security and economic challenges facing Baghdad and Erbil will make the American role and the assistance of the international community inevitable. Which requires thinking more pragmatically about the mechanisms of organizing this relationship away from any cause of the disruption of the relationship between Iraqi players. Achieving this goal - according to acceptable language - will be an important bet for the Iraqi negotiator in the coming period of time. This will be one of Mr. Al-Kazemi's most important credentials on his upcoming trip to Washington.

Success in accomplishing this mission in Iraq - specifically with regard to adapting and adjusting the crowd's vision according to new rules of the game in which Americans have a presence - will be an important message that Iraq passes to others. Therefore, everyone should maintain the unity, security and future of Iraq.

Dr. Montaser Al-Aidani:

I find that it is not easy to extrapolate Iraq’s goals in the strategic dialogue with the United States of America. In light of a dysfunctional parliamentary system and a fragile coalition government that is not based on a major parliamentary bloc or a homogeneous coalition that defines the basic directions of government, the government will be more like a mercurial or ghostly system; Because the effectiveness of parliamentary governments stems from the existence of a specific and homogeneous political base, at least, and a source of agreement or even agreement, as well as consensus that is a basic requirement in the strategic issues of countries, especially when they engage in dialogues or negotiations with major countries such as the United States of America as is customary in such situations, and therefore it is difficult Imagine a unified Iraqi position in the strategic dialogue with the United States of America on the level of the powers established in the Iraqi political system, so the task of the Iraqi interlocutor or negotiator is very difficult, or as some consider it to be a formality, whatever the skill of the Iraqi team.

The general addresses identified by the government negotiating delegation, such as sovereignty and the national interest, are issues subject to considerably different perceptions of Iraqi political forces in general, and at another level of relative difference on the level of Shiite political forces in particular, just as the other declared goals of the dialogue that represent other aspects For the relationship, such as cooperation in the fields of culture, education, health, finance, and economics, as well as security and military departments, they will contradict the conflicting and intersecting lines of regional and international interests with Iraqi internal policy lines and the positions of the main parties in the Iraqi regime.

In other words, defining the goals of Iraq in strategic negotiations with the United States of America does not mean the abstract Iraqi vision according to, if this provided a unified vision, but rather the vision that stems from reading Iraq’s position in international politics, which is largely impossible, as Iraq is still in Its external positions, roles and orientations, and even related internal trends, are influenced to a clear extent and may be subject to regional and international influences, and therefore there is no compass that determines its distant and internationalized position par excellence.

One of the most prominent indicators of the disintegration of the Iraqi position and the weak effectiveness of the Iraqi government as a result of this is the continuation of attacks on the US embassy in Iraq even before the start of the strategic dialogue, despite the government's repeated pledges to protect American diplomats and military personnel in Iraq. Thus, an Iraq that cannot unite or act to the extent that it can help itself, will not be able to be a party capable of conducting a productive or meaningful dialogue with the United States of America.

Dr. Qahtan Hussein Taher:

I think it was the developments in Iraq that prompted the Iraqi government to accept the United States' call to reconsider the nature of the relationship between the two countries. Perhaps the most important topic in this dialogue is the presence of the American forces in Iraq, and the importance of reaching a solution that is satisfactory to all Iraqi political parties. But it seems that this goal will not be achieved in light of the different positions of the political blocs between those who reject and support the continued US forces in Iraq. In light of this difference, we do not expect to reach positive results that serve the Iraqi interest.

Ahmed Javed:

I think the question should be: What is the need for Iraq to enter into a dialogue with the United States? Which is more needed for the other when entering this dialogue?

There is no doubt that whoever looks at international relations with a realistic view finds that Iraq is in need of the United States in a very large percentage, because the United States is a large, developed, and militarily and economically strong country with great political influence and is almost the first in everything between the countries of the world, and that its need for Iraq does not exceed Simple margin is negligible.

Therefore, the Iraqi politician must invest in the Iraqi-American dialogue well and work to restore mutual trust between the two parties and work to invest the possibility of a strong ally, such as the United States, to get out of its financial, security and health crises at the present time and also in the strategic perspective.

The goal of engaging in a dialogue with the American side on the basis of mutual interests and respect for sovereignty is that Iraq avoids many of the security dangers that beset the region and the threats of neighboring countries as well. It works to strengthen the military and security apparatus of the state and contributes to confining arms to the state.

I do not claim that these relations achieve everything that Iraq wants and that they will be ideal relations, but if the Iraqi leadership does well to invest a balanced relationship, it will benefit greatly from the present and future, and this is proven by the experiences of other countries.

The second axis - the role of the Iranian actor and the possibility of Iraq in reaching a comprehensive agreement with Washington


Realizing the importance of the Iranian actor in the Iraqi interior, its apparent effect on charting the features of Iraqi foreign policy, especially in the last ten years, and its potential presence on the agenda of the Iraqi interlocutor, a specific and clear question was asked to experts and specialists on the issue, so the question was: (Is it possible to For Baghdad, the Iranian actor ignored and reached a comprehensive agreement with Washington that achieves the interests of the two parties, and what does that mean?), And we were understanding the critical question in light of the current Iraqi situation, yet the opinions expressed on this question from the experts were very important, summarized the dilemma in which the axes move The Iraqi negotiator, as follows:

Dr. Elaf Rajeh:

How can the Iraqi negotiator ignore the Iranian factor in dialogue with the American states, and that the latter places in its strategic perception the importance of Iraq in containing Iran. In other words, although the political and protocol aspects allow Iraq to focus on issues of common concern with the United States of America without regard for Iranian pressure, the reality indicates otherwise, and for several important factors:
 First, it places Iraq in its strategic awareness of the importance of both Iran and the United States in its war against terrorism and for stability. Second, a large portion of the parties represented in the House of Representatives enjoy solid ties with political actors in Iran; Third, the Iraqi approach to meeting its food and energy needs from Iran; Fourth, the United States will put the issue of Iran on the table of discussion with Iraq, and here, it is imperative for Iraq and in light of its respect for good-neighborly relations to consult with Iran in this regard in the borders that meet the interests of Iraq and safeguard its sovereignty and achieve regional stability, especially if Iraq touches the existence of ambitions A non-American woman in this regard and to avoid putting Iraq into the base of the confrontation.

Nevertheless, if the political will is available to ignore external political pressures from any party, and in the event of harmony between the government and the legislative authority, Iraq is able to reach a formula of agreement that meets its aspirations and achieves its interests in light of the current wave of crises, whether accumulated or new, which it faces in Nowadays. Whereas, the United States can be a supportive and facilitating party to the needs of Iraq or be in a position of confrontation that complicates matters at different levels and places Iraq in an advanced position of confrontation, which is a very dangerous issue that Iraq tries to avoid and does not face on behalf of others.

Dr. Wathiq Al-Saadoun:

I see that Iran is important in these discussions. Rather, the fills of the American-Iranian confrontation in the Iraqi arena are the key to all the issues that were raised in the dialogue, and it is the main reason for holding this dialogue mainly. Without the US-Iranian tension in Iraq and the region, there would be no need for strategic dialogue Originally, therefore, ignoring or ignoring the Iranian actor will not solve the problem, if the political and security equation and the map of powers in the Iraqi arena remain the same, and ignoring the Iranian role and influence in Iraq will not eliminate it.Just as the American political mess in Iraq over the past years has created the political and security void that Iran has so well deserved, Americans should not simply ask the Iraqis to put an end to this Iranian penetration, the Americans, Iraqis and (the wise) should sit from Iran and put a solution Really this dilemma is because Iraq and the region will not tolerate more tensions, and the economic and security conditions in the region are very fragile. All the conflicting parties in Iraq must abandon the zero equation that aims to make the opponent lose everything. Iraq needs Iran and the United States, and Iran needs Iraq And the United States needs Iraq.

But if the United States decides that it wants to proceed with building a strategic relationship with Iraq away from the Iranian actor, and if the United States encourages Iraq to take such a step, and that the determinants of this strategic relationship are only the common interests between the two countries, there is no importance or consideration for Iran's interests in Iraq, in this case the United States must realize the limited capacity and capabilities of the current government and the magnitude of the challenges it will face as a result of this option, and that the United States work to protect the political and security conditions in Iraq from turmoil or collapse, everyone understands the possibility of the Iranian actor to influence the stability of Iraq politically And security, therefore, the Americans should help the current government not to put it in front of options beyond its capacity, and to help it by trying to resolve part of the American-Iranian conflict within regional mechanisms to alleviate the pressure of this conflict on the Iraqi arena, in the sense of distributing the pressures of this conflict over a wider area orTo vent it from other sites and not focus it in Iraq only. There are several fronts for the American-Iranian confrontation in the region. On the other hand, the Americans should help the Iraqi government by strengthening its political, security and economic tools to be able to perform the expected roles from them, otherwise the Americans will be like someone who says To the Iraqi government, "You and your Lord, go and fight."

Dr. Salim Kata 'Ali:

I think regarding the Iranian role, and the limits of its influence on the US-Iraqi strategic dialogue, I find that some are promoting that the dialogue between the United States of America and Iraq is an American-Iranian dialogue with Iraqi mediation, bypassing the right of Iraq and its status as a sovereign state, while acknowledging the size Iranian influences on Iraqi internal affairs.

Iraq, as the reality indicates to us, is in the midst of conflict and contradiction of interests and goals between the United States of America and Iran, and each side seeks to achieve its interests without taking into consideration the national interest of Iraq mainly, and what strengthened the Iranian influence is the nature of the roles played by most parties and political parties that She ruled Iraq after 2003, as, by virtue of practical experience, she was implementing the Iranian will, directly or indirectly, without considering Iraq’s interests and strategic priorities.

The possibility of limiting Iranian influence in Iraqi interactions is not easy due to the diversity of influence tools and the multiplicity of actors, but it is not impossible. As pressure and influence operations through threats, intimidation, and the actual use of weapons, it sends a message that Iraq is a weak country, and that there are parties outside the framework of the Iraqi state that violate the security and stability of the country, which weakens the role of Iraq regionally and internationally, and makes Iraq as if it is a tool of Iranian policy In the area.

Here, we can say that the Iraqi negotiator is facing a great opportunity, to reflect the true Iraqi vision of how to conduct dialogue with the United States away from Iranian influences on the one hand, and on the other hand, send a message to the Iranian side to the effect that continued Iranian interference in Iraqi internal affairs It will be a factor in alienating and moving away from Iran as a country neighboring Iraq, and heading towards the United States as a partner for Iraq, and that the Iranian decision-maker must realize this fact, and he must review the Iranian policy towards Iraq, and this also applies to the role of the United States of America.

Perhaps what affects the nature of the Iranian role in Iraq, that the parties that participated in managing the Iraqi state and brought the country to the brink of failure and collapse will have two options: As for continuing its policies that are far from the national interest of Iraq, which will result in more failure and collapse, or finding solutions A consensual policy that can save the country and open a door for it to get out of its crises. Perhaps at the forefront of that consensus is the possibility of limiting Iranian influence and role in the Iraqi issue, and the trend towards formulating a foreign policy based on interest and political realism in dealing with regional and international crises and issues. Which imposes on the Iraqi negotiator to be a high degree of diplomatic intelligence and how to get acquainted with the negotiating tools and their circumstances and the possibility of employing his negotiating papers to achieve the goals of the Iraqi dialogue.

Uday Asaad Khammas:

I find it right not to ignore the Iranian actor when thinking about drawing Iraqi partnerships, whether with the United States of America or others, and at the same time, there is a necessity to achieve a strategic balance in Iraq’s relations with either neighboring countries or regional surrounding countries, especially in the current conditions that Iraq is going through today and the region And the world.

It is also important for the interlocutor and Iraqi negotiator to understand the American concerns about the growing Iranian role in the region or in Iraq, which at some point reached pressure on the Iraqi government and on more than one occasion to adhere to the strategy of American maximum pressure against Iran. A foreign policy based on flexibility in drawing foreign relations, and mastering the art of balances to achieve Iraqi national interests, whether in the region or the region and contribute to international decision-making. Therefore, it is useful to focus on adopting a foreign policy that enhances the respect of these countries for the independence of the Iraqi decision and not being subject to the control of a party here or there.

Dr. Montaser Al-Aidani:

In light of extrapolating the situation of the Iraqi, it is not in the interest of Iraq to ignore the existing regional and international data, especially the escalating conflict between Iran and the United States of America on more than one level and the square in the region, the most prominent of which is the Iraqi arena. In the event that it contradicts the requirements of its national security and its supreme interests, this is a normal behavior for any country, particularly in its immediate neighborhood, especially since the Iranian actor is considered the most influential and one of control in Iraqi politics.

Or is there no agreement or agreement between these parties on the scope of the dialogue ?, while neglecting the assumption of linking the dialogue or negotiation with regional and international files in view of the objective data that these parties are aware of and with which it is impossible to conduct a dialogue at the Iraqi level of this type. In other words, such an assumption, if it exists, does not make sense for bilateral dialogue, which is the case with the second assumption that there is no agreement or agreement on a space for dialogue. So the first assumption remains the most likely, i.e. agreeing to a partial deal taking into account the larger equations.

Therefore, according to the foregoing, Iraq must take into account when determining its priorities the concerns and interests of the Iranian actor, but within the system of other interests of the influential parties, and in varying proportions according to the level of influence, and according to the nature and size of the risks that may arise from the paths of dialogue and its outcomes on the security and interests of those parties. Not to mention the benefits accrued, and that the Iraqi function is the compass in all of these equations to one degree or another to the extent available and possible.

To activate the role of the Iraqi negotiating delegation, its position in the negotiations can be based on obtaining an expanded parliamentary mandate for the lower and upper limits of the negotiating ceiling, and not political positions from the various parties, as explained by the head of the Iraqi delegation, Dr. Abdul Karim Hashim, who toured with a number of Iraqi political forces to agree on the basic concepts of the Iraqi negotiating track.

Dr. Hussein Ahmed Al-Sarhan:

The Iranian actor is the main problem in Iraqi-American relations since 2003, either directly or indirectly through its proxies in Iraq, and this is evident. Therefore, ignoring does not solve this problem and will further complicate US-Iraqi relations. With all this influence on the political, security and economic decision, the possibility of its extinction will remain if there is a clear national will aimed at building the state and preserving its independence, sovereignty and unity.

This requires that a serious message reach the decision-makers in Iran with both parts of the country (the presidency and the government), and the revolution of Iran (the guide, the Revolutionary Guards and the propaganda machine) centered on the following:

- Iraq has emerged from being a card with Iran in its regional and international conflicts and tensions, as is the case with Yemen, Lebanon and Syria. Iraq seeks to be a competent party to Iran in the region, not to be a subordinate to it.

- There is no standard for Iraq’s regional and international relations except the Iraqi national interest, and it is free in its political and economic directions and will not be affiliated with this or that party.

- The state of Iraq wants its relations with Iran to be the state, not the revolution of Iran, and for its relations with Iran to be through known diplomatic channels and in line with the Geneva Conventions for diplomatic and consular relations 1963, not through armed groups and militias. This requires, at the outset, to object to the current ambassador, Masjedi, who is a general in the Revolutionary Guards, as was his predecessors, and to demand his change and appoint an ambassador from the Iranian Foreign Ministry to take charge of facilitating his country's relations with Iraq.

- Follow-up on all economic activities related to the parties and armed groups affiliated with Iran and subject them to the laws and regulations in force in Iraq, to ​​get Iraq out of being a market for the Iranian Revolutionary Guard companies.

Iran, for its part, sensed the danger of displacing its influence from the Iraqi arena, before the start of the dialogue between Baghdad and Washington, and prompted a number of its proxies to launch missile strikes on important headquarters and locations such as Al-Taji base, and more than two attacks on the Green Zone and an attack on Baghdad International Airport. These strikes are part of it that occurred after the first round of dialogue. Therefore, a strong response to these armed groups will be a shocking matter to Iran and make it reckon with its accounts, especially after the great blow suffered by the Iranian influence in Iraq after the killing of Qassem Soleimani and Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis.

Dr. Qahtan Hussein Taher:

I think the Iranian actor is a difficult problem to solve. Given the size of Iranian influence in Iraq and the presence of a large degree of cooperation between the Iraqi and Iranian governments at all levels. Therefore, the Iraqi government is in great embarrassment: on the one hand, it is required to convince the Americans that it cannot turn its back on Tehran completely. On the other hand, it must convince Tehran that it still needs US political, security and economic support. And as long as this is the case, the prospect of a comprehensive agreement between Iraq and the United States appears weak. Even if it is signed, it will not be as applicable as its predecessor, which signed in 2008, which is called the Strategic Framework Agreement.

Ahmed Javed:

The difficulty of negotiations and dialogue on the Iraqi side lies in how to satisfy the Iranian side, and had it not been for the Iranian actor, there would have been no problem for the Iraqi negotiator in his dialogue with the Americans, and therefore the Iraqi negotiator will work hard to reach an agreement that will ensure that Tehran is not angry with him first and then engage in a dialogue It searches for Iraqi interests, and this means that the influence of Iranian influence on the Iraqi decision-maker is still great, despite popular condemnation of foreign interference, whether it is Iranian, Turkish or Saudi.

And if the Iraqi negotiator wants to invest the opportunity, he must seriously consider the wishes of the people first and rely on the Iraqi street to escape political dependency to strengthen his negotiating position, whether with the United States or with Iran, and this requires boldness and courage in the positions.

The third axis - the weaknesses of the Iraqi negotiator


After presenting the opinions of the experts and specialists above, it appears that the strategic dialogue with Washington does not take place in the best conditions for the Iraqi negotiator, not in terms of timing, or in terms of the local and regional environment governing the decision-maker. There are many elements of weakness that will impose themselves on the Iraqi negotiator - whether he wants it or not - and he is required to find appropriate solutions to neutralize them and prevent them from thwarting the dialogue with Washington, or perhaps the dialogue ends up with an unequal agreement (agreement) at the expense of the higher interests of the state.

Perhaps one of the most prominent of these elements is the extent to which the two sides need each other, because Iraq is the party most in need of the United States compared to the latter's need for it, and in all fields (security, military, economic, political, and health ...) and this fact will not be absent from the understanding of a professional negotiator such as the negotiator. The American, just as it is not strange for him, to use it as an important pressure card to blackmail the Iraqi side or push it to a result that does not achieve its interests as desired.

Nevertheless, the Iraqi party can neutralize the largest part of this component if it professionally utilizes Washington's internal conditions, that is, the negotiations are compatible with an American electoral year, in which the administration needs a symbolic achievement in its international relations, as well as its desire to find a satisfactory and safe situation for its forces inside Iraq, and its interests In the Middle East, its obligations to Baghdad are in accordance with the Strategic Framework Agreement of 2008, and other matters, but the ability of the Iraqi negotiator to carry out this maneuver successfully is clearly conditioned by Iraq's goals of dialogue, and the unity and coherence of its internal political decision.

The above condition in itself refers us to a new element of the weakness of the Iraqi side, as it appears from the context of events, the facts on the ground, and the march of the relationship between Baghdad and Washington, that the goals of Baghdad from the dialogue are not entirely clear, and may be general goals; For various reasons, it may be related to Baghdad's unwillingness to talk now, or it has been pushed to it due to pressure beyond its control.

Thus, if the situation does not help in achieving the intended results, the agenda should be completely clear to the Iraqi side, and compatible with the ability of its country to fulfill its obligations that it will eventually make to Washington. But this ability cannot be possessed with the presence of multiplicity in the centers of Iraqi decision-making, and the presence of forces outside or inside the government possessing the capabilities that make it blow up the government's pledges at any moment, and prevents their application.

The multiplicity of governmental and non-governmental decision centers in Iraq represents a fundamental weakness that weakens any official negotiator, and refers many pledges to mere ink on paper in the event of the emergence of parties that reject them or are willing to thwart them, and the government of Iraq cannot move to the end in this dialogue and the ensuing Negotiations with this unstable political situation, but it may be in their interest if it continues, to prolong the negotiations and not make any final pledges until the early Iraqi elections - if they happen - and to hold the US presidential elections, and wait for the results that may result from them that may tip the balance. The powers are in the form of another mother in the two countries, so the authority in Baghdad maintains a government that may enjoy greater popular support, and have more ability to take unified and coherent decisions, and then a final agreement with Washington will be beneficial to both sides, especially if it is capable of implementation on the ground by both parties.

Recommendations are wrong to ignore


In light of the current conditions that Iraq is going through, the recommendations and advice directed to the interlocutor and the Iraqi negotiator are:

Listen, listen, listen well, and then talk a little, in other words, do not make promises and thoughts in offering, and avoid talking about sensitive topics, and do not go into the depth of the discussion; So as not to fall victim to the current circumstances. Show a minimal level of understanding of the US position, and gradually enhance the language of cooperation and understanding to get the most gains. Use unexpected and secondary papers to distract the other person's focus. The American negotiator is strong and difficult and often uses the language of imposition, so do not care about the strengths and keep clear demands. It will be difficult to avoid sensitive issues such as targeting the US embassy or Iranian influence, and here, try to move away from the details and prolong the dialogue to obtain greater gains that will help you out of the current crises.

I know that it is better for Iraq to prolong the dialogue and not to reach a final deal with Washington in light of its current situation. Such an unenforceable deal by it will negatively affect its international reputation, as a reliable international party, and this will seriously harm its international relations. Also, any possible deal between the two sides should explicitly refer to the commitment of the United States of America to work to respect the sovereignty of Iraq, and to ensure its security and stability from all external attacks by neighboring countries or others, whatever their nature. In addition to its pledge that the survival of its military forces in Iraq is a temporary measure for a specific purpose, it was obliged by the circumstances of the current stage to fight the terrorist organization ISIS, and it is not permitted to use or employ these forces outside the framework of the mission previously specified to them.

You have to admit that the Iranian actor is a thorn in the side of the Iraqi negotiator, it cannot be taken off and disposed of, and cannot be ignored and can bear negative results, so you see that many analysts go to believe that this dialogue is not just an Iraqi-American dialogue, but rather an Iraqi dialogue - An American with an extraordinary Iranian presence. This dangerous role for Iran and putting its interests in Iraq and the Middle East on the agenda of the Baghdad-Washington dialogue is not good for Baghdad, as it will make it very reluctant to reach any final agreement with Washington that does not take into account the interests of Tehran in one way or another. In this case, it may be absurd to continue a dialogue that is doomed to failure, unless the map of interests for the three capitals becomes clear, and the limits of what can be agreed upon or intersect on it.

It is in the interest of Iraq and the requirements of its true sovereignty not to accept Iraqi-American negotiations that achieve the interests of Tehran and Washington at the expense of Baghdad. It is not possible to proceed with negotiations that ignore Tehran's interests, while realizing that the latter has enough capabilities to threaten the situation in Iraq in a way that makes any agreement between Iraq and the United States unenforceable on the ground.

In the face of this thorny situation, the two sides (Iraqi and American) need to assimilate or neutralize the Iranian role before starting any actual negotiations. Iran, in its current role, poses a serious threat to any agreement that does not take into account its interests or take its presence and what it can do into consideration.

Finally, the matter that cannot be ignored by the Iraqi foreign policy maker remains that rule known in the international relations that says: The strength of the foreign policy of any country represents an extension of its internal power, and that Iraq today suffers from a clear weakness in its internal situation, which is reflected in a permanent negative on its foreign policy In general, and on the strength of his negotiating delegation, this defect requires an end to it; Because it would make him the weakest party in any regional or international negotiations, and would threaten his supreme interests in all areas.

Participants in preparing the report:


Prof. Khaled Al-Ardawi, Director of the Al Furat Center for Development and Strategic Studies, and former director of the Center for Strategic Studies - Karbala University.

Prof. Wathiq Al-Saadoun is an Iraqi academic and senior researcher at the Turkish Center for Middle East Studies.

Prof. Dr. Dyari Saleh, an Iraqi academic specializing in geopolitics.

- Prof. Dr. Montaser Al-Aidani is an Iraqi academic and director of the Hawkamah Center for Studies.

- Prof. Dr. Ali al-Jubouri, an Iraqi academic, professor of political science at the College of Political Science - University of Baghdad.

Dr. Elaf Rajeh is an Iraqi diplomat and academic.
Uday Asaad Khamas, an Iraqi academic and diplomat.

Dr. Adel Bedaiwi, an Iraqi academic, is Professor of Strategy at the College of Political Science - University of Baghdad.

Dr. Salim Kati Ali, Head of the Department of International Relations at the Center for Strategic Studies - University of Baghdad.

- Dr. Qahtan Hussein Taher Akademi, Professor of Political Systems - Babylon University.
- Dr. Hussein Ahmad Al-Sarhan, head of the Political Studies Department at the Center for Strategic Studies - Karbala University, researcher at the Al Furat Center for Development and Strategic Studies.
- Mr. Ahmed Jaweed, an Iraqi human rights defender and director of the Adam Center for Defending Rights and Freedoms.


* Al Furat Center for Development and Strategic Studies / 2004-2020
www.fcdrs.com





https://annabaa.org/arabic/reports/23821
claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty This is the number of our soldiers in Iraq .. US General: Baghdad's attempts to limit attacks by some factions are "aggressive and beneficial"

Post by claud39 on Thu Jul 16, 2020 2:33 pm

[size=30]This is the number of our soldiers in Iraq .. US General: Baghdad's attempts to limit attacks by some factions are "aggressive and beneficial"[/size]





6 hours ago





An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 1672020142669e740c7b-cee3-45ac-9624-060125b2c6e9_16x9_600x338






[size=24]Digital Media NRT[/size]

[size=24]The commander of US forces in the Middle East, General Kenneth McKinsey, described the Iraqi government's attempts to limit attacks by some factions as "very aggressive and beneficial", indicating that the United States could continue to pressure ISIS and build military capabilities for Iraq, with fewer American forces On the ground[/size]

[size=24]"We can get the job done with a smaller number of American forces in Iraq, and it will be reduced in consultation with everyone," McKinsey said, in comments to US media, followed by Digital Media on RT, today, Thursday, July 16, 2020. Between 5,000 and 6,000 soldiers in Iraq .[/size]


[size=24]He added, "I think the government of Iraq recognizes the benefit that the United States, coalition and NATO forces have been achieving in their fight against ISIS, and I think we will reach a solution during negotiations with them ."[/size]

[size=24]He stressed that "Washington's continuing to help Iraq in its war against ISIS represents a setback for Iran," saying that Tehran is trying hard to get the United States out of the Iraqi theater, explaining that he "believes that this dream has reached a dead end for them, because they find that the new Iraqi government is not Fully loyal to them and take decisions that serve the interests of her country against Iran [/size]

[size=24]"The Iraqi government has been very aggressive and extremely beneficial in its efforts to limit attacks by Iranian-backed factions on Iraqi bases that include American forces, and Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kazemi takes his responsibility seriously to fight these militias and protect the coalition forces that are helping him," McKinsey said. .[/size]

[size=24]He continued, "For this reason, we have witnessed fewer attacks on American bases than we would have seen in the past few weeks," noting that "Iran is aware that it will not be able to remove the American forces from Iraq politically, so it is trying to do this by force through its militia." Iran's control of these factions has declined dramatically after the killing of the former Iranian Quds Force commander, Qassem Soleimani .[/size]

[size=24]The commander of the US Central Command for the Middle East indicated that Iran was under great diplomatic and economic pressure, but had "made sacrifices" at the expense of its people to ensure its continued military threat, including its ballistic missile forces, and said, "I do not consider Iran as less threatening now than it was several months ago." ".[/size]

[size=24]An American defense official had previously said that "more details about possible reduction plans for the American force in Iraq can be revealed after the American-Iraqi dialogue scheduled later this month ."[/size]



R.A.














https://www.nrttv.com/Ar/News.aspx?id=29115&MapID=2
claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty Al-Araji discusses with the American diplomat and the leader of the international coalition the developments of the American withdrawal

Post by claud39 on Thu Jul 16, 2020 2:38 pm

Al-Araji discusses with the American diplomat and the leader of the international coalition the developments of the American withdrawal





Thursday 16, July 2020





An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 844326-0c0eebd6-46c7-4eb8-8937-3caa5962801b





Baghdad / Nina / National Security Adviser Qasim Al-Araji discussed with the Chargé d'Affaires and the Commander of the International Coalition Forces the developments of the American withdrawal from Iraq.

A statement of the advisory said, "The Iraqi National News Agency ( NINA ) received a copy of it:" The two sides discussed a number of issues of common concern, foremost of which are Iraqi-American relations and their importance, as well as the importance of cooperation and coordination to provide support to Iraq.

They also reviewed developments in the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq, and verified them, stressing the need for relations with the United States in its civilian aspects to be in various aspects and areas supportive of Iraq.


 / End 3





https://ninanews.com/Website/News/Details?key=844326
claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty A government source: Al-Kazimi's visit to Washington, Tehran, and Riyadh aims to keep Baghdad out of conflicts

Post by claud39 on Thu Jul 16, 2020 2:58 pm

A government source: Al-Kazimi's visit to Washington, Tehran, and Riyadh aims to keep Baghdad out of conflicts


5 Hours ago





An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 %D9%85%D8%B5%D8%B7%D9%81%D9%89-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%A7%D8%B8%D9%85%D9%8A2-768x512




A government source revealed the agenda of the visits of Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kazemi to Washington, Tehran and Riyadh this month.

International agencies quoted the source as saying that, during his upcoming visits, Al-Kazemi will discuss bringing the views between Washington and Tehran closer, and reducing tension between Tehran and Riyadh, as well as discussing with officials in these countries the need to keep Iraq away from the conflicts between them.

He added that Al-Kazemi will work to hold the stick in the middle and will try to reach stages that remove the danger of these conflicts from Iraq, and pointed out that the visits will also focus on the role of these countries in easing tensions in Iraq and the region.


claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty A prospective round of strategic dialogue between Baghdad and Washington

Post by claud39 on Thu Jul 16, 2020 3:01 pm

A prospective round of strategic dialogue between Baghdad and Washington




16.07.2020










Iraqi National Security Adviser Qasim Al-Araji announced that the upcoming strategic dialogue between Iraq and the United States will focus on scheduling the withdrawal of American forces from Iraq.

He pointed out that the objectives of the dialogue will emphasize the independence of Iraq.




https://arabic.rt.com/features/1134681-%D8%AC%D9%88%D9%84%D8%A9-%D9%85%D8%B1%D8%AA%D9%82%D8%A8%D8%A9-%D9%84%D9%84%D8%AD%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%AA%D9%8A%D8%AC%D9%8A-%D8%A8%D9%8A%D9%86-%D8%A8%D8%BA%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%AF-%D9%88%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%B4%D9%86%D8%B7%D9%86/
claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty A session of discussions on economic cooperation Republic of Iraq - United States of America - Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf, July 16, 2020

Post by claud39 on Fri Jul 17, 2020 11:32 am

[size=34]A session of discussions on economic cooperation Republic of Iraq - United States of America - Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf, July 16, 2020[/size]




17/07/2020







An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 2F2D781C-8720-4ABB-AB46-F3DFBB26CFA4-1024x375










On Thursday, July 16, 2020, a three-way discussion session was held, which brought together representatives of the governments of the Republic of Iraq, the United States of America, and the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf (GCC) to discuss the topic of the electrical link project between Iraq and the Arab Gulf states.

This session is organized and supported by the government of the United States of America, and aims to work towards finding an effective way to implement the electrical link project between Iraq and the countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council, in addition to moving forward in encouraging economic cooperation between the Iraqi and Gulf sides.

The session issued the following joint statement:

The Government of Iraq, the United States, and the Gulf Cooperation Council have renewed their full support for the Gulf Cooperation Council electric linkage project for the electrical networks of Iraq and the Gulf Cooperation Council. The United States is committed to facilitating this project, and providing support where needed.

This project will provide the necessary electrical energy to Iraqi citizens, and support economic development in Iraq, especially in the southern governorates. 

The government of Iraq, the Gulf Cooperation Council, and the United States look forward to increased and closer cooperation in the economic, energy, and energy sectors between the United States, Iraq, and the Gulf Cooperation Council states, to be the basis for peace, development, and prosperity in the region.

The Government of Iraq, the Gulf Cooperation Council, and the United States called for the speedy and full implementation of the pledges made in 2018 by the international community at the Kuwait International Conference for Reconstruction in Iraq. 




https://www.mofa.gov.iq/2020/07/?p=16051
claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty A political analyst links Al-Kazemi's visit to Washington with this

Post by claud39 on Fri Jul 17, 2020 4:33 pm

A political analyst links Al-Kazemi's visit to Washington with this





Friday, July 17, 2020





An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 7202017121157108156873







Political analyst Kamel Al-Bayati considered that the upcoming visit of Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kazemi to Washington will not be useful if it does not include removing foreign forces from Iraq and emphasizing the implementation of the parliament’s decision.

Al-Bayati said, "The coming days will witness Al-Kazemi's visit to Washington with the aim of bringing the views of the region closer and easing the current external tensions."

He added, "The visit should be in the primary interest of Iraq, before it is to solve the problems of the region, especially those related to the external military presence."

He pointed out the importance of "the parliament’s interference and exercising its oversight role regarding the goals of the visit, and putting its touches on its agenda, where it can be used to benefit Iraq and understanding about removing the American forces from the country, with an emphasis on informing the parliament of the results of the visit with a session in which Al-Kazemi is hosted." 











https://www.thebaghdadpost.com/ar/Story/198694/%D9%85%D8%AD%D9%84%D9%84-%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%B3%D9%8A-%D9%8A%D8%B1%D8%A8%D8%B7-%D9%86%D8%AC%D8%A7%D8%AD-%D8%B2%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%A7%D8%B8%D9%85%D9%8A-%D8%A5%D9%84%D9%89-%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%B4%D9%86%D8%B7%D9%86-%D8%A8%D9%87%D8%B0%D8%A7-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A3%D9%85%D8%B1
claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty The Speaker of the House of Representatives receives the Chargé d'Affaires of the American Embassy

Post by claud39 on Tue Jul 21, 2020 2:55 pm

[size=32]The Speaker of the House of Representatives receives the Chargé d'Affaires of the American Embassy[/size]







 7/20/2020
 
An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 IMG-20200720-WA0044-800x445

Speaker of the House of Representatives Mohammed Al-Halbousi received, today, Monday the Chargé d'Affairs at the American Embassy in Baghdad, Brian McFeithers.


The meeting discussed developments in the country, a number of topics of common concern, and ways to activate it in the interest of the two friendly peoples.


===========
Media Office
of the Speaker of Parliament,
20 July 2020



An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 IMG-20200720-WA0045-e1595276566223



https://ar.parliament.iq/2020/07/20/%d8%b1%d8%a6%d9%8a%d8%b3-%d9%85%d8%ac%d9%84%d8%b3-%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%86%d9%88%d8%a7%d8%a8-%d9%8a%d8%b3%d8%aa%d9%82%d8%a8%d9%84-%d8%a7%d9%84%d9%82%d8%a7%d8%a6%d9%85-%d8%a8%d8%a7%d9%84%d8%a3%d8%b9%d9%85-5/
claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty America is ready to support Kurdistan in the field of economic development

Post by claud39 on Wed Jul 22, 2020 12:50 pm

America is ready to support Kurdistan in the field of economic development





7/22/2020







An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 %D9%85%D8%B3%D8%B1%D9%88%D8%B1-%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%B2%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%8A-%D9%88%D9%88%D9%84%D8%B1








Shafaq News / The President of the Kurdistan Regional Government, Masroor Barzani, received today, Wednesday, July 22, 2020, the new American Consul General to the Kurdistan Region, Rob Waller.



At the beginning of the meeting, they discussed the latest developments in Iraq and the region, and ways to enhance bilateral relations between the Kurdistan Region of the United States were discussed.



The Prime Minister congratulated the new American Consul General on the occasion of his assumption of office, and he wished him success in performing his new duties in a manner that strengthens the existing relations and establishes the foundations of cooperation between the United States and the Kurdistan Region, and the Prime Minister congratulated the former Consul General Stephen Wigan on his new duties at the American Embassy in Baghdad, He expressed his hope for his success in his upcoming responsibilities.



The new US Consul General pointed out the importance of strengthening relations between the United States, Iraq and the Kurdistan Region, and expressed his country's readiness to provide support to the Kurdistan Region in the field of economic development, especially in the energy and agricultural sectors.






https://shafaaq.com/ar/%D9%83%D9%88%D8%B1%D8%AF%D8%B3%D9%80%D9%80%D8%AA%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%AA/%D8%A7%D9%85%D8%B1%D9%8A%D9%83%D8%A7-%D8%AA%D8%A8%D8%AF%D9%8A-%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%B9%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%AF%D9%87%D8%A7-%D9%84%D8%AF%D8%B9%D9%85-%D9%83%D9%88%D8%B1%D8%AF%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%A7%D9%86-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D9%85%D8%AC%D8%A7%D9%84-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AA%D9%86%D9%85%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%82%D8%AA%D8%B5%D8%A7%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%A9/
claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty Washington-Baghdad Dialogue: America wants to strictly implement the sanctions list

Post by claud39 on Fri Jul 24, 2020 5:02 pm

[size=32]Washington-Baghdad Dialogue: America wants to strictly implement the sanctions list[/size]


- 3 Days Past


An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 1191105814-341x341




About two weeks before the second session of the strategic dialogue between the United States and Iraq, in which Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kazemi is to participate, an Iraqi official revealed that Washington included a paragraph related to the names of Iraqi, Syrian, Iranian and Lebanese personalities that the US Treasury Department imposed sanctions on in the past two years.

 The paragraph is related to discussing the seriousness of the Iraqi banks ’commitment to not dealing with these names, as well as discussing some of them escaping sanctions through activities managed by relatives or agents in their favor. The source pointed out that the Al-Kazemi government is in the process of undertaking major reforms in this area, specifically within the Central Bank of Iraq, the body responsible for the matter.


Al-Kazemi will participate in the second American-Iraqi dialogue session, during an upcoming official visit to Washington at the end of this July, according to what was previously revealed by Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein.




US officials are convinced of the existence of fraud within Iraq, enabling those involved in the sanctions to continue their commercial and financial activities

During the past two years, the US Treasury Department has continuously announced the announcement, and through official statements issued by it, on the inclusion of a number of Iraqi personalities and companies on the sanctions list, accompanied by convictions of them, related to what it says are crimes and violations in the field of human rights and financial corruption they committed, And also their cooperation with the Lebanese "Hezbollah" and the Iranian Revolutionary Guards. 

Among the most prominent of these names are the director of the “Islamic Bank of the Country”, the politician Aras Habib, the governors of Salahuddin and Nineveh, Ahmad al-Jubouri and Nawfal Hammadi al-Akoub, the politician Khamis al-Khanjar, the leader of the militia “Asa’ib” Qais al-Khazali and his brother Laith al-Khazali, and a leader in the “Popular Mobilization” Hussein Faleh Lami. This is in addition to the leader of the "Babylonian" militia, Ryan Al-Kildani, the leader of the "Shabak" militia, Waad al-Qud, and the "al-Nujaba" militia, Akram al-Kaabi.




According to a senior Iraqi official, there are officials in the US Treasury Department convinced of the existence of fraud within Iraq, which enabled those involved in the sanctions, whether Iraqis, Syrians, Lebanese or Iranians, to continue their commercial and financial activities, and to obtain hard currency, which prompted the Americans to include a full paragraph In the second dialogue session, Baghdad calls for reforms to be made.

 The source pointed out that American officials accuse the government of Adel Abdul Mahdi of not responding to the sanctions, and of allowing many of those listed on its regulations to withdraw funds or transfer funds or carry out sales and purchases through agents and relatives, and with the knowledge of the Central Bank of Iraq and other local banks.


The Iraqi official also revealed that the Al-Kazemi government will make additional pledges to tighten commitment to US sanctions, and to carry out reforms within the Central Bank of Iraq, and an investigation will be opened with the competent authorities to find out the real reasons behind the failure to implement decisions in this regard may expose Iraq to sanctions. 

The source acknowledged that there are political and factional influences (armed factions) linked to Iran on the central bank and on other oversight bodies, and that any commitment to the sanctions is considered by the authorities implementing the pressures as labor in favor of the United States.




Al-Kazemi’s government will make additional pledges to tighten compliance with sanctions, and to carry out reforms within the central bank

The source emphasized that for these reasons, Al-Kazemi intends to make fundamental changes in the central bank during the coming period.


For his part, the former official at the Central Bank of Iraq, Mahmoud Dagher, in connection with the "New Arab", stressed his country's commitment to the American sanctions issued against the personalities and companies, stressing that "it is impossible for Iraq not to implement such decisions issued by the American Treasury, nor will it risk Not to implement American decisions, as important. Dagher recalled that the Iraqi government "issued a circular to banks under the names of those who were included in the sanctions list, and transfers were stopped from them and to them," stressing his country's commitment "to implement such a decision if it was issued against any party or person."


The former official in the "Central Bank of Iraq" stressed that his country’s failure to implement the US Treasury Department’s decisions constituted an economic risk for Iraq and the Iraqis, which would stop all financial transfers to Iraq, and for this reason the bank is obliged to implement the sanctions issued against Iraqi personalities, whatever they may be.


On the other hand, a member of the Security and Defense Committee in the Iraqi Parliament, on the authority of the “Al-Fath” coalition, Karim Alaiwi, said that “his bloc is awaiting a position on the part of Al-Kazemi’s government regarding the rejection of unilateral sanctions against Iraqi personalities and entities.” 

It has the intention to hold talks with the American side about it, as it is political sanctions, and is not based on any realistic evidence. Aliwi said in an interview with Al-Arabi Al-Jadeed that the Al-Kazemi government should complete this task by rejecting any kind of sanctions that affect any Iraqi figure who is not convicted by the local judiciary, and working to remove names from any American list.


But one of the members of the negotiating delegation in the first dialogue session, which was held over a television circle last month between American and Iraqi officials, assured Al-Jadeed Al-Jadeed that the files of the second session were not definitively determined, and they may be comprehensive due to Al-Kazemi’s presence in Washington and his supposed meetings with senior administration officials. 

American, but he made it clear that it is primarily about terrorism and strengthening Iraq's security and military capabilities, the financial and health crises, electricity and strengthening the rule of law, fighting financial corruption and threatening armed groups linked to Iran, and the American military presence. 

And he considered that the file of Iraq’s commitment to the sanctions imposed on Iran, and on various personalities and parties inside and outside Iraq, would be within the political file that is under discussion with the prime minister.


Just deputies

New Arab




https://rawabetcenter.com/archives/113183

claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty Iraqi Alliance: Iraq is not ready for a new round of dialogue with Washington

Post by claud39 on Tue Aug 04, 2020 10:04 am

Iraqi Alliance: Iraq is not ready for a new round of dialogue with Washington


04/08/2020





An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 %D8%AA%D8%AD%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%81-%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%82%D9%8A%D9%88%D9%86-5-696x419




Information / private ...

On Tuesday, Iraqi Alliance MP Salem Tahimir said that Iraq is not ready to sit at the dialogue table with the American side in the near future .

Thameer said to "Information" that " Iraq is not currently ready for a second round of dialogue with the American side because of the circumstances the country is going through", adding that "negotiations will start in the second phase soon",
He stressed that "the United States of America has no desire to withdraw from Iraqi territory," considering that "the US military presence is negative in Iraq   from 2003 until today."

The member of Parliament, Enas Al-Maksousi, had confirmed earlier that the Iraqi-American dialogue in his first round, which started in 11 islands is almost crossword puzzles. Ended / h 25



claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty Al-Khikani: The parliament’s role is absent in the face of the government's move towards negotiations with Washington

Post by claud39 on Tue Aug 04, 2020 10:32 am

Al-Khikani: The parliament’s role is absent in the face of the government's move towards negotiations with Washington


04/08/2020





An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 %D9%85%D8%AC%D9%84%D8%B3-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%86%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%A8-696x435








Information / private ..



Political analyst Karim Al-Khakiani said that there is an absence of the parliament’s role regarding the negotiations that the government adopted with the American side regarding the presence of American forces on Iraq , pointing out that the parliament’s presidency should take its role in holding the government accountable and knowing what is going on in these negotiations.



Al-Khikani told Al-Maaluma that the parliament’s silence regarding negotiations with the American side suggests that there are hidden agreements regarding not talking about negotiations with the American side, at a time when the speaker of parliament bears the responsibility of not holding any session to discuss the matter.



He added that "some voices of deputies are still calling and demanding to clarify the movements of Al-Kazemi and the meetings of the negotiating delegation with the American side about the future presence of foreign forces on Iraqi soil ."



And that "some politicians support the American presence in Iraq and try to maintain the absence of the legislative authority's role in the negotiations, and to keep it opaque in the interests of Washington and its allies in the region." 



25 n ended



claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty Trump: Sending troops to the Middle East is America's biggest mistake

Post by claud39 on Tue Aug 04, 2020 1:02 pm

Trump: Sending troops to the Middle East is America's biggest mistake




04-08-2020 





An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Image




Baghdad / news


US President Donald Trump has described Washington's decision to send troops to the Middle East and intervene in conflicts in that region as the biggest mistake in the country's history. 


"The decision to send troops to the Middle East region and to send them into the conflicts of the Middle East was the greatest mistake in our country's history. This is my view," Trump said in an interview with Axios.


The US President had stated repeatedly earlier that the United States intends to end the policy of "endless wars" and seeks to establish partnerships with countries of the world instead of competing and fighting with them. 





https://www.ikhnews.com/index.php?page=article&id=223144
claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty Trump: This is the biggest mistake the United States has made

Post by claud39 on Tue Aug 04, 2020 1:04 pm

[size=30]Trump: This is the biggest mistake the United States has made[/size]




2020.08.04





An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 41eb821dd-36990-202008040932





Baghdad - people
  
US President Donald Trump has described Washington's decision to send troops to the Middle East and intervene in conflicts in that region as the biggest mistake in the country's history . 
 
Trump said yesterday (July 4, 2020), in an interview with "Axios": "The decision to send troops to the Middle East and to send them into Middle East conflicts was the greatest mistake in our country's history. This is my view." 
 
The US President had stated repeatedly earlier that the United States intends to end the policy of "endless wars" and seeks to establish partnerships with countries of the world instead of competing and fighting with them.  


claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty How Trump described his country's decision to send troops to the Middle East?

Post by claud39 on Tue Aug 04, 2020 1:06 pm

[size=30]How Trump described his country's decision to send troops to the Middle East?[/size]





9 hours ago





An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 4820209564519520










[size=15]Digital Media NRT[/size]
[size=15]US President Donald Trump, Washington's decision to send its forces to the Middle East region, considered it "the biggest mistake in the country's history "[/size]


[size=15]Trump said, in an interview with the Axios news website, today (4 August 2020), "The decision to send troops to the Middle East region and send them into the conflicts of the Middle East was the greatest mistake in the history of our country," noting that "this is his view of the subject ."[/size]


[size=15]Trump has repeatedly stated earlier that the United States intends to end the policy of "endless wars" and seeks to establish partnerships with countries of the world rather than compete and fight with them .[/size]





claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty Iraqi Alliance: Iraq is not ready for a new round of dialogue with Washington

Post by claud39 on Tue Aug 04, 2020 1:19 pm


Tuesday 04 August 2020 




An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 159654963486941100




Today, Tuesday, the representative of the Iraqi Alliance, Salem Tahemer, considered that Iraq is not ready to sit at the dialogue table with the American side in the near future.



The World - Iraq
"Iraq is currently not ready for a second round of dialogue with the American side because of the circumstances the country is going through," he said, adding that "negotiations will start in the second phase soon."


He stressed that "the United States of America has no desire to withdraw from Iraqi territory," considering that "the American military presence is negative in Iraq from 2003 until today."


The member of Parliament, Enas Al-Maksousi, had confirmed earlier that the Iraqi-American dialogue in his first round, which started on June 11, was almost "cross words . "




https://www.alalamtv.net/news/5082961/%D8%AA%D8%AD%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%81-%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%82%D9%8A%D9%88%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%82-%D8%BA%D9%8A%D8%B1-%D9%85%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%B9%D8%AF-%D9%84%D8%AC%D9%88%D9%84%D8%A9-%D8%AC%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%AF%D8%A9-%D9%85%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AD%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D9%85%D8%B9-%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%B4%D9%86%D8%B7%D9%86
claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty Re: An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations

Post by claud39 on Tue Aug 04, 2020 1:32 pm

@claud39 wrote:Trump: Sending troops to the Middle East is America's biggest mistake




04-08-2020 





An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Image




Baghdad / news


US President Donald Trump has described Washington's decision to send troops to the Middle East and intervene in conflicts in that region as the biggest mistake in the country's history. 


"The decision to send troops to the Middle East region and to send them into the conflicts of the Middle East was the greatest mistake in our country's history. This is my view," Trump said in an interview with Axios.


The US President had stated repeatedly earlier that the United States intends to end the policy of "endless wars" and seeks to establish partnerships with countries of the world instead of competing and fighting with them. 





https://www.ikhnews.com/index.php?page=article&id=223144







Tuesday 04 August 2020



An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 159654963486941100





Today, Tuesday, the representative of the Iraqi Alliance, Salem Tahemer, considered that Iraq is not ready to sit at the dialogue table with the American side in the near future.



The World - Iraq
"Iraq is currently not ready for a second round of dialogue with the American side because of the circumstances the country is going through," he said, adding that "negotiations will start in the second phase soon."


He stressed that "the United States of America has no desire to withdraw from Iraqi territory," considering that "the American military presence is negative in Iraq from 2003 until today."


The member of Parliament, Enas Al-Maksousi, had confirmed earlier that the Iraqi-American dialogue in his first round, which started on June 11, was almost "cross words . "




https://www.alalamtv.net/news/5082961/%D8%AA%D8%AD%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%81-%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%82%D9%8A%D9%88%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%82-%D8%BA%D9%8A%D8%B1-%D9%85%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%B9%D8%AF-%D9%84%D8%AC%D9%88%D9%84%D8%A9-%D8%AC%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%AF%D8%A9-%D9%85%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AD%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D9%85%D8%B9-%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%B4%D9%86%D8%B7%D9%86



The question of the day is that we will see an agreement with the United States, and Iraq on the withdrawal of troops, if we read the article with Trump, it looks like they want to leave the army, after that !! 

question

Is Iraq going to become a sovereign country, and take their own future in their own hands?


question

Could we have a good start to 2021 with a change in their currency, that's a good question to ask ourselves right now !!!

question


But like I said I am not a guru, make your own opinion by reading the article, good day everyone !!!




Claud (Moose)
claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty Deputy: The first round of the US dialogue was a crossword

Post by claud39 on Tue Aug 04, 2020 1:46 pm

Deputy: The first round of the US dialogue was a crossword




 04/08/2020





An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 %D8%A8%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B5%D9%88%D8%B1..-%D8%A5%D9%86%D8%B7%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%82-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AD%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D8%A8%D9%8A%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%82-%D9%88%D8%A3%D9%85%D8%B1%D9%8A%D9%83%D8%A7-696x522














The information / Baghdad ..



On Tuesday, a member of the House of Representatives, Enas Al-Maksousi, considered that the Iraqi-American dialogue in his first round was almost a crossword.



Al-Maksousi said in a statement to "Information", that "the Iraqi-American dialogue in its first round is almost just crossword puzzles, and there is nothing in its clauses that serves the Iraqi national interest."



She added that "what Iraq is going through since 2003 and to this day must be employed in favor of service, educational, cultural and health projects, and it is not limited to the issue of the American military presence in Iraq ."



Al-Maksousi indicated that "the first round of negotiations between the two sides did not address the economic and service side and lacks recommendations," considering that "the business paper presented between the two sides is cross words that lack all aspects that serve the interests of Iraq and its people." 



Ended / 25h






claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty Al-Fateh: We will continue to insist on removing the American occupation forces

Post by claud39 on Wed Aug 05, 2020 9:31 am

Al-Fateh: We will continue to insist on removing the American occupation forces


05/08/2020




An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 %D8%A7%D9%84%D9%81%D8%AA%D8%AD-1-696x435




Information / Baghdad .. 


The deputy of the Alliance of the Fath Alliance, Uday al-Shaalan, warned, on Wednesday, of a Zionist American conspiracy aimed at undermining the Iraqi people, indicating that his alliance will continue to insist on removing the American occupation forces from Iraqi territory.

Al-Shaalan said in a statement to the "information", that "the Al-Fatah coalition will not tolerate the occupier remaining for a longer period in Iraq ," calling for "uniting the political rank and standing in the face of the Zionist American foreign conspiracies that aim to undermine the will of the Iraqi people."

He pointed out that America, through its arms and media tools, is trying in various ways to thwart the American-Iraqi dialogue to stay longer in Iraq .

Al-Shaalan stressed that "an alliance will continue to insist on removing the American occupation forces from Iraqi lands and implementing the decision of the Iraqi parliament in this regard." 


Ended / 25h




https://www.almaalomah.com/2020/08/05/488455/
claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty Re: An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations

Post by claud39 on Wed Aug 05, 2020 9:36 am

@claud39 wrote:
@claud39 wrote:Trump: Sending troops to the Middle East is America's biggest mistake




04-08-2020 





An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Image




Baghdad / news


US President Donald Trump has described Washington's decision to send troops to the Middle East and intervene in conflicts in that region as the biggest mistake in the country's history. 


"The decision to send troops to the Middle East region and to send them into the conflicts of the Middle East was the greatest mistake in our country's history. This is my view," Trump said in an interview with Axios.


The US President had stated repeatedly earlier that the United States intends to end the policy of "endless wars" and seeks to establish partnerships with countries of the world instead of competing and fighting with them. 





https://www.ikhnews.com/index.php?page=article&id=223144







Tuesday 04 August 2020



An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 159654963486941100





Today, Tuesday, the representative of the Iraqi Alliance, Salem Tahemer, considered that Iraq is not ready to sit at the dialogue table with the American side in the near future.





The World - Iraq
"Iraq is currently not ready for a second round of dialogue with the American side because of the circumstances the country is going through," he said, adding that "negotiations will start in the second phase soon."


He stressed that "the United States of America has no desire to withdraw from Iraqi territory," considering that "the American military presence is negative in Iraq from 2003 until today."


The member of Parliament, Enas Al-Maksousi, had confirmed earlier that the Iraqi-American dialogue in his first round, which started on June 11, was almost "cross words . "




https://www.alalamtv.net/news/5082961/%D8%AA%D8%AD%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%81-%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%82%D9%8A%D9%88%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%82-%D8%BA%D9%8A%D8%B1-%D9%85%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%B9%D8%AF-%D9%84%D8%AC%D9%88%D9%84%D8%A9-%D8%AC%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%AF%D8%A9-%D9%85%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AD%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D9%85%D8%B9-%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%B4%D9%86%D8%B7%D9%86


The question of the day is that we will see an agreement with the United States, and Iraq on the withdrawal of troops, if we read the article with Trump, it looks like they want to leave the army, after that !! 

question

Is Iraq going to become a sovereign country, and take their own future in their own hands?


question

Could we have a good start to 2021 with a change in their currency, that's a good question to ask ourselves right now !!!

question


But like I said I am not a guru, make your own opinion by reading the article, good day everyone !!!




Claud (Moose)


Analyst: Only demand the removal of American forces when Iraq becomes strong and sovereign


30-07-2020 





An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Image








Baghdad / news

Analyst and political expert Mujahid al-Ta'i stressed that it should not be required to remove American forces, except when Iraq becomes strong and sovereign.

"Do you want to bring out the American forces? Yes, there is no need for letters, demonstrations, slogans, visits to Qom, and meeting with the militias ... What you need is to strengthen state institutions, amend the constitution, fight corruption, reform the security services, and confine arms in the hands of the state to make Iraq strong and sovereign," said Al-Ta’i. ".

"He is doing something right wrongly!"








https://www.ikhnews.com/index.php?page=article&id=222782
claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 Empty Soon ... Al-Kazemi is in the White House

Post by claud39 Yesterday at 11:41 am

[size=32]Soon ... Al-Kazemi is in the White House[/size]




 One Hour Passed





An American-Iraqi strategic dialogue: a matter of interests and expectations - Page 2 %D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%A7%D8%B8%D9%85%D9%8A-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%B4%D9%86%D8%B7%D9%86










Despite the outbreak of the Corona epidemic in the United States of America and the increasing controversy surrounding the holding of the American elections on time or postponed, this did not prevent the American White House from agreeing with the Presidency of the Council of Ministers of Iraq in determining the date of Mustafa Al-Kazemi’s Prime Minister visit to the United States of America and the meeting With US President Donald Trump, according to special information for the Links Center, it was decided to schedule the visit of Al-Kazemi to the United States of America on 20 and 21 of this month.

Setting the date of the visit and not postponing it or canceling it means that Iraq receives great attention from the American administration, and that the security and stability of Iraq comes in the highest priorities of the United States of America
Mustafa Al-Kazemi negligently dealt with it with determination and strength to show that Iraq is able to impose its sovereignty and prestige on everyone. This visit also indicates that Mustafa Al-Kazemi is welcomed and praised by the American administration.

Despite the challenges and difficulties facing Mustafa Al-Kazemi, his train is proceeding in a balanced way, and according to special information for the Links Center for Research and Strategic Studies, the upcoming meeting with Al-Kazemi will discuss common issues between the two countries, such as the strategic framework agreement, the redeployment of American forces in Iraq, and the firm response of ISIS The terrorist and the financial crisis in Iraq as a result of the drop in global oil prices.

The bottom line is that setting the date of the visit is evidence that the United States is concerned with providing all support to Iraq, and also evidence that the United States of America deals with Mustafa Al-Kazemi as a statesman who strives hard to save Iraq from its crisis and return it to the political map as an influential and effective country in Its Arab, regional and international environment. Al-Kazemi is able to do that with his leadership qualifications and national conscience. But he needs someone on his side internally and externally to make it happen.
Iraqi Studies Unit




https://rawabetcenter.com/archives/113866
claud39
claud39
VIP NewsHound
VIP NewsHound

Posts : 15439
Join date : 2018-11-04

Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

Back to top


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