Iraq's PM Maliki's Relations With Petraeus, "Poor"

From the Marine Corps Times:

A key aide says Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s relations with U.S. commander Gen. David Petraeus are so poor the Iraqi leader may ask Washington the withdraw the well-regarded U.S. military leader from duty here.

The Iraqi foreign minister calls the relationship “difficult.”

Petraeus says his ties with al-Maliki are “very good” but acknowledges expressing “the full range of emotions” on “a couple of occasions.”

U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker, who meets together with al-Maliki and Petraeus at least weekly, concedes “sometimes there are sporty exchanges.”

Al-Maliki has spoken sharply — not of Petraeus or Crocker personally — but about their tactic of welcoming Sunni militants into the fight against al-Qaida forces in Anbar and Diyalah provinces.

But the reality of how the three men get along likely lies somewhere between the worst and best reports about their relationship — perhaps one of the most important in the world and unquestionably central to the future of Iraq, the larger Middle East and scores, if not hundreds, of political, diplomatic and military careers in the United States.

A tangle of issues confront the three men, and none of them present clear or easy solutions:

— Al-Maliki, a Shiite who spent years in exile under Saddam Hussein, hotly objects to U.S. tactic of recruiting men with ties to the Sunni insurgency into the ongoing fight against al-Qaida. He has complained loudly but with little effect except a U.S. pledge to let al-Maliki’s security apparatus vet the recruits before they join the force. He also has spoken bitterly, aides say, about delivery delays of promised U.S. weapons and equipment for his forces.

— Petraeus is confronted with an Iraqi military and police force, nominally under al-Maliki’s control, that has in many cases acted on sectarian — namely Shiite — not national Iraqi interests. He has faced a significant challenge in persuading al-Maliki to shed his ties to radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, who runs the Mahdi Army militia.

— Crocker’s problems with the Iraqi leader are the appearance of foot-dragging or ineffectiveness on the political front — the need to shepherd critical benchmark legislation through parliament. U.S. opponents of the war will undoubtedly demand from Crocker, when he reports to congress in September, an explanation of why U.S. troops are fighting and dying to give al-Maliki political breathing space that the Iraqi leader will not or cannot capitalize on.

First word of strained relations began leaking out with consistency earlier this month.

Sami al-Askari, an key aide to al-Maliki and a member of the prime minister’s Dawa Party, said the policy of including one-time Sunni insurgents in the security forces shows Petraeus has a “real bias and it bothers the Shiites. It is possible that we may demand his removal.”

Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari said in an interview with Newsweek, that the Petraeus-al-Maliki relationship was “difficult.”

“The prime minister cannot just pick up the phone and have Iraqi army units do what he says. Maliki needs more leverage.”

A lawmaker from the al-Sadr bloc, who refused use of his name fearing the party would expel him over his continued close ties to al-Maliki, said the prime minister has complained to U.S. President George W. Bush about the policy of arming Sunnis.

“He told Bush that if Petraeus continues doing that he would arm Shiite Militias. Bush told al-Maliki to calm down,” according to the lawmaker who said he was told of the exchange by al-Maliki.

The lawmaker said al-Maliki once told Petraeus: “I can’t deal with you any more. I will ask for someone else to replace you.”

In an angry outburst earlier this month, al-Maliki said American forces should leave and turn over security to Iraqi troops. He quickly backpedaled, but the damage was done.

“There is no leader in the world that is under more pressure than Nouri al-Maliki, without question. Sometimes he reflects that frustration. I don’t blame him. I probably would too,” Crocker said.

The ambassador, one of the State Department’s most seasoned Middle East diplomats, appeared to be genuinely fond of al-Maliki and profoundly understanding of the Iraqi leader’s troubles.

“We are dealing with existential issues. There are no second tier problems ... so there is a lot of pressure. And we all feel very deeply about we’re trying to get done. So yeah, sometimes there are sporty exchanges,” he said.

“And believe me I’ve had my share of them. That in no way means, in my view, strained relations. I have great admiration for Prime Minister Maliki, and I know General Petraeus does as well. And I like to think it is reciprocal. Wrestling with the things we’re all wrestling with here, it would almost be strange if you didn’t get a little passionate from time to time.”

Petraeus, a wily, rising star at the Pentagon who is known for holding his cards close to his chest, called his relations with al-Maliki “very good...and that’s the truth,” but acknowledged, “we have not pulled punches with each other.”

Here’s why, he said:

“We have made an enormous investment here — 3,600-plus soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines have given their lives. And where we see something that could unhinge the progress that our soldiers and their soldiers are fighting to make ... or jeopardize some of the very hard-fought gains that we have made, I’m going to speak up. And I have on occasion. And on a couple of occasions have demonstrated the full range of emotions.”

All sides spoke with the critical September reports by Crocker and Petraeus to Congress clearly at the front of their minds — the need to make it clear to an increasingly hostile U.S. legislative branch that progress is being made and it would be wrong to start pulling out troops and cutting support now.

It will be a tough sell, but not for lack of getting their views before the public in advance of walking into Congressional committee rooms about seven weeks from now.

Egypt To Propose Iraq Cease-Fire At Conference; Baghdad Opposed

The International Herald Tribune reports:
Further deep differences emerged between Iraq and Arab countries on Monday days before a crucial conference aimed at bringing the region's support for the Baghdad government, with Egypt proposing a three-month cease-fire between Iraqi forces and insurgents.

An Iraqi diplomat said Baghdad was strongly opposed to the cease-fire proposal, which implicitly treats the Shiite-led Iraqi government and the Sunni-led "resistance" as equal partners in the country.
Egypt is trying to get the cease-fire call into final resolutions from two days of conferences on Thursday and Friday in the Egyptian Red Sea resort of Sharm el-Sheik. The gathering aims to rally the divided participants — Arab nations, Iran, the United States, Russia, China and top European powers — around a united plan to stabilize Iraq.

Arab nations are pressing the government of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to take concrete steps to better incorporate Iraq's Sunni Arabs into the government and military — including changing the constitution and ending the system for purging former members of Saddam Hussein's ousted Baath Party, which was dominated by Sunnis.

The Egyptian proposal only underlines the differences between Arab nations and al-Maliki's government. Iraq's Shiites and Kurds, who now dominate the government, have long viewed Sunni-led Arab governments as biased toward Iraq's Sunnis and sympathetic toward the Sunni-led insurgency.

Today in Africa & Middle East

Olmert clings to office despite harsh report on war

Iran to attend regional talks on Iraq strife

Major problems found in Iraqi rebuilding effort


Under the Egyptian proposal, the participants would "call on all parties to implement a cease fire for an initial period of three months to allow for a conducive environment to help foster the political process and national accord," according to a copy of the draft final resolutions, obtained by the Associated Press. It did not elaborate on how insurgents could be brought on board for a cease-fire.

The draft resolutions are still being finalized by senior diplomats from the participating countries, but an Iraqi official close to the discussions said the Egyptian proposal is a nonstarter.

"This is not a good idea. How can we have a cease-fire with terrorists?" said the Iraqi diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the discussions. Although the United States has been pushing al-Maliki to reach out for Sunni Arabs, it is highly unlikely that it would back a cease-fire call with insurgents who are battling U.S. forces as well as Iraqi troops.

There were also still differences over a resolution on how to build reconciliation between Iraq's Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds.

An Arab-backed resolution calls for the Iraqi government to take "constructive steps toward reviewing and amending the constitution and the Debaathification law."

But the Iraqi-backed version of the resolution calls only for steps toward reviewing the constitution, without a mention of changing it or a mention of the Debaathification program.

Syria is pressing for the final statement to also include a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops, a step opposed by Washington and the Iraqi government.

"There have been some differences in the points of view about the presence of the foreign troops in Iraq. There is a need for a compromise, and there is no need to mention a specific timetable," said Italy's ambassador to Egypt, Antonio Badini, who participated in talks in Cairo on Monday between diplomats from the participants aimed at hammering out the final resolutions.

Iraq's deputy foreign minister, Labid Abbawi, who headed his country's delegation in the preliminary talks, said the differences could be resolved in further talks.

"Some of the points need to be resolved, and the participants want to go back to their governments to resolve them," Abbawi told reporters.

The differences could heighten tensions at the gathering, which is to be attended by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. The U.S. and Baghdad are hoping the conference can produce a strong show of international support for al-Maliki's government — particularly a commitment to reduce Iraq's huge debts.

But Arab countries are demanding that Iraq do more to reach out to disgruntled Sunni Arabs before pledging any substantial aid to the troubled country. Al-Maliki has rejected any conditions on his government.

In June, al-Maliki announced a national reconciliation program that offers amnesty to members of the Sunni-led insurgency who are not involved in "terrorist activities" and amends the Debaathification law from their jobs. But Arab countries have called those steps incomplete and not implemented.