The New York Times: Iraqis are reviewing their relationship with Washington

POSTED ON [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] BY [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[size=52]The New York Times: Iraqis are reviewing their relationship with Washington[/size]

[size=45]Translation / Hamed Ahmed
[size=45]American oil workers flocked to Basra airport in preparation for leaving Iraq, at a time of heightened fears of war between the United States and Iran, according to the New York Times.[/size]
[size=45]After Friday prayers in Karbala, worshipers chanted death slogans for America.[/size]
[size=45]In Tahrir Square, in the middle of Baghdad, where protesters have been there for three months, a banner was raised expressing a message to both Iran and the United States that read: "Keep your differences and battles away from Iraq."[/size]
[size=45]On Friday, Iraqis woke up to the news of the killing of the commander of the Quds Force, General Qassem Soleimani, by a missile of an American march plane at Baghdad International Airport, accompanied by several other people.[/size]
[size=45]Even before the shock of this sudden news subsided, Iraqi parties were studying how the nature of their response would be. Armed factions close to Iran vowed a bloody revenge. As for Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi, he denounced the attack as a flagrant aggression against the sovereignty of Iraq, calling on the parliament to hold a session to discuss the future of the American presence in Iraq.[/size]
[size=45]The recent events have raised one comprehensive question: Can the United States maintain a cooperative security relationship with Iraq with the eruption caused by this assassination? The question was already circulating in the corridors of the power center in Baghdad, even after the Trump administration announced on Friday that it was expediting the dispatch of a new batch of troops to the region to face the crisis.[/size]
[size=45]Abdul-Mahdi said that the air strike on General Soleimani "represents a clear violation of the conditions for the presence of the American forces." He said parliament would meet in the coming days to consider "taking appropriate measures to preserve the dignity, security and sovereignty of Iraq," including whether to ask Americans to leave.[/size]
[size=45]The killing of Soleimani, which was intended to deal a blow to Iran, would likely be overturned to accelerate the achievement of a goal as long as Iran seeks it, which is to push for the removal of the American military presence from Iraq.[/size]
[size=45]Mohammad Shahbani, a researcher from the Institute of Oriental and African Studies in London who specializes in Iranian-Iraqi relations, says, "I think that with his death, he is putting the final nail to revive the American military presence in Iraq." The United States maintains approximately 5,000 troops in Iraq and a number of bases, but whether or not they remain, the American force in Iraq is very likely to shrink.[/size]
[size=45]Richard Haass, the chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations and a former US diplomat, wrote in a tweet on Twitter saying, "One of the inevitable consequences of the US strike is that the era of US-Iraqi cooperation is over. The American diplomatic and military presence will end if Iraq asks us to leave, or if our presence is merely a goal or both cases. The result will be Iranian influence, terrorism and stronger Iraqi fighting.[/size]
[size=45]Experts have said that if the Trump administration had a strategy to deal with the Iraqi government to achieve stability and sovereignty, the Soleimani killing would have provided reinforcement.[/size]
[size=45]Kenneth Pollack, a former CIA official and expert on Iraqi and American affairs, said that the assassination process means that Iraqi politicians will be, even for a certain period, less afraid of Iran and more willing to listen to the Americans, noting that following Iran in Iraq after losing their leader will be weaker trying Find out what they will do again.[/size]
[size=45]But he said the United States appears to have no policy in Iraq until after using the country as a base to confront Iran. On the other side, Iran appears to be present in the country at various levels.[/size]
[size=45]Qais Khazali, a leader in the crowd, says, "The United States has only one color. It is the military color and it is the only thing on which its money is spent." As for Iran, it has many colors, in culture, politics, religion, and in many other fields.[/size]
[size=45]Amir Abbas, a protester from Tahrir Square, said, "It was a wrong act from the United States. The Americans were required to coordinate with the Iraqi government," noting that this act constitutes a violation of Iraqi sovereignty.[/size]
[size=45]Emma Skye, a former adviser to the American forces in Iraq, said that "the Iraqi-American relations will actually be damaged by this event, I think there will be more calls to demand the departure of the American forces." America has no policy or strategy aimed at stabilizing Iraq. Rather, its goal is to contain Iran. ”[/size]
[size=45]About: The New York Times[/size]
[size=45][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[/size][/size]

No one listens to the NYTimes anymore, its like reading a comic book

Agree