Go home, Nouri al-Maliki tells Britain

[questionmark]

October 13, 2008

Time to go home, Nouri al-Maliki tells Britain

Deborah Haynes and Richard Beeston in Baghdad

British combat forces are no longer needed to maintain security in southern Iraq and should leave the country, Nouri al-Maliki, the Iraqi Prime Minister, has told The Times.

In an exclusive interview in Baghdad, Mr al-Maliki also criticised a secret deal made last year by Britain with the al-Mahdi Army, Iraq’s largest Shia militia. He said that Basra had been left at the mercy of militiamen who “cut the throats of women and children” after the British withdrawal from the city.

The Iraqi leader emphasised, however, that the “page had been turned” and he looked forward to a friendly, productive relationship with London. “The Iraqi arena is open for British companies and British friendship, for economic exchange and positive cooperation in science and education.”

Of Britain’s presence in southern Iraq, Mr al-Maliki said: “We thank them for the role they have played, but I think that their stay is not necessary for maintaining security and control. There might be a need for their experience in training and some technological issues, but as a fighting force, I don’t think that is necessary.”

Gordon Brown is expected to cut troop numbers significantly next year from the 4,100-strong contingent as Britain’s mission evolves to a more diplomatic presence. But even the status of British non-combat personnel is in doubt because negotiations on their presence beyond this year have yet to begin, Mr al-Maliki said.

A status of forces agreement (Sofa) between Baghdad and London is needed to authorise the presence of any British forces in the country beyond December 31, when a UN Security Council mandate expires. Mr al-Maliki said that he did not know why negotiations had not begun, speculating that the world financial turmoil had distracted the British. “We had decided to start them,” he said.

Britain wants to base its agreement on a similar deal being hammered out between Baghdad and Washington. But divisions on certain issues, in particular the immunity of US troops from Iraqi prosecution, have delayed the signing of that accord.

Mr al-Maliki hopes that the pact with the US will be approved by the end of the year. Failure to do so would force him to ask the UN to extend its mandate for all foreign troops to stay in Iraq. However, if a US-Iraq deal is clinched in time, Britain could be caught out.

Full story, source: The Times

[bathory]

yeah i don't know what to make of the brits regarding Iraq and Afghanistan

they left their parts of iraq a mess, effectively turning control over to the mahdi army, not because they were beaten or whatever, but out of policy/strategy

and it seems they are willing to do the same in Afganistan >.<

[GreyWeather]

yeah i don't know what to make of the brits regarding Iraq and Afghanistan

they left their parts of iraq a mess, effectively turning control over to the mahdi army, not because they were beaten or whatever, but out of policy/strategy

and it seems they are willing to do the same in Afganistan >.<

Wasn't this due to the fact that the Iraqi president and Afgani president. Told them that they can take care of that specific area?

[stevewinn]

yeah i don't know what to make of the brits regarding Iraq and Afghanistan

they left their parts of iraq a mess, effectively turning control over to the mahdi army, not because they were beaten or whatever, but out of policy/strategy

and it seems they are willing to do the same in Afganistan >.<

i know your not having a pop. But We never left our part of Iraq in a mess, we had to do what was viable based on the resources we have. unlike the US we don't have the numbers to surge, so had to cut our cloth accordingly, and by the looks of things its worked. because 2 years later (since the new strategy was implemented) we're now being told by the Iraqi government they can handle their own affairs in the south and its time for us to leave. obviously we'll be staying on another year to help support the US. especially with the supply lines in the south. fingers crossed within 12/24 months the US will be in the same position of being told they can leave.

[itsnotoutthere]

i know your not having a pop. But We never left our part of Iraq in a mess, we had to do what was viable based on the resources we have. unlike the US we don't have the numbers to surge, so had to cut our cloth accordingly, and by the looks of things its worked. because 2 years later (since the new strategy was implemented) we're now being told by the Iraqi government they can handle their own affairs in the south and its time for us to leave. obviously we'll be staying on another year to help support the US. especially with the supply lines in the south. fingers crossed within 12/24 months the US will be in the same position of being told they can leave.

& lets not forget the less than useless input from our european 'partners'.

[InHuman]

ROFL...

science and education..

Not **** you usually hear from places like that..