The political stalemate in Iraq ended only if you count Nouri al-Maliki appointing himself to three Cabinet positions (in addition to Prime Minister) and leaving ten other positions empty. He was supposed to form a full cabinet, no empty seats, no appointing himself. Nearly nine months after the election, that's the best he can do. And he had practice putting together a cabinet in April of 2006. So he should have been able to handle it. The fact that he couldn't says a great deal about the state of Iraq today. But don't hold your breath waiting for the stories covering that. Last week, Michael Jansen (Irish Times) noted, "The Iraqi election campaign began with an all-out effort by Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki and the dominant Shia religious parties to prevent the secular Sunni Iraqiya bloc from gaining an appreciable number of seats in the national assembly in the March 7th election. When polling was deemed largely fair by local and foreign monitors, Maliki refused to accept being edged out of the first place by Iraqiya. It took eight months and intervention by Iran and the US to break the deadlock, caused by his drive to stay in office. Maliki succeeded, despite accusations of being a dictator, at the exepense of the credibility of the political system. Violence escalated, and increasing numbers of foreign fighters infiltrated Iraq to join al-Qaeda." But aside from a few honest reporters like Michael Jensan, you won't find anyone raising that very real issue. Then again, you won't find a lot of reporting raising real issues to begin with.
Already today, reports from Iraq mention bombings and shootings (here, here and here). There's so much news, the cancer in Falluja, al Qaeda in Mesopotamia has allegedly issued a new dispatch, etc.. And yet the top story -- and the only Iraq story to make Google's 'front page' -- is about how 2.7 million barrels a day in oil production has been exceeded in Iraq (here and here). And yet they wonder why so many people see the illegal war as a war for oil?
The theft-of-Iraqi-oil laws have still not been passed by Parliament. Each year, the administrations of Bush and Barack have insisted that there was movement there. If the Iraq War was really about oil, you can be sure US forces will remain on the ground until those laws are passed.
Remain?
Last week, Sam Dagher's byline appeared on "Iraq Wants the U.S. Out" (Wall St. Journal) and, as pointed out at The Common Ills, through selective editing of a statement and by buring facts in paragraph 13, Dagher had Nouri stating that the US military would have to be out of Iraq at the end of 2011. Now we knew that was a lie. There's the issue of the Iraqi air force still not able to defend their own airspace. There's the backup plan whereby the soldiers remain in Iraq but are umbrella-ed under the State Department and not the Defense Department. Here's Nouri al-Maliki's full quote and the italicized part is what Dagher selectively quoted:
The last American soldier will leave Iraq. Secondly this agreement is sealed and at the time we designated it as sealed and not subject to extension, except if the new government with Parliament’s approval wanted to reach a new agreement with America, or another country, that’s another matter. This agreement is not subject to extension, not subject to alteration, it is sealed, it expires on Dec. 31
So, no, Nouri did not say that US soldiers leave. He said that it would be an issue for the Parliament to decide. (Which is most likely his way of pushing the blame for the extension he's going to be working for onto the Parliament.)
Sam Dagher disgaced himself with the selective quote (the full quote appeared in the transcript of the interview The Wall St. Journal published after Dagher's article became headline news on cable and was picked up by many news outlets.
Despite the fact that the transcript has been published, few have bothered to issue corrections and some are just outright lost. Such as The Portland Press Herald which offers:
Iraq's prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, told an interviewer in late December that he and his government were adamant that all U.S. combat troops should have left his nation by the end of this year.
That 12-month deadline isn't new, but working assumptions on both sides of the alliance have been that it would be extended, at least for security forces and for troops providing training for Iraqi military and police units.
That doesn't appear to be the case, however, and it doesn't seem as though al-Maliki is only conducting some hard bargaining to get a better deal.
If he is sincere, and he certainly sounded as if he was, that would leave mostly civilian aid workers and a few dozen military representatives working for the U.S. embassy to assist the newly formed government with both economic and security development.
That was published yesterday. Apparently they don't read too well on editorial boards in Maine.
Independent media long ago lost interest in Iraq. That's too bad because people continue dying over there. And it's too bad because the press continues lying over there. Dagher's only the most recent disgrace. Judith Miller's departure from The New York Times didn't end bad reporting. An ongoing war continues and the Beggar Media that made a name for itself countering the MSM coverage long ago surrendered the narrative to the corporate media.
---
Illustration is Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Not Quite There."
