Rice, Straw pay surprise visit to Baghdad

[gilliam]

Looks like the pressure is on the Iraqis to form a government and probably to get someone to replace Jaafari so they can:

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw paid a surprise visit to Baghdad on Sunday to discuss efforts to form a unity government.

British embassy spokeswoman Lisa Glover said Straw was “here to talk about government formation.” Straw and Rice are due to meet Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari and President Jalal Talabani and other leaders during the day. The visit comes as Jaafari faces mounting pressure from both within his ruling Shi’ite Alliance and rival politicians to step down.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com …

 

[Thekla]

gilliam:

Looks like the pressure is on the Iraqis to form a government and probably to get someone to replace Jaafari so they can:

gilliam,
3 and a half months without a government. What have they been doing over there?

And I know you know the answer to this question. Wasn’t there a point when Mr. Bush put Ms. Rice in charge of Iraq? He made a public announcement. What year was that?
Thekla

 

[gilliam]

Thekla:

gilliam,
3 and a half months without a government. What have they been doing over there?

And I know you know the answer to this question. Wasn’t there a point when Mr. Bush put Ms. Rice in charge of Iraq? He made a public announcement. What year was that?
Thekla

Thekla,
The Iraqis are in charge of Iraq. Not the US Sec. of State. I don’t know where your getting your facts from.

Anyway, what are they doing over there? Well, the government that is being formed is arguing over who will be PM. The party that won the election has enough votes to get him nominated, but not enough votes to get him ratified by the parliment. So they are negotiating. Looks like Ibrahim al-Jaafari will be replaced with someone else in a few days, and they will move on to form the government (appoint ministers, etc… which have pretty much already been decided).

My guess is that we are looking for about a week for Jaafari to step down. A week or two for people to solidify around a replacement. And then a vote in about one month. In the mean time, the militias will be reigned in a bit.

Ref:
The support for Ibrahim al-Jaafari, the current Prime Minister and candidate to lead the newly elected Iraqi government, is waning. Reuters reports a large majority of the United Iraqi Alliance no longer backs his candidacy, and a member of the UIA has publicly spoken out against Jaafari:

“I call on Jaafari to take a courageous step and set a fine example by stepping down,” Kasim Daoud, a senior member of the independent group within the Alliance, told Reuters… “Daoud’s call is supported by at least 60 percent of Alliance members of parliament,” another senior Alliance official from another group within the bloc told Reuters. “We need another 24 hours before starting the battle” to pressure Jaafari into resigning, he added
​

Jaafari has been given one last chance by the UIA to convince the outside parties to approve of his candidacy; "Alliance officials said the seven key groups inside the bloc, known to diplomats as the G7, met on Thursday and Friday and decided by four to three to give Jaafari days to persuade Kurds, Sunnis and secular leaders to rally behind him or quit."

It is interesting the call to oust Jaafari was led by a UIA faction other than SCIRI. This reinforces the point that opposition to Jaafari is not just led by SCIRI, and allows SCIRI to remain the silent power broker in the process. SCIRI’s candidate, Aadil Abdul Mahdi, will now rise in further prominence, as he is the preferred candidate of the secular Shiites, Kurds and Sunni factions outside the UIA.

billroggio.com/archives/2006/04/inside_the_uia_round.php
​

 

[Thekla]

gilliam:

Thekla,
The Iraqis are in charge of Iraq. Not the US Sec. of State. I don’t know where your getting your facts from

gilliam,
It’s unclear to me who is in charge of Iraq, but that said, I’m not talking about now. I’m talking about a couple of years ago and I just thought that you would know. No big deal. I’ll come across it again.
Thekla

 

[gilliam]

Thekla:

gilliam,
It’s unclear to me who is in charge of Iraq, but that said, I’m not talking about now. I’m talking about a couple of years ago and I just thought that you would know. No big deal. I’ll come across it again.
Thekla

I know what you are referring to, but that was then, Thekla, and a few elections have occured in Iraq since then. They have a constitution now, and their own temporary government. Now they are in charge. And things move more slowly, as is the case in that part of the world.

 

[gnjsdad]

Thekla:

gilliam,
3 and a half months without a government. What have they been doing over there?

And I have an even better question. Doesn’t it strike anyone as the least bit odd that…

• ) 3 years after the “liberation” of Iraq
• ) 3 years after “freedom and democracy” have been introduced to Iraq
• ) despite the reams of “good news” from there that the media is supposedly covering up…

that the Secretary of State has to make another “surprise visit” (meaning: fly in unanounced in the dead of night and leave before anyone finds out you’ve been there in the first place)?

Doesn’t that perhaps, maybe, make one think all’s not well over there?

 

[gilliam]

gnjsdad:

Doesn’t that perhaps, maybe, make one think all’s not well over there?

You need to read the thread:
[Support for Jaafari within the UIA appears to be crumbling]

 

[LRThunder]

gnjsdad:

And I have an even better question. Doesn’t it strike anyone as the least bit odd that…

• ) 3 years after the “liberation” of Iraq
• ) 3 years after “freedom and democracy” have been introduced to Iraq
• ) despite the reams of “good news” from there that the media is supposedly covering up…

that the Secretary of State has to make another “surprise visit” (meaning: fly in unanounced in the dead of night and leave before anyone finds out you’ve been there in the first place)?

Doesn’t that perhaps, maybe, make one think all’s not well over there?

What makes you think that? Any nation that has started up democracy, short of implemented by outside forces by force, has had problems. The U.S. once had a confederate government, the Articles of Confederation, where we had worthless currency and a rebellion (Shay’s Rebellion) that threatened the then weak national government’s ability to maintain order.

 

[gilliam]

“This is a really important time for the Iraqi leadership, for the Iraqi people, for Iraq itself,” Rice told CNN after the meeting. “It’s an opportunity to have a national unity government that can really take on and solve tremendous challenges.” ()

“We thought it was important to come and deliver a message that the time has come to end these negotiations and deliver a government,” she said.

…“It’s true the country has been accustomed to dealing with problems through violence, through coercion and through oppression,” she said. “Now they have to do it through politics.”

(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com …

 

[gnjsdad]

LRThunder:

What makes you think that?

What makes me think that? The fact that prominent American officials must make such “surprise visits”. It means they sneak in and out of Iraq unannounced for fear of their physical safety.

LRThunder:

Any nation that has started up democracy, short of implemented by outside forces by force, has had problems.

There are problems and there are Problems. Iraq is a place with capital-P Problems in large part because it’s “democracy” was imposed by an outside force.

LRThunder:

The U.S. once had a confederate government, the Articles of Confederation, where we had worthless currency and a rebellion (Shay’s Rebellion) that threatened the then weak national government’s ability to maintain order.

There is absolutely no comparison between Shays’ Rebellion and Iraq.

 

[Geldain]

gnjsdad:

What makes me think that? The fact that prominent American officials must make such “surprise visits”. It means they sneak in and out of Iraq unannounced for fear of their physical safety.

So you’d rather they announce their intentions in advance and provide terrorists with ample time to plan an attack?

There are problems and there are Problems. Iraq is a place with capital-P Problems in large part because it’s “democracy” was imposed by an outside force.

This is a canard. Not a single outside force grabbed a single Iraqi and made them vote in any of the local or national elections. No democracy has been imposed on anyone.

There is absolutely no comparison between Shays’ Rebellion and Iraq.

From where I sit, there was no attempt to compare the 2, but rather, a valid observation things didn’t go smoothly during the beginning days of the US either.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

gnjsdad:

What makes me think that? The fact that prominent American officials must make such “surprise visits”. It means they sneak in and out of Iraq unannounced for fear of their physical safety.

As opposed to sending a press release to Al Jazeera, painting bullseyes on their suits, and arriving in open-top limousines? Since when has concern for physical safety been an exclusive indicator of criminal intent?

gnjsdad:

There are problems and there are Problems. Iraq is a place with capital-P Problems in large part because it’s “democracy” was imposed by an outside force.

You’re making this up. Democracy was established through lengthy discussions, political campaigns, and elections.

gnjsdad:

There is absolutely no comparison between Shays’ Rebellion and Iraq.

If there were, what would it look like?

 

[gnjsdad]

Geldain:

So you’d rather they announce their intentions in advance and provide terrorists with ample time to plan an attack?

You make my point. Either that, or you simple don’t understand the necessity for such “surprise” visits. Iraq is NOT a safe environment for prominent Americans. Normal security precautions notwithstanding, the Secretary of State does not make “surprise” visits to real democracies like England, France, or Germany.

Geldain:

This is a canard. Not a single outside force grabbed a single Iraqi and made them vote in any of the local or national elections. No democracy has been imposed on anyone.

And the 140,000 American troops are mere bystanders, right? Sounds like you’re ready to begin an immediate withdrawl. I say the democracy in Iraq is a fiction - maintained only by the American military presence. You say that’s a canard. Well, OK. It’s a canard, then. Looking forward to you next post saying the job’s pretty much done, lets bring the troops home.

 

[gnjsdad]

Ani Ibi:

You’re making this up.

It’s a violation of forum rules to assume you know what another poster thinks.
Ani Ibi:

Democracy was established through lengthy discussions, political campaigns, and elections.

And the presence of 140,000 American and 30,000 British troops. I don’t think that little tidbit of information can be ignored.

 

[gilliam]

Our troops being there and staying there providing security are instrumental to the creation of democracy. I have no doubt. Also the gentile prodding of our diplomats at the appropriate time is also helping.

This is so much better than what was happening under Bremmer… oh well, now the Iraqis have to learn to do it and to have a peaceful transfer of power.

 

[Geldain]

gnjsdad:

You make my point.

No, I don’t

Either that, or you simple don’t understand the necessity for such “surprise” visits.

I understand the need for them quite well.

Iraq is NOT a safe environment for prominent Americans. Normal security precautions notwithstanding, the Secretary of State does not make “surprise” visits to real democracies like England, France, or Germany.

No, the Secretary does not usually make suprise visits to nations with well established, functioning governments, true.

And the 140,000 American troops are mere bystanders, right?

This is a nonsensical statement on par with suggesting democracy was “imposed” upon the Iraqi people.

Sounds like you’re ready to begin an immediate withdrawl.

No, it doesn’t.

I say the democracy in Iraq is a fiction - maintained only by the American military presence.

Now you’re changing the subject.

You say that’s a canard. Well, OK. It’s a canard, then.

Actually, your original declaration that democracy has been imposed is the canard.

Looking forward to you next post saying the job’s pretty much done, lets bring the troops home.

Please share with us a post where I’ve written such. You can’t because I haven’t.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

gnjsdad:

It’s a violation of forum rules to assume you know what another poster thinks.

Did you post the following?

gnjsdad:

There are problems and there are Problems. Iraq is a place with capital-P Problems in large part because it’s “democracy” was imposed by an outside force.

We have posted reams of evidence that Iraqi democracy was not imposed by an outside force. You have neither addressed that evidence nor have you proposed evidence of your own supporting your claim that democracy was imposed by outside force.

That is why I suggested that you were making your assertion up. If you want to prove that you are not making it up, then give us some links – credible links – or logical argumentation demonstrating that your assertion is true.

I did not assume to know what you think. I called you on what you actually said. And therefore no forum guidelines were violated.

gnjsdad:

And the presence of 140,000 American and 30,000 British troops. I don’t think that little tidbit of information can be ignored.

The presence of troops cannot “force” democracy on a nation. Only lengthy searches for leaders, lengthy development and training of those leaders, lengthy neighbourhood development, lengthy talks, the establishment and ratification of a constitution, and an election can form – not force – a democracy.

Democracy is about freedom – not about force. If you think it is about force then please show examples of leaders being forced at gunpoint to run for office; neighbourhoods forced at gunpoint to support parties; people forced at gunpoint to write, review, amend the constitution; people forced at gunpoint to vote.

Did this happen? No it did not happen. The Iraqi people created their democracy freely out of hope for better lives than those lived under tyranny and terror.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

gnjsdad:

You make my point.

No he has not.

gnjsdad:

Either that, or you simple don’t understand the necessity for such “surprise” visits. Iraq is NOT a safe environment for prominent Americans.

Surprise visits are necessitated by the presence of anti-democratic, terrorist non-Iraqi forces in Iraq, not by the presence of democracy in Iraq.

gnjsdad:

Normal security precautions notwithstanding, the Secretary of State does not make “surprise” visits to real democracies like England, France, or Germany.

Certainly I believe that if England, France, and Germany to were to have the same degree of anti-democratic, terrorist non-citizen forces perpetrating suicide bombings at several per week if not several per day then surprise visits would be necessitated.

England, France, and Germany share with Iraq the stabilizing influence of democracy. In the case of Iraq it is only a question of time to deepen the influence of universal education; to produce good fruits from improved health care and infrastructure; and to build on the national pride which flows from successes over many years in economics, human rights, culture and so on.

gnjsdad:

And the 140,000 American troops are mere bystanders, right?

Nobody said they were bystanders. But somebody said they were “forcing” democracy on the Iraqis. The troops have provided the security as well as the technical support for rebuilding the Iraqi society. Without the Iraqis themselves believing that this can be done and rolling up their own sleeves, then democracy would not have happened.

gnjsdad:

Sounds like you’re ready to begin an immediate withdrawl.

“Immediate” is an exaggeration. I believe American troops will be drawn down over the next year as more and more Iraqi units come up to speed in bringing foreign terrorists to justice.

gnjsdad:

I say the democracy in Iraq is a fiction - maintained only by the American military presence.

Yes, you have said this. But you have not demonstrated this. You have merely thrown it out there, hoping it will stick.

gnjsdad:

You say that’s a canard. Well, OK. It’s a canard, then. Looking forward to you next post saying the job’s pretty much done, lets bring the troops home.

Is that true? I suspect you might be happy to hear that the American troops are being called home. But I do not believe that you would be happy to hear that the job’s done. So let’s ask the question: will you be happy to hear that Iraq is a functioning, prosperous democracy? Yes or no, please.

 

[gilliam]

A transcript of thier remarks from this morning:

Remarks With British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw

 

[gnjsdad]

Ani Ibi:

I suspect you might be happy to hear that the American troops are being called home.

Yes, I would. Would you?
Ani Ibi:

But I do not believe that you would be happy to hear that the job’s done.

I do not believe “the job” **can **be done.
Ani Ibi:

So let’s ask the question: will you be happy to hear that Iraq is a functioning, prosperous democracy? Yes or no, please.

I would be happy to have an Iraq prosperous and at peace with its neighbors. Democracy, IMO, is incidental to that outcome. The attempt to force Western-style democracy is proviong a hindrance to that goal, IMO.