by Frances Taylor

Created on: July 17, 2008

If the Iraqi government formally asks the U.S. to leave Iraq, we should. We would need to reach an agreement on a timetable for withdrawal from the that country. If Iraq is a sovereign nation, then we need to abide by their request to remove our troops. If we are an occupying force, we will remain until "our" goals are achieved.

In order for the Maliki government to appear legitimate in the eyes of its people, it must have the power to ask America and any other foreign forces to withdraw from thier land by a certain time. If the Maliki government is not seen as legitimate, it can never govern the country effectively, and various factions within that country will continue to challenge it. Our choice is to support the government that we installed, or undermine it by our refusal to abide by its decisions.

This issue touches on our real reason for going to Iraq, for building more than a dozen military bases and the world's largest American embassy there. It goes to the reason that we invaded the country without an exit strategy, and have not developed one in more than five years. It goes to the reason why the Iraqi parliament has refused to sign oil leases with U.S. companies for the past three years. It goes to the reason why the Iraqi parliament has refused to reach a status of forces agreement with the Bush administration.
Maliki is in a difficult position. His regime could fall without us, but it is almost a guarantee that it will fail eventually if we don't leave.

Any agreement to remove US troops has to appear ot reflect the goals of Iraqi government as well as the U.S. government, with a "victory" that at least appears to give something to both sides. The fact that the Maliki government requested the removal of Blackwater military contractors from the country, for example, and the U.S has so far refused to do so is debilitating to Maliki's already feeble regime. It is proof to the Iraqis that their government cannot protect them from foreign forces within the country that do not have to adhere to Iraqi law or international law. The people know that US forces or contractors can do anything in their country, and they are accountable to no one there.

When a presidential candidate says we will not leave the so-called sovereign nation of Iraq "until we have achieved victory,' that is an agenda to undermine the government we claim to support. A vow to stay in Iraq "for a hundred years,'' even beyond the cessation of hostilities, is an agenda not only to undermine the current Iraqi government, but to guarantee further destabilization that will require our continuing presence.

Learn more about this author, Frances Taylor.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.