U.S. - Iraq Security Deal Near Collapse

The London Sunday Times reported October 26 that senior Iraqi officials have indicated that the long debated U.S. - Iraq security agreement is "doomed to failure." When you stop and think about it for a minute, this is probably a good thing.

There is no getting around the fact that the United States will be in Iraq for many years to come. There may be a combat role, a training role, a support role, an advisory role, or some combination of missions undertaken by American troops. But in some capacity, U.S. soldiers will remain in Iraq for the foreseeable future.

Therefore, it makes sense to work out a deal that is mutually beneficial to both Washington and Baghdad. The United States is less than two weeks away from electing a new President, and the winner of the November 4 contest is less than three months from assuming his new role as commander in chief. It seems pointless to rush through a security agreement that has not been through the Congress and that will not be binding on the new chief executive.

While the Times says the deal's failure "...would severely undermine American policy," I disagree. It simply means that a new option is needed until Iraq and the United States can work out a long-term agreement after the new American president is sworn into office. The best option in the absence of a new security deal is probably an extension of the current United Nations mandate, which is currently set to expire at the end of this year.

Such an extension would probably be fairly easy to secure. The United States, if it sought the extension, would vote for it, as would Britain and France. China would likely go along with the status quo rather than see a potential breakdown in Iraq in the absence of a deal, and Russia would likely concur given the Russian aim of keeping America tied up in the Middle East so that the United States cannot interfere with Russia's ambitions in Central Asia.

The bottom line is that the current deal is not likely to go through. Iraqi politicians are facing an election of their own, and they will probably be reluctant to take a firm position on the American presence until their political futures are more or less determined. Therefore, the Bush administration should probably return to the United Nations for an extension of the current mandate that would allow both Iraq and the United States to continue work toward a long-term deal.