Iraq present in «battle» U.S. elections
Iraq present in «battle» U.S. elections
Posted 05/07/2012 08:47 AM
Babinaoz (Reuters) – newspaper «The Washington Times» U.S., he may «be the mission in Iraq has ended, but the war is not over yet for President Obama». In reference to the President when he was a senator in the Senate in 2007 called for the withdrawal of U.S. forces hastily from Iraq. Obama fought his election campaign in 2008 on the basis of the U.S. to bring the troops home, and close the issue of Iraq. Obama completed his promise first, but the domestic political environment of Iraq and his close relationship that is growing increasingly with Iran, returned this war-torn country into a cycle of American political discourse again.
The paper says: The situation in Iraq is a tragic reminder of how fragile this country at the time it decided to Obama not to interfere much in the future, but that – according to the paper – may give the Republican candidate Mitt Romney and the rest of the Republicans a chance to open the foreign policy front effective against the current administration for being I left Iraq in an awkward position and provided an opportunity for Iran to expand its influence in the region.
saw on 15 Dec. / December 2011, put an end to official U.S. military intervention in Iraq, fulfilling the promise made by Obama in his campaign.
The report says that the words of Defense Secretary Leon Panetta prove their health now, in reference to what the minister while attended the end the U.S. mission in Iraq formally, and that when he said: «will expose Iraq to test in the coming days – by terrorism and by those who seek to divide it, by economic and social issues, through the demands of democracy itself ».
, said Mr. Panetta said clearly, the United States «will be there to stand by the Iraqi people who sail through these challenges. … «. Since then, it was throwing Iraq to the wolves.
saw the months following the withdrawal of U.S. forces a sharp rise in sectarian violence. And killed nearly 1500 people from civilians since December. And kept Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki see you power continuously and do not respect the power-sharing agreement that divided parliament hopelessly. In the meantime, the regional allies of the new Iraq, who have multiplied through the presence of the United States, crossing the now increasingly uncomfortable for al-Maliki because of convergence with Iran.
The paper says that »Iranian influence in Iraq is not a new development. Tehran has killed American soldiers, and worked on the processing of the militants and tried to formulate a specific political situation in years. And non-interference of the United States, allowed the increase of Iranian influence in the Maliki government ».
adds: Today, calls on Iran to actively Beautiful factional allies in Iraq, and doing all of its religious and economic impact of a large in an attempt
To prevent the opponents of the Maliki oust him, or call for a vote of no confidence in him.
Even now, despite continued reports of human rights violations, and the continued repression of freedom of the press – According to the report -, the Obama administration has remained silent, hoping that the American people will not notice that investments of the United States in Iraq may end up in the hands of the Iranians.
the paper concludes that «So what happens when decisions are made military and diplomatic on the basis of domestic political pressures. It encourages your enemies, and weakens your position. Thanks to Obama, the United States learn by this method difficult. We have lost our voice and our influence to the moment we left Baghdad, which, coincidentally, was also the precise moment when the son of al-Maliki ordered the tanks surrounded the homes of Iraqi Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi and two other senior opposition leaders ».
The growing call to take positions more assertive diplomacy on Iraq once again, despite the fact that the White House gives these calls deaf ear.
In the opinion of the newspaper »this political season and the president sees Iraq as anything other than through the lens of the campaign. While the interest of the President to avoid talking about Iraq, the Republicans would do well to take advantage of political unrest and the current sectarian attack on Obama’s foreign policy being the result of domestic considerations, and it’s foolhardy, and naive and short-sighted. The debate in 2004 about whether the United States should do with the invasion to begin with. But in 2012, you may be asking is: Was it reckless withdrawal from Iraq so our offer everything achieved by our brave troops have fought and died in order to achieve risk.
The rotation of the screw down the Iraqi political will strengthen Iran. Ozaralris The lack of leadership in both cases. Even with the provision of jobs, the economy and the huge debt and the Center occupies the top of the 2012 electoral campaign, and should not be surprised if the Almighty squawking about Iraq again, as happened in the past, to become the main point of contention. Abdul Ali Salman