Government spokesman: Al-Sadr’s proposal to close the American embassy will destroy Iraq

Government spokesman: Al-Sadr’s proposal to close the American embassy will destroy Iraq


Government spokesman - Al-Sadrs proposal to close the American embassy will destroy IraqThe government spokesman, Bassem Al-Awadi, said that the proposal to close the American embassy is an extremely dangerous matter, and it does not only affect the framework agreement, but is destroying Iraq. He stressed that the reservation about the two-state solution in accordance with the “criminalization of normalization” law was behind the Iraqi delegation’s confusion regarding By the Arab resolution at the United Nations General Assembly meeting.

Al-Awadi said in a media interview followed by Al-Mutla’: “The Iraqi government has international obligations, and diplomatic missions since the beginning of empires have been protected in accordance with international laws, customs and traditions, and closing the American embassy has very major consequences and repercussions.”

Closing the American embassy is an extremely dangerous matter, and it cannot be decided so easily, and it is a matter that not only affects the framework agreement, but also destroys Iraq.

In the case of the attack on the Swedish embassy, ​​16 European Union ambassadors said that we will close the embassies and leave Iraq, and this is for the sake of Sweden, so what do we expect if it is the embassy of the United States of America? Readings and analyzes indicate that “no one will remain in Iraq.”

The Western presence in general exists based on the presence of the United States in Iraq, as the presence of the international coalition is what reassures the rest that they are protected inside the country, and with their withdrawal, not a single Western party will remain in Iraq.

What happened in the United Nations Assembly is that the parliamentary decision to “criminalize normalization” stopped all of Iraq’s foreign obligations from the year 1948 until today. Therefore, Iraq cannot agree to any word or resolution that includes the phrase two-state solution, so the delegation studied the issue from a legal standpoint, and in In the end, after a very careful understanding, approval of the resolution was necessary and very important, because the origin of the resolution was adopted by the Iraqi government and it worked a lot on it, as it included a ceasefire and allowing the passage of humanitarian aid, so Iraq agreed with reservations on the articles that included the two-state solution.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said to the Iraqi delegation, “Why did you abstain from voting and why do you have reservations about the two-state solution decision, which is our demand,” and “Hamas welcomes and supports the decision,” so they told him that

The law criminalizing normalization obligates Iraq to reserve the two-state solution clause, otherwise the delegation will have violated Iraqi law.

Iraq’s official position is always consistent and consistent towards the Palestinian issue, but the “criminalization of normalization” law imposes new, completely different obligations on Iraq.

Two countries in the world reject the two-state solution: Iraq and Israel. Israel refuses because it does not want to give a state to Palestine, while Iraq refuses because of the law criminalizing normalization.