Thread: Iraq/Dinar News. before Febuary 2nd 2006

Voices of Iraq: Maliki-Parliament
Posted by: saleem on Thursday, January 25, 2007 - 07:36 PM

Maliki-Parliament
Maliki: Baghdad security plan not to exclude an outlaw
Baghdad, Jan 25, (VOI) – Iraq's Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki on Thursday called upon lawmakers to extend the emergency law as "a necessary step to carry out Baghdad security plan."
Al-Maliki said in a speech before a parliament session on Thursday "we appeal for all politicians, for the sake of a unified Iraq and for the safety of the country, to keep politics away from the implementation of the new security plan."
"The new plan was worked out and will be implemented by the Iraqi forces with a support from the Multi-National forces."
The Prime Minister who said the plan will not be influenced by politics promised that the plan would observe human rights once it was carried out.
"All security forces were instructed to respect the dignity of Iraqis and rights of the citizens," al-Maliki added.
The premier said "the plan aims at restoring security and order in Baghdad so that no outlaw will be excluded from punishment."
"For the plan be fruitful, I call upon the parliament members to extend the emergency law," al-Maliki said.
Over the past year, the parliament used to extend the emergency law for thirty day each time in Iraq except for Kurdistan region.
Maliki-Parliament :: Aswat al Iraq :: Aswat al Iraq

Originally Posted by archangel

No-show Iraqi MPs force parliament to stand still
Email Print Normal font Large font Damien Cave, Baghdad
January 26, 2007

Page 1 of 2 | Single page
Advertisement
AdvertisementMAHMOUD al-Mashhadani, the Speaker of the Iraqi Parliament, read a rollcall of the 275 elected members with the intention of shaming the no-shows.

Iyad Allawi, the former prime minister? Absent, living in Amman and London. Adnan Pachachi, the octogenarian statesman? Also gone, in Abu Dhabi.

Others who failed to appear on Monday included Saleh Mutlaq, a senior Sunni legislator; several Shiites and Kurds; and Ayad al-Samaraei, chairman of the Finance Committee, whose absence led Dr Mashhadani to ask: "When will he be back? After we approve the budget?"

It was a joke barbed with outrage. Iraq's Parliament in recent months has been at a standstill. Nearly every session since November has been adjourned because as few as 65 members made it to work, even as they and the absentees earned salaries and benefits worth about $A154,000.

Part of the problem is security, but Iraqi officials said they also feared that members were losing confidence in the institution and in the country's fragile democracy. As chaos has deepened, the Parliament's relevance has gradually receded.

Deals on important legislation, most recently the oil law, now take place largely out of public view, with the Parliament — when it meets — rubber-stamping decisions. As a result, officials said, vital legislation involving the budget, provincial elections and amendments to the constitution remained trapped in a legislative process that processed almost nothing.

US officials long hoped that the Parliament could help foster talks between Iraq's increasingly fractured ethnic and religious groups, but that has not happened either.

Goaded by US leaders, frustrated and desperate to prove that Iraq can govern itself, senior Iraqi officials have clearly had enough. Dr Mashhadani said the Parliament would soon start fining members $A500 for every missed session and replace the absentees if they failed to attend more than a quarter of the time.

Some of Iraq's more seasoned leaders say attendance has been undermined by a widening sense of disillusionment about the Parliament's ability to improve Iraqis' daily life. The country's dominant issue, security, is controlled almost exclusively by the US military and the office of the Prime Minister.

Every bombing such as Monday's, which killed 88 people at a central market, suggests to some that the Parliament's laws are irrelevant in the face of sprawling chaos and the Government's inability to stop it.
No-show Iraqi MPs force parliament to stand still - World - theage.com.au

Interesting,

As we all know, there is a lack of commitment within the Iraqi government, and to think that shaming those who failed to attend will work is pathetic. Most of those who are not attending are busy leading their militia and attacking the opposite sects, Sunnis and Shiites, so how could you shame these individuals into showing up for important votes which will serve the poor. Heck, I would bet most are illiterate, as has been pointed out, so they cannot even read the docket on parliament votes. (g)

What they need to do is not fine them $400.00, give each what they really strive for, a one way ticket to martrland, after all, this is what these terrorists strive for, so I think they should get what the deserve. Think about it, they are earning more than most American families combined, and they can't get their butts to a parliament meeting once a month to vote is pathetic.

We heard of the reshuffle from Maliki months ago, yet we have seen nothing to date, just about what we would expect having seen the announcement of 10K dinar and never seeing it happen. Sure makes you wonder about these people, are they all illiterate, or is it intentional torture of the poor which motivates no action. I think they have learned the American Democracy system just a little to well, after all, our politicians are also way out of touch with the poor and middle class, so same old same old is how I see it.

Good luck to all, Mike

New US strategy on Iran emerges from Davos
Anatole Kaletsky



The real value of Davos is in making connections - not just in the sense of networking and schmoozing with important people, but also in relating seemingly disparate events and ideas. Overtly the main themes at Davos today were terrorism and Iraq – and the story, as presented publicly by Iraqi and US politicians and officials, was all about wresting back control of Baghdad from terrorists, with al-Qaeda and Shia death squads bearing equal blame. In contrast to American officials, who simply repeated President Bush’s mantra that "failure is not an option", Iraqi politicians have a more realistic and nuanced view.



As Abd Al-Mahdi, the Vice-President, noted privately after his appearance at a plenary session: "The Americans actually have two options: either they stay or they withdraw. But we Iraqis don’t have any options. If we don’t succeed on ending the violence with the present strategy, we just have to be patient and keep trying. Unlike the Americans, we don’t have an exit strategy from Iraq." The same was true, he noted, of Iraq’s neighbours Iran, Syria, Turkey and Saudi Arabia. This was why Iraqi politicians were constantly urging President Bush to start talking to Iraq’s neighbours and warning the White House that any military attack on Iranian nuclear installations, whether by America or Israel, could spill over catastrophically into Iraq.

Why, then, did President Bush refuse to start talking to Iran and Syria, as recommended by the Baker-Hamilton commission? Why instead did he seem to be increasing military tensions with Iran? Iraqi officials wouldn’t speculate on this beyond the obvious remark that "firmness from America could be a way of bringing Iran to the negotiating table". But delving beneath the surface of this self-evident objective, three strands of a more interesting and hopeful strategy begin to emerge in conversations with Middle Eastern analysts and politicians at Davos.

Start with the premise that America is indeed being tough on Iran in order to strengthen internal opposition to the extremist confrontational policies of President Ahmadinejad. The purpose is not necessarily to trigger the removal of Ahmadinejad, but rather to shatter Iran’s present grandiose delusions of regional hegemony and bring Iran into negotiations from a position of relative weakness, rather than its present perceived strength.

Three strands of policy are now being directed to achieving this internal shift in Iranian politics. The first is, obviously, the US effort to reduce violence in Iraq – or failing that, at least to mount a show of strength against the Iranian-backed Shia militias and to remind Tehran that America retains its capacity to deploy overwhelming military power.

The second is the sabre-rattling over Iran’s nuclear programme, especially the semi-public threats of Israeli bombing, perhaps even with tactical nuclear weapons. America’s announcement that two aircraft carrier battle groups will move to the Gulf within a month or so are clearly a reminder that Washington still has plenty of firepower to attack Iran directly or to back Israeli bombing – and also to protect international oil shipments through the Gulf against Iranian retaliation. These deployments and public warnings do not necessarily suggest that an actual attack on Iran is likely but rather that America wants Iran to realise that it is playing for very high stakes in its confrontation with the West.

The third strand of America’s Iranian policy is less visible, but may well turn out to be more important. The idea is to thwart Iran’s threatened hegemony with an economic pincer movement consisting of financial diplomacy on one side and energy policy on the other. The main responsibility for this strand of policy rests not with America or Israel but with the third member of the unlikely new anti-Iranian alliance: Saudi Arabia.

The financial diplomacy consists not just of the sanctions against Iran agreed last month by the UN Security Council but also in the donors’ conference for Lebanon in Paris this week. The toughened UN sanctions are beginning to have some impact on Iran’s domestic economy and on its ability to do business and raise money internationally. Meanwhile, the Lebanon conference is demonstrating that the US-Saudi coalition can easily match and exceed the financial subsidies channelled by Iran to Hezbollah, Hamas and its other regional proxies. In doing this the Saudis’ involvement is crucial because of their ability to spend large sums of money without the budgetary and political oversight faced by Washington. At best, Saudi open-handedness would persuade key players, not only in Lebanon but also in Iraq and Syria, to desert the Iranian camp. At a minimum, Saudi efforts to buy support in the region would tempt Tehran into a bidding contest which the Iranian economy could simply not afford.

This brings us to the final and most interesting strand in the anti-Iranian policy nexus: the price of oil. Iran’s economy depends entirely on oil sales, which account for 90 per cent of exports and a roughly equal share of the Government’s budget. Since last July, a barrel of oil has fallen from $78 to just over $50, reducing the Government’s revenues by one third. If the oil price fell into the $35 to $40 range, Iran would shift into deficit, and with access to foreign borrowing cut off by UN sanctions, the Government’s capacity to continue financing foreign proxies would quickly run out. Iran has reacted to this threat by calling on Opec to stabilise prices but, in practice, only one country has the clout to do this: Saudi Arabia. Earlier this month, in a highly significant statement, Ali al-Naimi, the Saudi Oil Minister, publicly opposed Iranian calls for production cuts to halt the decline in prices. Mr Naimi's pronouncement was cast as a technical matter unconnected with politics, but it seemed to confirm private warnings by King Abdullah that his country would try everything to thwart Iran’s hegemony in Iraq and throughout the region, whether by military intervention or more subtle economic means.

This policy was spelt out with surprising precision in an article by Nawaf Obaid, a senior Saudi security adviser, in The Washington Post: "King Abdullah may decide to strangle Iranian funding of the Iraqi militias through oil policy. If Saudi Arabia boosted production and cut the price of oil in half, the kingdom could still finance its current spending. But it would be devastating to Iran, which is facing economic difficulties even with today's high prices. The result would be to limit Tehran's ability to continue funnelling hundreds of millions each year to Shiite militias in Iraq and elsewhere."

This article attracted huge attention in the Middle East and Washington, but was hardly noticed in the financial markets and the business community. But that was when the bulls still thought that they commanded the oil market and most analysts believed that the only direction for oil prices was up. Maybe they should think again.
New US strategy on Iran emerges from Davos - Economics - Times Online

Press Gaggle by Tony Snow
Aboard Air Force One
En Route Kansas City, Missouri



10:42 A.M. EST

MR. SNOW: Welcome, everybody, to this morning's gaggle. I have with me Secretary of Health and Human Services Mike Leavitt, and Kate Baicker from the National Economic Council.

Before we begin, let me just -- a couple of comments on developments in Iraq. The Prime Minister today has given an address -- we don't have a full translation yet, but as you probably know from your own reporting, at least three basic and important points:

Number one, he has once again made it clear that there's going to be no safe haven for those committing acts of terror within Baghdad, regardless of whether they're Shia, Sunni, Kurd, Arab, you name it.

Secondly, he has told the Council of Representatives that he wants the Council, during its current legislative session, which just has a couple more weeks to run, to pass a hydrocarbon law and also de-Baathification reform. As you know, those are two hugely important political benchmarks.

Number three, he also talked about the fact that in certain neighborhoods within Baghdad people have been pushed out of their homes, quite often by advocates or practitioners of sectarian violence. He says that the government is determined to allow those people back into their homes, and to push out what he referred to as the squatters.

So you had a very assertive address on the part of the Prime Minister. We certainly welcome that, because it demonstrates the kind of vigor we've been talking about and that the American people expect, and also responds specifically to concerns members of Congress have been expressing, in terms of the aims of and the determination of the government of Iraq.

And with that, I'll take questions.

Q Tony, could you talk about the Post support today on possible $7 billion to $8 billion increase for Afghanistan money?

MR. SNOW: Secretary Rice will be talking about it tomorrow, but we are, in fact -- and the President has discussed previously that we may be increasing our commitment in Afghanistan, and we will be.

Q Is that amount correct?

MR. SNOW: I think the amount is basically correct. Again, I'll let the Secretary confirm it tomorrow. But it's certainly in the ballpark.

Q It's for a wide -- not just military, it's for a wide range of initiatives, across a bunch of fronts, right?

MR. SNOW: Correct, but it will have a military component.

Q Do you have a comment on the resolution that got passed by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee yesterday?

MR. SNOW: No real surprises. Senator Hagel was the only Republican to vote for it. He was a co-sponsor, however, so you expect him to sign on to his own resolution. The President understands that people have political concerns. What he has said is, let's give this chance -- this plan a chance to work. You've already seen significant action, I think, since the President -- well, significant action since the President announced the way forward in the sense that Muqtada al Sadr has told members of the Mahdi army to stop wearing black and to put their arms down, and he's also instructed members of his political party to return to the political process.

We have seen assertive action on the part of Iraqi forces and joint Iraqi-U.S. forces within Baghdad taking on terror. You've seen what the Prime Minister had to say today. I don't want to attribute that specifically to the President's announcement of a way forward, but it is clear that a sign of American determination not only builds confidence but also activism on the part of the Iraqi government. And we continue to believe that it's important to make it clear to the Iraqis that our job is to help them build capability, and we'll do it.

Q Republicans on the panel were critical of the plan, like Voinovich and Lugar. Are you worried about the party splitting over Iraq?

MR. SNOW: No. What we want to do is, again, let members of the party -- and we know they will -- take a look at what happens as we proceed with the way forward. They know that five brigades are going into Baghdad, they know that 4,000 Marines are headed to Anbar, they know that there has been significant military improvement within Anbar, and they have all said things that we agree with: Number one, we cannot fail in Iraq. Number two, they support the troops. Number three, they want Iraqis in the lead.

We believe that the President's plan is the best way to achieve those objectives. We've also said, if you've got a better proposal that will achieve success in Iraq, help Iraqis get swiftly into the lead, and will demonstrate support for American forces, let us hear it. You have a patriotic obligation and you can do the whole nation a service.

Q Do you expect Iraq will dominate the meeting tomorrow with the House Republicans?

MR. SNOW: I don't think so. In fact, I don't expect it at all. I'll be talking to the House Republicans before the President does, but I think what House Republicans are looking for is they're going to want to talk about issues that came up in the State of the Union address, too, because that is going to play a significant role in politics over the next few months. So we'll talk about health care, we'll talk about immigration, we'll talk about energy, we'll talk about education, and we will talk about working together on Iraq, as well.

The fact is everybody in both Houses knows that we are going to proceed with the way forward, and they will have an opportunity to see results on the ground. And we also have no delusions, Americans want to see results on the ground, as well.

Q As the debate unfolds, though, are you hearing anything on Capitol Hill that you see as responsible -- you said that you'd be open to the debate -- anything that you can latch on to and perhaps move on yourselves?

MR. SNOW: I think at this point I really would resist talking about "latching on to," because it gives a sense of a sense of desperation, where, in fact, the President approaches this as a Commander-in-Chief. And as a Commander-in-Chief, it is his obligation to figure out how to succeed in Iraq. This is not a political exercise, this is an exercise in leadership.

To the extent -- we continue to look for each and every avenue towards success -- diplomatically, economically, politically and militarily. I think at this juncture, what we have are members expressing concerns -- perfectly understandable. We expect that. But also we understand that members of Congress will keep a keen eye out for what happens in the region and how events continue to unfold.

Q How aggressively is the White House lobbying members, particularly Republicans, on the resolutions?

MR. SNOW: Not particularly. We're talking with them, but we understand that members have concerns and they want to express them.

Q Have you asked Warner whether he will withhold negotiation with Democrats for a united resolution? Are you speaking with him about limiting any changes he might make to his resolution that might be more attractive to other Democrats?

MR. SNOW: No, certainly we've had conversations with Senator Warner. We're trying to take his temperature on what he intends. But I think any conversation about what he intends to do you probably ought to leave up to him. I'm certainly not going to speak on his behalf.

All right, thanks.
Press Gaggle by Tony Snow

Baghdad Bombs Kill at Least 22; Maliki Vows Crackdown (Update1)

By Robin Stringer

Jan. 25 (Bloomberg) -- Bomb blasts killed at least 22 people and wounded 40 in Baghdad as Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki warned there will be nowhere for militias to hide under the U.S.-Iraqi security plan for the capital.

A car bomber killed at least 18 people and wounded 20 in the central district of Karrada, hours after a motorcycle bomb left four dead and 20 injured, state television said.

``Any place used for terrorist operations will be targeted,'' al-Maliki told lawmakers today at a televised meeting of the Council of Representatives that followed the first blast. ``It doesn't matter if it's a school, a house or a mosque.''

The U.S. is deploying 21,500 more soldiers and Marines in Baghdad and al-Anbar province, and Iraq's army is moving three extra brigades to the capital. The plan was announced Jan. 10 by U.S. President George W. Bush. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee, in a nonbinding resolution approved yesterday, said sending more U.S. troops is ``not in the national interest'' and demanded Iraqis make political compromises to end the violence.

Bush's spokesman today welcomed what he termed a ``very assertive address'' by the prime minister.

``It demonstrates the kind of vigor we've been talking about and that the American people expect,'' Press Secretary Tony Snow told reporters aboard Air Force One as Bush traveled to Missouri. Maliki's remarks also respond ``specifically to concerns members of Congress have been expressing, in terms of the aims of and the determination of the government of Iraq,'' Snow said.

`Political Benchmarks'

Snow also cited Maliki's comments urging Iraqi lawmakers to pass a law governing the distribution of oil revenue and overhaul rules intended to rid the government of people loyal to former dictator Saddam Hussein. Both are steps that Bush has said must be taken for continued U.S. support.

``Those are two hugely important political benchmarks,'' Snow said.

The Karrada market attack came shortly after rockets struck the fortified Green Zone, where embassies and government buildings are located, the Associated Press reported.

On Jan. 22, a twin car bombing at a Baghdad market killed at least 75 people and wounded 150 others. Yesterday, in raids to crack down on militia groups in the capital, Iraqi and U.S. forces killed 30 alleged insurgents and arrested 35 suspects.

A booby-trapped car killed two women and a soldier in the northern city of Mosul, President Jalal Talabani's Patriotic Union of Kurdistan said in a statement on the party's Arabic- language Web site. The blast targeted an Iraqi army patrol and injured four other soldiers and a civilian, the PUK said.

A suicide bomber on a motorcycle killed two men and a woman in the western city of Fallujah, in al-Anbar province, Agence France-Presse reported.

To contact the reporter on this story: Robin Stringer in London at [email protected] .

Last Updated: January 25, 2007 12:50 EST
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...XXw&refer=home

Originally Posted by worf

I hope you are right on the bogus 1260 number. However if you take out emotions and follow what they are doing by the numbers, it would appear unfortunately for us, that is precisely what they are doing. Drip, drip, drip on their way to 1260. If they reach their 1260 number by end of Feb - Mar then they will probably proceed to drip, drip, drip on their way to 1000 by the end of 2007. Don't shoot the messenger, I am just stating my observations.

Once they pass all of their laws on HCL, Budget, impliment FIL, ascend into the WTO, we can then look at what they do. Unfortunately for me, it appears a rapid bold readjust just isn't going to happen anytime soon (if ever :( ). Please I beg of you GOI and CBI, prove me wrong!!! I really need it to happen quickly not the drip, drip, drip pace of the Chinese water torture!!


worf

I was surprised by your response Worf. My observations aren't emotion based but logic based. We'll agree to disagree on this. Fortunately I don't think it'll be much longer until we know how this plays out.

Iraqi Parliament paralyzed by no-shows
Deepening chaos hamstrings lawmakers
By Damien Cave Published: January 24, 2007


BAGHDAD: Mahmoud al-Mashhadani, the speaker of Parliament, read a roll call of the 275 elected members with a goal of shaming the no-shows.

Ayad Allawi, the former prime minister? Absent, living in Amman and London. Adnan Pachachi, the octogenarian statesman? Also gone, in Abu Dhabi.

Others who failed to appear Monday included Saleh Mutlak, a senior Sunni legislator; several Shiites and Kurds; and Ayad al-Samaraei, chairman of the finance committee, whose absence led Mashhadani to ask: "When will he be back? After we approve the budget?"

It was a joke barbed with outrage. The Iraqi Parliament in recent months has been at a standstill. Nearly every session since November has been adjourned because as few as 65 members made it to work, even as they and the absentees earned salaries and benefits worth about $120,000.

Part of the problem is security, but Iraqi officials also said they feared that members were losing confidence in the institution and in the country's fragile democracy. As chaos has deepened, Parliament's relevance has gradually receded.

Related Articles
Bush nominee predicts more 'tough days' in Iraq
Today in Africa & Middle East
Global conference pledges billions of dollars for Lebanon Senate showdown looms for troop buildup in Iraq News Analysis: Against odds, U.S. pushes forward on Mideast peace talks
Deals on important legislation, most recently the oil law, now take place largely out of public view, with Parliament — when it meets — rubber- stamping the final decisions. And as a result, officials said, vital legislation involving the budget, provincial elections and amendments to the Constitution remain trapped in a legislative process that processes nearly nothing. U.S. officials long hoped that the Parliament could help foster dialogue between Iraq's increasingly fractured ethnic and religious groups, but that has not happened either.

Goaded by U.S. leaders, frustrated and desperate to prove that Iraq can govern itself, senior Iraqi officials have clearly had enough.

Mashhadani said that Parliament would soon start fining members $400 for every missed session and replacing the absentees if they failed to attend more than a quarter of the time.

Some of Iraq's more seasoned leaders say attendance has been undermined by a widening sense of disillusionment about Parliament's ability to improve Iraqis' daily life. The country's dominant issue, security, is controlled almost exclusively by the U.S. military and the office of the prime minister.

Every bombing like the one Monday, which killed 88 people at a central market, suggests to some that Parliament's laws are irrelevant in the face of sprawling chaos and the government's inability to stop it.

"People are totally disenchanted," Pachachi said by telephone rom Abu Dhabi. "There has been no improvement in the security situation. The government seems to be incapable of doing anything despite all the promises."

Though the Constitution grants Iraq's only elected body wide powers to pass laws and investigate, sectarian divisions and the need for a two-thirds majority in some cases have often led to deadlock. Sunni and Shiite power brokers have blocked efforts to scrutinize violence connected to their own sects.

"Parliament is the heart of the political process," Mashhadani said in an interview at his office, offering more hope than reality.

"It is the center of everything. If the heart is not working, it all fails."

The Monday attendance actually surpassed the 50 percent plus one needed to pass laws. It was the first quorum in months, caused in part by the return of 30 members loyal to the Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr, whose end to a two- month boycott created a public relations blitz that helped attract 189 members.

But the scene in the convention center auditorium where Parliament meets only underscored the rarity of the gathering. It seemed at times like a reunion. At one point Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, who is head of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq and a Shiite rival of Sadr, arrived late — after being marked absent. He spent the first five minutes waving and nodding at colleagues, some of whom he apparently had not seen in months.

Parliamentary officials refused to provide attendance lists for every session, fearing retribution. They said all sects and regions had members who often did not come.

Each representative earns about $10,000 a month in salary and benefits, including money for guards. Yet on Monday, members from Baghdad neighborhoods to small towns in the hinterland — Sunnis, Shiites, Kurds, Christians and Turkmen — were all on the list of no-shows that Mashhadani read aloud.

The largest group of absentees consisted of unknown figures elected as part of the party lists that governed how most people voted in the December 2005 elections. Party leaders in Baghdad said they had urged their members to attend but emphasized that for many Parliament had become a hardship post.

Iraqi Parliament paralyzed by no-shows - International Herald Tribune

by Scott Sullivan
US Should Attack Kurds on Oil Sabotage
January 25, 2007 12:15 PM EST



Many foreign governments have meddled in Iraq’s internal affairs over the years, as the US and Iran are doing today by supporting the Kurds. No government, however, has ever had success in playing the Kurdish card. So says KGB officer Pavel Sudaplatov in his autobiography, Special Tasks. Sudaplatov, for twenty years, was the KGB’s Director of Special Operations Forces and one who also played the Kurdish card, without success.

The Kurds are unworthy partners because they trust no one; they will never compromise on the core issue of an independent Kurdistan; they are willing to destroy several Middle Eastern states on the way to that goal; and, finally, they are ready to sacrifice, without hesitation, the interests of any foreign partner who blocks the way to an independent Kurdistan.

In other words, while President Bush rests easy at night in the belief that the US has earned at least one reliable ally in the Iraqi mess, i.e., the Kurds, he could not be more mistaken.

These pessimistic thoughts on Kurdish perfidy come to mind as Iraq drafts a national petroleum law (see the excellent assessment by Steven Mufson, “Iraq Struggles to Finish Oil Law”, WP). Iraqi adoption of a National Petroleum Law would be a giant Iraqi step away from civil war. President Bush’s faith in a new democratic Iraq would be vindicated. This should be a no-brainer, correct?

Wrong. Iraq’s national petroleum law will never see the light of day. Despite extensive Iraqi negotiations and “agreement” on all the major issues, as reported last week in the media, an adviser to the Kurdish authorities was quoted in the Washington Post on Friday (1/18) as saying the details of an agreement have yet to be clarified.

To quote this unnamed Kurdish authority: “Outstanding issues include how much oil revenue will go to the central government; a charter for the new national oil company; (AP) — the role of the oil ministry; and the principles upon which the new commission could reject regionally negotiated contracts. Also unsettled is whether the commission will require a simple majority vote or a two-thirds vote to reject a contract's terms. Those provisions must all be part of one package with the petroleum law, Kurdish leaders said.”In short, nothing has been decided on Iraq’s national petroleum law, and nothing will ever be decided, thanks to the Kurds. For the Kurds, Iraq no longer exists. Besides, why should the Kurds give way when they have all the leverage over President Bush? (See “No Exit Plan for US Forces in Iraq,” Iran-Watch.com, 24 January 07.)Prediction: Muqtada al-Sadr, who believes in a unified Iraq, is on the right side of Iraq’s national petroleum law, whereas the Kurds are not and never will be. President Bush is attacking in the wrong direction. Without Iraq’s National Petroleum Law, Bush’s plans for Iraq are Dead on Arrival.
US Should Attack Kurds on Oil Sabotage by Scott Sullivan

Originally Posted by archangel

No-show Iraqi MPs force parliament to stand still
Email Print Normal font Large font Damien Cave, Baghdad
January 26, 2007

Page 1 of 2 | Single page
Advertisement
AdvertisementMAHMOUD al-Mashhadani, the Speaker of the Iraqi Parliament, read a rollcall of the 275 elected members with the intention of shaming the no-shows.

Iyad Allawi, the former prime minister? Absent, living in Amman and London. Adnan Pachachi, the octogenarian statesman? Also gone, in Abu Dhabi.

Others who failed to appear on Monday included Saleh Mutlaq, a senior Sunni legislator; several Shiites and Kurds; and Ayad al-Samaraei, chairman of the Finance Committee, whose absence led Dr Mashhadani to ask: "When will he be back? After we approve the budget?"

It was a joke barbed with outrage. Iraq's Parliament in recent months has been at a standstill. Nearly every session since November has been adjourned because as few as 65 members made it to work, even as they and the absentees earned salaries and benefits worth about $A154,000.

Part of the problem is security, but Iraqi officials said they also feared that members were losing confidence in the institution and in the country's fragile democracy. As chaos has deepened, the Parliament's relevance has gradually receded.

Deals on important legislation, most recently the oil law, now take place largely out of public view, with the Parliament — when it meets — rubber-stamping decisions. As a result, officials said, vital legislation involving the budget, provincial elections and amendments to the constitution remained trapped in a legislative process that processed almost nothing.

US officials long hoped that the Parliament could help foster talks between Iraq's increasingly fractured ethnic and religious groups, but that has not happened either.

Goaded by US leaders, frustrated and desperate to prove that Iraq can govern itself, senior Iraqi officials have clearly had enough. Dr Mashhadani said the Parliament would soon start fining members $A500 for every missed session and replace the absentees if they failed to attend more than a quarter of the time.

Some of Iraq's more seasoned leaders say attendance has been undermined by a widening sense of disillusionment about the Parliament's ability to improve Iraqis' daily life. The country's dominant issue, security, is controlled almost exclusively by the US military and the office of the Prime Minister.

Every bombing such as Monday's, which killed 88 people at a central market, suggests to some that the Parliament's laws are irrelevant in the face of sprawling chaos and the Government's inability to stop it.
No-show Iraqi MPs force parliament to stand still - World - theage.com.au

I LOVE THIS RIDE - BUT DANG IT - THIS RIDE COULD HAVE BEEN OVER IN NOVEMBER IF THEY HAD JUST SHOWED UP FOR WORK!!! AND RIGHT NOW WE ALL WOULD BE AT THE LAUGHLIN PARTY!!!

PS. I FIX'N TO FLY OVER THERE AND FARM JIG ON THEIR HEADS IF THEY DON'T GET THE SHOW ON THE ROAD!!

US hopes Maliki can soothe concerns in Congress
Thu 25 Jan 2007 18:39:41 GMT
By Tabassum Zakaria

KANSAS CITY, Mo., Jan. 25 (Reuters) - The White House expressed hope on Thursday that a vow by Iraqi's prime minister to crack down on militants would help soothe concerns in the U.S. Congress after a key panel rebuffed President George W. Bush's troop increase plan.

Bush spokesman Tony Snow said the administration welcomed what he called an "assertive" address by Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki on Thursday, two days after the U.S. president implored Congress to give his Iraq strategy a chance.

Rebuffing Bush, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee approved a non-binding resolution on Wednesday opposing his decision to send 21,500 more troops to fight in the increasingly unpopular war.

Maliki pledged to parliament to leave militants, Shi'ite and Sunni alike, nowhere to hide in Baghdad, where sectarian violence has added to Americans' doubts about his Shi'ite-dominated government's commitment to reconciliation.

Snow said Maliki also addressed "two hugely important political benchmarks" by telling Iraqi lawmakers he wanted them to pass a hydrocarbons law and de-Baathification reform in the current session.

"A very assertive address on the part of the prime minister," Snow told reporters aboard Air Force One traveling with Bush to Missouri. "We certainly welcome that because it demonstrates the kind of vigor that we've been talking about and that the American people expect."

"And (it) also responds specifically to concerns members of Congress have been expressing in terms of the aims and the determination of the government of Iraq," he added.

Snow said there were "no real surprises" in the Senate panel's vote on the Iraq resolution, and pointed out that Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel was the only Republican to vote for it. The measure now goes to the full Senate for a vote expected as soon as next week.

In the closely divided Senate, lawmakers were struggling to find compromise language that a majority could support. Some Republicans criticized as too partisan Wednesday's resolution that deemed a troop increase against the "national interest."

Bush has made clear he will not abide by any resolution opposing the troop build-up, and Vice President Dick Cheney said in a CNN interview "it won't stop us."

But a bipartisan vote would carry strong symbolism for a U.S. public weary of a war that has claimed more than 3,000 American lives and killed tens of thousands of Iraqis.

Sen. Richard Durbin, an Illinois Democrat, said it was "delusional" for Cheney to suggest, as he did to CNN, that the administration had achieved "enormous successes" in Iraq.

Despite that, Democratic leaders have stopped short of threatening to cut off funding for the troop build-up, mindful that would allow Bush and his allies to accuse them of abandoning the troops as the 2008 presidential race gears up. (Additional reporting by Donna Smith, Susan Cornwell and Matt Spetalnick in Washington)
http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/Cris...-R5-Alertnet-3