Iraq Wants Inspections for U.S. WMD

Alissa J. Rubin and Steven Lee Myers of the NY Times report the U.S.-Iraq agreement may not be signed by Iraq before the U.N. mandate expires on 12/31.

Several of the more independent members of Parliament said that the Iraqi government’s intimation that there had been significant progress on the security agreement was overblown.

“In Parliament it will face a lot of opposition,” said Mahmoud Othman, an independent Kurdish lawmaker. “Some of the nationalists won’t like it and some other groups, too. They won’t oppose it as such, but they will say they don’t like this article or that article. Maybe it will pass, but it will take some time.” ...

American officials worry that time is running out to get the deal approved before the end of the year, when the United Nations resolution authorizing the American military presence will expire.

One reason is opposition from Iraq's neighbors:

“The situation is very muddy right now and none of the neighboring countries are enthusiastic about it,” he added. “Iran is strongly trying either to delay it or not have it signed; Syria is doing the same. Turkey is also not for it to be signed quickly.”

The neighboring countries, especially countries like Syria and Iran that have limited or no diplomatic relations with the United States, view the American troop presence as an interference in the region.

Another is opposition to any form of immunity for U.S. troops:

Many Iraqi members of Parliament say that the proposed immunity provisions, which the United States supports, are too broad, and that they want American troops to be subject to Iraqi law for all their actions. The Americans say that their troops must have immunity when on military missions.

But there is one more reason that has never been mentioned in previous press reports: Iraqi fear that the U.S. will bring WMD's into Iraq:

Other members of Parliament want a provision that would allow Iraqi officials to search all American shipments coming into the country. Some Iraqis fear that Americans will bring in weapons that could be used to attack neighboring countries. The Iranians have been particularly worried that the United States could launch an attack on their country from Iraqi soil.

Iran and the United States have been saber-rattling for several years as Iran has moved ahead with a program to produce nuclear fuel that many political leaders in the United States and Europe fear could eventually be used to build a bomb.

“The heart of the matter is the jurisdiction over the searching of all cargos that are shipped to Iraq or from Iraq,” said Ali Adeeb, a close ally of Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki. “There is the possibility that the cargo contains weapons that may hurt Iraq, although the American side committed that no weapons of mass destruction would be sent to Iraq.”

So six years after George Bush used the (non-existent) threat of WMD's against Iraq, Iraq is now using the threat of WMD's against the U.S.!

Will anyone in the U.S. even notice the absurd historical turnabout? Since no one else will, hopefully Jon Stewart will tell America.

So what if time runs out?

American military and State Department officials warn that unless the agreement is ratified or the United Nations grants an extension — considered highly unlikely, given the need to persuade the Security Council to agree — American troops would have to halt operations. Troops would be confined to bases; they would not be able to fly air support missions or otherwise participate in any way in combat operations, officials have said.

So as of January 1, taxpayers will be spending $10 billion a month for 150,000 troops to do... absolutely nothing.

Will someone tell Congress to stop throwing our money away and bring our troops home?