Britain and US plan for quick exit from Iraq

London Times | May 17, 2004 | Philip Webster

[ejdrapes]

Britain and US plan for quick exit from Iraq

TONY BLAIR and President Bush are drawing up plans to speed the pullout of coalition forces from Iraq by giving it full control of its own security as soon as possible.

In an urgent attempt to show that there is an “exit strategy”, America, Britain and other coalition countries will help Iraq to create an army, police force, civil defence corps, intelligence services and border police force.

Yesterday’s briefing from British government sources marked a clear of shift of emphasis. For months, officials in London and Washington have talked about forces staying in Iraq “for as long as it takes” with 2006-07 seen as a real prospect. Now there is much more focus on the goal of leaving. The aim is reach a position where British and American forces can get out as soon as it is safe to, and to show the Iraqis and the increasingly anxious British and American publics that there is an endgame in sight, officials told The Times last night.

The move comes amid increasing speculation that the Prime Minister might leave office before the next election and comes after demands from politicians in both countries for an “exit strategy”.

Mr Blair’s position has become so uncertain that senior ministers led by Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, publicly rallied support for him yesterday and Gordon Brown demanded discipline from the Labour Party at all levels.

The new strategy, discussed by senior officials in Washington and London over the weekend, came as both countries accepted that Iraq would be given full sovereignty on July 1. In what was being portrayed as an example of Mr Blair’s quiet influence on Mr Bush, suggestions from Washington of only partial sovereignty have been dropped.

The first indication of the new approach came on Friday when Colin Powell, the US Secretary of State, Mr Straw and other coalition ministers said that forces would leave if the Iraqi interim government asked them to on July 1.

In an associated move, The Times understands, the expected deployment of extra British troops will not be announced this week. The Government wants to counter the impression that they were being sent in as a knee-jerk response to the removal of Spanish troops.

Major-General David Petraeus, of the US Army, who is leading efforts to set up the new Iraqi army, police force and security services, is studying closely the work of British forces in southern Iraq to forge links with local leaders.

The disclosure by the British Government of a new “joint plan” for a “developed and speeded-up” strategy for the weeks up to June 30 and beyond is evidence of Mr Blair’s acceptance that he must show that there will be an end to British military involvement.

He has told close friends that he would not contemplate quitting as Prime Minister with Iraq in its present state. He has said that he takes full responsbility for the war and is determined to ensure that the peace is won as well.

It is also understood that the new UN resolution on Iraq will not only make plain that the multinational force will operate with the consent of the interim government but that it will only be there until the Iraqis can take full control.

A senior official told The Times that an important “gear change” was taking place. “We are not about to cut and run. But the aim is to have a strategy which enables the Iraqis to take control as quickly as possible and allows us to leave as soon as possible.”

General Powell said yesterday: “We are planning to stay the course and we expect that Iraq's interim government that will come into place on July 1 would certainly ask us to remain and help them to stay the course.”

He added: “What we are anxious to do is to return sovereignty, but it’s a long way between that initial return of sovereignty and national elections. We certainly are not going to cut and run.”

Asked what would happen if the Iraqis elected an Islamic theocracy similar to Iran, General Powell said: “We will have to accept what the Iraqi people decide.”

But talk of an early pullout sent jitters through the Iraqi Governing Council, many of whose members are likely to serve in the new government.

Adnan Pachachi, who is widely tipped to become the head of state, said that any sovereign government had the right to ask foreign troops to leave its soil, but that it would be a long time before Iraq’s armed forces were strong enough to defend the country.

“Until we have enough Iraqi forces to confront the dangers of al-Qaeda and other terrorist organisations, I think we’ll probably be needing external help,” he told CNN.

Hamid Kifai, the Governing Council spokesman said: “There will not be a rapid withdrawal and nobody will be calling for a rapid withdrawal.”

[ejdrapes]

Is this really a new strategy? Haven't we always said we won't stay a day longer than we have to?

[konijn]

It's hot air

[laconic]

Sounds like its "Declare victory and get out of the mess".

[BillyCrockett]

"Haven't we always said we won't stay a day longer than we have to?"

Sure have. This isn't even a news story.

[Dubh_Ghlase]

"War is an ugly thing, but it is not the ugliest of things; The decayed and
degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is
worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to
fight, nothing he cares about more than his personal safety, is a miserable
creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the
exertions of better men than himself." - John Stuart Mill

[stremba]

This is a non story. We have said that we are turning sovereignity over to the Iraqis on July 1. If this is to be a meaningful transfer of power, we must remove our troops if the new government asks us to. This doesn't change the situation at all. The new government will know that they need US troops to maintain security until an Iraqi army is in place and is capable of doing the job.