Thread: Archive News - Iraqi Dinar Think Tank - 22/06/2010 - 04/10/2010

Iraqi army needs US help to sustain itself: commanders

Iraq cannot yet sustain its army despite having managed to quell a violent insurgency, US and local commanders told AFP, raising the prospect that American troops will stay on beyond 2011.

US military advisers described myriad inefficiencies and problems, from hospitals that lacked medics and dentists to byzantine processes that must be followed to request spare vehicle parts and other vital equipment.

"Tactically, they do well, but ... warfare is about logistics," said Colonel Steven Apland, who heads a Stability Transition Team that advises the Iraqi Army's 3rd Division at Al-Kissik Base, west of the northern city of Mosul.

"Their logistics systems are just, at this point, way below what their tactical competence requires," he said, as US forces ramped up an "advice and assist" mission in Iraq, following the formal end of combat operations on Tuesday.

To illustrate his point, Apland held up his pen, and related the complicated process that Iraqi soldiers must follow to request a new box of such pens.

Ecomagination from GE - with innovation, there will be more clean water for everyone

"I have to fill out this document in triplicate, quadruplicate, and then I have to hand it to some major, and he has to drive down to Baghdad to get it stamped ... and provide a document for you to come back up here, two blocks away, to actually release it (the supplies) to you," he said.

One of Apland's deputies, Lieutenant Colonel Craig Benson, later walked through a medical centre on the base and pointed out how well-supplied it was.

But the centre's lights were mostly off, because of a power cut on a base that has a generator farm that Benson says can provide sufficient capacity to power the base twice over.

"They have the equipment, they need the staff, and they need their logistics systems," he said.

"(Iraqi) combat lifesavers that we try and train to deal with a little bit of trauma on the battlefield have combat lifesaver kits that have expired stuff," Benson added.

Lieutenant Colonel Salah al-Din, the head of one of the base's vehicle maintenance workshops, said many Iraqi units also did not properly maintain their vehicles, eventually leading to engine and transmissions failures.

"We tell them -- before you go on a mission, check the vehicle, and after you come back from a mission, check the vehicle. If there is a small problem, you can fix it. The big problems, they start from the small problems," he said.

"Some units, they learn ... but some of them, they don't come, they forget us. When they have a broken engine, they come to me," Salah al-Din added.

As if to prove the point the colonel explained that he tells soldiers good maintenance can be compared to safe handling of IEDs, the home-made bombs that every day target the Iraqi security forces.

"When you find an IED on the road, it's better to remove it before it explodes, than for it to explode and for you to say, 'Hey, help me, what should I do?'" he said.

Salah al-Din, an 18-year veteran, said he often had difficulty obtaining spare parts from the logistics hub at Taji, north of Baghdad, and also struggled with the wide variety of cars in use.
Sitting side by side in his workshop, as if to hammer home the problem, were Nissan, Kia, Ford and Mitsubishi vehicles, all requiring their own unique parts.

A lack of competence in military logistics led the deputy commander of the new US mission, Operation New Dawn, to say he expects a new Iraqi government to ask for extra help beyond a December 2011 exit deadline for American troops.

"I know the Iraqi government are looking at some of the gaps they are going to have in their capabilities in December 2011 and they are concerned about it," Lieutenant General Michael Barbero said on Wednesday.

"I would predict that they are going to ask for some assistance. We've got a lot of work to do right up to December 2011."

Apland estimates that it will take around two to three years for the Iraqi army's logistics to improve to necessary levels, noting that after the 2003 US-led invasion, the then newly created forces were built to immediately conduct counter-insurgency operations only.

"We knew that some of the finesse of organisation, especially in areas like logistics, personnel, human resource management, those were going to lag behind," he said.

"Bottom line -- it's a terribly inefficient system right now."

http://www.zawya.com/Story.cfm/sidAN...A%20commanders

Issawi, Aaraji discuss investment map

The Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Rafeea al-Issawi received in Baghdad on Wednesday Sami al-Aaraji, the head of the National Investment Commission.

"The two officials discussed the ongoing work throughout Iraq according to the investment map," said a release issued by the al-Issawi's media office as received by Aswat al-Iraq news agency.

It noted that the meeting concentrated on housing projects that respond to the demand of limited and mid income Iraqis.

http://www.zawya.com/Story.cfm/sidZA...vestment%20map

Iraq still far from sovereign, despite US pullout: analysts

With the US combat mission officially at an end Iraq is a step closer to independence, but contrary to what its leaders proclaim the country is still far from sovereign, analysts say.

Seven years of occupation and two decades of United Nations sanctions that followed Iraq's 1990 invasion of Kuwait have so disabled this once regional powerhouse that it is still in great need of the United States, they say.

"Iraq has for years been trying to recover its sovereignty," said Hamid Fadel, who teaches political science at Baghdad University.

"The gradual withdrawal of the US army can be a step in this direction, but many obstacles remain in between," he told AFP.

US forces ended their combat mission in Iraq on Tuesday, drawing down troop numbers that surged to almost 170,000 following the 2003 US-led invasion to less than 50,000 at present, prior to a complete withdrawal at the end of 2011.

Ecomagination from GE - with innovation, there will be more clean water for everyone

"This is a day that will remain in the memory of all Iraqis. Today, Iraq has become a sovereign and independent country," Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki said in a televised speech on Tuesday.

But for Fadel, the supposed sovereignty of Iraq is also contradicted by the "preponderant" US role in the country, particularly on security issues, and UN sanctions which give the New York-based institution considerable power here.

"Baghdad is still under Chapter 7 of the UN charter," he said, which means that 20 years after the invasion of Kuwait, Iraq is still the target of drastic sanctions of the Security Council.

Chief among them is the requirement to pay five percent of oil revenues into a UN special fund which handles war reparations, and to which Iraq has paid 30 billion dollars so far.

"Iraq still needs the American umbrella. It is unable to protect itself from external attacks," Fadel added.

For Ihsan al-Shammari, a political economist at Baghdad University, it is difficult to speak about Iraqi independence when 49,700 troops remain stationed in his country.
"The withdrawal was a commitment that (US President Barack) Obama intended to keep, and it was symbolic," he said.

"When he announced the end of combat missions on Tuesday evening at the White House it felt like the speech was intended for Americans, not Iraqis," al-Shammari added.

Aziz Jabr, a professor at Baghdad's Mustansiriya University was of the same opinion, reflecting on Iraq's weakness when compared against regional rivals.

"Iraq does not have a deterrent power vis-a-vis its neighbours -- Iran, Turkey, Syria and Saudi Arabia," he said, recalling comments by Iraq's top army officer, Lieutenant General Babaker Zebari, who last month urged US troops to stay until 2020.

For security inside Iraq, the end of US combat missions means that Iraqi forces alone are now responsible.

Despite a resurgence of attacks inside Iraq since July, Maliki stated Tuesday that Iraq's own army and police were up to the task of protecting the population. His remarks did not lessen the scepticism of many Iraqis.

For Jabr, the main weakness of the security forces in the fight against insurgents is in collating intelligence.

"They are able to collect information, but not to analyse it," he said, in an opinion shared by Shammari.

"The war against terrorism does not depend on military might, but on intelligence," Shammari said. "To arm and train the Iraqi forces was clearly not sufficient."

Although the military was largely destroyed and subsequently disbanded after the 2003 invasion a series of multi-million dollar deals in recent years have seen Baghdad buy tanks and airplanes from the United States.

http://www.zawya.com/Story.cfm/sidAN...%3A%20analysts

Iraq 'close' to forming new government: Biden

Iraq is "close" to forming a new government nearly six months after elections, US Vice President Joe Biden told CBS on Wednesday during a visit to the country.

Iraqi leaders have been mired in political deadlock for months, with main parties in mid-August breaking off coalition talks aimed at forging a government, amid widespread public discontent with the war-torn country's political elite.

Biden, in an interview with US broadcaster CBS, said he had met with "every one of the major leaders" as well as with representatives of each party that won seats in Iraq's parliament.

"There are 325-plus members of their parliament (and) the largest party got 91 votes. So it takes a while to put together this coalition, but I believe they are close to doing that," he said.

http://www.zawya.com/Story.cfm/sidAN...ent%3A%20Biden

Iraq: Abstractions and Realities

For the past few days, US media has been full of comment and speculation about the effect that the reduction in the number of American troops might have on future developments in Iraq.

Some commentators speak of a 'landmark' event, giving President Barack Obama credit for honouring an agreement signed under his predecessor. The idea is that the president would be able to claim that he was the man who finished a war that his 'evil' predecessor started.

The problem, however, is twofold.

First, Obama adulators are uncomfortable with admitting that the massive troop withdrawal was made possible because the new Iraqi army and its US allies have succeeded in defeating Al Qaeda in Iraq.

Secondly, the reduction in the number of troops does not mean an end of US involvement in Iraq. The US will continue to maintain some 50,000 troops, backed by hundreds of warplanes and a full flotilla of battleships in the region. The fact that the remaining units are labelled 'non-combat' does not change anything. If and when necessary, that label would be changed to 'combat units.'

Those who would die rather than admit that the overthrow of Saddam Hussein was a good thing and that Iraq today, though not a bed of roses, is better than it was under the Takritis, also point to the fact that Baghdad politicians have not yet made a deal to form a new government.

One pro-Obama pundit claims that the political impasse in Baghdad shows that Iraqis are not ready for a pluralist system of government based on elections. The subtext here is that, had Saddam Hussein not been removed from power, he would have been able to form a new government in five minutes.

Taking time to form a coalition government, however, is not limited to Iraq. Belgium, which has a history of over a century of democracy, is still without a government after two years of attempts at coalition building and two general elections. Right now, another well-established democracy, Australia, is grappling with the complexities of forming a coalition government.

The last general election in Iraq was just the first step towards a non-sectarian political culture in that country. This was the first time that political rather than sectarian identities were presented as the main criterion for making a choice. Nevertheless, it may take half a dozen more elections before voters fully learn to vote for political programmes rather than sectarian affinities.

Leaving aside the clash of egos, a feature of all political systems, forming a coalition government in Iraq has run into a major difficulty. The main parties capable of forming a coalition feel obliged to negotiate accords over issues for which they have no clear electoral mandate.

Three main issues could be identified.

The first concerns the actual control of the nation's oil resources and revenues. The issue was not highlighted during the election campaign and none of the main parties offered a clear position on it.

Nevertheless, at least two views could be identified.

One view is that of those who want a strong central government and insist that Iraq's oil belongs to all of its people and must be exploited on behalf of the whole nation. This means that all decisions regarding oil expiation and exploitation rights, and all related contracts, must be taken in Baghdad.

The second view is that, because new Iraq has a federal structure, decision regarding the oil industry must also be devolved. At present, this means that the autonomous Kurdish government, set up in three northern provinces, should have the right to develop oil resources in the territory it controls.

However, if that principle is accepted other 'federal' units could claim that same rights in the future.

The second major issue is the barely hidden agenda of some Shiite parties, backed by Iran, to set up an autonomous federal region in eight southern provinces. Such a unit would include most of 'useful Iraq' and more than 70 per cent of he country's oil reserves. It would leave Baghdad as a large head without a body.

Creating an Arab satellite state has been part of Iran's strategy since the 7th century AD. The first such state was created as a buffer against the Byzantine Empire. The planned buffer state in southern Iraq would be used against the United States and its regional allies. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which s emerging as the true power in Tehran, has already set up a special unit to ' manage relations' with the putative mini-state in southern Iraq.

The third issue concerns Kirkuk, with most Kurdish parties sold to an openly annexationist posture that regards even Mosul as a future target.

With such high stakes, it is not surprising that coalition talks have taken so long. The parties involved have no mandate from their respective electorates to make any deals on oil, federalism and Kirkuk. This means they are trying to settle crucial issues that must be decided in a future election.

The practical way out of the impasse would be to forma government on the basis of existing realities rather than future conjectures. Iraq today is work in progress, its final shape to be determined through years of necessarily uneven political development. In this work in progress, no party or community is able to impose its views on others. Thus no endurable compromise is likely on any of the three crucial issues under discussion. The best that the parties could do is to dance around the issues, thus delaying the formation of a government even further.

The wisest course would be to set these issues aside for the time being and concentrate on creating a coalition that could work to further improve security and the provision of essential government services. Iraq also needs to renegotiate its international status, notably by seeking a removal of all United Nations sanctions, while preventing neighbouring countries from intervening in its affairs.

It took the United States almost a quarter of a century to fully work out its federal system, and it was not until after the War of Secession in the middle of the 19th century that the full status of individual states and their relationship with the central government in Washington was worked out.

In practical terms, the three issues that have delayed the formation of a coalition in Baghdad are mere abstractions because, even if agreement is achieved, the government, in its present weakness, would not be able to deliver on any of them.

What Iraq needs is a government dealing with here and now. And the sooner the better.

http://aawsat.com/english/news.asp?section=2&id=22177

After Iraq war, uncertainty and seemingly mixed messages

As President Obama declared Tuesday that it was "time to turn the page" in Iraq, Mahmoud Othman - tuning in to the Oval Office address here at 3 a.m. - listened in shock.

For Americans, the message was clear: The United States' war in Iraq is over. But the long-time Kurdish politician heard something different: Despite U.S. insistence that Americans remain committed to Iraq, they are halfway out the door.

"They decided to finish it, but they know it's not over," Othman said Thursday. "War with terrorism is here, and Iranian intervention is here. They are lying to tell their people that they left behind a government that is capable and Iraqi security forces that are capable. . . . There is no government, the people don't have confidence in the Iraqi security forces, and Iraqi suffering is increasing."

Many people here say that they did not expect Obama's declaration to sound so final or that Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates would acknowledge that the war is over, albeit "clouded" by its start in a U.S.-led invasion based on a false premise.

"I'm disappointed by this new administration," Othman said. "They want to run away from Iraq."

He also criticized Vice President Biden's trip to Baghdad this week to mark the end of the U.S. combat mission, questioning why Biden did not hold a news conference while he was here. "This is America - it's supposed to be transparent," he said.

Yet even as the administration declares that the more than seven-year-long war has ended,U.S. diplomats and military commanders in Iraq have been spreading a somewhat different message: They are still here, although in smaller numbers, for at least 18 more months.

They had spent the year before the drawdown assuring Iraqis that they were not picking up and leaving Iraq in the dust. They said they knew there were challenges ahead and that they would be here to help deal with them - Kurdish and Arab disputes over land that could trigger battles, constitutional amendments so sensitive they were never dealt with, an oil revenue-sharing law that was never passed and a lower but still significant level of violence.

In his farewell speech at Wednesday's change of command ceremony, Gen. Ray Odierno asked Iraqis for "strategic patience." In previous statements, he had hinted at the possibility of a long-term U.S. military relationship with Iraq after Dec. 31, 2011, the deadline for U.S. withdrawal stipulated in a bilateral security agreement.

The newly arrived U.S. ambassador, James F. Jeffrey, struck a similar note of reassurance in his first briefing to reporters in Baghdad last month.

"The point we're trying to make . . . is that we're not abandoning Iraq, and we're not really even leaving Iraq," he said. "Violence, uncertainty and risks to our strategy are not over."

The perception of a mixed U.S. message has fed the uncertainty many Iraqis say they feel. They are unsure what they want, they say, unsure if the United States is staying or going, unsure that their future will be any better than their past.

"It changed for them," said Najah Abdul Rahman, a bookseller on Baghdad's storied Mutanabi Street, referring to the Americans. "It's finished because of their unexpected losses in lives and in money."

On the railing of a staircase in his bookstore hang the pictures of Rahman's own losses, a brother and nephew killed in a 2007 bombing on this street, named for a famous Iraqi poet and known as the street of books.

"They entered for nothing. They removed the regime but created conflict from the many different parties they brought, and now they take their troops out," he said. "We don't know what we want. We are afraid that if they withdraw, the sectarian killing will return, but at the same time we know the killings started while the Americans were here. We're confused."

Iraqi newspapers published commentaries Thursday questioning the Americans' departure. In one, a writer using the pen name Abdullah al-Sikooti (Abdullah the Silenced) asked why they didn't take the "cancer" they had brought with them as they left. Why don't they return the "beautiful nights and minds" before they leave?, he asked.

A political cartoon in another Arabic newspaper depicted Uncle Sam flanked by two men, "the situation in Afghanistan" and "the situation in Iraq." Iraq had no arms, Afghanistan had no legs, and Uncle Sam had his arms around the pair as he flashed the victory sign.
Back on Mutanabi Street, Abdul Rahman sat in his bookstore on a plastic chair.

"We don't know what happened, what is happening or what will happen," he said. "But Iraq is a country that never forgets."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...=moreheadlines

Iraq needs economic investment, says US

With the United States officially ending combat operations in Iraq, the US State Department is urging friends such as Australia to mark this new phase by injecting investment.

US deputy assistant secretary for Iraq affairs Michael Corbin agreed there were still security threats, although the outlook had greatly improved.

Mr Corbin said companies would still need to make their own assessment of the security situation

He said the US was still encouraging Iraq to form a government following the election on March 7. However, intense and violence-free negotiations were continuing with the two competing coalitions, both with 89 seats, were separated by just two seats.

Mr Corbin said building trade and economic strength were now key to Iraq's future through providing education and work for young people so they did not turn to terrorism.
"We are working closely with the Iraqi government to develop areas such as agriculture," he told reporters in a telephone briefing from Washington.

"Iraq has a long history of irrigated agriculture between the two rivers, the Tigris and the Euphrates, and this is a great way of employing people if those farms could be put back to work.

"What we are looking for really is for Iraq to work with the international community to work on those trade and economic partnerships that will help Iraq rebuild the potential that it has had in the past."

Mr Corbin said multinational oil companies had successfully bid to develop Iraq's oil reserves and were beginning to bring the southern oilfields online.

"We see that those companies who are going into Iraq will provide hopefully a basis that others can follow," he said.

Australia still has 65 troops in Baghdad providing security for embassy personnel. Australia has also provided significant aid, totalling about $50 million this year with a focus on agriculture, governance, basic service delivery and supporting vulnerable populations.

Mr Corbin said security had previously dominated the relationship between Iraq and other nations.

He said many challenges remained and terrorists continued to seek to undermine Iraq's government making a point through their attacks around the August 31 drawdown date."

"But we do not believe they will succeed. They have failed in the past at targeting economic infrastructure, at targeting coalition forces, at targeting the iraqi security forces and innocent civilians," he said.

"We believe the Iraqi government and security forces are well placed to deal with these issues."

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news...902-14pk6.html

Global firms consider projects in Basra’s power sector

Several global firms proposed investment projects in the electricity sector in Basra, according to a local official on Thursday, adding a delegation from Germany’s Siemens is having negotiations with officials in Basra.

“A delegation from Siemens met today (Sept. 2) with officials of the provincial council’s electricity committee to discuss ways to carry out projects in the power sector in Basra,” Ziyad Ali told Aswat al-Iraq news agency.

“The delegation expressed readiness to carry out power projects in the fields of construction of 11/33 kilovolt stations,” he said.

Also, a consortium of Turkish companies proposed to build a power station in Basra and a refinery to feed the plant with fuel, Ali added.

http://en.aswataliraq.info/?p=136441

Kuwaiti Company Wins $7m Contract in Iraq

Kuwait-based Eastern National Oilfield Services (ENOS), a subsidiary of Kuwaiti Safat Energy Holding (KUW: SENERGY), has won a $7 million (8.2 billion Iraqi dinars) contract to provide oil well testing and digging services for an unnamed company in Iraq, according to a report from ADP News.

Safat Energy reportedly released the information in a statement to the Kuwait Stock Exchange (KSE) last week. The contract is valid for a period of two years, with a renewal option.

Safat Energy, formerly Hasibat Holding, is engaged in investment activities in the oil and gas sector. It holds controlling interest in several oilfield service companies. Through its subsidiaries, Safat Energy offers wire-line and production logging, drilling, perforating, well testing and stimulation, cementing, engineering design and consulting, facility construction and maintenance and other oilfield services. The company has operations in Kuwait, Iraq, Bahrain, Libya, the United Arab Emirates, China, Pakistan and Egypt.

http://www.iraq-businessnews.com/201...tract-in-iraq/

Originally Posted by Seaview

After Iraq war, uncertainty and seemingly mixed messages

As President Obama declared Tuesday that it was "time to turn the page" in Iraq, Mahmoud Othman - tuning in to the Oval Office address here at 3 a.m. - listened in shock.

For Americans, the message was clear: The United States' war in Iraq is over. But the long-time Kurdish politician heard something different: Despite U.S. insistence that Americans remain committed to Iraq, they are halfway out the door.

"They decided to finish it, but they know it's not over," Othman said Thursday. "War with terrorism is here, and Iranian intervention is here. They are lying to tell their people that they left behind a government that is capable and Iraqi security forces that are capable. . . . There is no government, the people don't have confidence in the Iraqi security forces, and Iraqi suffering is increasing."

Many people here say that they did not expect Obama's declaration to sound so final or that Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates would acknowledge that the war is over, albeit "clouded" by its start in a U.S.-led invasion based on a false premise.

"I'm disappointed by this new administration," Othman said. "They want to run away from Iraq."

He also criticized Vice President Biden's trip to Baghdad this week to mark the end of the U.S. combat mission, questioning why Biden did not hold a news conference while he was here. "This is America - it's supposed to be transparent," he said.

Yet even as the administration declares that the more than seven-year-long war has ended,U.S. diplomats and military commanders in Iraq have been spreading a somewhat different message: They are still here, although in smaller numbers, for at least 18 more months.

They had spent the year before the drawdown assuring Iraqis that they were not picking up and leaving Iraq in the dust. They said they knew there were challenges ahead and that they would be here to help deal with them - Kurdish and Arab disputes over land that could trigger battles, constitutional amendments so sensitive they were never dealt with, an oil revenue-sharing law that was never passed and a lower but still significant level of violence.

In his farewell speech at Wednesday's change of command ceremony, Gen. Ray Odierno asked Iraqis for "strategic patience." In previous statements, he had hinted at the possibility of a long-term U.S. military relationship with Iraq after Dec. 31, 2011, the deadline for U.S. withdrawal stipulated in a bilateral security agreement.

The newly arrived U.S. ambassador, James F. Jeffrey, struck a similar note of reassurance in his first briefing to reporters in Baghdad last month.

"The point we're trying to make . . . is that we're not abandoning Iraq, and we're not really even leaving Iraq," he said. "Violence, uncertainty and risks to our strategy are not over."

The perception of a mixed U.S. message has fed the uncertainty many Iraqis say they feel. They are unsure what they want, they say, unsure if the United States is staying or going, unsure that their future will be any better than their past.

"It changed for them," said Najah Abdul Rahman, a bookseller on Baghdad's storied Mutanabi Street, referring to the Americans. "It's finished because of their unexpected losses in lives and in money."

On the railing of a staircase in his bookstore hang the pictures of Rahman's own losses, a brother and nephew killed in a 2007 bombing on this street, named for a famous Iraqi poet and known as the street of books.

"They entered for nothing. They removed the regime but created conflict from the many different parties they brought, and now they take their troops out," he said. "We don't know what we want. We are afraid that if they withdraw, the sectarian killing will return, but at the same time we know the killings started while the Americans were here. We're confused."

Iraqi newspapers published commentaries Thursday questioning the Americans' departure. In one, a writer using the pen name Abdullah al-Sikooti (Abdullah the Silenced) asked why they didn't take the "cancer" they had brought with them as they left. Why don't they return the "beautiful nights and minds" before they leave?, he asked.

A political cartoon in another Arabic newspaper depicted Uncle Sam flanked by two men, "the situation in Afghanistan" and "the situation in Iraq." Iraq had no arms, Afghanistan had no legs, and Uncle Sam had his arms around the pair as he flashed the victory sign.
Back on Mutanabi Street, Abdul Rahman sat in his bookstore on a plastic chair.

"We don't know what happened, what is happening or what will happen," he said. "But Iraq is a country that never forgets."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...=moreheadlines

just perhaps of Maliki would have tried harder to please and take care of HIS people for the past 4 years instead of PLAY politics he would have won the majority and STILL be PRIME MINISTER...instead,he did what he did...lost the majority vote and NEEDS to step down...and he does not want to do that....march 7 elections...still no government formed?...thats not the U.S.'s fault...do they expect the good ole U.S. to keep spending dollars in a country that does not know what they want?....we can't keep funding the money we have spent on this inept country anymore...Maliki and politicians as him have bled Iraq dry...IMHO..Pat