You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Iraq-Jordan
US sets limits to Iraqi self-rule
2004-04-27
The US has warned that the new government due to take power in Iraq on 1 July will have to delegate some of its powers to the coalition. Secretary of State Colin Powell said it was important that coalition troops continued to operate under US command.

The US has insisted it is sticking to the planned timetable of transferring power to an interim Iraqi government after 30 June despite the upsurge of violence in Iraq. But in an interview with Reuters news agency, Mr Powell said that while the new government would take full sovereignty over the country, it would have to give some of it back to the Americans so that the US would still be in command of its own troops. "I hope they will understand that in order for this government to get up and running - to be effective - some of its sovereignty will have to be given back, if I can put it that way, or limited by them," Mr Powell said. "It's sovereignty but [some] of that sovereignty they are going to allow us to exercise on their behalf and with their permission."
Gotta walk before you run.
Speaking in Washington, Mr Powell said the coalition did not mean to "seize anything away" from the planned caretaker government. "It is with the understanding that they need our help and for us to provide that help we have to be able to operate freely, which in some ways infringes on what some would call full sovereignty," he said.

But in an interview with the Associated Press, the current head of the US-backed Iraqi Governing Council, Massoud Barzani, accused the US of behaving like "an army of occupation".
"If it were me, I wouldn't have allowed it to come to this by making earlier mistakes," Mr Barzani said. "I probably wouldn't have made the mistake of letting an army of liberation turn into an army of occupation."
Yeah, yeah, tough guy, you're so smart you only lived under Saddam for 30 years.
The BBC's State Department correspondent, Jon Leyne, says there is a danger that the new Iraqi government will be seen as a puppet of the American occupiers.
Who cares what he thinks?
Mr Powell insisted that the coalition wanted the new government to have a real part to play in rebuilding Iraq: "From day one on, I hope that they will exercise more and more control over the ministries, over the priorities for reconstruction, over answering questions of their people. It is in our interest to have that happen."
Posted by:Steve White

#7  The US? Well it seems that way or else why invade.
Posted by: Antiwar   2004-04-27 11:41:38 AM  

#6  If you had any doubts about the quality of BBC reporting ... congratulations, you were right. They are quoting their own correspondent as if he were (1) independent of the BBC, and (2) someone whose opinion matters. What a joke, seriously pathetic. Reminds me of when I was ten and my friend and I did a (one-edition) neighborhood newsletter. We interviewed each other too.
Posted by: sludj   2004-04-27 3:57:37 PM  

#5  [Off-topic or abusive comments deleted]
Posted by: Antiwar TROLL   2004-04-27 11:41:38 AM  

#4  Yeah, yeah, tough guy, you're so smart you only lived under Saddam for 30 years.

Just to clarify, he headed part of the Kurdish autonomous zone, (under US/UK air protection, to be sure). So for the last 13 years he WASNT under Saddam. And prior to that hed led rebellion against Saddam.

In any case, are we going to diss anyone who lived under Saddam??? I mean like who are we expecting to run Iraq??
Posted by: Liberalhawk   2004-04-27 11:26:45 AM  

#3  Back when the Iraqi Army occupied Kuwait and parts of Iran, the concept of an "occupation army" caused no public criticism among Iraqis.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester   2004-04-27 7:31:39 AM  

#2  quote 'The US has warned that the new government due to take power in Iraq on 1 July will have to delegate some of its powers to the coalition. Secretary of State Colin Powell said it was important that coalition troops continued to operate under US command. '


Unfortunatley atm Iraqi's couldnt run a bath , let alone their own country .....

Posted by: MacNails   2004-04-27 5:08:43 AM  

#1  I'm surprised Powell even "went there" in terms of discussing these issues. Obviously the status of forces agreement and autonomy of US forces was always going to be key, and tricky. But there's nothing to be gained by talking about this openly -- Powell is sharper than this, wonder if he was drawn out on it by questions or something else is going on.

As for Barzani, two points. Frankly, I imagine he might have dealt with the situation better than we did, but we were constrained by our own and world standards, so there we are. Second, I'll personally put him in charge if he can explain what the hell he and others mean by turning "into an army of occupation." There's something negative about this term for him and others, but it's a perfectly neutral term in int. law and practice, and they never explain exactly what the difference is between this and being an army of "liberators". Annoying.
Posted by: IceCold   2004-04-27 1:46:21 AM  

00:00