| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq |
| Rift Opens Between U.S., Chalabi on Iraq |
| 2003-09-25 |
| WASHINGTON (AP) - The Bush administration is locked in a deepening dispute with the leader of Iraq’s American-installed interim government, Ahmad Chalabi, over a timetable for self rule - still another complication for U.S. efforts to rebuild the country. Administration officials thus far have rebuffed an appeal by Chalabi, the president of the 25-member Iraqi Governing Council, for the United States to relinquish control to Iraqis sooner rather than later. Chabbers, are you nutz? Quickest way to become irrelevant with GWB and Rummy is to sound the least bit French. The plan, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told a Senate hearing on Wednesday, is to turn Iraq back over to its people under a seven-point plan "through a constitution and elections and then passing of sovereignty at a pace as rapidly as is reasonable." In other words, the administration doesn’t intend to turn over the reins of power to an unelected council - even if it created the council. Oh my gosh, Chabbers, Rummy believes in democracy! Better get your re-calculator out, you’re going to need it. But Chalabi, a longtime ally of conservatives at the Pentagon and in Congress, and several other Iraqi leaders who also owe their posts to the United States are expected to make their case directly to Capitol Hill. He’s nutz -- nothing could make GWB cut him off quicker than that. Chalabi on Wednesday denied there was a rift between the council and Washington. "We have no disagreement with the United States government," he told a news conference at the United Nations. "We are not at odds with the U.S. We are working to achieve the common objectives." And Chirac says he’s a friend. The delegation of Iraqi officials attending this week’s U.N. General Assembly session will head to the nation’s capital next to meet with House and Senate members. Their aim: more autonomy for the council and at least partial control immediately of the finance and security ministries. They plan to argue that turning over power soon could save American taxpayers tens of billions of dollars. How? Oil is going to flow when it’s ready regardless of who runs the Treasury. L. Paul Bremer, the top U.S. administrator in Iraq, says the process must be an orderly one. "The only path to full Iraqi sovereignty is through a written constitution, ratified and followed by free, democratic elections," he told a congressional hearing. Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., a longtime supporter of Chalabi, said the leader has been one to push against U.S. policy but not one to undermine it. "That’s been the way he’s operated in the past," said Brownback, who plans to meet with Chalabi next week. He said he’ll listen carefully to Chalabi’s appeal. But Brownback said it would be a serious mistake to pull U.S. forces out of Iraq too quickly. "I gots my limits, Chabby, and you’re pushing them!" Chalabi listened Tuesday as President Bush suggested that Iraqi self-government should not be rushed and more nations should share the peacekeeping burden. The process should be "neither hurried nor delayed by the wishes of other parties," Bush said in a slap primarily at France and Germany, which want a quick turnover of control, and an expanded role for the United Nations. Chalabi and his colleagues want to hasten the day when the United States relinquishes control - but don’t want to see an expanded U.N. role or additional foreign troops. Kurt Campbell, a former top Pentagon official who now works at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said the rift is the latest manifestation of an internal feud between the Pentagon and the State Department. Powerful elements in the Pentagon would like to see Chalabi given more power and basically agree with his recent statements, while the State Department continues to favor a more deliberative process that brings in other nations, Campbell said. "What we have to avoid is a debacle and the quickest way to do that is to get as many people involved as possible," Campbell said. Ivo Daalder, a Brookings Institution analyst and co-author of a book on Bush’s foreign policy, said the split is putting the administration in an embarrassing position. The Iraqi authorities are "not legitimate because we installed them," Daalder said. "And so we now have a problem of going against the people we put in power, saying they can’t be trusted." Who said anything about the Council? It’s Chabbers who is the problem. Support for Chalabi in Iraq is mixed. He has many critics opposed to anyone ruling Iraq who has spent most of his life abroad. Chalabi, 58, left Iraq as a teenager. Chalabi is president for September. The council presidency rotates among nine members. Enjoy your swan song, Chabby! |
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #13 The Iraqis will never vote for Chalabi. They dont know the guy. The guy speaks Arabic with a Kensington accent. How so fake.Would Americans vote for George Bush if he had a weird chinese accent and left America fifty years ago only to return with an invading Army, liberation or not. and occupy camp david like chalabi took over Govermental offices in Iraq. |
| Posted by: stevestradamus 2003-9-25 9:13:57 PM |
| #12 I'm sure that Chalabi is a fine fellow. Don't give him control over the security force and budget that way if he mutates into Charles Taylor at least Iraqis have elected him. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2003-9-25 7:17:05 PM |
| #11 mhw: Good point on the "poltician smooth" aspect which is really where I was coming from. I currently reside in The Peoples Republic of Kalifornia....so I can say for sure we have more than our share. Also, he hasn't exaclty shot strait with us at times. Dirtbag may have been strong....but I still don't trust the guy. I can't believe I'm agreeing with State on this one. First time for everything I suppose. |
| Posted by: Rex Mundi 2003-9-25 4:26:51 PM |
| #10 To Rex: the charge of embezzlement (which I think is what you refer to) is a based on a conviction in a Jordanian court and who knows what the reality it. Regarding risk, the man flew into Kurd territory (before the war) while Saddam had a price on his head. He did this several times trying to negotiate between Kurdish factions. He serves in the council while knowing the Baathists have a price on his head. Yes, he had body guards for all of these events, but that doesn't mean it was risk free. And as MOJO says, he is 'politician smooth' and that makes some people dislike him. But we have elected 'smooth' politicians ourselves. |
| Posted by: mhw 2003-9-25 2:26:02 PM |
| #9 Sorry to offend your sensibilites mhw, but Chalabi has a lot to answer for. He's no super patriot by any stretch. The only time I can see him risking his life is when he made off with a lot people's money...hence his comfortable life style you refer to. Mojo is right...noone trusts the guy -and for solid reasons. |
| Posted by: Rex Mundi 2003-9-25 12:36:19 PM |
| #8 What would Iraq lose if it refused to pay debts to France saying that France was complicit with Sadaam? |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2003-9-25 11:23:51 AM |
| #7 It's always been intended that the people on the council will help put together the new government, but not be a part of it themselves. That's why the Hakim's didn't both join - but the one they planned to be a govt. minister got himself blowed up. Oops. Chalabi - He's too damn smooth. I don't trust him, and I'm sure the Iraqis don't. They're not dumb, just beaten and bruised. |
| Posted by: mojo 2003-9-25 11:21:23 AM |
| #6 chirac wants a fast turnover because france is big enough to scare iraq, and the US wont budge. Iraq has an unpaid bar bill with France ya know... |
| Posted by: flash91 - fatwah you talkin bout willis 2003-9-25 10:53:01 AM |
| #5 I think John may be on to something. Remember Gardner wanted to turn over control and maybe sovereignty to the exiles quickly. That got overruled, in part cause State and CIA didnt trust the exiles (well except for the INA, their own guys) Bremer is State by background, though said to be on good terms with DoD. Just cause Chirac is pushing for a quick handover, it may be a mistake to assume that this is a logical "dovish" position. Hes probably just pushing for it cause the Admin is against it, not so much hoping it gets adopted as simply trying to embarass the admin in the UN, and get concessions that will dignify France and the UN. If the Bush admin said the trains in Iraq should run slowly, Chirac would say they should run on time, and vice versa. Doesnt tell you what to do with the trains in Iraq. It also may be a mistake to identify "DoD" as a single player. It is not at all clear to me that Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz are pursuing the same strategy. Wolfies priority is transforming the mideast - Rummys is transforming the US military. Im not sure Wolfie genuinely agreed with Rummy's early deployment decisions for post-war Iraq. Im also not sure they agree on Iraqi politics now. The presence of powerful enemies inside and outside the admin tends to make them appear closer, but its possible more complex things are going on. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2003-9-25 9:39:55 AM |
| #4 Disagree with you Rex. Chalabi has his faults but he is as serious a player as anyone else in Iraq. Furthermore, this dispute with the US is largely performance art with the intent of getting him some more allies in Iraq. It may work. It may not work but it is serious. Also, calling him a dirtbag is uncalled for. He could have lived a very prosperous and comfortable life in the US or Britain by cutting off his interest in Iraq. Instead he put his life on the line to return to Iraq (in fact a number of times he flew into the Kurdish sector before the invasion and before the war, he was hunted by Sadam's assasins because of his anti Sadam activities.) |
| Posted by: mhw 2003-9-25 9:36:05 AM |
| #3 It would be pretty stupid to transfer control of Iraqi internal securty before there are constitutional checks and balances of executive power are enacted. Security better stay in coalition hands until after Iraqis elect a government. Arrafathead should have at least convinced us of that. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2003-9-25 9:00:11 AM |
| #2 Chabby has never been a serious player, no matter how he has stroked himself. The Iraqis know this better than anyone. So long dirt bag! |
| Posted by: Rex Mundi 2003-9-25 3:05:07 AM |
| #1 Let me guess....the rift is actually between State and the Pentagon, Chalabi is just caught in the middle. |
| Posted by: john 2003-9-25 3:04:37 AM |