Bush's Iraq Defense Pact Is Falling Apart

The United States has a very tenuous legal justification for invading and occupying Iraq. That justification is a United Nations mandate that was approved after Bush sent Colin Powell to lie to the United Nations about reasons for the war. But that mandate runs out at the end of this year. At that time, the United States would either have to withdraw or get the mandate extended.

But Bush doesn't like either option, so he has been trying to force the Iraqis to agree to an American-Iraqi Defense Agreement. Such an agreement would let him bypass the United Nations and commit the United States to keeping troops in Iraq for many years. For a while it looked like he might be successful in that endeavor, but now opposition is growing in both countries.

Although the Bush administration says it's still on target to complete the agreement by July 31st, anonymous sources in the administration and the Iraqi government say they don't think an agreement can be reached by the end of the year. The sticking point in the negotiations are the terms of the agreement each side is demanding.

The Bush administration wants:

* Dozens of bases from which U.S. troops can launch attacks or arrest Iraqis without prior consent of the Iraqi government.

* Complete immunity for U.S. troops and security contractors.

* Control of Iraq's air space.

* No guarantee the U.S. will protect Iraq from foriegn attacks.

The Iraqi government wants:

* U.S. troops to stay on bases outside the cities.

* No immunity for troops and security contractors.

* U.S. will act only when Iraq requests help.

* U.S. will not control Iraqi air space.

It doesn't look like the two sides are close to an agreement. But even if they were, opposition to the agreement is growing in this country. Even some Republicans are afraid Bush is trying to force a future administration into accepting an unending occupation of Iraq.

Obama has spoken up about the agreement and says it must be "absolutely clear that the United States will not maintain permanent military bases in Iraq." He also says that any security commitment to Iraq must have Congressional approval. Obama is on solid constitutional grounds here.

Any such agreement reached would have the effect of a treaty, and according to the United States Constitution, "He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur". It seems clear enough that the agreement could not take effect without approval of the Senate.

If Senate Democrats would just show a little backbone, they could stop this ridiculous agreement in its tracks, and that's just what they should do! Without the agreement, Bush would have to go back to the United Nations. They certainly wouldn't agree to a long extension of the mandate, if they extended it at all.

It is time to withdraw ALL American troops from Iraq. A good step toward achieving that goal would be to deny Bush this defense agreement. That would give the next president the option of starting an orderly withdrawal.