Iraq Update

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.


IRAQ UPDATE….McClatchy’s Leila Fadel has good piece today about the state of play in negotiations between Nouri al-Maliki and the Bush administration regarding withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq. You really should read the whole thing, but here’s the conclusion:

Maliki is now demanding a firm timetable for withdrawal and jurisdiction over American soldiers outside their bases. The second demand has stalled the process and does not seem amenable to compromise.

For now, Maliki has achieved none of his demands, said Ali al Adeeb, a leading legislator in Maliki’s party. The current wording in the agreement is that U.S. soldiers will withdraw to their bases by June 30, 2009, and leave by the summer of 2011 if conditions allow.

“What the Iraqis want is a firm date, and with all the insistence and persistence on our side, all we have is a firm date for restricting the American military to their bases,” he said. “There is no overconfidence or arrogance in Maliki’s insistence on his position. … There is a clear indication that the Iraqi forces are now capable of providing the security services required. I think it’s enough time, three years is more than enough time.”

It really is hard to figure out what’s going on here. My guess is that Bush is willing to compromise on the withdrawal language since, as a practical matter, (a) it’s going to be conditions-based no matter what the text says, and (b) he’s not going to be president when it happens anyway. But surely Maliki must know that Iraqi jurisdiction over U.S. troops is just a flat nonstarter. No American president in his right mind would agree to that, or even to anything close to it. Can he seriously be holding out for something more than language that guarantees “consultation” and “continuing progress toward full command integration”? If he is, he’s deluded.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest