Did Maliki endorse Obama's plan?
Posted: Sunday, July 20, 2008 12:34 PM by Mark Murray
Filed Under:
Security
From NBC's Mark Murray
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's interview with the German magazine Der Spiegel has set off political shockwaves here in the United States. Here is their conversation...
VIDEO: NBC Deputy Political Director Mark Murray discusses Barack Obama's trip and his meeting with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.
SPIEGEL: Germany, after World War II, was also liberated from a tyrant by a US-led coalition. That was 63 years ago, and today there are still American military bases and soldiers in Germany. How do you feel about this model?
Maliki: Iraq can learn from Germany's experiences, but the situation is not truly comparable. Back then Germany waged a war that changed the world. Today, we in Iraq want to establish a timeframe for the withdrawal of international troops -- and it should be short. At the same time, we would like to see the establishment of a long-term strategic treaty with the United States, which would govern the basic aspects of our economic and cultural relations. However, I wish to re-emphasize that our security agreement should remain in effect in the short term.
SPIEGEL: How short-term? Are you hoping for a new agreement before the end of the Bush administration?
Maliki: So far the Americans have had trouble agreeing to a concrete timetable for withdrawal, because they feel it would appear tantamount to an admission of defeat. But that isn't the case at all. If we come to an agreement, it is not evidence of a defeat, but of a victory, of a severe blow we have inflicted on al-Qaida and the militias. The American lead negotiators realize this now, and that's why I expect to see an agreement taking shape even before the end of President Bush's term in office. With these negotiations, we will start the whole thing over again, on a clearer, better basis, because the first proposals were unacceptable to us.
Later in the interview...
SPIEGEL: Would you hazard a prediction as to when most of the US troops will finally leave Iraq?
Maliki: As soon as possible, as far as we're concerned. U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes.
SPIEGEL: Is this an endorsement for the US presidential election in November? Does Obama, who has no military background, ultimately have a better understanding of Iraq than war hero John McCain?
Maliki: Those who operate on the premise of short time periods in Iraq today are being more realistic. Artificially prolonging the tenure of US troops in Iraq would cause problems. Of course, this is by no means an election endorsement. Who they choose as their president is the Americans' business. But it's the business of Iraqis to say what they want. And that's where the people and the government are in general agreement: The tenure of the coalition troops in Iraq should be limited.
The Obama campaign quickly seized on these comments. "For months, Sen. McCain has called any plan to redeploy our troops from Iraq 'surrender' -- even though we'd be leaving Iraq to a sovereign Iraqi government," it said in a memo to reporters. "Now, the Bush Administration is embracing the negotiation of troop withdrawals with the Iraqi government -- a position that Senator Obama called for last September, and reiterated on Monday in the New York Times. And now, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki supports Barack Obama’s timeline, telling Der Spiegel that, 'Barack Obama is right when he talks about 16 months.'"
Embarrassingly for the White House, it mistakenly sent out a Reuters clip of the Maliki interview to its general press list with this headline: "Iraqi PM backs Obama troop exit plan -- magazine." Whoops. As NBC's Patty Culhane noted, either the Bush Administration wanted make sure every single reporter who covers the White House knew that the Iraqi prime minister is publicly back Obama's war plan, or someone meant to make the staff aware and instead sent it to reporters -- which is what happened. A staffer confirmed that he accidentally sent it to the wrong group and he's been getting calls ever since...
Hours later, the McCain campaign finally issued its response to the Maliki interview. "The difference between John McCain and Barack Obama is that Barack Obama advocates an unconditional withdrawal that ignores the facts on the ground and the advice of our top military commanders," said McCain foreign policy adviser Randy Scheunemann in comments that the Obama camp and many independent analysts would find questionable. "John McCain believes withdrawal must be based on conditions on the ground. Prime Minister Maliki has repeatedly affirmed the same view, and did so again today. Timing is not as important as whether we leave with victory and honor, which is of no apparent concern to Barack Obama. The fundamental truth remains that Senator McCain was right about the surge and Senator Obama was wrong. We would not be in the position to discuss a responsible withdrawal today if Sen. Obama’s views had prevailed."
Then, throwing a wrench into this entire story, Maliki's government walked back his comments -- although only somewhat. The government's official spokesman, Ali al-Dabbagh, said that Maliki's words had been misunderstood and mistranslated and were not conveyed accurately. Al-Dabbagh explained that Mr. al-Maliki confirmed the existence of an Iraqi vision stems from the reality with regard to Iraq security needs, as the positive developments of the security situation and the improvement witnessed in Iraqi cities makes the subject of U.S. forces' withdrawal within prospects, horizons, and timetables agreed upon and in the light of the continuing positive developments on the ground.
As NBC's Chuck Todd noted on Meet the Press this morning, it is significant that the Iraqi government mentioned "timetables' in its statement walking back the Der Spiegel interview.
Meanwhile, Der Spiegel says it's standing by its version of the interview.
