Obama vs. McCain: Iraq politics
Posted: Monday, July 21, 2008 9:17 AM by Domenico Montanaro
The New York Times says that on the eve of Obama’s Iraq visit, “its prime minister tried to step back Sunday from comments in an interview in which he appeared to support Mr. Obama’s plan for troop withdrawal… Mr. Maliki's interview prompted immediate concern from the Bush administration, which called to seek clarification from Mr. Maliki’s office, American officials said… After that, the government’s spokesman, Ali al-Dabbagh, issued a statement casting doubt on the magazine’s rendering of the interview. The statement, which was distributed to media organizations by the American military early on Sunday, said Mr. Maliki’s words had been ‘misunderstood and mistranslated,’ but it failed to cite specifics.”
VIDEO: As Barack Obama talks of timetable for withdrawal from Iraq, how does he differ with John McCain on the future of U.S. troops there? NBC's Lester Holt speaks with NBC's Andrea Mitchell.
“‘Unfortunately, Der Spiegel was not accurate,’ Mr. Dabbagh said Sunday by telephone. ‘I have the recording of the voice of Mr. Maliki. We even listened to the translation.’ But the interpreter for the interview works for Mr. Maliki’s office, not the magazine. And in an audio recording of Mr. Maliki’s interview that Der Spiegel provided to The New York Times, Mr. Maliki seemed to state a clear affinity for Mr. Obama’s position, bringing it up on his own in an answer to a general question on troop presence.”
Here’s the transcript of the Der Spiegel interview:
And Der Spiegel is standing by its reporting of the conversation with Maliki. “A number of media outlets likewise professed to being confused by the statement from Maliki's office. The New York Times pointed out that al-Dabbagh's statement ‘did not address a specific error.’ CBS likewise expressed disbelief pointing out that Maliki mentions a timeframe for withdrawal three times in the interview and then asks, ‘how likely is it that SPIEGEL mistranslated three separate comments?’ Matthew Yglesias, a blogger for the Atlantic Monthly, was astonished by ‘how little effort was made’ to make the Baghdad denial convincing. And the influential blog IraqSlogger also pointed out the lack of specifics in the government statement. SPIEGEL sticks to its version of the conversation. Maliki's comments immediately hit the headlines of US papers and Web sites across the country, partly the result of a White House employee inadvertently sending out a news alert to its full media distribution list. The White House said it was an error and that it was meant to be sent internally only.”
Reporting from Baghdad, NBC’s Andrea Mitchell says that the Maliki government is trying to put pressure on the Bush Administration to set a timetable for withdrawal.
USA Today writes, “Al-Maliki's initial comments created problems for McCain, said Peter Trubowitz, a government professor at the University of Texas-Austin. The political fallout, Trubowitz said, may depend on which al-Maliki statement sticks. ‘Maliki's initial statement helps Obama,’ he said, but the follow-up could mitigate matters for the Republican. ‘I don't think it really helps McCain, but it's certainly less damaging than the first set of comments.’”
The McCain campaign is having a campaign conference call on Obama and Iraq at 9:30 am ET.
"While refusing to confirm or deny anything about Obama's schedule, [Obama's] aides were furious with this McCain comment: "I believe that either today or tomorrow -- and I'm not privy to his schedule -- Sen. Obama will be landing in Iraq with some other senators." Obama's aides "noted every major news outlet has resisted speculating on the timing or location of Obama's war-zone maneuvers out of safety concerns."
