US State Department spokesman Adam Ereli in 2005.
Photo: AFP
|
 |
"No One Thought that We Would Get Bogged Down in Iraq so Deeply and for So Long"
// An American Diplomat Lays Out a Timetable for Troop Withdrawal
This week is the fourth anniversary of the beginning of the war in Iraq, which was marked in the US and Europe by anti-war demonstrations that drew thousands of protestors. Former US State Department spokesman Adam Ereli, who now heads the State Department's Foreign Press Center for Europe and the Middle East, tells Kommersant correspondent Nargiz Asadova when the US plans to withdraw its troops from the country.
Have you achieved your goal in Iraq?
To be honest, not entirely. But we have done well. First of all, a cruel tyrant who oppressed his own people and intruded on the territory of his neighbors no longer poses a threat to anyone. Secondly, for the first time in its history Iraq has a constitution that was written by the Iraqi people and that guarantees them basic human rights and enshrines the rule of law and the legitimacy of the government. Third, the Iraqi people chose their government for the first time in their history. Twelve and a half million Iraqi citizens participated in the elections in 2005 and voted for their leaders. And this is an important achievement. Of course, there is not the stability and security that we had all hoped for. We cannot overlook that fact. The Iraqi government and its friends are working on resolving these problems.
What has interfered with the attainment of your goal in Iraq?
Frankly speaking, there are many factors. There is the damage that was done to Iraqi society during 30 years of rule by Saddam Hussein's ruthless regime. I mean the problem of the Sunni minority ruling the Shiite majority for so long. The Sunnis used their power to weaken the Shiite community socially and politically. And when the Sunnis lost power, the resentments that had been building up in Iraqi society for years came to the surface in the form of political struggle, criminal activity, or simply overt terrorism. In addition, several of Iraq's neighbors are supporting these shows of violence. All of these are factors, and we have defined some of them as critical.
One of these factors is apparently Iran. How do you plan to resolve the problem of Iranian influence in Iraq?
This is a problem that everyone is working on finding a solution to, starting with the Iraqi government. And both the US and Iraq's neighbors as well. Two weeks ago a conference of senior officials took place in Baghdad, at which Iraq discussed diplomatic initiatives from neighboring countries and discussed what its neighbors could do to support Iraq. That was an opportunity to say to Iraq's neighbors that good neighbors do not furnish arms to illegal militias, weapons that help one Iraqi kill another.
It has been said that if the US withdraws its troops from Iraq, Iraqi Shiites will immediately fall out with the Iranians, since they will no longer be united in the struggle against a common foreign enemy. Do you agree?
Everyone who knows anything about the situation in Iraq does not consider the withdrawal of troops from Iraq to be a good idea. Of course, the Iraqi government does not want that to happen. And the American president also does not intend to do that. That could lead to a power vacuum that could be exploited by terrorists and forces that are interested in the destabilization of Iraq. Our plan, which we developed jointly with the Iraqis, is to do everything in our power to make sure that the Iraqi armed forces have every possible opportunity to ensure security in Iraq, both within the country and on its borders. We hope that this will not take too long. As the Iraqi army becomes increasingly effectual, the American president and the presidents of other countries will be able to gradually withdraw their troops from Iraq. We have an excellent example of how this needs to be done: the withdrawal of British troops from Basra, where the Iraqis demonstrated their ability to control the situation. It would be a big mistake to withdraw all of the troops immediately, before the Iraqis themselves are able to take care of their country.
Are you worried that the power vacuum that could arise after the withdrawal of troops from Iraq could draw in Iran?
Yes, that is a clear danger.
The Baker/Hamilton report suggested opening talks with Iran and Syria to resolve the problem of security in Iraq. Are you carrying on any negotiations with them?
No. As I have already said, there was a conference in Baghdad that was attended by Iraq's neighbors. On April 10 there will be a conference of foreign ministers in Istanbul. And that was an opportunity to get together and tell the Iranians what is expected from them in the context of the Iraqi problem. The same applies to Syria. But I wouldn't call these negotiations – they're more like multinational diplomatic discussions. The US has let it be known that we have no intention of participating in bilateral negotiations with Iran or Syria. We can open negotiations only under well-defined and very clear circumstances. We respect Iran, and we have let them know that they have been flouting UN Security Council resolutions for years, and they do not want to suspend their uranium enrichment program. If they do that, we will be prepared to discuss all aspects of our relationship. With regard to Syria, we do not believe that there is any point in talking with Syria as long as there is no perceptible change in its policy for supporting terrorism and attempts to destabilize the region.
What do you think about the possibility that Iraq will be divided into three parts – Kurdish, Shiite, and Sunni?
I don't think that anyone is seriously in favor of that idea. The US believes that Iraq should remain one country within its current borders.
Thousands of people in the US, Europe, and around the world have taken to the streets this week to protest the war in Iraq. How would you explain to these people that the US is not withdrawing its troops from Iraq?
Americans have run up against something that they did not expect. Four years ago, no one would have thought that we would get bogged down in Iraq so deeply and for so long. People are expressing this disillusionment at demonstrations. But, as the US president has said, we are responsible for what is happening in Iraq. And even despite the fact that Americans are sacrificing a great deal, it is very important not to leave Iraq as long as our work is not done, as long as Iraq is not secure. No matter how attractive the idea of withdrawing our troops from Iraq might appear, the price of that would be too high. As the US president has said, if we do that, we will regret it later. The disillusionment and impatience of Americans is understandable, but the world has to know that if America shoulders a burden of responsibility, it follows through with the task. And so it is very important that we stay there and ensure the security of Iraq for future generations of Iraqis.
George Bush said recently that several more months are needed to finish the military operation in Iraq. But it is unlikely that the civil war in Iraq will end within a few months. So when will the US withdraw its troops from Iraq?
Our goal is to see a strong central government in Iraq. The Iraqi government must have the power to protect the Iraqis. This goal is absolutely attainable. We should not forget that the Iraqi government is just a little over one year old, and few governments have run up against the number of problems and challenges that this government has. It is progressing unbelievably. Of course, it needs to solve a lot of problems. But that is feasible. We hope that six to twelve months from now Iraq will be a country in which the violence has not completely ceased, of course, but that it will be at a level that will not threaten the existence of Iraqi society.
Nargiz Asadova
All the Article in Russian as of Mar. 23, 2007
|
|
|
