Team Infidel
Forum Spin Doctor
FNC
June 10, 2008
Special Report With Brit Hume (FNC), 6:00 PM
BRIT HUME: The Bush administration has repeatedly denied that it is seeking permanent U.S. military bases in Iraq, but suspicions about that possibility are gaining traction as the U.S. negotiates a new security pact with the Iraqi government. Now Iran is pressuring its neighbors about that subject. National security correspondent Jennifer Griffin explains.
JENNIFER GRIFFIN: It’s a future relationship that threatens Iran. Iran’s supreme leader chastised the Iraqi prime minister for trying to hammer out a long-term agreement with the U.S. Known as a status of forces agreement, the U.S. has similar pacts with nearly 80 other nations. It would outline how U.S. forces operate in Iraq after a U.N. mandate passed at the start of the war expires later this year. Iraqi parliament members in Washington expressed their fear the agreement will set up permanent U.S. bases in Iraq for use in military strikes against Iraq’s neighbors.
SHEIK KHALIF AL-ULAYAN [Iraqi Parliament Member]: (Translated.) We don’t just think it’s a treaty that affirms the occupation of Iraq. It’s even worse. It looks like a treaty that will be the annexation of Iraq to the United States.
NADEEM AL-JAPERI [Iraqi Parliament Member]: (Translated.) We think any treaty should be signed or negotiated after the complete withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq at the end of this year.
GRIFFIN: In a letter to Congress, more than 30 Iraqi parliament members rejected any agreement that is not, quote, “linked to clear mechanisms that obligate the occupying American military forces to fully withdraw from Iraq, in accordance with a declared timetable and without leaving behind any military bases, soldiers or hired fighters.”
Now Congress, led by antiwar Democrats suspicious this administration is trying to tie the hands of the next president, is demanding an explanation. Four members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, led by its chairman, Joe Biden, sent a scathing letter to the defense secretary and secretary of state threatening to block war funding unless Congress is consulted.
RYAN CROCKER [U.S. Ambassador to Iraq]: I can tell you that we are not seeking permanent military bases in Iraq. That is just flatly untrue.
SEAN M. MCCORMACK [State Department Spokesman]: There are no secret annexes. There are no secret side deals that people won’t be able to see and access. However, we’re not going to negotiate in public.
GRIFFIN: If it isn’t concluded by the end of the year, the U.N. mandate could be extended.
CROCKER: My focus on this is more on getting it done right than getting it done quick.
GRIFFIN: In fact, it was Iraq’s leaders who asked for a bilateral agreement and an end to the U.N. mandate to show Iraq is sovereign.
National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe told Fox negotiations are continuing and both the Iraqi and U.S. leadership want an agreement by the end of the year. At the Pentagon, Jennifer Griffin, Fox News.
June 10, 2008
Special Report With Brit Hume (FNC), 6:00 PM
BRIT HUME: The Bush administration has repeatedly denied that it is seeking permanent U.S. military bases in Iraq, but suspicions about that possibility are gaining traction as the U.S. negotiates a new security pact with the Iraqi government. Now Iran is pressuring its neighbors about that subject. National security correspondent Jennifer Griffin explains.
JENNIFER GRIFFIN: It’s a future relationship that threatens Iran. Iran’s supreme leader chastised the Iraqi prime minister for trying to hammer out a long-term agreement with the U.S. Known as a status of forces agreement, the U.S. has similar pacts with nearly 80 other nations. It would outline how U.S. forces operate in Iraq after a U.N. mandate passed at the start of the war expires later this year. Iraqi parliament members in Washington expressed their fear the agreement will set up permanent U.S. bases in Iraq for use in military strikes against Iraq’s neighbors.
SHEIK KHALIF AL-ULAYAN [Iraqi Parliament Member]: (Translated.) We don’t just think it’s a treaty that affirms the occupation of Iraq. It’s even worse. It looks like a treaty that will be the annexation of Iraq to the United States.
NADEEM AL-JAPERI [Iraqi Parliament Member]: (Translated.) We think any treaty should be signed or negotiated after the complete withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq at the end of this year.
GRIFFIN: In a letter to Congress, more than 30 Iraqi parliament members rejected any agreement that is not, quote, “linked to clear mechanisms that obligate the occupying American military forces to fully withdraw from Iraq, in accordance with a declared timetable and without leaving behind any military bases, soldiers or hired fighters.”
Now Congress, led by antiwar Democrats suspicious this administration is trying to tie the hands of the next president, is demanding an explanation. Four members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, led by its chairman, Joe Biden, sent a scathing letter to the defense secretary and secretary of state threatening to block war funding unless Congress is consulted.
RYAN CROCKER [U.S. Ambassador to Iraq]: I can tell you that we are not seeking permanent military bases in Iraq. That is just flatly untrue.
SEAN M. MCCORMACK [State Department Spokesman]: There are no secret annexes. There are no secret side deals that people won’t be able to see and access. However, we’re not going to negotiate in public.
GRIFFIN: If it isn’t concluded by the end of the year, the U.N. mandate could be extended.
CROCKER: My focus on this is more on getting it done right than getting it done quick.
GRIFFIN: In fact, it was Iraq’s leaders who asked for a bilateral agreement and an end to the U.N. mandate to show Iraq is sovereign.
National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe told Fox negotiations are continuing and both the Iraqi and U.S. leadership want an agreement by the end of the year. At the Pentagon, Jennifer Griffin, Fox News.