Relations impacts and cp’s
AT: US-Iraq relations zero sum with Iraq-Iran
Download 1.27 Mb.
|
AT: US-Iraq relations zero sum with Iraq-IranRelations aren’t zero sum- Iraq can remain neutral BBC 5/4 [2010, BBC Monitoring Middle East – Political, Analysts view Gulf accusations against Iran, mutual distrust - Al-Jazeera TV, lexis] Adil Abd-al-Mahdi = Iraqi vice president Asked about the nature of the relations between the Iraqis, people and government, and Iran following the withdrawal, Abd-al-Mahdi says: "We have always had good relations with the two sides." He adds: "In terms of the hostility between Iran and the United States, we in Iraq have attempted to prevent Iraq from becoming a conflict arena between these forces, or any other forces. Y you will remember that we have attempted to assist in holding bilateral talks between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran, and three rounds were held within this framework." He notes that following the US withdrawal, there is another signed agreement; namely, the Strategic Framework Agreement between Iraq and the United States, which will "organize relations between Iraq and the United States, within political, economic, and cultural frameworks, and other normal relations between two sovereign countries." The correspondent says observers believe this agreement is aimed for the United States to maintain its role in Iraq to prevent Iraq from being associated with Tehran, to which the vice president responds: "Iraq will not be affiliated with any side; neither to the United States nor any other side. Iraq is very proud of its sovereignty and independence. However, contrary to previous governments that have led the country to the brink of ruin and crises, it wants to start friendships with all neighbouring countries, without exception, in addition to the international community." Relations aren’t zero sum- Iraq can maintain relations with both for stability and not geostrategic purposes Almusawi 2010 [Karim, Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq representative in the United States, Washington Post 3/5, Iraqi council isn't on Iran's payroll, lexis] I would like to refute the allegations that the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI) is receiving some $9 million a month from the Iranians. This is simply not true. The relationship between ISCI and Iran is based on mutual respect and the desire to construct a lasting relationship that will profit the Iraqi people. Proper and friendly relations with the Iranian regime are for the purposes of securing Iraq's interests and for the protection of our citizens and borders. ISCI wants to establish a positive relationship with all of Iraq's neighbors. We are also very much for the augmentation of the relationship between Iraq and the United States on the scaffolding of the Strategic Framework Agreement. Because of our strong relationships with Iran and the United States, ISCI in 2006 called for a dialogue between the two to promote peace and understanding. To say that ISCI is on the Iranian payroll is grossly inaccurate. ISCI represents the interests of the Iraqi people. AT: US-Iraq relations key to oilUS oil investments are in Iraq are weak- other countries are winning us out and political relations aren’t key BBC 5/4 [2010, BBC Monitoring Middle East – Political, Analysts view Gulf accusations against Iran, mutual distrust - Al-Jazeera TV, lexis] Adil Abd-al-Mahdi = Iraqi vice president Concerning US investments in Iraqi oil projects, and whether or not this constitutes a guarantee for the continuation of the US role in Iraq, the vice president says: "There has been much talk that the Iraqi oil would be taken and controlled by the US companies." He says that there have been two tenders for the Iraqi oil fields, and the US side was found to be the weakest in these contracts, adding that the Chinese, Russian, British, Korean, Turkish, and other companies won, while only one US company, Exxon, won fields that are not considered to be the greatest or most important. He says: "This is important proof that Iraq manages its policies in a sovereign and independent manner, and grants contracts to whoever gives the best options and conditions." Asked if this is due to an Iraqi decision to diminish the US role, or because the Americans are apprehensive of the future of Iraq, Abd-al-Mahdi says the US prices were higher, while the others were more "aggressive" in their prices. Asked if this indicates that Bush's oil policy in Iraq has failed, Abd-al-Mahdi says the policies of oil companies are independent of the US government. He adds: "It is obvious that the companies will take into consideration the strategies of the US government, just as the US government will take the policies of the US companies into consideration." US-Iraqi relations bad – diplomatic power TurnA. US military in Iraq is resisting handing over the reigns to diplomats—it’s a battle over control Washington Post 5/25 [2010, U.S. officials grapple with shift from military-run effort in Iraq, lexis] Many U.S. commanders are reluctant to hand over the reins to civilians during a political transition that they see as a make-or-break period in Iraq. They view their civilian counterparts as excessively risk-averse and overly reluctant to intervene in Iraqi affairs. "Iraq is on a very positive gliding path," said a U.S. senior military official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to express concern about the State Department's readiness to become the lead player. "But this is not a slam-dunk. You can't walk away from here and think that everything is going to turn out all right." U.S. diplomats say the oft-heard concerns of their military counterparts are unfounded. They argue that they are better suited to build on the security gains that the military helped achieve. Munter said U.S. officials would still try to influence the Iraqi government but would no longer aspire to control it. Diplomats, he said, are at ease in messy, ambiguous situations, whereas commanders are more prone to try to assert control of imperfect situations. B. US military withdrawal from Iraq is key to diplomatic relations Washington Post 5/25 [2010, U.S. officials grapple with shift from military-run effort in Iraq, lexis] U.S. diplomats in Baghdad have for years felt overshadowed by their military counterparts -- commanders who have controlled a vast budget and overseen an enormous footprint. "Here we are, in the largest embassy in the history of the world, and every morning when I deal with the military, I'm aware of how small we are," Cameron Munter, the embassy's No. 2 diplomat, said in a recent interview. Now, however, the balance of power is starting to shift. With the end of the United States' seven-year-long military mission in Iraq drawing closer, American diplomats are redefining U.S. influence in a country where commanders have for years used firepower, billions of dollars and a hands-on approach to redraw the spheres of power. As the military's footprint shrinks, the embassy is exercising a new assertiveness in one of America's most complicated and high-stakes bilateral relationships. Directory: file -> view view -> Western Europe after wwii view -> Author study: paul fleischman view -> Qpa1 7ela study Guide view -> Arctic Oil/Gas Neg view -> November 1970 Approximately 150,000-500,000 deaths Bhola Cyclone Bangladesh view -> Grade Level: 6 Unit of Study: Caribbean glce view -> Citation: Duffield, Katy view -> Table of Contents Lesson # view -> Chinese Wind Energy Disad Download 1.27 Mb. Share with your friends:
|