The current Iraqi prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, is in the news lately over his endorsement of Barack Obama's plan for withdrawing troops on a sixteen-month timetable, but yesterday in Washington it was a former Iraqi prime minister, Iyad Allawi, who was making news. And it wasn't good news for Maliki.

Allawi, a former Baathist and an Iraqi nationalist, heads the Iraqi National List party in Iraq, and he served as the first prime minister of a sovereign Iraq until elections gave power to the Shiite religious parties. Allawi is a Shiite, but a secular one, who appeals to both Sunnis and Shiites. After quitting the Baath party, Allawi lived in exile and he was supported by MI-6 and the CIA, and he returned to Iraq in 2003. He makes no secret of wanting to replace Maliki, who is a confirmed sectarian with close links to Iran.

Last September, Allawi tried to arrange clandestine meetings between Iraqi resistance forces under Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri, a former aide to Saddam Hussein, and US commanders in Iraq.

Yesterday he testified in front of a subcommittee of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs to discuss the proposed US-Iraq status of forces agreement (SOFA) and the parallel US-Iraq strategic framework.

Allawi blasted the so-called surge, saying that it failed in its primary objective, namely, to end the Iraqi civil war and foster political reconciliation. He said that General Petraeus personally came to his house early in 2007 to assure him that the surge would accomplish its intended objective. Instead, things got worse, said Allawi.

"There is an urgent need to build nonsectarian institutions," he told the committee. Sitting alone, dressed conservatively in a gray suit, Allawi said that Iraq's police and army are still organized on a sectarian basis. Asked about the importance of US training for Iraqi forces, Allawi said, "The issue is not training. By and large, training is secondary." The problem, he said, is that the police and army are not loyal to Iraq, not loyal to a national chain of command, but report informally to Shiite militias.

Asked by subcommittee chairman Rep. Willian Delahunt (D.-Mass.) if the Iraqi army was composed of sectarian militias that have just "exchanged uniforms," Allawi replied, "Unfortunately, this is the case." He said that he'd discussed the problem directly with President Bush and General Petraeus, but without answer.

Allawi said that thirteen members of his party had been assassinated by thugs tied to the army and police. "They were killed by people in uniforms, dressed in police and army uniforms. We had not only thirteen killed, but we had hundreds arrested." Such arrests and killings, Zimbabwe-style, made a sham of the 2005 and 2006 elections. Backed by more than 100 Iraqi parliamentarians, Allawi is trying to ensure the UN and Arab League observers keep a close watch on provincial and national elections in 2009. (Originally scheduled for October, 2008, the provincial elections will likely be postponed because of Kurdish sabotage of the election law over its Kirkuk provisions.)

Most of the militia gangs who've infiltrated Iraq's security forces are tied to the Iran-backed Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI) and its Badr Brigade, who provide Maliki's main political support.

Allawi stressed the Iraq's constitution, which he called "divisive," needs to be rewritten.

Allawi demanded that the Iraqi parliament be given a chance to review any US-Iraq accords signed by Bush and Maliki.

In testimony before Allawi, Danielle Pletka of the American Enterprise Institute pooh-poohed Iraqi public opinion, which is strongly opposed to a continuing US presence. The only thing that matters, said Pletka, a hardcore neocon, is what America wants, Iraqi public opinion be damned. She ridiculed Iraqis, suggesting that most Iraqis believe that there were no Jews in the World Trade Center on 9/11. "If we polled Iraqis about the number of Jews in the World Trade Center, their answer is not likely to reflect reality," she huffed. So why take Iraqis seriously when they say that they want US forces to withdraw? She added:

The question of the extension of the United Nations mandate that governs the allied presence in Iraq has received undue attention, and distracted from the very real question of American interests. ...

Some have suggested that Iraqi parliamentarians who have expressed concern about the shape of any bilateral agreement with the United States should carry the day. Their views, however, are theirs alone. These parliamentarians are responsible to their constituents. Their opinions regarding immunity for American service people, contractors, the nature of American bases in Iraq and all else are questions to bring to their side of the table. We have our own side.

Maliki, who'd like the US to stay in Iraq indefinitely to continue training his security forces, is under great pressure from Iraqi nationalists, including Muqtada al-Sadr, to support the timetable idea.

Sadly, only four -- four! -- members of the House of Representatives bothered to attend the Allawi hearing: Democrats Russ Carnahan, Rosa DeLauro, and Lynn Woolsey, and Republican Dana Rohrabacher.

Comments (7)

1. "Sadly, only four -- four! -- members of the House of Representatives bothered to attend the Allawi hearing: Democrats Russ Carnahan, Rosa DeLauro, and Lynn Woolsey, and Republican Dana Rohrabacher."

   Probably because it's irrelevant.

   And I don't say that snarkily, just factually. Obama OR McCain, we'll be out of Iraq by 2010...both men have said or hinted (in McCain's case) that that's what they want.

   After that, Iraq can handle its own problems and al-Maliki can become a "President-for-Life"...as long as long as he's relatively nice to us, Israel, and the Oil Companies....just like the Saudis and the Gulf sultans.

   Posted by Maskdelta at 07/24/2008 @ 1:26pm

2. Allawi is a CIA front, and is being used by Bush as a bargaining chip in his negotiations with Iraq over the status-of-forces agreement.

   Bush is essentially trying to send a signal to Maliki that "if you don't play ball, we will put our guy -Allawi - back in charge so we can get what we want.

   Allawi has absolutely ZERO credibility, as it was he who claimed Sadaam possessed weapons of mass destruction in the run-up to the invasion!

   I'm glad most of Congress missed his testimony as it is clear that he is simply being used by Bush to try to justify continued American presence in Iraq and control of Iraqi oil by US oil companies.

   And why do we care what Danielle Pletka has to say about anything? If she doesn't not respect the opinion of Iraqis concerning their own country, then she obviously has no regard for the democratic process and is just like a lot of neocons who think they can dictate their views to the rest of the world.

   Posted by Metteyya at 07/24/2008 @ 1:46pm

3. >>>Only a fool would place any credence on Malicky's support for the Obana plan. He knows it's all hype.

   Posted by frankgrits at 07/24/2008 @ 1:50pm <<<

   It certainly is better than John McSame's 100-years-in-Iraq plan thank bankrupts the US economy and continues to attract hostility toward America from the Muslim world.

   If McCain cannot offer anything different than the Bush occupation of Iraq, then he REALLY IS a third-term Bush presidency!

   Posted by Metteyya at 07/24/2008 @ 1:59pm

4. It probably should not surprise anyone to learn that figures in the Iraqi "government" right now have ties to militant groups and will try to organize death-squad activity against political rivals. FWIW, Allawi's "engagement" with the former Ba'athist elements etc. constitutes the potential for a coup. All those guys over there right now play real hardball with each other, they're ugly people living in an ugly world that we helped create first with our creation of the ugly Saddam Hussein and then with our ugly invasion and occupation.

   As above, so below. If you don't want to want witness the worst of man, then don't give into the worst of man and precipitate a disaster that produces the worst of man in spades. The history of US "interventionism" in the Middle East is a fine example of how sewing the sees of hatred and destruction can produce a bountiful harvest.

   Posted by Zero at 07/24/2008 @ 2:16pm

5. Hmm. I guess that whole greeting us with open arms and flowers thing still isn't true. A lot of people seem to want us to leave. Oh well. LETS TURN THIS INTO A MILITARY OCCUPATION!!! That way we can fight a real war, where we are fighting the entire country not just "insurgents"

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/24/2008 @ 2:47pm

6. Posted by frankgrits at 07/24/2008 @ 1:50pm

   Geez...of course. FRANK (and McCain) know what the Iraqi people want more than their so-called "Prime Minister"!

   Posted by Maskdelta at 07/24/2008 @ 3:37pm

7. The only thing that matters, said Pletka, a hardcore neocon, is what America wants, Iraqi public opinion be damned. She ridiculed Iraqis, suggesting that most Iraqis believe that there were no Jews in the World Trade Center on 9/11. "If we polled Iraqis about the number of Jews in the World Trade Center, their answer is not likely to reflect reality," she huffed. So why take Iraqis seriously when they say that they want US forces to withdraw? She added:

   What kind of horseshit is this!? First of all, what difference does it make if there were Jewish people killed in the 9/11 attacks or not? What about the people who weren't Jewish? Don't they count!!

   Pletka is an idiot wrapped up in a moron to steal a line for 2.5 men. Even if most Iraqi's believed that, what the hell difference does that make on what they have to say about "THEIR" country. Gee, with the same logic, if Americans voted against a neocon, who cares what they have to say, the neocon should be president.

   Posted by Wolfgang1 at 07/25/2008 @ 12:33pm