The Free Arab Voice

[Sùrsum corda! (POL)]

I will write what today’s article on Al-Qabas to mention that the document uses ambiguous phrases and general terms, which can be interpreted in many ways. There is also no mention of the removal of Iraq from the UN’s article seven.

It seems also that there are some kind of differences between the Arabic version and the English version but since we don’t have the English version then I can’t say about this.

First it starts with Article I which explains the purpose of this document and it given as following:

Reorganize the temporary presence, the activities and the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq.

Article II explains the terms used in this agreement.

The first term is “Installations and areas agreed upon” which are in my opinion is not very good explained

Installations and areas agreed upon are the installations and areas owned by the Iraqi state and used by the American forces.

These Installations and areas will be identified in alist presented by the Americans forces and reviewed by a joint commission.

Note from the Iraqi side:

The Iraqi side asked the American side to attach the list of these installations and areas to the agreement.

Article IIII Tasks

Cooperation to defeat Al-Qaeda in Iraq and other outlaw groups. Strange thing about this is that in point I the same previous text repeated adding “remnants of the former regime”

Point II says something about a joint body called JMOCC to coordinates the military operations

Point V is very short and can interpreted in many ways, it says the following:

There is nothing in the agreement limits the right of the both sides from self-defense.

Very shadowy, since every military operation can be played as “self defense”.

Article XII is one the article still in dispute between the two sides:

U.S. has the legal authority for military forces and civilian elements inside and outside the installations and areas only notice the use of only.

Iraqi side noted:

U.S. has the legal authority for military forces and civilian elements inside installations and areas used by these forces and outside while they are in combat operations.

American side noted:

As temporary prosecutions, until the end of the withdrawal and the combat operations.

After that the U.S. becomes the legal authority for military forces and civilian elements inside and outside the installations and areas

There is also point VI in the same article

Members of the American forces and civilian elements arrested or detained by the Iraqi authority will be delivered directly to the U.S. authorities.

Iraqi side noted:

Members of the forces and civilian elements arrested or detained by the Iraqi authority will be prepared to be delivered to the U.S. authorities within 24 hours.

The Iraqi side suggested to treat "foreign" detainees the same as article 22 offered by the U.S. treatment of the Iraqi detainees which is: to be delivered to the Iraqi authorities within 24 hours

Article XXVI starts with a dispute on the name of this article

Noted by the Iraqi side:

The Iraqi side suggested to title this article: “Transition the authority to the Iraqi security and the withdrawal of the U.S. forces from Iraq”.

The funny thing is the American side mark.

The American side suggested to name this article: “the withdrawal of the U.S. forces from Iraq”.

One point is very clear in this article, which is there a timetable for the withdrawal of the American forces from Iraqi cities, villages and streets to their military basses and this is scheduled 30 Aug 2009.

As for the total withdrawal there is: (…..)

http://www.roadstoiraq.com/2008/08/28/sofa-preview/

[Sùrsum corda! (POL)]

Il SOFA in Iraq sembra funzionare con i sunniti. Gli sciiti invece filo iraniani rimangono più vicini al Mahdi che a Baghdad.