The U.S. is seeking to keep thousands of trainers in Iraq.
Reuters is reporting that a potential compromise between the U.S. and Iraq will leave 2,000-3,000 U.S. trainers to remain in the country after the withdrawal deadline:
'To avoid angering allies and fuelling sectarian tension, Maliki, who is also acting defense and interior minister, may opt to bypass parliament and have his ministries sign agreements with Washington for 2,000-3,000 U.S. trainers, sources said."If the political blocs refused to announce their final decision on the U.S. withdrawal ... Maliki would go it alone and sign memorandums of understanding with the American side," said a senior lawmaker in Maliki's State of Law party.
"In that case, he would not need to get the political blocs or the parliament to approve," the lawmaker said.
The lawmaker, who is close to Maliki, said the 3,000 U.S. trainers would need security, technical and logistic support which could raise the contractors' total to around 5,000.
'
The irony is that in both democracies, keeping American troops in Iraq is unpopular and yet both leaders are angling to keep troops there anyway.
Robert Baer has more:
'The Obama administration fully understands that a symbolic troop presence in Iraq isn't going to turn that country into a Western democracy or measurably improve the the fighting capacity of the Iraqi army. Instead, I speculate, it looks at as troops there as a deterrent - against Iran and against the president's domestic critics. I don't find any of this comforting, but it does explain why the president would continue on with the Iraqi war blunder.'
Would 5,000 U.S. trainers and contractors really deter Iran?
(AP Photo)