Washington disregards Baghdad's decisions. Its forces continue to stay and the dispersion of positions supports them
Information/private.
The Pentagon expressed a position through which it responded to the Iraqi government, which was determined to schedule the removal of their forces during the current year, so Washington did not pay attention to Baghdad's demands, and hit the desires of political and popular forces "in disregard."
The refusal of the Washington administration to withdraw its forces from Iraq is not new, as it has always maintained that its exit in 2011 was a big mistake, which it was reconciled by introducing ISIS gangs to return from the window again, under the pretext that it was able to return again to Mesopotamia.
The Pentagon confirmed on Monday that it does not currently plan to withdraw its forces of about 2,500 troops from Iraq, under the pretext of fighting ISIS gangs.
The leader of the Fatah Alliance, Aide Sahib, outlined the reasons for the continued US presence in Iraq, while stressing the importance of Washington's commitment to agreements with the Iraqi state.
Sahib said, in an interview with the Information Agency, that "the US presence in Iraq is due, among other things, to Washington's fear for its interests in the region, and therefore it will not abide by any pledge with the Iraqi government or any other political party related to the withdrawal of its forces from Iraq."
He adds, "The other thing revolves around the Iraqi house, where there are three houses inside the Iraqi house, which leads to the absence of unity of discourse, which Washington invests very heavily by pushing the components towards each other, and through this policy can establish its presence in the country."
The leader of the Amiri alliance pointed out that "there are very many international files, where we need a global negotiating team capable of going towards global institutions to embarrass Washington and draw its policy inside Iraq, as is the case in Korea, Japan and Germany "
Sahib stressed "the importance of America's commitment to agreements and commitments with the Iraqi state, especially the previous ones, as Washington cannot violate Iraqi autonomy and not abide by the Strategic Framework Agreement, for example."
Washington disregards Baghdad's decisions. Its forces continue to stay and the dispersion of positions supports them
Washington disregards Baghdad's decisions. Its forces continue to stay and the dispersion of positions supports them
"Official occupation"
The American response to Baghdad's demands clarifies one reality, which this or that political party is trying to hide to ensure the achievement of mutual interests, away from the interests of the Iraqi people, who have suffered greatly from the American presence on their territory.
In addition, the leader of the coordination framework, Mahmoud Al-Hayani, commented on the position of the US Department of Defense, which rejected the exit of its forces from Iraq, and while describing the US presence as "occupation", he stressed the lack of need for these forces to survive.
Al-Hayani said, in an interview with the agency / Information /, that "after the recent position issued by the Pentagon, which refused to withdraw its forces from Iraq, those forces have become officially occupied," noting that "the Iraqi government insists on the formation of committees to schedule the removal of all foreign forces, while Washington rejects this idea."
He pointed out that "the security agreement concluded between Baghdad and Washington focused on pushing back the danger and fighting terrorism that threatens the country, but this file has ended after the defeat of ISIS gangs, which confirms that the country does not need these forces." "
"The forces that defended the country from the threat of ISIS were represented by the Iraqi security forces, not the Americans," he said, pointing out that "America's insistence on staying confirms the existence of premeditated goals and intentions."
The American presence in Iraq is due to a basic reason and revolves around the existing political forces, so that each of them searches for its interests, so you see that party is allied with Turkey, and this with the UAE, and the other with America , so it does not consider Iraq its home, but just a geographical location to be on, and stole the largest amount of its wealth.