Arab Nations Nix Sending Troops to Iraq
Mon May 17, 2:40 PM ET Add World - AP to My Yahoo!
By DONNA ABU-NASR, Associated Press Writer
SOUTHERN SHUNEH, Jordan - Sending Arab and Muslim peacekeepers to Iraq (news - web sites) is one possible strategy to reduce violence there, but the head of the Arab League said Monday that's not possible while Americans are in charge.
And Jordan's King Abdullah II warned that neighboring nations would not be good peacekeepers for Iraq because they would be too tempted to meddle.
Others in the region either ruled out the proposal — at least for now — or said questions like who would pay for and who would oversee such a force should be answered before it can be seriously considered.
Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Maher, whose country does not border Iraq, said Egypt will not deploy its military there and hasn't "heard that any Arab country has volunteered" to do so.
With mounting U.S. casualties and the looming deadlines of U.S. presidential elections in November and the June 30 transfer of sovereignty to Iraq, questions are increasingly being raised over how America will get out of Iraq. One scenario could involve the Arab League taking over the Sunni Triangle area, protecting the Sunnis from the Shiites, while U.S. troops fade into the background.
It's not clear whether the Americans would hand over to such a force. The Arab League's chief, Amr Moussa, dismissed that idea, telling The Associated Press it's "stupid" to call on Arabs to separate Arabs and that Arab troops will never go to Iraq to "cover for the occupation."
Moussa said it was out of the question for League nations to commit peacekeepers to Iraq while the country is under occupation, but the issue might be reconsidered after the planned June 30 restoration of sovereignty to Iraqis.
"The current situation is a situation of occupation, so is it conceivable or logical that Arab countries or Arab armies join in occupying an Arab country?" Moussa said.
"When the time comes, after the restoration of sovereignty to Iraq, and the situation requires such a participation, it will be another ... story," he added.
Earlier this month, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari said Iraq wants other Arab nations — but not its direct neighbors — to send troops to patrol Iraq. But he said support for the idea was so sparse at an Arab foreign ministers meeting that Iraq wouldn't make a formal request through the 22-member Arab League, which has a summit of heads of state scheduled for next week in Tunisia.
"We presented it as a question: `Is there any possibility to send Arab peacekeeping forces, though not from countries neighboring Iraq?'" Zebari said. "The response was not encouraging, and the subject was not followed up."
Zebari said Iraq is still interested in the idea — adding, "we need the support" — but specifically ruled out forces from neighboring Turkey because of opposition from Iraqi Kurds.
The Arabs set a precedent for military intervention close to home a quarter of a century ago. After Syria invaded Lebanon in 1976 vowing to end civil war there, the Cairo-based Arab League agreed to send a joint Arab peacekeeping force. Syria dominated the force, which became increasingly drawn into the sectarian fighting instead of neutrally keeping the peace, and the civil war dragged on until 1990.
Asked about that, Moussa said: "Iraq is not Lebanon and Lebanon is not Iraq."
An Arab official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the deployment issue is being discussed among Arabs, but that it does not look feasible at the moment.
He said no country will commit troops without a U.N. mandate, one that would make it clear the Arab peacekeepers will not be under U.S. military command.
He said another point that needs to be settled is who pays for the deployment.
At a meeting with journalists Monday on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum (news - web sites), Abdullah said Jordan will not send peacekeeping troops to Iraq. He said the kingdom is willing to help in other ways.
Like any country bordering Iraq, "we have an agenda," he said. "It's too tempting to use the presence of your troops to have an impact on society inside Iraq."
"I've taken the decision, truly, from a moral point of view, that I don't think it's right for Jordan to send troops to Iraq. And I don't think it's right, at the same time, for anybody else (bordering Iraq). ... We have our special interests," Abdullah added.
"It is right for Arab troops to be committed, but not those that surround Iraq — it's better for us to sit this one out," he said.
He noted Jordan has sent troops elsewhere on peacekeeping missions, including Bosnia, Croatia and Afghanistan (news - web sites), has trained Iraqis in Jordan and has medical facilities inside Iraq.
"We're prepared to accept all sorts of support for Iraq, but as for the military presence, it may be questionable," he said.
The Jordanian royal family's Hashemite dynasty ruled Iraq from the end of World War I, when Britain installed King Faisal I, until 1958, when his grandson King Faisal II was killed in a coup. From time to time, speculation arises that Prince Hassan, the one-time heir to the Jordanian throne, would like to rule Iraq, and Abdullah has had to publicly quash such ideas in the past.
Among Iraq's other neighbors, Turkey and Syria have Kurdish populations they fear could take inspiration from Iraqi Kurds' elevated political status. Shiite Muslim Iran is keenly interested in the fate of Iraqi Shiites — a long-oppressed majority under Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) — and has been accused of meddling by the United States. Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, both Sunni Muslim countries, also are worried about having a restive country dominated by Iraqi Shiites on their doorsteps. |
