US:Shias say imposition of deadlines and benchmarks suit Washington's interests, not those of Baghdad, write Ned Parkerand Saif Hameed.
Leading Shia politicians have pleaded with the US to stop imposing deadlines for reforms meant to stabilise Iraq and vented frustration that their country's future was becoming a hostage of internal US politics.
Comments by Shia and Sunni officials, made after the White House on Thursday released its assessment of the Iraq government's progress towards achieving 18 important benchmarks, also reflected the rifts fuelling Iraq's sectarian war.
A senior Shia official who is close to the prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, accused Sunnis of sabotaging efforts to meet Washington's goals, including the passage of a national oil law. In turn, the head of Iraq's main Sunni bloc called for aggressive action to implement the proposals as a way to combat Shia militias.
"As Iraqis we need more time. Maybe the American agenda has no more time. Initially the benchmarks were an Iraqi initiative. They were not an American initiative," said vice-president Adel Abdel-Mahdi, a Shia. The Iraqi government drafted the original version of the benchmarks last year, he said. "At the end we have an Iraqi process," he said, defending Mr Maliki's government, which the Bush administration report says has made mixed progress.
Washington established the benchmarks, including an oil law, and a programme to rehabilitate former Baath party members, as the price for raising its troop levels to 160,000 this spring. The failure of the Iraqi government to deliver broad progress five months into the US build-up has left the government worried that the Americans could start to cut their military and financial aid.
"This is a young democracy in Iraq. People have been oppressed for a long time. They never experienced democracy," said Mr Adel Mahdi, a favourite of Washington and a candidate for prime minister if Mr Maliki falls.
The vice-president listed several accomplishments of the often criticised government. "On the security issue, I think there are achievements," he said, listing the split in al-Anbar province between Sunni sheikhs and al-Qaeda militants, a drop in violence in Baghdad and the willingness of Iraqi security forces to confront militias around Iraq.
"On the Iraqi side you always need more time. You have those two clocks in Washington and Baghdad; you have to synchronise," Mr Abdel-Mahdi said.
Iraqi officials chafed at the conflict between Congress and President Bush over the benchmarks and at the negative characterisations of them by US lawmakers. "They want to rush the benchmarks for reasons related to US internal affairs . . . It is not like they want us to have an oil law and we don't want to," said Shia parliament member Sami al-Askri, an adviser to Mr Maliki. "The Iraqi government is not required to adhere to the timeframe the Americans set."
Iraq's planning minister, Ali Baaban, a Sunni who took part in drafting the oil law, complained that US diplomats pressurised Iraqis to make decisions quickly, which did not suit Baghdad's interests.
"They urged all participants to finish their jobs in short time, maybe for some political reasons related to Mr Bush or the American government," he said. Mr Maliki's government feared if it didn't meet Washington's goals it would lose critical support, Mr Baaban said.
He compared the rush to finish and approve the oil law with the campaign by the US embassy to get Iraqis to approve a constitution in 2005. "Later on we discovered this constitution was full of mistakes and weak points," Mr Baaban said. The Iraqi parliament is still working on revising the constitution, which in its current form authorises strong regional powers and a weak national government.
Mr Baaban said the latest draft of the oil law opened the door to provinces controlling their reserves independent of the Iraqi government. Shia officials disputed his account.
- (LA Times-Washington Post service)