But it seems likely many of them will stay long into the future—in part because everyone knows Iran wants them gone.
Nothing is certain yet. Few Iraqi politicians want to be seen in public saying the American need to stay. Similarly, the US government doesn’t want to be seen suggesting US troops should remain. So an intricate political dance is under way. But it appears the only sizable Iraqi political group that insists the Americans leave is Muqtada as-Sadr’s party—and that is one reason so many others want the Americans to stay.
How many US troops will stay is the subject of a tense and hushed debate among US and Iraqi officials.
“Nobody wants foreign forces in his country, but sometimes the situation on the ground has the final say on such matters,” said Sunni lawmaker Yassin al-Mutlaq in an interview with the Associated Press. “Right now, nobody can decide.”
There are about 47,000 American troops in Iraq now, down from an October 2007 peak of 166,000. In the eight years since the March 20, 2003, US invasion, almost 4,500 US forces have been killed and the war has cost American taxpayers more than $750 billion.
US military officials and Western diplomats in Baghdad say the number of troops now being considered to stay ranges from a few hundred, who would work under the US Embassy, to the tens of thousands, likely clustered in bases far off the beaten path where they would be little seen by Iraqi civilians.
A senior adviser to Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki told the AP the US is quietly suggesting to Iraqi officials that up to 20,000 troops stay. American officials repeatedly have refused to discuss how many troops might remain if Iraq asks for a continued large force.
The troop quandary has become what the AP called “a political game of chicken between Baghdad and Washington.”
Both Maliki and President Barack Obama face frictions with their own supporters if they agree to keep thousands of US forces in Iraq beyond Dec. 31. Yet neither al-Maliki nor Obama wants to be blamed for losing the war if Iraq is overrun by widespread insurgent attacks or sectarian fighting after US troops leave.
Violence has dropped sharply from just a few years ago. But deadly bombings and shootings continue daily.
Baghdad political analyst Hadi Jalo told the AP that al-Qaeda and former Baathists are likely to launch “big attacks in order to shake the government and show its weakness” after American troops withdraw.
“I expect that Iraq will face a security tsunami,” Jalo said. “On the other hand, if the US forces stay after 2011, Maliki will face a problem of a different kind. Any such move will anger his traditional Shiite allies, as well as Iran and Syria. Now and later, Maliki cannot afford the wrath of these three supporters.”
Like the US Congress, Iraq’s parliament is torn over whether the troops should stay. In Baghdad, Maliki advisers say he is trying to push the decision to the legislature to give himself political cover.
Chief among Maliki’s concerns is vehement opposition by the Shiite religious hardline followers of anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, who has demanded repeatedly that the US “occupiers” leave on schedule or face retaliation.
The senior Maliki adviser said Maliki ultimately might approve continued US troops, but require the 325-seat parliament to ratify his move by a two-thirds majority. Achieving that vote margin would be all but impossible in the face of the Sadrist opposition.
“We strongly refuse any extension of the US military staying in Iraq, and I personally will work from within to prevent it from happening,” said Sadrist lawmaker Hakim al-Zamili, who sits on parliament’s national security committee. “Our problems are because of the very presence of the invaders.”
Still, the government acknowledges that it cannot protect itself from foreign threats. Last summer, Iraqi military commander Gen. Babaker Shawkat Zebari predicted the country would need allied air support — including fighter jets and spy planes — for another decade before the nation’s air force is able to defend its borders.
Maliki’s decision last month to delay the purchase of 18 US F-16 fighter jets, and spend the money on food rations for Iraq’s poor, fueled speculation he plans to ask thousands of American pilots and soldiers to stay.
Kurdish lawmaker Ashwak al-Jaf said Iraqi forces are still unprepared to protect the nation — largely because they appear to be loyal to political and sectarian allegiances instead of the entire country. The US has spent more than $22 billion since 2004 to train and equip Iraq’s security forces.
“I see the American presence as the safety valve,” she said in an interview with the AP. “Their presence is an absolute must to ensure security. We will vote for the US military to stay.”
US Ambassador to Iraq James F. Jeffrey has predicted that no more than several hundred active-duty troops and other Defense Department employees will remain in Iraq beyond this year as part of a security office run by the American Embassy in Baghdad.
Their mission would be to continue training and otherwise helping Iraqi forces with logistics, such as buying and maintaining military equipment.
But for anything beyond that, Washington insists the Iraqis must ask. Already, US forces in Iraq are packing up and preparing to leave.
Then-US Defense Secretary Robert Gates told a House panel several weeks ago the Obama Administration “is very open to a continuing presence that would be larger where we could help the Iraqis for a period of time.” But, he added: “Our presence is not popular in Iraq. I think the [Iraqi] leaders understand the need for this kind of help, but no one wants to be the first one out there supporting it. So we will continue that dialogue. But at the end of the day, the initiative has to come from the Iraqis. They have to ask for it.”
Gates’ succesor, Leon Panetta, has repeated the refrain that Iraq has to make up its mind and ask for any troops if any are to stay beyond December 31.