By Kenneth J. Theisen
On November 26, 2003 President Bush and Iraqi prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki signed an agreement that will begin negotiations on the future U.S. military and economic role in Iraq. It is the clear intention of the Bush regime to “legalize” a long-term U.S. occupation of Iraq with the currently compliant Iraqi puppets. According to General Douglas Lute, Bush’s coordinator on Iraq and Afghanistan, “The two negotiating teams, Iraq and the United States, now have a common sheet of music with which to begin the negotiations.” Unfortunately the song on the sheet is about the death of Iraqi sovereignty.
The General was quick to emphasize that because any agreement would not be a formal treaty it would not be subjected to any Congressional oversight. He also said that the agreement will “provide a bilateral mandate … for the continued presence and mission of US troops.” The agreement will decide, “What US troops are doing, how many troops are required to do that, are bases required, which partners will join them, all these things are on the table.”
And in a gift to Bush’s corporate cronies, according to an Associated Press report, the proposal will also give the U.S. preferential investment treatment in Iraq. In other words the Iraqi economy, including its vast oil resources will be turned over to imperialist investors. An agreement is expected no later than the summer of 2008.
The formalization of a long-term U.S. presence in Iraq should come as no surprise. With few exceptions, after U.S. wars, the U.S. military does not leave the conquered lands or even nearby areas. More than 60 years after World War II, the U.S. still has thousands of military forces in Germany and Japan. The same is true in Korea, even though the Korean War ended more than 50 years ago. After the Balkan wars, the U.S. created a series of U.S. bases there in the 1990s and after. The U.S. military empire expanded in the 20th century and continues to grow in the 21st century.
There are between 700 and 1000 U.S. military bases in some 130 countries throughout the world. Some are small and some are the size of small cities, with hundred of thousands of military personnel and private contractors such as Halliburton providing profitable support to the bases. But they all have the same purpose – to ensure U.S. imperialist domination of the world.
The Bush regime now expends more money on military spending than the entire rest of the world combined. The so-called “war on terror” has been used to justify massive spending increases for military purposes, including the expansion of bases throughout the world and in particular in the area of the Middle East. Most countries in the region now are home to U.S. military bases, although not all such bases are acknowledged by the host countries for domestic political reasons. Since the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the number of U.S. bases in Iraq has varied, but there are approximately 100 there.
U.S. military bases serve multiple purposes. They are meant to support ongoing wars such as those in Iraq and Afghanistan. They also serve as staging areas for future wars such as the one against Iran. They further provide support for authoritarian governments who act as hosts, letting local opposition and other nations know that the U.S. will protect the host government as long as it does U.S. bidding. They serve as a monetary reward for backers of the Bush regime as well. Supporting these bases costs billions of dollars and lucrative contracts for base support are awarded to loyal backers of whatever party is in power at the time in Washington.
But with this latest deal, the Bush regime is short-circuiting the debate about future U.S. action in Iraq. If the regime is not stopped, it will lock into place the U.S. role in Iraq for decades to come. The “negotiations” that will take place will more likely be a series of dictation sessions with the Bush regime telling its Iraqi puppets what the U.S. intends to do in Iraq. It is not a coincidence that the Bush regime is building the largest U.S. embassy in the world in Baghdad as these negotiations begin. The embassy will be the real center of power in the newest U.S. neo-colony.
For those skeptics that think the Bush regime can not possibly be so emboldened as to establish a decades” long occupation of Iraq, take a look at the following quote from one of the past U.S. imperialist leaders. “There are people in Washington ” who never intend to withdraw military forces from Iraq and they”re looking for ten, 20, 50 years in the future”the reason that we went into Iraq was to establish a permanent military base in the gulf region, and I have never heard any of our leaders say that they would commit themselves to the Iraqi people that ten years from now there will be no military bases of the United States in Iraq. This was said by former President Jimmy Carter on February 3, 2006.
For those who think the leading Democratic presidential contenders intend to get out of Iraq any quicker than the Bush regime, I would remind people that in one of the debates this year, Clinton, Obama and Edwards would not commit to being out of Iraq by the end of their first term if they were elected as president. In fact, all three have plans that would allow tens of thousands of U.S. troops to stay in Iraq. And when they talk about redeployment, the Democrats are talking about stationing large numbers of troops at other bases in the region so that Iraq will still be a neo-colony of the U.S.
You now know what the U.S. intends to do in Iraq. What do you intend to do to impede the plans of our imperialist government?