The Iraqi Prime minister Nouri Al-Maliki announced on Saturday 31/12/2011 the beginning of Iraq’s celebrations due to the departure of the American forces. This was preceded by Al-Maliki visiting America for two days on the 12/12/2011 in which he met President Obama and Vice-President Biden who is responsible for overseeing the Iraqi issue along with secretary of state Hilary Clinton so as to discuss the arranging of the Iraqi situation after the American withdrawal. On the 15/12/2011 the American secretary of defence Leon Panetta announced the implementation of the decision to halt military American operations in Iraq by holding a small celebration for this occasion at Baghdad airport in which the American flag was lowered and the Iraqi flag was raised in its place.
بِسْمِ اللّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ
Q&A: The declaration of America’s withdrawal from Iraq
Question:
The Iraqi Prime minister Nouri Al-Maliki announced on Saturday 31/12/2011 the beginning of Iraq’s celebrations due to the departure of the American forces. This was preceded by Al-Maliki visiting America for two days on the 12/12/2011 in which he met President Obama and Vice-President Biden who is responsible for overseeing the Iraqi issue along with secretary of state Hilary Clinton so as to discuss the arranging of the Iraqi situation after the American withdrawal. On the 15/12/2011 the American secretary of defence Leon Panetta announced the implementation of the decision to halt military American operations in Iraq by holding a small celebration for this occasion at Baghdad airport in which the American flag was lowered and the Iraqi flag was raised in its place.
So how should these celebrations be viewed? Has America really completely withdrawn from Iraq? Did it fail to accomplish its objectives or did she achieve what it intended in terms of influence in Iraq and its destruction in terms of being a united state with real power and strength? Finally) is the withdrawal beneficial to Obama’s re-election campaign?
Answer:
The celebrations marking the removal of the occupation are indeed a great matter because Allah سبحانه وتعالى made the influence of the disbelievers over the land of the Muslims Haraam:
وَلَنْ يَجْعَلَ اللَّهُ لِلْكَافِرِينَ عَلَى الْمُؤْمِنِينَ سَبِيلًا
“And Allah will never allow the disbelievers to have a way over the believers”
However, this is only the case if the occupation has really been removed from its roots, trunk and leaves where all of its power and influence has vanished along with its thoughts and laws in addition to its symbols and agents. If this occurred then we would make tasbeeh praising Allah سبحانه وتعالى and in this time the celebration would carry with it the taste of victory and rejoicing:
وَيَوْمَئِذٍ يَفْرَحُ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ * بِنَصْرِ اللَّهِ
“And on that day the believers will rejoice with the victory of Allah”
However, on the other hand if the occupation remains in body and form and only some cosmetic change has taken place then the celebration will not carry with it the taste of victory or the taste of rejoicing.
In order to explain the reality of this answer we will present the following matters:
1) It is known that America had decided to withdraw from Iraq before the current administration of Obama. So the previous administration under Bush which had taken the decision to invade Iraq went ahead on the 17/11/2008 to enforce a security agreement upon Iraq so that it continues to maintain its influence on a permanent basis. It also mentioned in the text of this agreement in the first part of the 24th article that American forces would withdraw from Iraq at the end of 2011. Therefore the current administration is simply implementing the decision that had been made in regards to the withdrawal. The decision to withdraw also came as an implementation of the promises Obama made in his first election campaign when he stated that he would withdraw the American forces from Iraq, and this promise had an impact on the success of his campaign. Even though he did not make the agreement himself he exploited it within his campaign and has included the implementation of this promise within his coming campaign to aid him with his re-election in the forthcoming year.
2) The one who scrutinizes the subject finds that America has not left Iraq completely but rather only from the direct military rule. It has been able to retain power and influence under different means through its staff in the American embassy and those who have remained with them. In addition there are those remaining to train the Iraqi forces, assisting them and preparing for them to take their places in four military bases within Iraq as has been reported in the news. The remaining of these forces under the name of Embassy employees or trainers happened as a result of America realising that the majority of the Iraqi people were against the immunity given to the American forces to the point where political forces within the parliament announced that it would not vote in favour of this decision. So America in collusion with Al-Maliki and his government made steps to keep hundreds of troops under the banner of being named trainers alongside thousands who they consider as employees and contractors with the American embassy; their number reaching 16,000! The French News Agency commented about this on the 13/12/2011 stating: ‘The issue of immunity has been solved by the wording of the agreement which contains the explanation that the United States embassy in Baghdad will be the largest in the world and contain 16,000 staff’.
This means that the Americans achieved what they had wanted to which was the retaining of diplomatic immunity under different headings. So they implemented their programme of withdrawing forces who were wearing military uniform except for a small number that remained and at the same time maintaining a huge number who wear civilian uniform and Al-Maliki amongst others from amongst the agents colluded with them in this as is known. This had been planned for a number of years when America first decided to build the largest embassy in the world in Baghdad which would accommodate such a huge number of workers. So this embassy can be considered as a military base of a different shape in addition to being a huge spying nest from where she can steer Iraqi affairs from behind a curtain. Indeed she will be the one who plots the conspiracies, stirs fitnah, strife and divisions between the people of Iraq as they have done from the beginning of the occupation until now. Aside from this she will maintain hundreds of troops and contractors in four bases meaning that they will be managing these four bases under the heading of being trainers and experts!
3) America occupied Iraq in order to: expand its control and influence, to strike at the interests of competing Western states, to make it a base for America in the region, to plunder its resources, to impose its systems and way of life, to destroy its power and prevent it from becoming a supporting power which could unify the Ummah and establish the rule of their Rabb Al-‘Azeez Al-Hakeem. For this reason it kept a large number of contractors and employees in the largest embassy that it possesses in the world and tied Iraq with security and strategic partnership agreements amongst other agreements in a number of areas. Joseph Biden the vice-president of America indicated this during his visit to Baghdad by saying: ‘Three years ago the two states signed an agreement concerning a framework of a strategic partnership which came as an affirmation of the desire of both nations to establish long lasting ties of co-operation and friendship and that this strategic partnership framework is a continuing agreement and it represents the foundations upon which the relations between us will be built in a manner of mutual benefit’ (Al-Jazeera 30/11/2011).
Similar to this was quoted from Obama in his joint press conference with Al-Maliki on the 12/12/2011 when he said: ‘The United States of America will remain a strong and continual partner to Baghdad after the withdrawal of the last American soldier from Iraq’.
The security agreement states the following in the 27th article of the first section: ‘Upon the arising of and foreign danger of internal danger against Iraq or the occurrence of aggression upon it or contravention of its sovereignty, political independence or unity of its lands or water or air space, or a threat to its democratic system and elected institutions, and built upon the request of the Iraqi government, the two parties would engage immediately in strategic movements, and in accordance to what they agree between them, that the United States will take appropriate measures including diplomatic and military measures or any other measure to guard against this threat’.
This is the article that makes it easy for America to interfere militarily with the collusion of any Iraqi government aligned to America so that she (Iraq) will agree with her in that the situation calls for it!
4) America destroyed Iraq and made it weak taking it back tens of years, and she killed and injured hundreds of thousands of its people, and made millions homeless. It created divisions, differences and fitnah between the people and drew up a harmful un-Islamic constitution which exposed the land to being split up as it guarantees the right of announcing independent internal provinces. America left Iraq suffering under many issues and realities so that she will remain aligned to her and this is in addition to the written agreements that have already tied Iraq to her and the agents they have produced in order to maintain this bond and to support the continual influence and control of America over Iraq. Obama remarked upon the tying of Iraq with America and the guarantee of its loyalty describing it as a partnership: ‘We are building a new partnership between our nations. And we are ending a war not with a final battle, but with a final march toward home’ and he said that it had been an: ‘extraordinary achievement’ (AFP 15/12/2011).
5) In summary America even though it has been afflicted by powerful blows from the resistance giving it a lesson that it won’t forget, it nevertheless achieved its objectives in Iraq. It announced its withdrawal from Iraq after it had put in place a regime that would proceed in its path after it. America also imposed an un-Islamic harmful constitution which divided the country and shook its stability as well as a security and strategic agreement amongst other agreements which tie the country to the Americans and make it subject to being under its mercy, as well as allowing its agents to call for American help and assistance when they feel that the corrupt rule is under threat! Then she announced her withdrawal after establishing a base resembling a large military base calling it a huge ‘Embassy’ that contains 16,000 Americans whose role is to maintain and protect American influence using any style they see fit to achieve this. It also maintained its presence in four military bases under the naming of trainers and experts and this embassy and bases form a huge den for spying! as long these American roots and what relates to them are not cut completely from the land of the Raafidain (Iraq) then the withdrawal will not be complete.
6. Despite all this America has come to know that there are men who are strong in their relationship with their Lord and who find honour only in their Deen and will not accept other than a sincere and truthful governance in Iraq and if they were to get a foothold then the tables would be turned over upon the head of America and its agents and they will flee with their backs turned and this is not a hard matter for Allah سبحانه وتعالى.
7th Safar 1433
01/01/2012
Original Arabic Source: http://www.hizb-ut-tahrir.info/arabic/index.php/HTAmeer/QAsingle/3270/