BAGHDAD & SANTA
FE, NM (By Tim
Arango, NYT)
February 8, 2012
— Less than two
months after
American troops
left, Obama is
preparing to slash
by as much as half
the enormous
diplomatic presence
it had planned for
Iraq, a sharp sign
of declining
American influence
in the country.
Officials in Baghdad
and Washington said
Ambassador James F.
Jeffrey and other
senior State
Department officials
were reconsidering
the size and scope
of the embassy,
where the staff has
swelled to nearly
16,000 people,
mostly contractors.
The expansive
diplomatic operation
and the $750 million
embassy building,
the largest of its
kind in the world,
were billed as
necessary to nurture
a postwar Iraq on
its shaky path to
democracy and
establish normal
relations between
two countries linked
by blood and mutual
suspicion. But the
Americans have been
frustrated by what
they see as Iraqi
obstructionism and
are now largely
confined to the
embassy because of
security concerns,
unable to interact
enough with ordinary
Iraqis to justify
the $6 billion
annual price tag.
The swift
realization among
some top officials
the diplomatic
buildup may have
been ill advised
represents a
remarkable pivot for
the State
Department, in that
officials spent more
than a year planning
the expansion and
that many of the
thousands of
additional personnel
have only recently
arrived. Michael W.
McClellan, the
embassy spokesman,
said in a statement,
“Over the last year
and continuing this
year the Department
of State and the
Embassy in Baghdad
have been
considering ways to
appropriately reduce
the size of the U.S.
mission in Iraq,
primarily by
decreasing the
number of
contractors needed
to support the
embassy’s
operations.”
Mr. McClellan said
the number of
diplomats —
currently about
2,000 — was also
“subject to
adjustment as
appropriate.”
To make the cuts, he
said the embassy was
“hiring Iraqi staff
and sourcing more
goods and services
to the local
economy.”
After the American
troops departed in
December, life
became more
difficult for the
thousands of
diplomats and
contractors left
behind. Convoys of
food that were
previously escorted
by the United States
military from Kuwait
were delayed at
border crossings as
Iraqis demanded
documentation the
Americans were
unaccustomed to
providing.
Within days, the
salad bar at the
embassy dining hall
ran low. Sometimes
there was no sugar
or Splenda for
coffee. On
chicken-wing night,
wings were rationed
at six per person.
Over the holidays,
housing units were
stocked with Meals
Ready to Eat, the
prepared food for
soldiers in the
field.
At every turn, the
Americans say, the
Iraqi government has
interfered with the
activities of the
diplomatic mission,
one they grant the
Iraqis never asked
for or agreed upon.
Prime Minister Nuri
Kamal al-Maliki’s
office — and
sometimes even the
prime minister
himself — now must
approve visas for
all Americans,
resulting in lengthy
delays. American
diplomats have had
trouble setting up
meetings with Iraqi
officials.
For their part, the
Iraqis say they are
simply enforcing
their laws and
protecting their
sovereignty in the
absence of a working
agreement with the
Americans on the
embassy.
“The main issue
between Iraqis and
the U.S. Embassy is
we have not seen,
and do not know
anything about, an
agreement between
the Iraqi government
and the U.S.,” said
Nahida al-Dayni, a
lawmaker and member
of Iraqiya, a
largely Sunni bloc
in Parliament.
Expressing a common
sentiment among
Iraqis, she added:
“The U.S. had
something on their
mind when they made
it so big. Perhaps
they want to run the
Middle East from
Iraq, and their
embassy will be a
base for them here."
Those suspicions
have been reinforced
by two murky
episodes, one
involving four armed
Americans on the
streets of Baghdad
Iraqi officials
believe were Central
Intelligence Agency
operatives and
another when an
American helicopter
was forced to make
an emergency landing
because of a
mechanical failure
on the outskirts of
the capital on the
banks of the Tigris
River.
“The plane that
broke down raised
many questions about
the role of
Americans here,”
said Ammar al-Hakim,
the leader of the
Islamic Supreme
Council of Iraq, a
leading Shiite
political party and
social organization.
“So what is the
relationship? We’re
still waiting for
more information.”
The current
configuration of the
embassy is actually
smaller than the
original plans that
were drawn up at a
time when officials
believed a residual
American military
presence would
remain in Iraq
beyond 2011. For
instance, officials
once planned for a
700-person consulate
in the northern city
of Mosul, but it was
scrapped for
budgetary reasons.
Iraq’s foreign
minister, Hoshyar
Zebari, met with Mr.
Jeffrey last week to
discuss, among other
things, the size of
the American
presence here. “The
problem is with the
contractors, with
the security
arrangements,” Mr.
Zebari said.
Mr. Jeffrey will
leave the task of
whittling down the
embassy to his
successor, as
officials said he is
expected to step
down in the coming
weeks.
“We always knew what
they were planning
to do didn’t make
sense,” said Kenneth
M. Pollack, of the
Saban Center for
Middle East Policy
at the Brookings
Institution. “It’s
increasingly
becoming clear they
are horribly
overstaffed given
what they are able
to accomplish.”
Mr. Pollack
described as
unrealistic the
State Department’s
belief it could
handle many of the
tasks previously
performed by the
military, such as
monitoring security
in northern areas
disputed by Arabs
and Kurds, where
checkpoints are
jointly manned by
Iraqi and Kurdish
security forces, and
visiting projects
overseen by the
United States Agency
of International
Development.
Americans are also
still being shot at
regularly in Iraq.
At the Kirkuk
airport, an Office
of Security
Cooperation, which
handles weapons
sales to the Iraqis
and where a number
of diplomats work,
is frequently
attacked by rockets
fired by, officials
believe, members of
Men of the Army of
Al Naqshbandi Order,
a Sunni insurgent
group.
American officials
believed Iraqi
officials would be
far more cooperative
than they have been
in smoothing the
transition from a
military operation
to a diplomatic
mission led by
American civilians.
The expansion has
exacted a toll on
Iraqi government
ministries, which
are keen to exert
their sovereignty
after nearly nine
years of war and
occupation, and
aggravated
long-running
tensions between the
two countries.
The size of the
embassy staff is
even more remarkable
when compared with
those of other
countries. Turkey,
for instance, which
is Iraq’s largest
trading partner and
wields more economic
influence here than
the United States,
employs roughly 55
people at its
embassy, and the
number of actual
diplomats is in the
single digits.
“It’s really been an
overload for us, for
the Foreign
Ministry,” Mr.
Zebari said of the
American mission.
The problems with
the supply convoys,
as well as a wide
crackdown on
security contractors
that included
detentions and the
confiscation of
documents, computers
and weapons,
prompted the embassy
to post a notice on
its Web site warning
Americans working
here “the government
of Iraq is strictly
enforcing
immigration and
customs procedures,
to include visas and
stamps for entry and
exit, vehicle
registration, and
authorizations for
weapons, convoys,
logistics and other
matters.”
The considerations
to reduce the number
of embassy
personnel, American
officials here said,
reflects a belief
that a quieter and
humbler diplomatic
presence could
actually result in
greater leverage
over Iraqi affairs,
particularly in
mediating a
political crisis
that flared just as
the troops were
leaving. Having
fewer burly, bearded
and tattooed
security men — who
are currently the
face of America to
many Iraqis and
evoke memories of
horrible abuses —
could help build
trust with Iraqis,
these officials
believe.
“Iraqis, as
individuals, have
had bad experiences
with these security
firms,” said Latif
Rashid, a senior
adviser to President
Jalal Talabani.
One State Department
program ikely to be
scrutinized as
officials consider
reducing the size of
the embassy is an
ambitious program to
train the Iraqi
police, which is
costing about $500
million this year —
far less than the
nearly $1 billion
the embassy
originally intended
to spend. The
program has
generated
considerable
skepticism within
the State Department
— one of the
officials
interviewed
predicted the
program could be
scrapped later this
year — because of
the high cost of
support staff, the
inability of police
advisers to leave
their bases because
of the volatile
security situation
and a lack of
support by the Iraqi
government.
In an interview late
last year with the
American Office of
the Special
Inspector General
for Iraq
Reconstruction, a
senior Iraqi
official at the
Interior Ministry
said the United
States should use
the money it planned
to spend on the
police program “for
something that can
benefit the people
of the United
States.” The
official, Adnan al-Asadi,
predicted the Iraqis
would receive “very
little benefit” from
the program.
Reducing the size of
the embassy might
have the added
benefit of quieting
the anti-Americanism
of those who
violently opposed
the military
occupation.
Moktada al-Sadr, the
Shiite cleric who
has steadfastly
railed against
American influence
here and whose
militia fought the
American military,
has recently told
his followers the
United States has
failed to “disarm.”
Mr. Sadr recently
posted a statement
on his Web site that
read, “I ask the
competent
authorities in Iraq
to open an embassy
in Washington,
equivalent to the
size of the U.S.
Embassy in Iraq, in
order to maintain
the prestige of
Iraq.”












