When sovereignty isn't sovereignty
As anyone with a half a brain has noticed, the sovereignty to be transferred on June 30 is kind of lacking:
Though the U.S.-led occupation will end on June 30 and an interim Iraqi government will be installed, more than 135,000 U.S. forces and 19,000 troops from Britain and other nations will remain.
White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Monday that the Bush administration envisions that, under the U.N. resolution, the multinational force would remain under the control of U.S. military commanders.
The resolution does not say whether the Iraqis would be able to ask U.S. and other international troops to leave the country. It states “the importance of the consent of the sovereign government of Iraq for the presence of the multinational force.”
But it only authorizes the “Transitional Government of Iraq” to review the mandate of the multinational force. That government won’t be chosen until after elections planned to take place by Jan. 31.
So, they can make sovereign decisions, except for the most important one, foreign troops on your soil. Oh, but they’ll figure it out later:
But the relationship between the multinational force and the new Iraqi government will be spelled out in an exchange of letters with the interim government, once it is created, senior British officials said.
Eh, we’ll get to it. But, I mean, you know how the mail is, it takes SO long to get stuff, it may be a while.
But really, are they actually going to ask us to leave? No. So what’s the problem?
And don’t forget, the Iraq war was crippling blow to terrorism.