Young Iraqis wary of the future

Nizar Latif, Foreign Correspondent

• Last Updated: June 14. 2008 9:51PM UAE / June 14. 2008 5:51PM GMT

BAGHDAD // As Iraqi politicians and US officials continue heated negotiations about the long-term presence of US troops in Iraq, teenagers are worried their leaders may sign away the country’s sovereignty and their hopes for an independent future.

The National spoke to dozens of school-aged Iraqis, asking their opinion on the Status of Forces Agreement – the deal that will outline the legal status of US troops in Iraq when their current United Nations mandate expires at the end of this year. Although not old enough to vote, the 14 and 15-year-olds will be adults long before any agreement is likely to expire.

Details of the future US role in Iraq have not been publicly revealed, but are thought to include US demands for at least 60 permanent bases, immunity from prosecution for US soldiers and the right to determine when Iraq has been attacked by a foreign power – something that could be crucial if the United States did want to strike Iran.

Many of the students said they did not pay any attention to the news, and did not believe their opinion mattered. A common view was that US and Iraqi authorities would simply do as they pleased.

But others were more engaged in the issue and all of those either expressed anger, worry or a sense of betrayal.

“The Americans want to impose a convention on Iraq that will keep them here for decades,” said Jumam al Shamry, a 15-year-old Shiite girl. “I don’t think we should accept such an agreement or if we are going to, it must be put to a national vote.

“This is not something that Iraqi politicians alone should decide on, this is something all the Iraqi people.”

A student at Aziziyah High School, 60km south-east of Baghdad, Jumam insisted any such agreement would not be approved if there were to be a popular vote.

“The Iraqi people will reject anything that gives America legal ownership of our country and if the government signs anything that does that, we will all consider it to be a government of occupation.”

In Baghdad, Mohammed Mabrook, a student of al Shaab High School, said he was angry that negotiations were not being held in the open.

“We deserve to have a full and accurate idea about what is being talked about,” Mohammed, 14, said. “This is too important to be discussed behind closed doors. We should be told the full nature of any agreements but at the moment none of us really know anything.”

Mohammed, an aspiring journalist, said he suspected the plan was to ensure any future Iraqi government remained dependent on the United States, in effect surrendering the country’s sovereignty.

“The one positive thing is that many Iraqi political blocs and groups are coming out and standing up against this agreement,” he said. “That perhaps means we have a chance to not just be permanently under the control of the Americans.”

US troops are currently in Iraq under the legal umbrella of a one-year UN mandate that gives them various powers to conduct military operations and detain suspects. That mandate is due to expire at the end of 2008, when in theory it will not be renewed. With the likely removal of this UN cover – some Iraqis have said it may have to be extended – Washington and Baghdad have been in bilateral talks aimed at securing an agreement by July. Initially the United States is believed to have insisted all foreign contractors be granted immunity from prosecution, and the right to carry out military operations without prior approval from the Iraqi government. Those clauses have, according to an Iraqi official, been dropped. But a key sticking point remains over the number of US bases, prompting some Iraqis in the ruling parliamentary coalition to say they may even ask the Uited States to leave entirely.

Nouri al Maliki, the prime minister, said the talks, which have been highly controversial, are stalled. Yaman Mohammad, a 15-year-old Sunni, said any deal between the Iraqi and US governments was bound to be unfair. “This is a negotiation of the weak and the strong. The Americans already control things and they will make sure they continue to do so.

“The Americans are here as occupiers and I am certain they want to remain here as occupiers. No independent Iraqi government can accept that, and no real Iraqi government would agree that American soldiers can arrest Iraqis.”

Yaman, who studies at Hurriya High School in Baghdad’s Palestine Street, said he was against any deal that kept US troops on the ground in Iraq

“All the time these things happen, Iraq is not a real state. If an agreement is signed, it will just be an Iraqi seal on the occupation. We will not recognise it as legal.”

Further south, in the Karrada district of the Iraqi capital, Ammar Chamoun, a 15-year-old Christian, said any agreement should include a timetable for withdrawal of US troops.

“I can see that my sons and my grandsons will still be living under American rule unless we take the right choice now,” he said. “The Americans say they have given us liberty but now want to keep their soldiers here. The time has come for Iraq to unite, whatever sect we are from, and say that if the Americans are to be here, they must be here on our terms.

“That means no immunity for their troops, and it means no long-term occupation. We will not be like Japan which still has US bases on its soil 60 years after the Second World War.”

nlatif@thenational.ae