IRAQIS REACT TO PRESIDENT OBAMA'S SPEECH: MOST

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 BAGHDAD 000537

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/02/2014
TAGS: IZ PGOV PREL
SUBJECT: IRAQIS REACT TO PRESIDENT OBAMA'S SPEECH: MOST
WELCOME TROOP WITHDRAWAL MESSAGE, SOME EXPRESS CONCERNS
OVER UNRESOLVED POLITICAL ISSUES

Classified By: Deputy Polcouns John G. Fox, per 1.4 b/d.


1. (U) SUMMARY: Iraqi leaders and citizens largely welcomed
President Obama's February 27, 2009, speech announcing U.S.
plans to begin the drawdown of American combat units from the
country in line with the Seucurity Agreement. Most said they
favored the continuation of a strong American partnership
even as troops steadily left the country. The focus on U.S.
support for non-sectarian Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) drew
particular praise, most prominently among minority Sunnis.
Some Iraqis cautioned that outstanding political issues (for
example, Kirkuk's status, oil law, disputed territories,
etc.) -- alongside open Arab-Kurd tension -- would require
sustained U.S. attention. Overall, Iraqis seem ready,
although a bit apprehensive at the same time, for a new
chapter in Iraqi-U.S. relations to begin. END SUMMARY.

--------------
MOST IRAQIS ROUNDLY WELCOME MESSAGE
--------------


2. (U) Leaders and residents across Iraq expressed strong
support for the President's announcement that U.S. troops
would begin to drawdown in the country. Positive reactions
encompassed all regions. In Hillah, a senior Da'wa
provincial leader said the plan showed that both the GoI and
new American administration were in full agreement about the
path forward. A Sadrist Provincial Council member signaled
his agreement in the same meeting with PRT Babil
representatives.


3. (U) In Anbar, two local party officials expressed overall
support for the President's message, but with one urging that
U.S.forces should remain in Iraq "for at least another five
years" in order to train and support a non-sectarian ISF, as
well as to build up the Iraqi air force due to "regional
threats." (Note: Anbar-based Sunni Arabs have been among
the most vocal about the need for a more long-term U.S. troop
presence, given their often-stated concerns about perceived
Iranian influence and suspicions toward a Shia-dominated
government. The mayor of Ramadi, for example, has regularly
told the PRT in Anbar that U.S. forces should "not leave Iraq
any time soon." Interestingly and notably, PM Maliki
recently described Anbar to the charge and General Odierno as
a "hot spot" -- implying the western province should be among
the last places from which U.S. troops depart. End note.)


4. (U) In Salah ad Din, local contacts (including the PC
chairman) have regularly commented that it is key to have a
target date for the withdrawal of U.S. forces, which would
help undercut accusations that cooperation with the U.S.
amounted to "treasonous" activity.


5. (U) In Wasit, Al Kut residents expressed general support
for the President's announcement. Some residents, however,
inquired whether U.S. troops would remain in Iraq should
problems require American military intervention. Sadrists
have openly questioned the need to keep up to 50,000 troops
in Iraq. Some have cited suspicions regarding U.S.
motivations given the high number of the planned residual
presence.

--------------
SOME FLAG UNRESOLVED POLITICAL ISUES,
ESPECIALLY IN THE NORTH
QESPECIALLY IN THE NORTH
--------------


5. (U) In northern Iraq, reactions have been
(unsurprisingly) more mixed. The PC Chairman in Kirkuk
cautioned that moving too quickly to withdraw troops would be
a "mistake" and "spoil" the work so far done by the U.S. in
Iraq. He said Iraqis perceived the U.S. to be the only
effective counter-balance to the Shia-led government; once
U.S. troops leave, civil war might erupt as Kurds sought to
protect themselves. The chairman added that the U.S.
continued to be viewed as the "ultimate authority" in Iraq
and that Kurdish leaders remained unsure about how they would
proceed without U.S. backing or support. In contrast, A9@Jw]JQQ/f a "no more
Occupation"
perception among the people, but cautioned that ISF would
continue to need U.S. support to ensure that they respected
human rights and were not tied to ethnic or religious
motivations.


8. (U) Turkomen PC members in Kirkuk said that Iraq's
political process had not yet resolved key issues regarding
the future of the oil-rich city, disputed territories and oil
revenue. He stressed there "needs to be action, not just
meetings" on these subjects. A Shia member of ISCI agreed
with the troop departure timeline, noting that Iraq had to
take on more responsibility for its own future, otherwise
Iraq's current dependency on the U.S. (like a child with
parents) would not end.

--------------
COMMENT
--------------


9. (C) Local media reports gauging reactions to the
President's speech track with what our PRTs have heard across
the country. A majority of Iraqis appear to understand that
the upcoming U.S. troop withdrawal will mark a new period in
which more will be expected of Iraqi leaders and citizens
alike in order to resolve outstanding issues. Continued
support for ISF should help lessen concerns about a return to
sectarian violence. Currently unresolved political issues --
most prominently those tied to the Kurdish region and its oil
fields -- will test, however, the extent to which Iraq's
democratically elected politicians see a common future
working together toward shared aims -- or, perhaps, something
else. U.S. troop departures should highlight that debate and
spur leaders to begin to make more tough decisions and sooner.
BUTENIS

BAGHDAD 00000537 002 OF 002




6. (U) The head of a main Arab party in Kirkuk said they
opposed the "premature" plan. Once the U.S. leaves, a
"disaster" will happen. Another party member claimed that
when she heard the President's speech, she almost collapsed
-- in a prior meeting with the PRT, the same PC member had
said that it was "better to have the U.S. in Iraq for 100
years than Iran for one year."


7. (U) A PUK member of the Kirkuk PC said that as long as
the U.S. increased its civilian efforts as its military
commitment was reduced, the timeline appeared sound and
reasonable. He added that many believed the main U.S.
objective in Iraq had been achieved (i.e., removing a
dictatorship and fostering a democratic government in its
place); with sustained, non-military aid to Iraq, the U.S.
could prevent any backsliding. A local Kurdish councilwoman
stressed the positive aspect of a "no more Occupation"
perception among the people, but cautioned that ISF would
continue to need U.S. support to ensure that they respected
human rights and were not tied to ethnic or religious
motivations.


8. (U) Turkomen PC members in Kirkuk said that Iraq's
political process had not yet resolved key issues regarding
the future of the oil-rich city, disputed territories and oil
revenue. He stressed there "needs to be action, not just
meetings" on these subjects. A Shia member of ISCI agreed
with the troop departure timeline, noting that Iraq had to
take on more responsibility for its own future, otherwise
Iraq's current dependency on the U.S. (like a child with
parents) would not end.

--------------
COMMENT
--------------


9. (C) Local media reports gauging reactions to the
President's speech track with what our PRTs have heard across
the country. A majority of Iraqis appear to understand that
the upcoming U.S. troop withdrawal will mark a new period in
which more will be expected of Iraqi leaders and citizens
alike in order to resolve outstanding issues. Continued
support for ISF should help lessen concerns about a return to
sectarian violence. Currently unresolved political issues --
most prominently those tied to the Kurdish region and its oil
fields -- will test, however, the extent to which Iraq's
democratically elected politicians see a common future
working together toward shared aims -- or, perhaps, something
else. U.S. troop departures should highlight that debate and
spur leaders to begin to make more tough decisions and sooner.
BUTENIS