january 2010 is shaping up to be the month of postponed elections for the middle east.
if the iraq vote is delayed, it could cause some hard decisions for the u.s. under the status of forces agreement signed last fall, the u.s. is obligated to remove all combat troops from the country by august 31, 2010 and to remove all foreign troops from the country by the end of 2011. there are a lot of troops and equipment in the country so the easiest way to meet the deadline would be to start the withdrawal right away.
but instead the u.s. has only reduced its presence in the country back to the pre-surge levels through attrition. the plan is to maintain those levels to provide security through the january 2010 parliamentary election and then to rapidly reduce the number of u.s. forces to 50,000 (all of whom would be classified as "non-combat troops") to meet the august 31, 2010 deadline. it's a tight schedule, but apparently the military thinks it can do it. that would give the u.s. another 16 months to withdraw the remaining 50,000 and to remove all of the american military equipment.
a delay in the parliamentary election mucks up that plan. the obama administration would have to decide whether it wants to begin the rapid withdrawal on schedule at the end of january 2010 (even that means fewer troops available whenever the parliamentary elections ever happen), or delay the beginning of the pullout until the iraqi election happens (even though that might make the u.s. miss the august 31, 2010 and december 31, 2011 pullout deadlines).
to make things more complicated, the status of forces agreement between the u.s. and iraq that established the pullout timetable is supposed to be put to a ratification vote at the same time as the january 2010 parliamentary elections. unless the agreement gets ratified, the iraqi government will give notice to the u.s. that all foreign forces have to be out of the country in one year, a much tighter timetable than the one in the SOFA. it's not clear to me whether the delay in parliamentary election would also delay the ratification vote (the news articles i have read imply that it would, as they seem to assume that without a parliamentary vote, there will be no election in january), or whether the failure to ratify would trigger the one year notice accelerated withdrawal provision.
not a lot of attention has been focused on iraq since obama took office. the u.s. has committed to a binding withdrawal timetable and the president has put the focus on afghanistan, where his priorities lie. but the end of american involvement in iraq is only a done deal if everything goes as planned. tariq al-hashemi veto of the election law may have tossed that original plan out the window. it's not clear to me how the obama administration will handle it.
