Posted on 05/19/2004 7:48:32 PM PDT by mdittmar
An interim Iraqi president, prime minister and other top ministers should be selected in the next two weeks, President Bush said on Wednesday as he prepared to lay out for the American public his strategy for handing sovereignty to Iraqis.
Rushing to stem eroding support at home and abroad for his Iraq policies, Bush discussed with his Cabinet and Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi plans for what he called a "full transfer of sovereignty" to an Iraqi interim government on June 30 backed by a new U.N. Security Council resolution.
Berlusconi came to Washington to press Bush to give Iraqis more say over their security forces and military facilities after the handover. While Berlusconi suggested there was a broad consensus, senior Bush administration officials said the interim government would have limited authority in some areas and Iraqi forces, while overseen by fellow Iraqis, would still fall under a U.S.-led command.
In a public address next week, Bush plans to lay out in more detail the course for the remaining month and a half before the scheduled transfer, administration officials said.
Spreading violence and a prison abuse scandal have pushed the president's approval ratings to new lows and he is eager to show Americans he is on top of the situation with time running out before the handover deadline.
Officials said Bush would discuss his Iraq plans when he meets privately with fellow Republicans on Capitol Hill on Thursday.
Bush said he expected decisions to be made in the next two weeks on who will become the new Iraqi prime minister and president, and assume the two positions of deputy president.
Berlusconi proposed an international conference on Iraq be held before elections in January.
He also suggested the president of the interim Iraqi government visit New York in July to meet members of the U.N. Security Council and representatives from coalition member countries.
"It's a very convincing plan," said the Italian leader, a leading ally in the U.S.-led occupation of Iraq. "We agreed on all of these future possibilities."
U.N. RESOLUTION
Bush is increasingly confident of winning support for a new U.N. resolution that would recognize the interim government, even though details about its makeup and authority have yet to be settled.
White House spokesman Scott McClellan said he expected action "soon" on the resolution. Washington wants it passed before June 30. McClellan said U.N. envoy Lakhdar Brahimi will also "come back with some names for that interim government soon."
Bush is trying to counter growing concerns inside and outside his administration that the occupation is failing and that he has no strategy to improve the situation.
At G8 talks last week, the foreign ministers of major industrialized countries challenged the United States to transfer real power to Baghdad in the handover.
France, which last year blocked U.N. approval of the U.S. invasion, said Washington must give up control over local forces, while Italy said a new government must have a say over American troop tactics.
Bush administration officials have said the Iraqis would have responsibility for administering the country on June 30, the official end of the occupation.
But they want security to stay under the leadership of the United States, and regulations promulgated by the Coalition Provisional Authority may stay in place until elections in January 2005.
U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage told Congress earlier this week that Iraqi troops, although under U.S. command, would be permitted to opt out of any operation.
Bush plans to shift control of oil revenues and the Iraq Development Fund to the new Iraqi leadership, officials said.
The lefties are so predictable.
the media must do everything they can to portray the 6/30 handoff as "cut and run" - the sad part is, many freepers will buy into it.
The June 30th date has been out there for who knows how long now... The leftists scoffed and said there never would be a handover on June 30th. Now that it is apparent that the handover WILL take place on June 30th, they're claiming Bush is RUSHING to do it.
LOL. These treacherous scumbags are so transparent.
bump
Could this article be any more slanted? I honestly thought it was a joke when I started reading it. I love how the author takes it upon himself to somehow discern what the President's motives are.
When is bill clinton going to pursue his exit strategy in Kosovo? I'm glad to see the press is on his case about that.
Done right, this could help him with those who are fuzzy on what to expect in Iraq.
"the media must do everything they can to portray the 6/30 handoff as "cut and run" - the sad part is, many freepers will buy into it."
Yep. I also noticed that the columnist assumed way too much about why the President is doing this and that. The piece is agitation propaganda disguised as hard news.
I thought it was a positive article for a change. The key quote is the Italian PM thinks the plan is convincing. Compared to the usual fare this article is a good one. The President needs to start making some news instead of being hostage to how the media reports his responding to news. That's what this article is about. Making news. Getting on the offense.
I don't know how it can be made any clearer. Politicians and the President have said all along that we will be in Iraq for a long time. In June Iraq will be handed over to a temporary government until elections can be held.Seems to me the press just doesn't like the truth anymore.
True !!
These morons are once again furious that their previous dire predictions haven't come to pass. They said America would not be any safer if we went into Iraq. We went; has anyone seen anything like 9/11 occur? Of course not. However, the libs spin it now to say that Iraq is no safer now that we're there. It's 1000% safer without Saddam's henchmen running loose murdering their countrymen, but the media likes to portray the few death-cult loyalists as a nationwide uprising. You back commie-libs like this into a corner and make them realize that their arguments are 100% wrong, and they just spin it 180 degrees and keep running. Common cowardice, a trait they all share.
Ping! The talking heads are going to be insufferably noisy over the next two weeks.
Didnt we "rush" to war in 18 months ?...now in another 18 months we are "rushing" to get out. All this rushing around is sure hard on a person
I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see GW's poll numbers go up when this is done over the next few weeks.
Spreading violence and a prison abuse scandal have pushed the president's approval ratings to new lows and he is eager to show Americans he is on top of the situation...
Bush is trying to counter growing concerns inside and outside his administration that the occupation is failing and that he has no strategy to improve the situation.
It's always been bad, but it's getting worse. I think that by November, every Reuters story about this administration will be titled "Bush is Hitler".
He's needs to lay it all out for us and repeatedly so without the boilerplate comments he's been tossing around..
Imagine that. Bush said his goal was a 6-20 hand over, and now the very anti Bush Reuter's reports he is "rushing" to the handover...
Talk about bias in headlines.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.