Photo

Reuters Photojournalism

Our day's top images, in-depth photo essays and offbeat slices of life. See the best of Reuters photography.  See more | Photo caption 

Photo

Weird homes

Home is where the heart is, no matter what unusual form that home may take.  Slideshow 

Photo

The drone wars

The frontlines of America's covert drone program.  Slideshow 

Sponsored Links

No resolution on U.S. troops in Iraq, Iran threat seen

Related Topics

U.S. Army soldiers provide security during a mission at the city of Kut, southeast of Baghdad September 21, 2011. re taken September 21, 2011.  REUTERS/Mohammed Ameen

U.S. Army soldiers provide security during a mission at the city of Kut, southeast of Baghdad September 21, 2011. re taken September 21, 2011.

Credit: Reuters/Mohammed Ameen

WASHINGTON | Mon Oct 17, 2011 4:39pm EDT

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Washington has not given up on trying to secure a deal to keep U.S. military trainers in Iraq beyond the end of the year, as it frets about what it calls Iranian meddling in the region, U.S. officials said on Monday.

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said American and Iraqi officials were continuing discussions that might permit U.S. soldiers to stay in Iraq beyond the December 31 deadline for ending the American military presence more than eight years after the U.S.-led invasion to oust Saddam Hussein.

As the deadline draws near for pulling out all but a few hundred of the remaining 40,000 troops, some reports have suggested the Obama administration has abandoned its effort to secure a deal that would keep troops -- possibly thousands of them -- to remain to train and advise Iraqi forces.

For months, Iraq's fractured political elite has been at odds over whether American soldiers should stay as trainers. Baghdad rejects any legal immunity for U.S. soldiers, and Washington says that means no deal.

"There is no drop-dead date at this point," Panetta told reporters at the Pentagon. "We're continuing to negotiate."

Panetta's spokesman, George Little, said a "broader mission remains on the table for discussion ... beyond the Office of Security Cooperation."

Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki last week said U.S. troops could stay on as part of the small NATO mission or as part of an already existing U.S. embassy military training program -- the Office of Security Cooperation -- which would give American troops legal protections.

The country's political leadership gave Maliki the green light to negotiate, but without immunity -- a sensitive matter that would have required tricky horse-trading within his fragile cross-sectarian government and could possibly lead to defeat in parliament.

American officials however are unlikely to authorize their soldiers to stay without at least partial immunity.

Little said the U.S. desire to keep the trainers in Iraq was based in part on a threat seen emanating from neighboring Iran.

"Regardless of the question of troop presence, we are going to be working closely with the government of Iraq because we remain very concerned that Iran is meddling, not just in the affairs of Iraq but of other countries in the region. And that's unacceptable," Little said.

Washington and Tehran have long been at odds over Iran's nuclear program, the alleged role of Iranian militants in Iraq, and other issues.

But tensions increased last week when U.S. officials accused Iran's Quds Force, the covert arm of its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, of plotting to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in Washington. Tehran dismissed the charges.

(Reporting by Missy Ryan; editing by Warren Strobel and Mohammad Zargham)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (3)
fromthecenter wrote:
Enough already, what are we going to do, stay there for another 40 years and wait for al-sadr to die? Let’s get out now and let the arab spring take the people where they want to go. We have spent enough in blood and treasure in the ME. It’s time to take care of our own backyard.

Oct 17, 2011 5:06pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
green76joe wrote:
Revelation 18 foretells that Babylon, today’s Iraq, will be this world headquarters for the world dictator, the Antichrist, who will control the global economic system to be implemented. A global economic crisis will be the precursor to this scenario (Revelation 13:16-17). Isaiah 13 – 14, Jeremiah 50 – 51, along with Revelation 16 reveals the total destruction of Babylon, modern-day Iraq, at the end of the 7 year judgment just before Jesus Christ returns to Earth.

Oct 18, 2011 1:35pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
mmcdonald2k wrote:
That’s funny…we are in a WAR with Iraq? I don’t remember a declaration of war…probably will be the same ‘ol with Iran…Connect the dots people.

Oct 18, 2011 1:36pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.