Time to go home, al-Maliki tells Britain..

Job Well done.. Time to go home..

The Times..

British combat forces are no longer needed to maintain security in southern Iraq and should leave the country, Nouri al-Maliki, the Iraqi Prime Minister, has told The Times.

In an exclusive interview in Baghdad, Mr al-Maliki also criticised a secret deal made last year by Britain with the al-Mahdi Army, Iraq’s largest Shia militia. He said that Basra had been left at the mercy of militiamen who “cut the throats of women and children” after the British withdrawal from the city.

The Iraqi leader emphasised, however, that the “page had been turned” and he looked forward to a friendly, productive relationship with London. “The Iraqi arena is open for British companies and British friendship, for economic exchange and positive cooperation in science and education.”

Of Britain’s presence in southern Iraq, Mr al-Maliki said: “We thank them for the role they have played, but I think that their stay is not necessary for maintaining security and control. There might be a need for their experience in training and some technological issues, but as a fighting force, I don’t think that is necessary.”

But even the status of British non-combat personnel is in doubt because negotiations on their presence beyond this year have yet to begin, Mr al-Maliki said.

A status of forces agreement (Sofa) between Baghdad and London is needed to authorise the presence of any British forces in the country beyond December 31, when a UN Security Council mandate expires. Mr al-Maliki said that he did not know why negotiations had not begun, speculating that the world financial turmoil had distracted the British. “We had decided to start them,” he said.

Britain wants to base its agreement on a similar deal being hammered out between Baghdad and Washington. But divisions on certain issues, in particular the immunity of US troops from Iraqi prosecution, have delayed the signing of that accord.

Mr al-Maliki hopes that the pact with the US will be approved by the end of the year. Failure to do so would force him to ask the UN to extend its mandate for all foreign troops to stay in Iraq. However, if a US-Iraq deal is clinched in time, Britain could be caught out.

“To avoid reaching the critical deadline, I wish for the negotiations between the two sides to start quickly to determine what elements of the force should remain and their specialities,” Mr al-Maliki said. With no such agreement and no new UN mandate, British forces would “lose their legal cover and have to leave Iraq”.

Christopher Prentice, the British Ambassador, said: “It will be good to move out of the artificial relationship in which military aspects had prominence and into a more natural partnership. We fully intend to develop a broad-based relationship with the whole of Iraq. I hope that we will see that happen in the course of next year.”

Mr al-Maliki’s harshest words were for the actions last year of British troops in Basra, which came under Britain’s responsibility after the 2003 invasion. “They stayed away from the confrontation, which gave the gangs and militias the chance to control the city,” he said, referring to a decision by British Forces to leave a palace in Basra for their airport base.

“The situation deteriorated so badly that corrupted youths were carrying swords and cutting the throats of women and children. The citizens of Basra called out for our help . . . and we moved to regain the city.”

Asked whether he thought the British move had been premature, he said: “Very.”