As several articles point out today, the final tentative draft of the SOFA is being submitted to the Iraqi Parliament and to key members of Congress…

Bush Administration Briefs Members on Draft U.S.-Iraq Agreement

The Bush administration launched a lobbying campaign Thursday to convince Congress of the merits of a draft agreement governing the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq in the years ahead.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid , D-Nev., was expecting a call from national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley to discuss the proposed pact. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates earlier reached out to senior members by phone. They included the Democratic chairmen of the Armed Services committees, Rep. Ike Skelton of Missouri and Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, as well as Rep. Duncan Hunter of California, the ranking Republican on the House panel.

“From the initial details we received, the agreement appears to provide enough flexibility to allow the U.S. to continue operations against al-Qaeda and stand up the Iraqi security forces,” Hunter said. “We look forward to receiving additional details from the Department of Defense.”

The pact would provide the legal underpinnings for the U.S.-led coalition’s further military engagement in Iraq after Dec. 31, 2008, when the U.N. resolution authorizing its presence expires.[...]

Although Congress is not bound by law to ratify the pact, the Iraqi parliament is. And the prospects the pact will be approved in Baghdad are far from certain. To address that risk, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has begun to press the case for the agreement with Iraqi lawmakers.

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said Rice had spoken to Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and Vice President Adil Abdul-Mahdi, a Shiite and a top member of the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, a Shiite political party whose support for the agreement is pivotal and far from certain.

“The Iraqis are considering the text; we are talking to the Iraqis,” McCormack said.

And…

US Defense Secretary Robert Gates is satisfied with a draft agreement with Baghdad on the legal status of US forces in Iraq and has begun consultations with Congress, his spokesman said Thursday.

Gates believes the draft agreement "adequately" protects US troops in all facets of their operations from combat to legal protections, said Geoff Morrell, the Pentagon press secretary.

"We would never advocate for a document for a … status of forces agreement that did not adequately protect our forces," Morrell said.[...]

Morrell said the agreement reached by US and Iraqi negotiators would not be final until it had been approved by leaders in both countries, but it was close enough that Gates had decided to consult key members of Congress.

On Thursday, the secretary began making calls to the leaders of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees to discuss key points of agreement contained in the draft, the spokesman said.

Let’s reflect back on the long and twisty road the SOFA process has taken… It all started with the joint Declaration of Principles signed by Shrub and Maliki back in November 2007…

Taking into account the principles discussed above, bilateral negotiations between the Republic of Iraq and the United States shall begin as soon as possible, with the aim to achieve, before July 31, 2008, agreements between the two governments with respect to the political, cultural, economic, and security spheres.

So much for meeting the 31 Jul.08 deadline, eh? Anyways, in starting the journey, Shrub laid out some lofty goals he had expected to foist upon Maliki and the Iraqis… U.S. Asking Iraq for Wide Rights on War…

With its international mandate in Iraq set to expire in 11 months, the Bush administration will insist that the government in Baghdad give the United States broad authority to conduct combat operations and guarantee civilian contractors specific legal protections from Iraqi law, according to administration and military officials.

This emerging American negotiating position faces a potential buzz saw of opposition from Iraq, with its fragmented Parliament, weak central government and deep sensitivities about being seen as a dependent state, according to these officials.

Rather prophetic, no? As Leila Fadel and others had enumerated the U.S. SOFA demands had included amongst others: 1) 58 U.S. bases on Iraqi soil from which U.S. forces can launch operations in and out of Iraq without the consent of Iraq’s government, 2) Control of Iraqi air space up to 30,000 feet,and, 3) Full legal immunity for U.S. troops and private security contractors.

The first condition has taken the most contorted path of all, it has evolved from 58 ‘permanent’ bases with an ‘aspirational time horizon’ for our withdrawal, to a general time horizon…

The White House offered no specifics about how far off any “time horizon” would be, with officials saying details remained to be negotiated. Any dates cited in an agreement would be cast as goals for handing responsibility to Iraqis, and not specifically for reducing American troops, said a White House spokesman, Gordon D. Johndroe.

But the White House statement said that the two leaders “agreed that improving conditions should allow for the agreements now under negotiation to include a general time horizon for meeting aspirational goals such as the resumption of Iraqi security control in their cities and provinces and the further reduction of U.S. combat forces from Iraq.”

It then slithered along into a 2015 deadline…

The United States asked Iraq for permission to maintain a troop presence there to 2015, but U.S. and Iraqi negotiators agreed to limit their authorization to 2011, Iraqi President Jalal Talabani said.

"It was a U.S. proposal for the date which is 2015, and an Iraqi one which is 2010, then we agreed to make it 2011. Iraq has the right, if necessary, to extend the presence of these troops," Talabani said in an interview with al-Hurra television, a transcript of which was posted on his party’s website on Wednesday.

Ironically, Maliki Suggests Bush Pushed To Extend U.S. Presence In Iraq To Help McCain…

Tsk, tsk… Using our troops for political purposes, eh, Shrub?

Which brings us to where it stands today… Full Withdrawal From Iraq By 31 Dec 2011!

Now, the legal immunity for the troops and private contractors followed a much straighter trajectory… Shrub’s sheer obstinacy and Maliki’s vow to stand firm ensured that…

He also said no foreigners would be given full legal immunity. The US has been trying to include immunity from prosecution in the Iraqi courts for its soldiers as part of the deal.

“We will not accept to put the lives of our sons on the line by guaranteeing absolute immunity for anybody, whether Iraqis or foreigners,” Mr Maliki said. “The sanctity of Iraqi blood should be respected.”

Ironically, as I noted here, Maliki has forced Shrub to concede fully on the immunity issue, otherwise, with no security deal in place and a balky Russia potentially fouling up an extension to the UN mandate…

"If that happens, according to the international law, Iraqi law and American law, the US forces will be confined to their bases and have to withdraw from Iraq."

Game over…!