U.S. Allies in Iraq Want Out, Adding to Bush Pressure (Update2)

By Celestine Bohlen

Dec. 22 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S.-led ``coalition of the willing'' in Iraq will be less willing in 2006.

The U.K., Italy and South Korea are making plans to reduce or even withdraw their troops by the end of next year, following other nations, such as Ukraine and Bulgaria, that have already started to depart. ``It is not a matter of if, but how,'' said Roberto Minotti, senior research fellow at the Aspen Institute in Rome.

The reduction of foreign troop levels will make little difference on the ground in Iraq, where U.S. troops now number 160,000, out of a total force of 184,000. The real impact may be political, undercutting President George W. Bush's claims to be leading an international operation and adding to pressure on him to set a firm plan for a reduction in U.S. forces.

``It makes even more of a mockery of what the administration likes to call a coalition,'' said retired U.S. Army Major General William Nash, now a fellow at the New York-based Council on Foreign Relations. ``My guess is that it would bring the international legitimacy of the operation into question.''

When U.S.-led forces invaded Iraq in March 2003, the coalition included 35 nations, whose numbers are now down to 28. By the end of this month, Ukraine and Bulgaria will have withdrawn combined troops of 1,250. ``Our troops will be back home before the New Year,'' Ukraine's Chief of General Staff Serhiy Kyrychenko said at a Dec. 12 press conference in Kiev.

Poland and Italy

The remaining members of the coalition include Britain, the largest contributor after the U.S. with 8,000 troops; South Korea, with 3,200; Italy, at 2,900; and Poland, with 1,400. Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi said on Nov. 23 that his nation's forces will ``probably'' come home next year.

Both politics and money concerns are pushing these countries to examine their participation in the U.S.-led operation. The Polish force costs $600 million a year, or 10 percent of the Polish military budget, according to Marek Purowski, spokesman at the Polish embassy in Washington. He said $32 million in assistance has been provided by the U.S., with an additional $100 million promised by Bush during a visit to Poland this year.

Polish Prime Minister Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz said in a radio interview on Dec. 20 that he will make a decision in the next two weeks on when to withdraw Poland's remaining troops.

New Contingent?

While Poland's former government said it would recall all troops by the end of this year, the new cabinet that took power in early November may decide to send a new contingent to Iraq when the troops currently stationed there return at the end of the year, the newspaper Rzeczpospolita reported today. The new contingent would contain no more than 900 soldiers who would no longer take part in patrols and whose main task would be to train Iraqi forces, the newspaper said.

Seventy-five percent of Poles oppose their country's involvement in Iraq, according to a June survey for the Warsaw- based Center for Public Research. Poland has already sent home 1,000 troops since 2003.

William Odom, a retired Army lieutenant general who served as director of the National Security Agency under President Ronald Reagan and is now a senior fellow with the Hudson Institute in Washington, said the U.S. may even be relieved by the departure of some of the allies.

`Pretty Unilateral'

``It means we are paying these people less money and lowering the administrative coordinating costs in Iraq,'' he said. ``There is the public-image issue, but that is no longer significant. We look pretty unilateral anyway.''

Bush vowed in a speech Dec. 19 to ignore critics who say the U.S. should begin withdrawing troops. ``To retreat before victory would be an act of recklessness and dishonor, and I will not allow it,'' Bush said. ``We would abandon our Iraqi friends and signal to the world that America cannot be trusted to keep its word.''

In Italy, where the Iraqi operation is budgeted at 600 million euros a year, or $720 million, talk of withdrawal is driven by a parliamentary election scheduled for April 9.

Even within Berlusconi's coalition, which backed the U.S.- led war, the Iraq operation is increasingly unpopular. ``Most people see it as becoming a long-term mission, which it was not supposed to be,'' Minotti said.

Berlusconi Pledge

The Berlusconi government insists that any Italian withdrawal be done in concert with the U.S. The opposition, led by Romano Prodi, says it's ready to leave without the Americans. Neither side has said it would opt for immediate withdrawal.

Britain, which last year spent 910 million pounds ($1.6 billion) on its Iraqi operations, will certainly coordinate any withdrawal with the U.S., said Jeremy Greenstock, the U.K.'s former envoy to Iraq, who was ambassador to the United Nations in the run-up to the invasion, who's now director of the Ditchley Foundation, which promotes U.K.-U.S. relations.

``The important thing is that no one has a timetable,'' said Greenstock in a telephone interview on Dec. 14. ``London, Washington and Baghdad will judge together by how things progress.''

U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair, visiting British troops in the southern Iraqi city of Basra today, refused to set ``an arbitrary timetable'' for withdrawal.

```The whole purpose is to build up the Iraqi capability to do the armed forces' work, and police, so that we can draw down our own troops,'' he told reporters.

`Not Forever'

In a Nov. 17 interview on British ITV television, Iraqi President Jalal Talabani said U.K. troops could leave in 2006.

``We don't want British forces forever in Iraq,'' he said. ``Within one year, I think by the end of 2006, Iraqi troops will be ready to replace British forces in the south.'' The British are in charge of security in four southeastern Iraqi provinces.

``Anything with a date in it is wrong,'' said Sagar Sharma, a British Defense Ministry spokesman. ``Our aspiration is to hand over security in Iraq, and we are hoping that some of that could start next year. We will begin not according to a timetable, but where right conditions are met.''

Though the war in Iraq has been politically unpopular in the U.K., pressure to withdraw has been less than in the U.S., said Dana Allin, a research fellow at the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies.

``On many levels, the British presence is more sustainable,'' Allin said. ``It is safer in the Shiite south, and casualties are low.''

So far, 98 British troops have been killed in Iraq, compared with 2,157 American deaths, according to the Iraq Coalition Casualty Count Web site. Casualties among other coalition troops numbered 103 as of Dec. 20.

Withdrawal `Possible'

South Korea will bring one-third of its troops home in 2006, Defense Minister Yoon Kwang-Ung said on Nov. 17. ``We judge it is possible to withdraw some of the troops considering the scale of the projects scheduled for next year, the status of stabilization in Iraq and the trend in coalition forces,'' he said, according to Yonhap news agency.

In the U.S., public approval of Bush's handling of the 32- month conflict has dwindled -- at 39 percent in a USA Today/CNN/Gallup Organization poll released Dec. 13, down from this year's high of 50 percent in February. An ABC News/Washington Post poll taken Dec. 15-18, following Iraqi parliamentary elections, showed 46 percent approving of his handling of Iraq, a 10-point increase from November.

``As I read it, the president is determined not to be forced into reductions that go against the trend of events,'' Greenstock said. ``It would be rash to predict. I am sure there will be reductions, but the number will probably stay quite high.''

To contact the reporter on this story: Celestine Bohlen in Paris at cbohlen1@bloomberg.net .

Last Updated: December 22, 2005 09:22 EST

		Email this article Printer friendly format