BAGHDAD, 7 December 2006 — A call for President George W. Bush to reduce US support to Iraq if Baghdad fails to improve security drew a sour response yesterday from Iraqi politicians, who said Washington had an obligation to back their government.

“The US calls itself an occupying force in Iraq and, according to the Geneva Conventions, if you are an occupier then you are responsible for the country,” said parliamentarian Mahmud Othman, a Kurd. “They have no right to do this. This is unfair.”

Bassim Ridha, a top adviser to Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki, said the White House has to support Baghdad “all the way.”

“If they do not support the government then it will look as if they do not do what they preach,” Ridha said. “We need their support to go forward.”

A high-level, bipartisan panel urged Bush yesterday to act to halt a “grave and deteriorating” crisis in Iraq by holding talks with Iran and Syria and starting to withdraw US combat forces.

The report said Washington must step up action — including the threatened reduction of political, military and economic support — to make the Iraqi government improve security.

Haidar Al-Abadi, a member of Maliki’s Dawa party and close associate to the prime minister, said most of the panel’s recommendations, including a dialogue with Iran and Syria and increased training for Iraqi security forces, had been expected.

But the threat to reduce support was new.

“We were told there would not be pressure as such,” said Abadi. “In our dialogue with the US administration, we said that we would work together.”

“We are all in the same boat; we are not fighting only internal criminals but we are fighting international terrorism,” Abadi said. “We need support for that.”

Not all lawmakers saw the report in a negative light, with one even saying it gives an opportunity for the government to address the grievances of its fractious components.

“There are measures, I think, that if Maliki commits to, will spare it from these threats of withdrawing support,” said Zhafer Al-Ani of the Sunni Iraqi Concord Front, the largest Sunni bloc in the Iraqi Parliament.

Despite being part of the national unity government, Sunnis have accused Maliki and his fellow Shiites of running the country in an sectarian manner, and of freezing them out of the decision-making process.

Ani detailed a series of measures the government could take to address Sunni grievances, which he said would go a long way to meeting the recommendations of the study group.

“Most importantly, the Iraqi government in its decisions, needs to show a national face and not a sectarian one,” he said.

Iraq Government Welcomes Report

The Iraqi government welcomed the recommendations made to the US administration by the Iraq Study Group yesterday, saying its proposals that Iraqis should take the lead on security were similar to their own.

“The report is in line with the Iraqi government’s view that the security must be transferred to Iraqis and Iraq must assume the lead,” Deputy Prime Minister Barham Salih said.

He and other senior officials, along with Prime Minister Maliki, were briefed by video link by former US Secretary of State James Baker and other members of the Study Group just before they presented their report in Washington.

Maliki’s office issued a statement saying he was briefed on the report and saw in it three main recommendations: That the national unity government should be supported, that Iraq’s neighbors should be consulted and that US forces should switch from combat to a supportive and training role.

Salih said: “We, too, have called for international and regional consensus in supporting Iraq’s transition to stability.”

A spokesman for the main Sunni minority bloc in Parliament said he was disappointed the report contained no suggested timetable for US troop withdrawal.

“We don’t want to see an immediate withdrawal that would cause chaos but we wanted a timetable for withdrawal,” Saleem Al-Jibouri of the Iraqi Accordance Front told Reuters.

Arabs Doubt Bush Will Overhaul Mideast Policy

The Bush administration will ignore unwelcome recommendations on Middle East policy from the bipartisan Iraq Study Group, Arab commentators said yesterday.

The study group, led by former US Secretary of State James Baker, proposed abandoning President George W. Bush’s policy of trying to isolate Syria and Iran and resuming attempts to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which Bush has given low priority.

But Arab commentators said changing course on these policies at this stage in his presidency was more than they expected from a president who has shown little flexibility.

Taken as a whole, the recommendations would amount to a volte-face in the Middle East policy which Bush has followed for the past six years.

The case could be different in Iraq, where Bush faces an urgent need to save his reputation and avert complete disaster, they said.

“The Bush administration is probably in a state of mind where it would not implement these things, especially the Syria-Iran part of it,” said Walid Kazziha, professor of political studies at the American University in Cairo.

“These are good recommendations and would go a long way to alleviate the problems the Americans are facing but I doubt very much they will take them seriously,” he added.

Mohamed El-Sayed Said, deputy director of the Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies in Cairo, said Bush was too far gone in his hostility toward Syria and Iran to engage in serious talks with the two governments now.

“Syria has shown signs it is willing to engage but I don’t think the Bush administration is in a mood to do that with Syria and Iran. This advice will not be heeded,” he added.

He said he also doubted that Bush was willing to put pressure on Israel for a compromise in the way that his father, President George Bush, and James Baker did back in 1991.

Adel Al-Harby, political editor at the leading Saudi daily Al-Riyadh, agreed the administration would not engage with Damascus and Tehran.

“I think it’s too early to talk about dialogue with either of them in the present situation. The US administration wants dialogue between Baghdad and both Damascus and Tehran, not between Washington and Damascus and Tehran,” he said.