There is not much comment, nor a diary that I can find, that points out this story, the lead on the Washington Post home page:
BAGHDAD, Nov. 16 -- After months of painstaking negotiations between Baghdad and Washington, the Iraqi Cabinet on Sunday approved a bilateral agreement allowing U.S. troops to remain in this country for three more years.
The accord still needs approval by Iraq's parliament, but the Cabinet vote indicated that most major Iraqi parties supported it. The Iraqi government spokesman portrayed the pact as closing the book on the occupation that began with the U.S.-led 2003 invasion.
"The total withdrawal will be completed by Dec. 31, 2011. This is not governed by circumstances on the ground," the spokesman, Ali al-Dabbagh, told Iraqi reporters, pointedly rejecting the more conditional language that the U.S. government had earlier sought in the accord.
This is a defeat for Bush on several counts:
Still, there is no doubt that the accord, if passed by parliament, will sharply reduce the U.S. military's power in Iraq. American soldiers will be required to seek warrants from Iraqi courts to execute arrests, and to hand over suspects to Iraqi authorities. U.S. troops will have to leave their combat outposts in Iraqi cities by mid-2009, withdrawing to bases.
This says it all. The Bush adminstration caved in on the most important points. This, I think, is good news for the Obama administration in that the framework for withdrawal will have been approved by the Bush administration and will take the Iraq war off the table as a major issue once Obama moves in. It would then be very easy for him to speed up the timetable to the 16 months.
Of course, the deal isn't final. The Iraq parliment will drag its feet, and it seems there is some opposition from the Sunnis. But they are anxious to take the American occupation off the table before provincial elections in January.
On the whole, a fitting end to the diasaster that was the Bush foreign policy.