By David Morgan WASHINGTON, July 9 (Reuters) - Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's call for a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. forces appears to be a potentially dangerous political ploy to win popular support in upcoming elections, U.S. analysts say. Maliki and his allies in the Baghdad government face a growing challenge from supporters of anti-American Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, who analysts say has stoked popular dislike of the U.S. troop presence as a gambit to win support in provincial elections expected this autumn. Analysts say disapproval of the U.S. force presence has been widespread among average Iraqis since the widespread looting that followed the 2003 invasion, making it easy for Iraqi politicians to appeal to nationalist sentiment with duplicitous calls for a U.S. troop withdrawal. "As a result, Iraqi politicians talk to the domestic audience about how terrible the occupation is and how much they'd like it to end. Then they say to the Americans in private: 'Don't go! Don't go! Don't go!'" said Stephen Biddle of the Council on Foreign Relations. This week, analysts say, Maliki and others in his government appeared to play the same political game with negotiations for a U.S.-Iraqi security agreement by saying publicly there could be no deal without a timetable for the withdrawal of foreign forces. There are 146,000 U.S. troops in Iraq. Maliki's government also faces a challenge in national elections expected as early as next year. The Bush administration, which has opposed any timetable for a troop withdrawal, sought to play down the statements by stressing common U.S.-Iraqi interests in security. Samuel Brannen of the Center for Strategic and International Studies said Maliki's comments suggested the Bush administration had not been open enough about its long-term interests in Iraq. "It's obvious we're doing something wrong and we haven't taken the opportunity to reassure the Iraqis about our intentions. Now it's provided Maliki with the lever to show he's not a puppet of the United States," Brannen said. Analysts and U.S. officials say they believe the Iraqis in the end will opt for an agreement with language vague enough to allow U.S. troops to stay, possibly by linking any departure to fragile conditions on the ground. "The Iraqis have made it very clear, including meetings I had with the president and foreign minister of Iraq, that it's based on conditions on the ground," Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain told a television interviewer this week. McCain is a staunch advocate of the current U.S. strategy in Iraq. His Democratic rival in the November election, Sen. Barack Obama, was an early opponent of the war and has called for a 16-month timetable for pulling U.S. combat forces from Iraq. Analysts say there is still a danger that recent Iraqi calls for a withdrawal timetable could saddle Baghdad with a troop departure the government does not actually want. 'GREAT DANGER' "The great danger in this whole situation is that if the Iraqis screw this up badly enough, they could end up forcing us to leave, which they know would not be good for them," Biddle said. "It's a terribly pernicious situation." An abrupt withdrawal of U.S. forces, analysts say, would remove a vital security element that has contributed to a sharp decline in violence over the past year and raise the specter of recurring sectarian violence. One reason for concern is a new swaggering air of confidence that analysts say Maliki has begun to exhibit following a series of Iraqi security successes against Shi'ite and Sunni insurgents. The Baghdad government is also benefiting from a surge in oil prices that has made government coffers flush with cash. The worry is that Maliki might actually believe Iraqi forces are capable of acting alone. "The Maliki government and Maliki himself are feeling quite confident in their strength," said Sam Parker of the U.S. Institute of Peace, a U.S. government-funded group that studies conflict resolution. "The problem is that the state apparatus, despite the fact that it's getting stronger, it's still dependent on the U.S.," added Parker, noting that Iraqi successes against insurgents in Mosul and Basra required substantial U.S. military support. U.S. Army Lt. Gen. James Dubik told the House of Representatives Armed Services Committee on Wednesday that Iraqi ground forces could be ready to handle security without U.S. help by mid-2009. Dubik, the senior U.S. Army officer in charge of training Iraqi forces, added it was unclear when other elements of the Iraqi security system, including the Iraqi air force, would be ready. (Editing by Peter Cooney)
U.S. soldiers of the 2nd Brigade, 1st Armored Division patrol the Jamilla market in Baghdad's Sadr City July 9, 2008. Iraq will not accept any security agreement with the United States ...
