U.S. and Iraqi talks over the status of U.S. forces have broken down, leaving the long term determination over a U.S.-Iraqi status of forces agreement to the next President. The Bush administration, operating under a U.N. mandate that expires at the end of this year, were hopeful that a long term agreement governing the U.S. presence in Iraq could have been concluded before President Bush’s term was up. The administration will now be forced to negotiate a short term agreement with the Iraqis. The Iraqi government, responding to domestic pressure, appears to be looking for some sort of timetable for U.S. forces to withdraw, or at least draw down. The issue of legal immunity for U.S. forces operating in Iraq appears to be a sticking point as well. From the Washington Post:

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and his political allies have come under intense domestic pressure to reject any perceived infringement on Iraqi sovereignty. Maliki, who last week publicly insisted on a withdrawal timeline, wants to frame the agreement as outlining the terms for “Americans leaving Iraq” rather than the conditions under which they will stay, said the U.S. official, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity because U.S.-Iraqi negotiations are ongoing.

With Maliki having promised that a completed “status of forces” agreement with the U.S. would be submitted to the Iraqi Parliament for approval, with two thirds approval needed,he may now be trying to find a way to circumvent that promise, as it is doubtful that such an approval could be had. The Bush plan is now in ashes, and the next President will make the call. And with some Democrats still fearful of the national security backlash from a hasty withdrawal could the failure of the next President to be able to reach such a status of forces agreement bring us to a political place where the Iraqis themselves demand a timetable for withdrawal? An interesting scenario, and one that appears more likely than it has ever been.