DOCSLIB.ORG

Withdrawing from Iraq: Alternative Schedules, Associated Risks, and Mitigating Strategies

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Withdrawing from Iraq: Alternative Schedules, Associated Risks, and Mitigating Strategies THE ARTS This PDF document was made available from www.rand.org as CHILD POLICY a public service of the RAND Corporation. CIVIL JUSTICE EDUCATION Jump down to document ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT 6 HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research NATIONAL SECURITY POPULATION AND AGING organization providing objective analysis and PUBLIC SAFETY effective solutions that address the challenges facing SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY the public and private sectors around the world. SUBSTANCE ABUSE TERRORISM AND HOMELAND SECURITY Support RAND TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE Purchase this document WORKFORCE AND WORKPLACE Browse Books & Publications Make a charitable contribution For More Information Visit RAND at www.rand.org Explore the RAND National Defense Research Institute View document details Limited Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in this work. This electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for non-commercial use only. Unauthorized posting of RAND PDFs to a non-RAND Web site is prohibited. RAND PDFs are protected under copyright law. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please see RAND Permissions. This product is part of the RAND Corporation monograph series. RAND monographs present major research findings that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND monographs undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity. Withdrawing from Iraq Alternative Schedules, Associated Risks, and Mitigating Strategies Walter L. Perry, Stuart E. Johnson, Keith Crane, David C. Gompert, John Gordon IV, Robert E. Hunter, Dalia Dassa Kaye, Terrence K. Kelly, Eric Peltz, Howard J. Shatz Prepared for the Office of the Secretary of Defense Approved for public release; distribution unlimited NATIONAL DEFENSE RESEARCH INSTITUTE The research described in this report was prepared for the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and conducted in the RAND National Defense Research Institute, a federally funded research and development center sponsored by the OSD, the Joint Staff, the Unified Combatant Commands, the Department of the Navy, the Marine Corps, the defense agencies, and the defense Intelligence Community under Contract W74V8H-06-C-0002. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available for this publication. 978-0-8330-4772-4 The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research organization providing objective analysis and effective solutions that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors around the world. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. R® is a registered trademark. Cover photo: The Iraqi flag flutters as a soldier of the 5th Squadron, 4th Cavalry regiment, salutes during the transfer ceremony of the JSS Ghazaliyah IV security station to full Iraqi Security Forces control in the Ghazaliyah district of Baghdad on February 14, 2009. Ahmad Al-Rubaye/AFP/Getty Images © Copyright 2009 RAND Corporation Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Copies may not be duplicated for commercial purposes. Unauthorized posting of RAND documents to a non-RAND Web site is prohibited. RAND documents are protected under copyright law. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit the RAND permissions page (http://www.rand.org/ publications/permissions.html). Published 2009 by the RAND Corporation 1776 Main Street, P.O. Box 2138, Santa Monica, CA 90407-2138 1200 South Hayes Street, Arlington, VA 22202-5050 4570 Fifth Avenue, Suite 600, Pittsburgh, PA 15213-2665 RAND URL: http://www.rand.org To order RAND documents or to obtain additional information, contact Distribution Services: Telephone: (310) 451-7002; Fax: (310) 451-6915; Email: [email protected] Preface Security has improved dramatically in Iraq since 2007; both the U.S. and the Iraqi governments want to see the U.S. presence reduced and have the Iraqis assume a greater role in providing for public security. These developments have brought the United States to a critical juncture in Iraq. The emerging challenge is to continue a withdrawal of U.S. forces while preserving security and stability in the country and in the region. With this in mind, the U.S. Congress provided resources in the fiscal year 2009 Defense Appropriations Act for an independent study to assess alternative schedules to draw down U.S. forces and effect the transition to Iraqi forces provid- ing for the nation’s security. This study assesses the feasibility of three such plans and makes recommendations designed to reduce the risks attendant on withdrawal; these recommendations are, for the most part, relevant whichever drawdown schedule is ultimately met. The analysis supporting this report was completed in May 2009, and the illustrative schedules all assume implementation decisions having been made in time for implementation in May, if not earlier. To the extent that such decisions are made later, the schedules would likely be pushed back accordingly. We recognize that any drawdown schedule that calls for U.S. forces remaining in Iraq beyond the end of December 2011 would require renegotiating the Security Agreement between the United States and Iraq. The RAND Corporation National Defense Research Institute was asked to conduct this study. This report documents the study findings. It describes alterna- tive drawdown schedules and analyzes how internal Iraqi security and stability and regional political and military issues might affect and be affected by these plans. It should interest senior members of the Obama administration, including policymakers in the Departments of Defense and State, members of Congress, and military planners and operators. This research was sponsored by the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs and conducted within the International Security and Defense Policy Center (ISDP) of the RAND National Defense Research Institute (NDRI), a federally funded research and development center sponsored by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Staff, the Unified Combatant Com- iii iv Withdrawing from Iraq: Alternative Schedules, Associated Risks, and Mitigating Strategies mands, the Department of the Navy, the Marine Corps, the defense agencies, and the defense Intelligence Community. For more information on RAND’s International Security and Defense Policy Center, contact the Director, James Dobbins, who can be reached by email at [email protected]; by phone at 703-413-1100, extension 5134; or by mail at the RAND Corporation, 1200 South Hayes Street, Arlington, Virginia 22202-5050. More infor- mation about RAND is available at www.rand.org. Contents Preface ................................................................................................. iii Figures ................................................................................................. xi Tables .................................................................................................xiii Summary ..............................................................................................xv Acknowledgments ............................................................................... xxxiii Abbreviations .................................................................................... xxxvii CHaptER ONE Introduction ........................................................................................... 1 The Purpose of This Report ........................................................................... 2 Why Three Alternatives? ............................................................................ 2 The Effects of the Drawdown ...................................................................... 3 Methodology ........................................................................................... 3 About This Report ..................................................................................... 5 CHaptER TWO Drawdown Scheduling............................................................................... 7 Ending the Combat Mission in Iraq ................................................................. 8 Iraqi Security Forces ................................................................................... 9 U.S. Military Forces in Iraq .........................................................................10 Sequencing the Withdrawal of U.S. Combat and Support Forces ..............................11 Implementation and the Rotation Schedule .......................................................12 The Security Agreement Referendum...............................................................12 Three Alternatives .....................................................................................13 Rationale .............................................................................................14 Defining the Alternatives ..........................................................................15 Alternative 1: Combat Units Depart by April 30, 2010 ..........................................16 Planning..............................................................................................16 ISF Support
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Being Lesbian in Iran
    Human Rights Report Being Lesbian in Iran Human Rights Report: Being Lesbian in Iran 1 About OutRight Every day around the world, LGBTIQ people’s human rights and dignity are abused in ways that shock the conscience. The stories of their struggles and their resilience are astounding, yet remain unknown—or willfully ignored—by those with the power to make change. OutRight Action International, founded in 1990 as the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission, works alongside LGBTIQ people in the Global South, with offices in six countries, to help identify community-focused solutions to promote policy for lasting change. We vigilantly monitor and document human rights abuses to spur action when they occur. We train partners to expose abuses and advocate for themselves. Headquartered in New York City, OutRight is the only global LGBTIQ-specific organization with a permanent presence at the United Nations in New York that advocates for human rights progress for LGBTIQ people. [email protected] https://www.facebook.com/outrightintl http://twitter.com/outrightintl http://www.youtube.com/lgbthumanrights http://OutRightInternational.org/iran OutRight Action International 80 Maiden Lane, Suite 1505, New York, NY 10038 U.S.A. P: +1 (212) 430.6054 • F: +1 (212) 430.6060 This work may be reproduced and redistributed, in whole or in part, without alteration and without prior written permission, solely for nonprofit administrative or educational purposes provided all copies contain the following statement: © 2016 OutRight Action International. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of OutRight Action International. No other use is permitted without the express prior written permission of OutRight Action International.
    [Show full text]
  • Iran: Ethnic and Religious Minorities
    Order Code RL34021 Iran: Ethnic and Religious Minorities Updated November 25, 2008 Hussein D. Hassan Information Research Specialist Knowledge Services Group Iran: Ethnic and Religious Minorities Summary Iran is home to approximately 70.5 million people who are ethnically, religiously, and linguistically diverse. The central authority is dominated by Persians who constitute 51% of Iran’s population. Iranians speak diverse Indo-Iranian, Semitic, Armenian, and Turkic languages. The state religion is Shia, Islam. After installation by Ayatollah Khomeini of an Islamic regime in February 1979, treatment of ethnic and religious minorities grew worse. By summer of 1979, initial violent conflicts erupted between the central authority and members of several tribal, regional, and ethnic minority groups. This initial conflict dashed the hope and expectation of these minorities who were hoping for greater cultural autonomy under the newly created Islamic State. The U.S. State Department’s 2008 Annual Report on International Religious Freedom, released September 19, 2008, cited Iran for widespread serious abuses, including unjust executions, politically motivated abductions by security forces, torture, arbitrary arrest and detention, and arrests of women’s rights activists. According to the State Department’s 2007 Country Report on Human Rights (released on March 11, 2008), Iran’s poor human rights record worsened, and it continued to commit numerous, serious abuses. The government placed severe restrictions on freedom of religion. The report also cited violence and legal and societal discrimination against women, ethnic and religious minorities. Incitement to anti-Semitism also remained a problem. Members of the country’s non-Muslim religious minorities, particularly Baha’is, reported imprisonment, harassment, and intimidation based on their religious beliefs.
    [Show full text]
  • Reimagining US Strategy in the Middle East
    REIMAGININGR I A I I G U.S.S STRATEGYT A E Y IIN THET E MMIDDLED L EEASTS Sustainable Partnerships, Strategic Investments Dalia Dassa Kaye, Linda Robinson, Jeffrey Martini, Nathan Vest, Ashley L. Rhoades C O R P O R A T I O N For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RRA958-1 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available for this publication. ISBN: 978-1-9774-0662-0 Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. 2021 RAND Corporation R® is a registered trademark. Cover composite design: Jessica Arana Image: wael alreweie / Getty Images Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions. The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org Preface U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Crude Oil for Natural Gas: Prospects for Iran-Saudi Reconciliation
    Atlantic Council GLOBAL ENERGY CENTER ISSUE BRIEF BY JEAN-FRANCOIS SEZNEC Crude Oil for Natural Gas Prospects for Iran-Saudi Reconciliation OCTOBER 2015 The relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia are often presented as an intractable struggle between powers Global Energy Center - tions: Shia in Iran and Sunni in Saudi Arabia.1 The Saudis feelthat threatenedfind legitimacy by what in their they respective consider anIslamic encroaching tradi At a time of unprecedented volatility and opportunity, the Atlantic Council Global Energy 2 The Center works to promote global access to affordable, “Shia crescent” of Iranian influence, extending from reliable, and sustainable energy. al-Sham (Syria-Lebanon) to Iraq, Iran, and Yemen. Alongside government, industry, and civil society House of Saud, in particular, views this “crescent” as an- partners, the Center devises creative responses attempt to bring an end to its stewardship of Islam’s to helpenergy-related develop energy geopolitical strategies conflicts, and policies advances that stretchingholiest sites across and replace the states it with of the Shia Gulf supervision. Cooperation Simi sustainable energy solutions, and identifies trends larly, Iran fears the threat of encircling Sunni influence, ensure long-term prosperity and security. Council (GCC), through to Egypt, Jordan, Pakistan, and parts of Syria. Certainly, the death of many hundreds than they appear. Saudi Arabia’s use of a sectarian soldiersof Hajjis tofrom the Iran Syrian and front other a fewcountries days later in Mecca are creat on - narrative to describe the 2011 uprising in Bahrain ingSeptember great tensions 24, 2015, between as well the as twothe dispatch Gulf giants. of Iranian Further and Iran’s self-appointed role as the champion of Shia rights underline how sectarian rhetoric has primarily thebeen opposing utilized bystate.
    [Show full text]
  • The Real Outcome of the Iraq War: US and Iranian Strategic Competition in Iraq
    The Real Outcome of the Iraq War: US and Iranian Strategic Competition in Iraq By Anthony H. Cordesman, Peter Alsis, Adam Mausner, and Charles Loi Anthony H. Cordesman Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy Revised: December 20, 2011 Note: This draft is being circulated for comments and suggestions. Please provide them to [email protected] Chapter 6: US Strategic Competition with Iran: Competition in Iraq 2 Executive Summary "Americans planted a tree in Iraq. They watered that tree, pruned it, and cared for it. Ask your American friends why they're leaving now before the tree bears fruit." --Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.1 Iraq has become a key focus of the strategic competition between the United States and Iran. The history of this competition has been shaped by the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988), the 1991 Gulf War, and the US invasion of Iraq in 2003. Since the 2003 war, both the US and Iran have competed to shape the structure of Post-Saddam Iraq’s politics, governance, economics, and security. The US has gone to great lengths to counter Iranian influence in Iraq, including using its status as an occupying power and Iraq’s main source of aid, as well as through information operations and more traditional press statements highlighting Iranian meddling. However, containing Iranian influence, while important, is not America’s main goal in Iraq. It is rather to create a stable democratic Iraq that can defeat the remaining extremist and insurgent elements, defend against foreign threats, sustain an able civil society, and emerge as a stable power friendly to the US and its Gulf allies.
    [Show full text]
  • Aibs-Shortlist-2-2020.Pdf
    The AIBs 2020 The Shortlist TV and VIDEO Arts and culture The Dancer Thieves Banyak Films for Witness, Al Jazeera English The Red Door Project: Evolve Blue Chalk Media for The Red Door Project Spirit of Tokyo CNN Beethoven’s Ninth: Symphony for the World Deutsche Welle Matera Traveller Iran International Miyako, The Last Dance NHK in association with NHK Enterprises Chinese Folk Opera Phoenix Satellite Television Human interest MENtal Health: Breaking the Silence 5 News, ITN Fly on the Wall: The Virus Al Jazeera English Online Word of Truth: Transgender Arabs Living in the Middle East Alhurra Television African Voices: Female Pilots CNN Surviving the Special Forces De Mensen PANO: Secret on Instagram één for VRT Off the Grid: Missing Babies TRT World The Skin we Wear Very! For CNA, Mediacorp Pte Ltd Supporters of the AIBs 2020 The AIBs 2020 The Shortlist Natural world Fault Lines - Amazon Burning: Death and Destruction in Brazil’s Rainforest Al Jazeera English Borneo is Burning CNN Chris Packham: Plant A Tree to Save the World ITN Productions Sinking Island Radio Free Asia Freed to be Wild RT VOA Films: Illegal Logging Inside Mexico Monarch Butterfly Sanctuary VOA (Voice of America) Australia's Ocean Odyssey: A Journey Down the Wild Pacific Media for Australian Broadcasting East Australian Current Corporation and ARTE France Science and technology The Big Picture: The World According to A.I. Al Jazeera English Refugee Gardens: Turning Old Mattresses into Fresh Food BBC News Inventing Tomorrow CNN WFH: New Reality CNN Coded World Peddling
    [Show full text]
  • Iraq: U.S. Regime Change Efforts and Post-Saddam Governance
    Order Code RL31339 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Iraq: U.S. Regime Change Efforts and Post-Saddam Governance Updated May 16, 2005 Kenneth Katzman Specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress Iraq: U.S. Regime Change Efforts and Post-Saddam Governance Summary Operation Iraqi Freedom accomplished a long-standing U.S. objective, the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, but replacing his regime with a stable, moderate, democratic political structure has been complicated by a persistent Sunni Arab-led insurgency. The Bush Administration asserts that establishing democracy in Iraq will catalyze the promotion of democracy throughout the Middle East. The desired outcome would also likely prevent Iraq from becoming a sanctuary for terrorists, a key recommendation of the 9/11 Commission report. The Bush Administration asserts that U.S. policy in Iraq is now showing substantial success, demonstrated by January 30, 2005 elections that chose a National Assembly, and progress in building Iraq’s various security forces. The Administration says it expects that the current transition roadmap — including votes on a permanent constitution by October 31, 2005 and for a permanent government by December 15, 2005 — are being implemented. Others believe the insurgency is widespread, as shown by its recent attacks, and that the Iraqi government could not stand on its own were U.S. and allied international forces to withdraw from Iraq. Some U.S. commanders and senior intelligence officials say that some Islamic militants have entered Iraq since Saddam Hussein fell, to fight what they see as a new “jihad” (Islamic war) against the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Three Tweets to Midnight Nuclear Crisis Stability and the Information Ecosystem
    NUCLEAR POLICY READOUT & RECOMMENDATIONS Three Tweets to Midnight Nuclear Crisis Stability and the Information Ecosystem 58th Strategy for Peace Conference October, 2017 | Airlie Center, Warrington, VA This Readout and Recommendations presents key discussion points and observations from a multidisciplinary roundtable convened in October 2017 at the Stanley Foundation’s 58th annual Strategy for Peace Conference. The brief provides a framework for identifying such questions. It identifies several disruptive dynamics in the information ecosystem. It then looks at the psychology of decision making and asks when during the arc of a crisis the information ecosystem might have significant detrimental influence. It also recognizes that technology may be empowering new actors who have stabilizing effects on the information ecosystem and could promote accuracy and informed decisions. The brief concludes with a series of open questions deserving further examination. How might a nuclear crisis play out in today’s media environment? the likelihood that a conflict could escalate, potentially to include What dynamics in this information ecosystem—with social media the threatened or actual use of nuclear weapons. increasing the volume and velocity of information, disrupting journalistic models, creating potent vectors for disinformation, “Trending” opening public channels for adversaries to influence national leaders, and changing how political leaders interact with con- stituencies—might threaten rational decision making during crises The Information Ecosystem and Its Malignancies between nuclear-armed states? The urgent focus today on social media and “fake news” often 1 neglects the scope and scale of the challenge. A large-scale tech- There are still many unknowns about the effects of social media nology transition is disrupting how we communicate, thereby on international conflict.
    [Show full text]
  • Iraqi War Fighting Capabilities: a Dynamic Net Assessment
    CSIS_______________________________ Center for Strategic and International Studies 1800 K Street N.W. Washington, DC 20006 (202) 775-3270 (To comment: [email protected] For Updates see CSIS.ORG, “Military Balance”) Iraqi War Fighting Capabilities: A Dynamic Net Assessment Anthony H. Cordesman Arleigh A. Burke Chair for Strategy Center for Strategic and International Studies Revised July 21, 2002 Copyright Anthony H. Cordesman, all rights reserved. Iraq: A Dynamic Net Assessment 7/22/02 Page ii Introduction This document is an expanded version of a report originally prepared for a conference at the Naval War College in July 2002. The author would like to thank his colleagues at that conference for many suggestions and corrections. He would also like to thank the Smith-Richardson Foundation for some of the funding for the project. Copyright Anthony H. Cordesman, all rights reserved. Iraq: A Dynamic Net Assessment 7/22/02 Page iii Table of Contents INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................................................ 1 IRAQ’S CURRENT MILITARY FORCES....................................................................................................................................... 1 The Iraqi Army and Key Security Elements......................................................................................................................1 The Deployment of Army and Security Elements .............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Grand Strategy of Militant Clients: Iran's Way Of
    Security Studies ISSN: 0963-6412 (Print) 1556-1852 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fsst20 The Grand Strategy of Militant Clients: Iran’s Way of War Afshon Ostovar To cite this article: Afshon Ostovar (2018): The Grand Strategy of Militant Clients: Iran’s Way of War, Security Studies To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2018.1508862 Published online: 17 Oct 2018. Submit your article to this journal View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=fsst20 SECURITY STUDIES https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2018.1508862 The Grand Strategy of Militant Clients: Iran’s Way of War Afshon Ostovar ABSTRACT This article argues that militant clients should be understood as a pillar of Iran’s grand strategy and an extension of its military power. The article examines why Iran has relied on militant clients since the 1979 revolution and the benefits and costs of its client approach. In evaluating these issues, it iden- tifies five main areas where Iran has gained from its client strategy: 1) maintaining independence from the West; 2) suc- cessfully exporting its religio-political worldview; 3) extending its military reach and power; 4) reducing political costs of its foreign activities; and 5) establishing needed regional allies. It further identifies five main dangers that Iran faces by continu- ing its strategic behavior: 1) increased pressure from the United States and a broader US military regional footprint; 2) more unified regional adversaries; 3) the risk of unintended escalation with the United States and regional adversarial states; and 4) enduring regional instability and insecurity Introduction In the 21st century, no state has had more success in utilizing militant clients outside its borders toward strategic ends than the Islamic Republic of Iran.
    [Show full text]
  • Iraq: U.S. Regime Change Efforts and Post-Saddam Governance
    Order Code RL31339 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Iraq: U.S. Regime Change Efforts and Post-Saddam Governance Updated November 21, 2005 Kenneth Katzman Specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress Iraq: U.S. Regime Change Efforts and Post-Saddam Governance Summary Operation Iraqi Freedom succeeded in overthrowing Saddam Hussein, but Iraq remains violent and unstable because of Sunni Arab resentment and a related insurgency. The Bush Administration says that U.S. forces will remain in Iraq until the country is a stable democracy that will not host radical Islamist forces. The Administration has held out Iraq as a potential model for reform throughout the Middle East. However, mounting casualties and costs have intensified a debate within the United States over the wisdom of the invasion and whether or not to wind down U.S. involvement without completely accomplishing those goals. The Bush Administration asserts that U.S. policy in Iraq is showing important successes, demonstrated by elections that chose a National Assembly (January 30, 2005), a referendum that adopted a permanent constitution (October 15, 2005), progress in building Iraq’s security forces, and economic growth. The next major milestone will be the holding of elections for a permanent government by December 15, 2005. While continuing to build, equip, and train Iraqi security units, the Administration has been working with the new Iraqi government to include more Sunni Arabs in the power structure; Sunnis, many of whom are mobilizing to vote against the draft constitution, were dominant during the regime of Saddam Hussein and now feel marginalized by the newly dominant Shiite Arabs and Kurds.
    [Show full text]
  • Received by NSD/FARA Registration Unit 12/18/2018 9:48:31 AM OMB No
    Received by NSD/FARA Registration Unit 12/18/2018 9:48:31 AM OMB No. 1124-0002; Expires May 31, 2020 U.S. Department of Justice Supplemental Statement Washington, dc 20530 Pursuant to the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, as amended For Six Month Period Ending June 30, 2018 (Insert date) I - REGISTRANT 1. (a) Name of Registrant (b) Registration No. Kurdistan Regional Government - Liaison Office - USA 5783 (c) Business Address(es) of Registrant 1532 16th Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036-1402 2. Has there been a change in the information previously furnished in connection with the following? (a) If an individual: (1) Residence address(es) Yes □ No □ (2) Citizenship Yes □ No □ (3) Occupation Yes □ No □ (b) If an organization: (1) Name' Yes □ No 0 (2) Ownership or control Yes □ No E (3) Branch offices Yes □ No 0 (c) Explain fully all changes, if any, indicated in Items (a) and (b) above. IF THE REGISTRANT IS AN INDIVIDUAL, OMIT RESPONSE TO ITEMS 3, 4, AND 5(a). 3. if you have previously filed Exhibit C1, state whether any changes therein have occurred during this 6 month reporting period. Yes □ No H If yes, have you filed an amendment to the Exhibit C? Yes □ No E If no, please attach the required amendment. TThe Exhibit C, for which no'printed form is provided, consists of a true copy of the charter, articles of incorporation, association, and by laws of a registrant that is an organization. (A waiver of the requirement to File an Exhibit C may be obtained for good cause upon written application to the Assistant Attorney General, National Security Division, U.S, Department of Justice, Washington, DC 20530.) FORM NSD-2 Revised 05/17 Received by NSD/FARA Registration Unit 12/18/2018 9:48:31 AM Received by.NSD/FARA Registration Unit 12/18/2018 9:48:31 AM (PAGE 2) 4.
    [Show full text]