A U.S. soldier patrols Baquba, in Diyala province some 65 km (40 miles) northeast of Baghdad October 16, 2008.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates said on Friday that U.S. troops should not be concerned by a deal that is said to let Iraq prosecute American military personnel if they commit serious crimes on Iraqi soil.

Some members of the U.S. Congress have questioned whether the pact offers enough protection from an Iraqi justice system that does not guarantee due process.

Iraqi officials have said the final draft agreement, which creates a legal basis for American troops to stay in Iraq after a United Nations mandate expires at the end of this year, states that U.S. forces should withdraw by the end of 2011.

They have also said that the pact, known as a Status of Forces Agreement, would allow Iraqi authorities to prosecute U.S. troops for serious crimes under certain circumstances.

But the pact appears to contain many caveats that mean U.S. forces would face Iraqi justice only in very rare cases.

“I think there is not reason to be concerned,” Gates told reporters at the Pentagon.

He said Gen. Ray Odierno, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, and his predecessor, Gen. David Petraeus, had been deeply involved in negotiations over the deal, which also has the backing of Adm. Mike Mullen, the top U.S. military officer.

“Adm. Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Petraeus, Gen. Odierno and I are all satisfied that our men and uniform serving in Iraq are well protected,” Gates said.

The document still requires the approval of several Iraqi bodies, including the country’s parliament.

The Bush administration contends the deal does not need ratification by Congress but, with only three months left in office, it is anxious to get broad political support from lawmakers.

Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice have briefed key members of Congress, including the presidential candidates, Republican Sen. John McCain and Democratic Sen. Barack Obama.

‘VERY CONCERNED’

Gates described the reaction from lawmakers he spoke with as “generally positive,” but Rep. Ike Skelton, a Missouri Democrat who chairs the armed services committee in the House of Representatives, said he had “real questions”.

“I am very concerned about reports that U.S. service personnel may not have full immunity under Iraqi law,” said Skelton, who was briefed by Gates.

However, Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, the ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said initial briefings suggested the deal was acceptable.

“It appears … that the administration has negotiated responsibly on behalf of U.S. national security interests and with the protection of American G.I.’s at the fore,” he said.

Democratic Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, the influential chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he would reserve judgment until further reviewing the pact.

“It’s critical that our dedicated men and women in uniform serving in Iraq have full legal protections and are not subject to criminal prosecution in an Iraqi judicial system that does not meet due process standards,” he said in a statement.

The deal is politically delicate for Bush’s Republican administration also because it has always rejected timetables for a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq — a policy advocated by Obama and other Democrats.

Levin said the draft had strict deadlines for the pullback of U.S. forces from Iraqi cities and towns by next summer as well as withdrawal from the country by the end of 2011.

“The president’s reversal on the subject of a timetable is welcome and overdue,” he said.

Administration officials insist the “time horizons” in the draft will depend on conditions on the ground.

The agreement is in two parts, a U.S. official said. One deals with the presence of U.S. forces in Iraq. The other, a strategic framework agreement, deals with the overall bilateral relationship, including political, economic and cultural ties.

Source: Reuters