On the Iraqi side of the equation, Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi and his political allies supported the continued presence of American troops. This is despite the fact that his predecessor, Nouri al-Maliki, belonging to the same Shiite Dawa party, was unable to agree with the Obama administration on a new SOFA, even though the Bush administration had been concluded in 2008. However, due to controversies related to a SOFA (for example. B Immunity for American troops), it is thought that the likely agreement between the United States and Iraq will probably be an executive agreement, unlike a formal sofa, because the latter should be submitted to the Iraqi parliament and abadi – and the Pentagon – does not want to run the risk that a sofa will be defeated by Iraqi lawmakers. While some of Abadis` political allies see the benefits of a continued U.S. military presence in the country, it is likely that once the subject is submitted to Parliament, they will pressure their members to demonstrate their nationalist Bona-Fides and criticize the agreement. The status of the armed forces of Iraq (official agreement between the United States of America and the Republic of Iraq on the withdrawal of American forces from Iraq and the organization of their activities during their temporary presence in Iraq) was an agreement on the status of the armed forces (SOFA) between Iraq and the United States, signed in 2008 by President George W. Bush. It was decided that U.S.
troops would withdraw from Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009 and that all U.S. troops would leave Iraq completely by December 31, 2011.  The pact called for criminal prosecution for the detention of prisoners for more than 24 hours and an arrest warrant for searching houses and buildings that had nothing to do with the fighting.  U.S. contractors working for U.S. forces were reportedly subject to Iraqi criminal law, while contractors working for the State Department and other U.S. authorities would retain their immunity. If U.S.
forces had committed undecided “premeditated crimes” while off duty and off base, they would have been subject to an indecisive procedure that would have been defined by a joint committee of the United States of Iraq if the United States certified that the armed forces were out of service.     Aamer Madhani, “Withdrawal of U.S. combat forces is `New Dawn` for Iraq,” USA Today, August 19, 2010 available at www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2010-08-20-iraq20_ST_N.htm. SOFAs have been designed in the past for specific exercises and/or events, but 55 includes a date for the withdrawal of all forces from a foreign territory seems unique for this agreement.56 Withdrawal is a two-step process. The first requires the withdrawal of all U.S. troops from the cities, villages and towns of Iraq by June 30, 2009; the second requires the withdrawal of all U.S. forces from Iraqi territory by December 31, 2011.57 The JMOCC, created to coordinate military operations, goes to areas and facilities in which U.S. facilities.