Iraq's national security adviser, Muwaffaq al-Rubaie, said on Tuesday the government "will not accept a memorandum of understanding if it does not give a specific date for a complete withdrawal of foreign troops."

Rubaie's remarks to journalists in the Shiite holy city of Najaf was a forceful explanation of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's own comments on Monday that Baghdad was looking for a deal ensuring the withdrawal of U.S. troops.

Maliki told Arab ambassadors in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) on Monday that his government suggested an interim memorandum of understanding with the United States "either for the departure of the [foreign] forces or set a timetable, so that we know their presence will end in a specific time."

Maliki was responding to questions from the Arab envoys in Abu Dhabi about the negotiations with the United States, and was broadcast on state-owned Iraqiya TV – footage that was spread like wildfire.

Iraq and the United States have since March been negotiating a deal that would specify the legal role of the U.S. forces in the country after the U.N.'s mandate for that purpose expires at the end of the year.

U.S. President George W. Bush and Maliki had sought to finalize the deal by July's end, but the talks have been stalling over how much authority the foreign troops would maintain.

It was not the first time the prime minister's remarks seemed to have taken Washington off guard. U.S. officials were similarly taken by surprise last month when Maliki said the security and military negotiations had reached a "dead end" because Iraq's sovereignty was being threatened by American demands.

The White House and Pentagon spokesmen denied the negotiations were based on a withdrawal timeframe.

"It is important to understand that these are not talks on a hard date for a withdrawal," White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said.

Echoing a similar reaction to Maliki's remarks, Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman told reporters: "With respect to timetables, I would say the same thing I would say as to respects to the security situation – it depends on conditions on the ground. Timelines tend to be artificial in nature."

The U.S. administration has long insisted that setting a schedule for withdrawal would provide an advantage to insurgents fighting the U.S.-led forces.

But the Shiite-dominated Iraqi government has been coming under increasing domestic pressure to negotiate a pact that would not keep the U.S. troops in the country indefinitely, as rival mainstream and rebel Sunni and Shiite forces have united in seeking an end to the occupation.

Just as a withdrawal from Iraq has become a prominent issue in the U.S. presidential election campaign, it has apparently become similarly, if not more, important in Iraqi local elections in October.

Analysts say Maliki's remarks in Abu Dhabi may be an attempt to ease parliamentary opposition to a deal that many have vowed to turn down if it infringed on Iraqi sovereignty and failed to mention a date for withdrawal.

They say Maliki might also be looking for a short-term memorandum of understanding to avoid a vote from the legislature, and one that would not bind either Baghdad or Washington in the future, especially since the U.S. administration has only six months left in office.

Maliki has also been coming under pressure from Iran and, to a lesser degree, Sunni Arab states who have found it unpopular and unsafe to normalize relations with Baghdad when there are more than 150,000 U.S. troops in the country and Washington is pulling the political and military strings.

Arab diplomats in Amman told the Middle East Times that despite the political polarization between the Arab states and Shiite Iran, the Arabs are not eager for an arrangement that would threaten Tehran with an American military strike and ignite another war in the region.

Maliki apparently reiterated to Bush last week, in a video conference call, that the United States cannot use Iraqi territory to attack Iran, warning that such an action would fuel more tension and wreak havoc in Iraq and the entire region.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, which backs Maliki's government, said in Kuala Lumpur on Tuesday that the U.S. military bases around the world should be removed, adding the "greatest threat in the Middle East and to countries in the world is U.S. intervention."

Ahmadinejad said that in order to "rebuild confidence, the U.S. must withdraw its forces from Iraq and allow the fate of the people of Iraq and regional countries to be written by the hands of their own people."

While the U.S. allies in the Arab world are less vocal about their concerns with the American presence in Iraq, diplomats say that Maliki – in his drive to lure Arabs to reopen their embassies in Baghdad and start dealing with the country like a "brotherly" nation – has assured Arab leaders that his government was working toward finding an exit for the U.S. forces.

Bahrain on Tuesday named an ambassador to Baghdad, for the first time since the invasion, following the UAE's appointment of an ambassador on Sunday, which also waived Iraq's $7 billion debt.

Jordan's King Abdullah II is also expected to be the first Arab head-of-state to visit Iraq sometime this week, after Amman named an ambassador to the embassy in Baghdad, which has been run by a charge d'affaires since it was bombed by suspected al-Qaida attackers in 2003.