Who should recognize whom?

Prime Minister Maliki presented his reconciliation plan to the parliament today and in spite of some objections from some parties the heads of parliamentary blocs declared their support for this plan soon after the session of the parliament ended and requesting some further detailed descriptions and modifications in some cases to match their blocs' understanding of the reconciliation concept.

It seems like this plan represents a real will for reaching a form of understanding among the different rivals in this country to make the country move forward and build the country without having to resort to violence through adopting dialog and talk instead of violence and alienation.

However, this honest will is not be enough to make this project succeed unless it's combined with a workable formula and here I think insisting on classifying armed groups and declaring some of them as "honorable resistance" and legitimizing their acts while they are yet to recognize the new political system and drop their weapons is totally wrong.

These armed groups of all backgrounds must be classified under one category which is militias and these under the reconciliation plan are recognized as a main obstacle hindering the building of a modern state of law. Thus separating the so called resistance from the militias and treating them as different categories will be the beginning of a failed project.
I am not talking out of a personal conviction but I'm talking out of the fact that makes any description other than "harmful militias" a big mistake and should the government fall in this mistake to appease this or that faction, the government will be facing a terrible contradiction…let me put it this way, first you hear this:

-The elected Iraqi government officially asks the UN security council to extend the mission of the multinational forces in Iraq for another year.

Then this:

-The elected Iraqi government offers legitimacy to armed groups fighting the multinational forces.

Doesn’t that sound absurd?

We have to choose one of two ways; either to consider each and every one of these armed groups an outlaw militia and deal with them accordingly by dismantling and disarming them and then prosecuting those involved in crimes against Iraqis or against the multinational forces.

Or,

To consider the government's plea for keeping the multinational forces an illegitimate decision that does not reflect the people's will. Then we should take the case to the parliament and tell them to vote.
And if the parliament decides these forces should leave immediately instead of staying an extra year then so be it! Let the forces go pack and let's legitimize resisting them and then we can go face our destiny alone.

But this will not happen because we saw the government pass this step without any considerable objection from the parliament and even those who raised objections did not request a vote; they object just to embarrass another bloc and because they know well what the result for such a vote would be.

Offering legitimacy to any entity that bears arms outside the official security forces is the beginning of the wrong solution. The interests of Iraq and the decisions of the elected government and logic put us before one valid choice…

No legitimacy for outlaw militants, period.

Who carries arms outside the official circle is an outlaw and should not be negotiated with before he drops his weapon and must first recognize the government that represents 11 million voters before he can ask for recognition from the government.