[casi] News titles, 02-09/04/03

[Peter Brooke <pbrooke@DELETETHISukonline.co.uk>]

News titles, 02-09/04/03 (Wednesday to Wednesday)

I finished putting this collection together on Wednesday 9th April, just
before material started coming in on the toppling of President Hussein's
statue and the general celebrations of freedom. For a while it looked as
though the Americans and British were at last being welcomed as liberators -
something which had happened nowhere else in the South of Iraq, where they
were either opposed, or received with the politeness due to those who might
or might not control the availability of water.

Then it became clear that something else altogether had happened. A mob
(like the mobs that exist potentially in every major city) had been
liberated from the constraints of the law. The American army had opened a
Pandora's box and, at the time of writing three days later, there is still
no sign of its being closed again.

But even if the rejoicing in the streets was specious, there can be no doubt
that the government and army of Iraq are no longer functional. And the
Americans may be very close - at a total cost, going back to 1990, of
thousands of billions of dollars and over a million lives - to their
ambition of wiping the smile off President Hussein's face. Oh for the days
when he could have been seized in chains and made to act for the rest of his
life as a footstool for the Emperor to mount his horse!

When the war started we were told every effort would be made to spare
civilian lives and infrastructure. After the embarrassing failures of the
first week of the campaign and the disaster of a sandstorm that inhibited
activity in the air, they seem to have thrown restraint to the winds and
decided to use maximum force in the hopes of being able to avoid the
unappealing prospects of siege warfare and street to street fighting (given
that the popular welcome they were hoping for did not materialise). Looking
at the thing from a purely moral point of view, what can be said? The
Guardian informed us recently that four and a half million people have been
killed recently in the more evenly matched wars in the Congo; the Iran/Iraq
war lasted ten years and took one million lives. Perhaps those facts could
be used to say something in favour of the American reliance on overwhelming
force. Perhaps only two thousand civilians and ten thousand young men
wearing uniforms of one sort or another have had their bodies ripped apart
by these means, and the whole process (if we take the end of government and
the collapse of the society into anarchy as marking the end of the 'war')
has only lasted a few weeks. That, we suppose, is success of a sort.

A radical change, then, has taken place on the ground. But the government of
President Hussein is still the legal government of Iraq, the only
government recognised as such by the United Nations, and nothing has
happened to change that fact. Those countries - and they include Turkey -
who have expelled properly accredited representatives of the Iraqi
government at the behest of the invading power are themselves acting in
defiance of international law, if such an animal can be said to exist. The
USUK invasion of Iraq has the same standing in law as the Iraqi invasion of
Kuwait (to liberate the people of Kuwait from a corrupt despotism) or the
Italian invasion of Ethiopia (to liberate the people of Ethiopia from
slavery). That the British 'Defence' (!) Secretary Geoffrey Hoon should
regard looting as 'good practice' is perfectly understandable. The looters
are only doing on a small scale what his government is doing on a large
scale.

The United Nations is therefore now fast heading towards a crisis. The
Security Council is going to be put under intense pressure to legitimise the
conquest and spoliation of Iraq. The pressure will come from Prime Minister
Blair, once again playing the role of moderate multilateralist. The
government of the United States will manifest an insolent indifference to
the outcome of these discussions. Mr Blair's 'multilateralism' is a matter
of post facto multilateral legitimation of Mr Bush's unilateralism.

It is all very reminiscent of Jacques Louis David's great painting of the
coronation of Napoleon. Napoleon crowns himself in the presence of the Pope.
The Pope would have liked to have crowned him himself. Failing that, to make
some little gesture that could have been interpreted as a consecration. It
might have been politic on Napoleon's part to have let him. Indeed that was
why he had had him brought there in the first place. But in the end his
contempt for the pretensions of the representative of the system of
international law generally recognised in Europe at the time, and source of
the legitimacy of monarchs, was too great for him. The Pope was left without
a role to play, and it shows on his face. Made all the more powerful by the
fact that it is the only interesting face in the whole - very big -
painting, surrounded as it is by a sea of bourgeois mediocrity and
complacency.

The United Nations as the source and guardian of the generally accepted
principles of international legitimacy is in much the same position as the
Pope of David's day. It can maintain a semblance of authority by conferring
legitimacy on accomplished facts. It will have some illusion of influence so
long as the real power has a use for it (enforcing sanctions for example).
But it can be disregarded at will when it ceases to be useful (for example
for the purpose of going to war).

It is difficult to have confidence that the leaders of those countries which
have (for whatever reason) stood by the principles of international law will
be able to withstand the blandishments of Mr Blair - he who is so
magnanimously willing to bring them, and the institution they represent,
back into the fold of the International Community. Our best hope lies with
the pride of the Emperor, who may well decide that he does not want the
gesture of consecration. He may demand a degree of self humiliation that
will be too much even for a whole harem of captive popes. He may even have
already decided that continued membership of the United Nations is no longer
compatible with the ambitious programme of remodelling the world that is
tempting him. Mr Bush has already declared that the run up to the war was a
last chance for the Security Council to prove its 'relevance'. The Security
Council, for once in its undistinguished history, failed the test, failed to
play a useful role in the project of the Superpower. Surely Gulliver isn't
going to allow himself ever again to be inconvenienced by the paltry ropes
of the people of Lilliput?

But if Gulliver decides to shake himself free, the people of Lilliput will
have to decide what to do. To make deals, one by one, with the Giant (as
envisaged by the project for a New American Century)? Or to try to maintain
some sort of organised community among themselves. The United Nations can
become the organising centre for those peoples still willing to live under
some system of generally agreed international conventions - conventions
which respect the soveriegnty (which is to say the process of historical
evolution) of each of the member states; or it can continue as it is at the
present time - a machine for consecrating the arbitrary self interest of a
force many times more powerful than itself.


NEWS, 02-09/04/03 (1)

RAPE OF IRAQ (1)

*  Innocent van victims set up by Saddam: Imam [It seems that 'a prominent
Muslim cleric from the town near where the shooting and an earlier homicide
bombing occurred' told Fox News that the people in the van that was shot up
at a US checkpoint had been 'put in the bus by Saddam Hussein's forces,
their husbands or fathers were taken hostages and the driver was ordered to
speed up to the checkpoint and not stop so that they would be shot at'. On
has the feeling that if there was any truth to this we would have heard more
about it ... followed by the question: if it is made up tale, who made it
up?]
*  3 CIA assets killed in Baghdad [Very difficult to come up with a
definition of 'unlawful combatant' in Guantanamo Bay that wouldn't apply to
the 'more than 300 Special Forces, who moved into the country to join Delta
troops and CIA paramilitaries' - especially to their colleagues who were, as
we are assured, at work before the war began ('began'. I don't think it was
ever actually declared, was it?). Note the possibility that Qusay was
killed. I have a suspicion that Izzat Ibrahim might also have been killed on
the same occasion. The article includes an account of President Hussein's
walkabout in Baghdad (which, R.Fisk has assured us, was genuine)]
*  Five killed in suicide bomb [Extract, giving The Scotsman's account of
the advance on Baghdad: 'Today, residents were fleeing suburbs near the
airport into the city centre, running from what one called a "night of hell"
as US forces moved in.']
*  Al-Jazeera Shows Iraqi Women Suicide Bombers' Videotape ['"The martyr
operation led to the destruction of nine armored vehicles ... the Iraqi
announcer said']
*  US troops bring war to streets of Baghdad; 1,000 Iraqis reported killed
[Saturday, 5th April]
*  Key Marine Commander Is Removed [Col. Joe W. Dowdy]
*  The Baghdad intifada [Pepe Escobar seems to have decided that the game is
up. Like D.Rumsfeld, he envisages a Shi'i uprising inspired by a newly
liberated Grand Ayatollah Sayyed Ali al-Sistani and the newly arrived 'Abdul
Majid al-Khoei, son of the late Grand Ayatollah Abul-Qasim al-Khoei (who was
Grand Ayatollah Sistani's master)' In fact what seems to have happened was a
mob uprising possibly inspired by agents of Ahmad Chalabi's Free Iraqi
Forces, making themselves indispensable. He suggests the possibility that
'the Medina - which was guarding the bottleneck between Najaf and a lake and
Baghdad and facing the marines in al-Kut over the Tigris' could have been
'decimated by a barrage of seven-ton Daisy Cutters']
*  17 civilians killed in airstikes on Basra
*  U.S.: Heavy Iraqi Casualties in Baghdad [Incursion on Saturday. 'Between
2,000 and 3,000 Iraqi fighters were killed in a show-of-force foray into
Baghdad by American armored vehicles, the U.S. Central Command ... "I would
think the Iraqi people feel a sense of somewhat relief that this repressive
regime and its ability to brutalize them is about over"' ... Overall, the
Pentagon says 79 Americans have been killed in action in Iraq, with eight
missing in action and seven held as POWs, while 27 British soldiers have
been killed. Central Command says there are 6,500 Iraqi POWs, but no figures
have surfaced from either side for Iraqi military casualties.]
*  Riddle of the sands [The Scotsman gives the USUK version of events
(triumphant unopposed advance) then speculates interestingly on Iraq as a
society without a real military tradition, by which I assume is meant a
national military tradition, since there is a very rich tradition of tribal
warfare. This lack of a national military tradition may have been one the
problems the Baath Party was trying to address - as Mussolini wanted to get
into the First World War in order to consolidate Italian national unity - or
the Easter Rising in Dublin aimed to show Irishmen they could fight for
Ireland instead of for Britain. The Iraqi people have a long tradition of
living under Empire. We shall soon see whether or not they've shaken off the
habit]
*  US forces secure Karbala, kill 400
*  US has no confirmed reports on fate of "Chemical Ali"


AND, IN NEWS, 02-09/04/03 (2)

RAPE OF IRAQ (2)

*   Battle for Basra "more or less over"
*   Suicide at the walls of Baghdad [Pepe Escobar reckons its all over bar
the shouting. But he is reluctant to admit the possibility that Saddam might
come to a humiliating end: 'Saddam may never be found. The fighting spirit
of the roughly 500,000 Iraqis who form the elite of the regime and depend on
its survival remains. Saddam may opt to deliver audio rallying cries,
reminiscent of calls by Osama bin Laden, from the Iraqi ether ... He knows
that his victory would be not to capitulate.']
*  Four die as Iraqi rocket hits command post [One would think a direct
Iraqi rocket hit on the HQ of the US 3rd infantry's 2nd brigade would have
merited more attention from the press than it got]
*  Bomber crew kills nine in 'The Big One'. But was Saddam Hussein among
them? [Patrick Cockburn on this and other attempts to kill President
Hussein]

URL ONLY
http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/w-me/2003/apr/05/040502661.html
*  U.S. SAYS REPUBLICAN GUARD NOT COHESIVE
by Robert Burns
Las Vegas Sun, 5th April
[Tough talkin' Air Force Lt. Gen. Michael Moseley 'directs the air portion
of the Iraq war from a command post known as the Combined Air Operations
Center, a sprawling complex at Prince Sultan Air Base, south of the Saudi
capital' ... "The preponderance of the Republican Guard divisions that were
outside of Baghdad are now dead," he said. "I find it interesting that folks
say we're softening them up. We're not softening them up. We're killing
them."' brought to you by brotherly Saudi Arabia]

DIVIDING THE SPOILS

*  Oil's well that ends well [Anatole Kaletsky argues that the war will not
cause any great financial upsets bcause the production of oil is now
assured, through the capture of the Southern fields (he is surely wrong at
the time of writing when he says the Kirkuk firld is secured). That being
the case 'As  far as the world economy and financial markets are concerned,
this war is  already over.' He goes on to argue  - rightly in my view - that
war in general is good for business.]
*  U.S., Allies Clash Over Plan to Use Iraqi Oil Profits for Rebuilding
[Question if 'the U.S. has the legal power under international law to seize
and sell Iraq's oil absent a new Security Council resolution' ... "It is
extremely doubtful any reputable oil company will purchase oil without clear
title." But some industry officials said oil companies might be willing to
buy Iraq oil if purchases were guaranteed by the United States.' The
emphasis is of course on using the oil for the benefit of the Iraqi people.
For example by paying off the debts the Iraqi people owe to Kuwait under the
UN Compensation Scam? Former Shell Oil Co. chief executive Philip J. Carroll
is tipped to be the man in charge of Iraqi oil]
*  Postwar Iraq would need more than oil funds, experts say [Dean Baker,
co-director of the liberal Center for Economic and Policy Research in
Washington, and Bathsheba Crocker, director of the Post-War Reconstruction
Project at the centrist Center for Strategic & International Studies, argue
that Iraq's economic condition is disastrous and will require 'an
international aid and debt relief program as ambitious as the Marshall
Plan'. As for oil, 'the more oil Iraq produces to try to pump up its
earnings, the more likely it becomes that prices will fall, leaving it no
better off than before', which reminds us of the problems that led President
Hussein to invade Kuwait in the first place]
*  Lead role suggested for oil majors in post-war Iraq [Talks between Iraqi
opposition leaders in exile and senior US officials, 'held under the
auspices of the oil and energy working group of the State Department's
future of Iraq project'. There is a reference to 'Baghdad's archaic oil
industry' but no reference to the conditions under which 'Baghdad's archaic
oil industry' had to operate for the past twelve (indeed the past twenty
five) years]
*  Exiles call for Iraq to let in oil companies [At 'the fourth round of
talks this weekend between Iraqi oil experts, international consultants and
the US State Department ... many in the group favoured production-sharing
agreements (PSA) with oil companies ... For years, big oil companies have
been fighting for such agreements without success in countries such as
Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.']
*  What companies are where in the Iraqi oil sector [List of companies that
have contracts with the Iraqi government or who were in negotiations. These
are the companies that would have invested in Iraqi oil once sanctions were
lifted (how they must have regretted their countries' idiotic insistence on
abiding by Security Council resolutions). Note that France has no definite
signed contracts. The countries that do have contracts are China, Russia,
Vietnam, Romania and Syria]
*  U.N. Releases $863M in Iraq-Kuwait Funds [The United Nations Compensation
Committee chooses just this moment to remind us of its existence. But now
that there is a possibility that the third of Iraq's oil income that goes on
compensation is going to be stolen from the US not from Mr Hussein, will
international law prove itself yet again to be ... responsive to
circumstances?]


AND, IN NEWS, 02-09/04/03 (3)

BBC CHRONOLOGY, 3rd - 8th April

WARS OF THE WAVES

*  BBC film maker killed by landmine
*  Ban on Al Jazeera lifted [by the Iraqi government]
*  Escaped Arab Journalist Questions Western Media's War Coverage
['Embedded' Arab journalist captured by Iraqis. "They will never tell the
truth of how many of their soldiers have been killed," Awwad said, adding
that near Az-Zubayr at least 20 British soldiers had been killed though the
official figure given was just two.]
*  US warplanes bomb Al Jazeera office, kill journalist
*  Michael Kelly: War reporter, editor and sworn foe of liberal tendencies
in American political life [An obituary]
*  Three Journalists Killed in U.S. Strikes [This account of the strike
against Reuters turns into a general account of strikes against journalists]


and, in News, 02-09/04/03 (4)

IN THE VICTORS' BAGGAGE TRAIN

*  Denmark Seeks U.S. Help to Find Iraqi Ex-General [Nizar al-Khazraji, as
it begins to be widely suspected that the US will be in the best position to
help]
*  Role for Exile Leaders Urged [Donald Rumsfeld proposes installing Ahmad
Chalabi in Southern Iraq to 'deflect international criticism that the United
States plans to exert sole control over Iraq for an indefinite period ... It
would also improve the chances for resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict, Perle said, because "Chalabi and his people have confirmed that
they want a real peace process, and that they would recognize the state of
Israel."']
*  U.S. Enlists Aid of 700 Iraqi Exiles ['Less than 100 others trained by
the Pentagon in Hungary went into Iraq earlier to do liaison jobs with
U.S.-led forces. It was not immediately clear how the new group was
organized and why it did not go through the same training. ... "We are proud
to contribute our forces," Ahmad Chalabi of the INC said in a statement
Sunday from Nasiriyah.]
*  U.S. Airlifts Iraqi Exile Force For Duties Near Nasiriyah [Extract giving
attempt to explain the relation between this group and the group in Hungary.
The explanation offered isn't very illuminating]
*  'Missing' Iraqi General Now in Kuwait: Paper [Danish paper gives account
of secret paper by Vincent Cannistraro]
*  US troops should stay in Iraq for at least two years: Chalabi [Chalabi
complains that 'the US Central Intelligence Agency now blames him for their
own faulty intelligence' and assures us (as he's said before): "I'm not a
candidate for any position in Iraq, and I don't seek an office," he told
CBS. "I think my role ends with the liberation of the country."]

THE JUNIOR PARTNER

*  Straw: UK won't back attack on Syria and Iran [That's comforting, but it
remains to be seen]
*  Why Britain wants this war [Lawrence Smallman argues for Al Jazeera that
behind all Mr Blair's moralising blether there is a coherent and intelligent
strategy to ensure stability of oil supplies, and to prevent the
consolidation of Europe. There is also a quite sincere pro Americanism.
Smallman refers to the annual meeting of the British American Project. 'Many
of the main figures in 'New Labour', including Tony Blair, have participated
in this project and then returned back to the UK inspired by US policy - in
pretty much the same way that Shaw and Wells were impressed by Stalin's
Russia in the 30s.']
*  Five killed in suicide bomb [Extract celebrating the Wisdom and Quiet
Authority of Tony Blair, who, it seems, brought us the war on Afghanistan.
Donald Rumsfeld & co, wanting to get on with Iraq, were inclined not to
bother with it. Thank heaven for Mr Blair]
*  British troops in Iraq have N.Ireland experience to draw on [This is
especially amusing at the time of the Bloody Sunday hearings in Londonderry.
What the British troops learned in Northern Ireland was the technique of
keeping their distance: driving the population mad with the perpetual noise
of overhead helicopters while leaving the dirty and dangerous work on the
ground to the local police and UDR (I don't really think Mr Chalabi's army
would be up to the task). As Adrian Guelke eventually says (is he being
ironic? I don't remember him as someone who is capable of being ironic): '"A
lot of helicopters in the sky, surveillance, spying on people, very heavily
fortitified army posts ... that kind of equipment will not be in place in
Iraq for quite a while"']


AND, IN NEWS, 02-09/04/03 (5)

SHI'I WHO MUST BE OBEYED

*  Clerics' blessing sought for Shia uprising [in pursuit of the the
Najaf-based Grand Ayatollah Sistani]
*  Main Shiite Opposition Vows to Stay Neutral Until Regime Toppled [Variety
of opinions: Hakim, Khoei, Sistani and Lebanese and Iranian. Sayyed
Abdelmajid al-Khoei is 'a scholar who has repeatedly called for Shiite
cooperation with the United States', but 'the Shiite religious leader in
Najaf, Grand Ayatollah Mirza Ali Sistani, denied a US military report that
he had issued a fatwa calling on the populace not to impede coalition
military forces, Arab news channel Al-Jazeera reported yesterday. On the
contrary, Iraqi television said Sistani and four other top Shiite scholars
at Najaf had called on Iraqis of all beliefs and ethnic groups to unite in
the defense of their country against "the enemies of God and humanity."']
*  Iraqi Shiite leader calls for immediate end to war and UN to rule Iraq
[Proposal by Ayatollah Mohammad Baqir Hakim which, however, doesn't offer
the conqueror anything in the way of spoils. One would have thought after a
millennial experience of having to deal with conquerors he would have known
better]
*  US hopes exile's return will sow seeds of new order [Account of
Abdelmajid al-Khoi (later, outside the period of this mailing, murdered) and
his relations with Grand Ayatollah, Ali Sistani: 'On Thursday, US military
officials said the cleric (Sistani) had issued a fatwa, or edict, declaring
that Iraqi Shia should not interfere with US forces. The son, however,
denied this, saying the fatwa said only that citizens should refrain from
looting.' Khoei says, helpfully, "Even if the Americans temporarily appoint
one of their generals to be president of Iraq, then the Shia will be fine
with that. But if they appoint a Sunni, then I guarantee there will be a
revolt. I will have to leave, because I promised them justice and it didn't
come."]

KURDS WHO MUST BE RESTRAINED

*  Kurdish Leader Freed From Norway Jail [Mullah Krekar 'after a court ruled
there wasn't enough evidence to hold him on charges of terrorism'. He seems
to get out of so many scrapes one begins to wonder if Mullah Krekar isn't
related to Mullah Nasruddin]
*  Iraqi missile kills 17 Kurds: report [in village of Kafri in northern
Iraq]
*  Saddam's army retreats to Mosul with heavy losses ['In reality, the
peshmerga do not have to advance into Kirkuk or Mosul. Once the Iraqi army
retreats or breaks up, about 300,000 Kurdish refugees from the two provinces
­ many of them armed ­ have said they intend to return home as soon as
possible. And it is becoming increasingly difficult for Turkey to invade
because of the growing number of US troops in northern Iraq.']
*  Turkey denies shelling Kurdish villages ['just inside the Iraqi border
near  Zakho, northern Iraq']
* A message to the Iraqi people from Tony Blair [Tony comes out with the
soothing sentiments he obviously thinks should be coming from George.
Including this: 'The money from Iraqi oil will be yours'. So huge amounts of
it won't be going off to pay the Kuwaiti compensation claim?]
*  Denied Entry Into Iran, Ansar Fighters Surrender ["Perhaps the Iranians
understand English better than Kurdish."]
*  Kurds get lucky, but not out of the woods yet [Moving defence of the
Kurds from Nick Cohen. Which includes the following interesting analogy:
'It's as if the Palestinians were to wake up and find that the world's only
superpower was on their side and land they thought they had lost forever was
back in their possession. The comparison isn't meant frivolously. What
Baathism has created in northern Iraq is a West Bank, and even friends of
the Kurds are worried about what will happen when the regime falls and the
ethnically cleansed go home.']
*  We lost everything! [Restatement of Kurdish case against the Iraqi
government behaviour in the campaigns of 1975 and 1988]
*  Kurds joyful, Arabs wary after town changes hands [Taking of Shehan, near
Mosul. In the Baath Party building: 'Another document listed the names of
Kurds who joined militias in the autonomous Kurdish area of northern Iraq
... It said their families in the town should pay for their sons' treason by
having their monthly food supplies ‹ likely under the U.N. oil-for food
program ‹ cut off.']
*  Iraqi Communists in North Dream of Brighter Future [Interesting account
of the Kurdish Communist Party, left over from the destruction of the Iraqi
CP: "As a party we have faced complete extinction at least three times ...
What party has ever faced what we have faced?"]
*  Atop Mountain, Rebel Kurds Cling to Radical Dream [Interesting account of
Turkey's Kurdish movement, KADEK, in Northern Iraq: 'For the rank and file,
the period of limbo in the mountains has become a sort of monastic retreat
... "Here, it is easier perhaps to concentrate, to devote yourself to the
fight without being caught up in things that have nothing to do with
revolution."']


AND, IN NEWS, 02-09/04/03 (6)

DESERTS OF ARABIA

*  Why are the Americans gunning for Syria? [Lebanon Daily Star roundup of
Arab press - admiration for Syria's stand; conviction that US agenda set by
Zionists]
*  Why non-Iraqis want to join the war [Rather touching account of Syrian
youth who was all set to go when his mother put a stop to it by confiscating
his 'passport, Syrian identity card, money']
*  The Arabs' stake in Iraq's resistance [Another Lebanon Daily Star roundup
of the Arab press, focussed on Syria. All the examples given are based on
the assumption that things are going badly for the Americans. There is a
reference to the possibility that Turkey might still deny the US overflight
rights - so that issue still didn't appear to have been resolved]
*  Saudis shun lucrative contracts to US-led forces in Iraq [including the
Al-Safi Dairy Co, 'the world's largest integrated dairy farm with some
32,000 cows']
*  UN can only have secondary role in Iraq: Arab League chief ['because it
was unable to prevent the US-led war from starting.' But then, so was the
Arab League]
*  AIPAC and the Iraqi opposition [Extract discussing the Saudi role in
helping the US war effort]
*  Arabs 'won't recognize' puppet American administration in Iraq [Lebanon
Daily Star roundup of Arab press]
*  Arabs react with dismay, disbelief to news of US troops in Baghdad [Vox
Pop in Ryadh: 'if this is true, it's quite frustrating']

PROGRESS OF THE PRETEXT

*  U.S. Troops Find Vials, Iraqi Chemical Arms Manuals [They later turned
out to be conventional explosives]
*  Marines shed their chemsuits ['after being told the threat of a chemical
or biological attack was no longer considered serious.' With all sorts of
improbable explanations, skirting round the obvious one]
*  Suspected WMD site in Iraq turns out to contain pesticide [material found
near Hindiyah]


NEWS, 02-09/04/03 (7)

'THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY? FUCK THEM.'

*  Turkey allows US to use its territory: Supplies for troops in Northern
Iraq [After Colin Powell's visit to Turkey: 'humanitarian aid ... food,
medical supplies and fuel supplies for the US troops ...  However, Prime
Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan told reporters later that supplies to US
forces would not include weapons or ammunition.' My understanding was that
such things were already going through (see 'Turks stone trucks carrying US
military equipment' and 'Violent protests in Turkey force US to put
equipment transport on hold' in last week's mailing). The problem being the
tendency of ordinary Turks to throw stones at them. No mention is made of
overflight rights]
*  Turkey to expel three Iraqi diplomats: Government source
*  Bush advisor: Canadians will rue PM's stand [But if, as Mr Perle
believes, the US doesn't need anyone else, why should he get upset at
Canada's lack of support? More interestingly, he envisages the possibility
of splitting the world between NATO, as 'a coalition of Liberal democracies
capable of acting to protect the interests of all of them from these new
threats' and the UN, as a body 'principally composed of corrupt, failed
despotic governments that refuse to act against terrorist and rogue states.'
I know which side I'm on ...]
*  In further bid to mend US ties, Putin promises to ratify nuclear accord
*  Chirac expresses support for allies in war cemetery apology
*  Convoy Evacuating Russian Diplomats Comes Under Fire [see next article
and also iraqwar.ru, (russian intelligence notes, perhaps), 6th April (2)]
*  Shooting overshadows Rice's Moscow visit ['"The Russian ambassador to
Iraq thinks that the column of Russian cars, filled with diplomats and
journalists, was deliberately attacked by the Americans," RIA Novosti
wrote"' Condoleezza Rice expresses great indignation that Russia might have
helped Iraq with the means to defend itself. But why should that be a
reprehensible thing to do? Oh, I know. It was a breach of 'international
law' ...]
*  Keep the UN well away from Iraq - for now [Simon Jenkins advises the UN
to have nothing to do with Iraq until a desperate US administration comes to
them, begging for help. An excellent, spirited article: 'For six months,
spin doctors have hurled at it [the world] the Big Lie, that the UN never
grasped the nettle of Saddam Hussein. They ignore the fact that the UN did
exactly what America and Britain told it to do, sanctioning and
impoverishing Iraq in pursuit of their chosen policy of containment. At no
point until the end did the Security Council deny Washington anything, even
when most of its members rightly thought that bombing and sanctions were
counterproductive to toppling Saddam. For Washington to accuse the UN of not
grasping this nettle is outrageous. Now that America and Britain have
grasped it, they had better hold on to it. As Mr Kingston waves his Tomahawk
over his head and cries, "Get lost, world", the world should retreat.' He
argues, rightly in my view, that an American withdrawal now would be
disastrous and irresponsible. There is no choice. Iraq must, for the
foreseeable future, be 'a Pentagon colony' and the only 'justice' should be,
blatantly, victors' justice. The implications are appalling but that is the
situation Messrs Blair and Bush have created. Nothing else is possible.]

ON THE HOME FRONT

*  New polls music to Pentagon ears as US support for war broadens
*  AIPAC and the Iraqi opposition [Extract on the attitudes to the war held
by the different Jewish schools in the US]
*  Forty injured as police fire rubber bullets at peace protesters [in
Oakland, California]

MURPHY'S LAW

*  U.S. Black Hawk helicopter shot down in Iraq [Includes brief accounts of
other recent incidents involving Black Hawk helicopters]
*  18 die as US plane bombs Kurdish convoy in worst 'friendly fire' incident
*  Accusations fly over lack of action on friendly fire deaths ['The number
of Iraqi non combatants killed will never be counted.' Though this time
there is an attempt to count civilian deaths - at least those that make it
into the newspapers - at http://www.iraqbodycount.net/ (the number at the
moment of writing is 1158 min/1411 max)]


AND, IN NEWS, 02-09/04/03 (8)

ASSUMING THE WHITE MAN'S BURDEN

*  Pentagon squares off against Powell, Europe ['the mainstream Brookings
Institution and the Council on Foreign Relations and (more surprisingly)
from right-wing think tanks such as the American Enterprise Institute and
the Hoover Institution' calling on Washington to '"seek passage of a
Security Council resolution that endorses the establishment of a civilian
administration in Iraq, authorizes the participation of UN relief and
reconstruction agencies, [and] welcomes the deployment of a security
stabilization force by NATO allies"'. It seems that the smarter elements of
the US political establishment are beginning to panic.]
*  Iraqis fear Americans may run country after war [Financial Times account
of rows surrounding the possible appointments of J.Woolsey and A.Chalabi
(the latter seems to count as an American)]
*  UN spells out limits of US post-conflict rights [Mark Malloch Brown, head
of the United Nations Development Programme on the impossibility of
reorganising Iraq, and especially the oil industry, without referring to the
United Nations]
*  Empires don't go home [Andrew Coyne, in the National Post, argues that US
imperialism isn't a danger because 'An empire is an explicit scheme of
territorial aggrandizement, born of military conquest and maintained by
force of arms. The conquered territory is wholly absorbed within the legal
and administrative structure of the imperial power.' Mr Coyne is not, it
seems, familiar with Marxist literature on Imperialism as 'the highest form
of capitalism' (strangely enough, after nearly a century, it still is). Here
the crucial thing is control of the national economy, not physical power
(which implies responsibility. Not an American concept). Its the difference
between slavery (owning black people) and sharecropping (controlling them
through debt). In the case of Iraq, however, there is just a little glimmer
of hope that the US will be tempted into the older, more classical,
'British' form of imperialism and that thereby 'history' might begin again.
All very fragile, but it seems that for the moment US mistakes are the only
thing left for the world to hope for (it would be difficult to imagine
anything more naive than Mr Coyne's conviction that 'At most, they [the US
leaders] hope to displace the rulers of a small number of dictatorships
that, like Iraq, have been waging a low-intensity war upon the United States
and its citizens for many years -- a situation American governments of both
parties have put up with for far too long, and which no American government
of either party would accept after Sept. 11.']
*  The Bush administration's dangerous colonial adventure [Patrick Seale
argues that the initial unexpected degree of Iraqi resistance has driven
USUK to move quickly using massive force and abandoning its earlier concern
to avoid civilian casualties (after all, if the population is already
against them, what have they got to lose?). He goes on to a discussion of
the differing US and UK post war strategies]
*  Can U.S. Rebuild Iraq Without Baathists? [asks Charles Tripp, a historian
of Iraq at London's School of Oriental and African Studies: '"The Iraqis
inside are the ones who can deliver the goods," he told Reuters, forecasting
that U.S. occupation forces "will let the Baathists reinvent themselves."']
*  U.S. may rely on Baathists after war
*  Lead role for US, UK in post-war Iraq reaffirmed [by Condoleezza Rice
(not, as Al Jazeera has it, showing an appalling level of ignorance,
Condoleeza Rice): "Given what we have been going through, what we are going
through, it is no surprise that the coalition should have the leading role";
and also by Colin Powell: "we would not support essentially handing
everything over to the UN for someone designated by the UN to suddenly
become in charge of the whole operation."]
*  Former general to head post-war administration [The Pentagon's office of
Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance moves into Umm Qasr. Note also:
'On Friday, the House of Representatives passed a supplementary budget
amendment excluding France, Germany, Russia and Syria from taking part in
US-funded reconstruction bids in Iraq because of their opposition to the
US-led war.']
*  US begins the process of 'regime change' ['Pentagon officials told The
Observer that the administration is determined to impose the Rumsfeld plan
and sees no use for a UN role, describing the international body as
'irrelevant'.']
*  UK to appoint deputy for interim authority ['The main Shia opposition and
Kurdish groups this week dismissed the Pentagon's plans and the decision to
put Gen Garner in charge.']
*  US and UK focus on legitimacy of interim rule ['"They [the occupying
powers] really have no rights under the Geneva Conventions to transform the
society or the polity or to exploit its economic resources or anything of
that sort," Shashi Tharoor, UN under-secretary general, said on Tuesday. But
he added that the UN did not want the "poisoned chalice" of running Iraq
either.' Let's just hope such wisdom prevails]


AND, IN NEWS, 02-09/04/03 (9)

WHO'S NEXT?

*  Ex-CIA director: U.S. faces 'World War IV' [James Woolsey, speaking at a
meeting of 'Americans for Victory Over Terrorism' identifies 'three enemies:
the religious rulers of Iran, the "fascists" of Iraq and Syria, and Islamic
extremists like al Qaeda.' All of them, we note, Muslim. He doesn't bother
with Noth Korea. "As we move toward a new Middle East," Woolsey said, "over
the years and, I think, over the decades to come ... we will make a lot of
people very nervous." The leaders of Egypt and Saudi Arabia for example, but
one wonders if Mr Blair mightn't be feeling a little nervous too. The notion
that JW is being tipped as 'Information Minister' in the new Iraqi
administration really does leave us with the impression that the lunatics
have taken over the asylum]
*  'Syria-next' seems improbable [Michael Young in the Lebanon Daily Star as
usual arguing that Washington should be humoured. He suggests that Syria has
a lot to lose if it persists in its present militant opposition to US power.
Although the title suggests that he wishes to be reassuring, the following
is anything but: 'According to Kuwait's Al-Rai al-Aam newspaper, US Special
Forces have destroyed part of the Kirkuk-Banyas pipeline that was used by
Iraq to export oil to Syria outside the UN's oil-for-food program. The
Americans also destroyed part of the railway link between the two countries
- both actions a clear message to Damascus that a US-dominated post-war Iraq
may look unkindly on Syria. This is also a US administration that has for
the first time called Syria's presence in Lebanon an "occupation." And the
person who did so was Powell ...']
*  The War That May End the Age of Superpower [Extracts. The article, from
the Asia Times, is a long account of the likely consequences of a long drawn
out war on the US economy, written on the assumption that Iraqi resistance
to the US invasion would persist.]
*  French duplicity rules UN out of rebuilding Iraq [by William Rees-Mogg.
If the French and the UN have any wit, and if they read the article by Mr
Mogg's fellow Times columnist, Simon Jenkins (in the International Community
section), they won't want anything to do with the rebuilding of Iraq]
*  Why We Fight [The New American is a journal attached to the John Birch
Society and arguing an isolationist position several degrees to the right of
Donald Rumsfeld. This article contains some astonishing material from A
World Effectively Controlled by the United Nations, a 1962 State
Department-commissioned study written by Dr. Lincoln P. Bloomfield of the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and "The Pentagon's New Map", a March
2003 Esquire magazine article by Thomas P.M. Barnett, a Pentagon specialist
in "Strategic Futures and, it appears, close associate of Mr Rumsfeld (it
can be got at http://www.nwc.navy.mil/newrulesets/ThePentagonsNewMap.htm).
These go to show that the aim of the war and of much previous US policy is
'connectedness' - bringing Iraq into contact with the 'Core' - the global
system of 'banking, tariffs, copyright protection, environmental standards'.
China and Russia are as bad and dangerous as Iraq and Syria, but they are
not targetted because they are in touch with the Core. This is seen as
ultimately a strategy for a homogenised world under the dominance of the UN
and the freedom loving US should have nothing to do with it]

ROUGH JUSTICE

*  Iraqi POWs Will Get Day in Court, but Which Court? [The US has discovered
a new crime - defending one's country against illegal invasion. And upon
what possible grounds can the Fedayeen Saddam be deemed to be unlawful
combatants - oh well, presumably the same grounds as the Taliban. And then
the 'Lawyers Committee for Human Rights' chips in usefully to say 'it was
important that those responsible for crimes in Iraq who fled to other
countries should also be tracked down.']
*  Red Cross Says It's Seen 3,000 Iraqi POWs
*  Plans for Iraqi-led courts to try Saddam's regime [The article includes
an interesting concept. Underneath the actual system of justice which
functioned in Iraq over the past thirty five years, there is a 'true' system
which somehow still exists and only needs to uncovered and hey presto we
have the legitimacy that is needed to try members of the Iraqi government.
Farfetched as that may be, however, it still seems less farfetched than the
alternative notion that a country that has just undertaken an illegal
invasion can call on the legal system of the United Nations to try the legal
government of the country that is the victim of the invasion]
*  Iraqi democracy is about judges, not voters [Lebanon Daily Star argues
that the first priority in Iraq is to establish an independent judiciary and
that this can only be done under the auspices of the UN]
*  U.S. plans war crimes tribunal without UN ['The officials said U.S.
military or civil courts have the right to prosecute Iraqis accused of
crimes in the current conflict.The Americans say Iraqis violated rules of
war by executing at least one U.S. prisoner, opening fire after feigning
surrender with a white flag, and parading U.S. prisoners of war before TV
cameras.' But for crimes against Iraqis: "We believe [the prosecutions] must
have some indigenous roots to reinstate the rule of law." Hopefully this
means that the United Nations will not be tainted by contact with this
particular venture]
*  Allies opt for bombs instead of trials [Attempts to target Iraqi
government leaders suggest USUK isn't very keen to bring them to trial]


AND, IN NEWS, 02-09/04/03 (10)

THE OLD IRAQ

*  Saddam's regime is a European import [Bernard Lewis argues that political
authority in the Muslim/Arab world has always traditionally been limited -
by religion or by other interest groups. The idea of an absolute unlimited
authority, which he sees as characteristic of the Baath Party - is
essentially a Western (Fascist/Communist) idea. He doesn't say it but it is
also an American idea - not within the US itself but increasingly in US
relations with the rest of the world, which seem to be based on the earlier
European concept of Absolute Monarchy]
*  Aid shipments to Iraq being refused [The Iraqi Red Crescent refuses help
from Jordan: "They said that they only wanted us to condemn the aggression
against Iraq, the killing of civilians and the violation of International
Humanitarian Law, particularly the bombardment of the Red Crescent Hospital
several days ago, which caused damage to the hospital and left several
injured."]     
*  Bagdhad, two cities separated by the Tigris [Short but quite useful
description of Baghdad, rich and pompous, or poor and picturesque]
*  British troops find human remains in Iraqi 'morgue'
*  Remains of 200 killed in Iran-Iraq war found near Basra [Al Jazeera
explains the morgue as remains of Iraqi soldiers recently returned by Iran]
*  Remains are old soldiers, not torture victims [Al Jazeera said remains of
Iraqi soldiers returned from Iran; the NY Times and Washington Post version
says remains of Iranian soldiers ready to be returned to Iran. Either
version presupposes that remains were kept and attempts made to identify
them, which is more than can be said for the bodies tumbled into the sand by
the forces of the United Nations at the end of the UN Gulf War]
*  US finds 'terrorist' camp [Salman Pak, though there is no mention of the
extensive underground facilities which used to feature so prominently when
it was a question of finding excuses to launch the war. We are told that the
camp has been destroyed (as well as some foreigners who were in it), which
seems to be a wanton destruction of possible evidence for Saddam Hussein's
connections with international terrorism]
*  Iran says Iraq-based armed opposition defecting in face of US-led
invasion [Mujahedeen al-Khalq. Sad to think that if the US had set abou
tackling the axis of evil in a different order the Mujahedeen al-Khalq would
have been promoted to the status of freedom fighters]
*  Ali Hassan al-Majid [an obituary]

THE NEW IRAQ

*  Umm Qasr aid effort 'a shambles' [Account by Patrick Nicholson fom the UK
charity Cafod]
 *  Call to prayer revived by troops [Bright picture of happy simple and
devout people flourishing under the benign gaze of their liberators. We
learn that during the time of the secularist Baath government the call to
prayer was forbidden and people had to pray in secret. The scene unfolds
somewhere unspecified but apparently around the southern oilfields. Which
suggests it is probably Shi'i. So why do they follow the Sunni practice of
five calls to prayer a day as opposed to the (I thought) usual Shi'i
practice of three?]
*  Baghdad hospitals on the brink of crisis ['Dr. Sadek al-Mukhtar described
this war as more destructive than the 1991 Gulf War. "In the previous
battles, the weapons seemed merely disabling; now they're much more lethal,"
he said ... "Damage to infrastructure is further hampering relief efforts in
and around the city," said Wimhurst, citing the destruction of a bridge
leading south from Baghdad which made alternative routes south of the city
unsafe. The ICRC has described the situation as "near critical" in the
capital with water systems to become quickly affected with no maintenance of
power plants and generators. Lack of adequate clean water is hampering
efforts to treat the wounded.']
*  ICRC stops staff movement in Baghdad
*  Lack of fresh water threatens hospitals swamped by casualties
*  War Against Iraqi People [Everyday examples of death and humiliation]


AND, IN NEWS, 02-09/04/03 (11)

RUSSIAN INTELLIGENCE NOTES, PERHAPS NOT

*  3rd April [Iraqi forces taken by surprise by rapid US thrust. 'Due to the
intensive aerial and artillery strikes the Iraqi headquarters [in Karabela]
lost most of its communication facilities and has partially lost control of
the troops ... The Iraqi losses were up to 100 killed and up to 300
captured. The US troops destroyed or captured up to 70 Iraqi tanks and
APCs.' Coalition also made substantial progress in al-Kut, but not round
Najaf, nor Nasariyah: "...Resilience of this unquestionably brave enemy is
worth respect. Four time we offered them to lay down their arms and
surrender, but they continue resisting like fanatics..." USUK dominance
based on air power which is especially useful in the desert. The article
concludes: 'Foreseeing the possibility of a future military standoff between
the US and North Korea the analysts are certain that the US cannot hope for
a military victory on the Korean Peninsula without the use of nuclear
weapons.']
*  4th April [This report claims that the Iraqis had already written off
Baghdad airport before the US troops arrived; there is no evidence that the
"Medina" ("Al Madina al Munavvara") and the "Hammurabi" Republican Guard
divisions of the 2nd Republican Guard Corps were destroyed; numbers of
Iraqis captured by the US troops are unimpressive ('just over 1,000 people
only half of whom, according to the reports by the US field commander, can
be considered regular troops of the Iraqi army'). Resistance continues in
Nasariya: 'The US troops are no longer trying to storm the areas [of
An-Nasiriya] held by the elements of the Iraqi 11th Infantry Division, but
instead use artillery and aviation to methodically destroy these areas'.
Which conforms to the general picture of quick advances made possible by
massive, and largely indiscriminate, bombing]
*  5th April [The GRU Report for 5th April gets off to a surprising start:
'The situation on the US-Iraqi front is characterized by gradual reduction
of American offensive activity ... It is supposed that during the next two
days the American command will attempt local strikes in order to improve and
extend their positions on the south and, especially, south-west approaches
to Baghdad (crossing the Baghdad ­ Samarra roadway) and begin bringing fresh
forces from Kuwait.' An explanation is given for the dismissal of 'Commander
of the 1st Expeditionary Marine Squadron colonel Joe Dowdy' The crossing of
the Euphrates at Nasariya is still insecure - 'Every column passing across
the bridge gets shot by Iraqis from the left bank and the marines have to
cover it by setting smoke screens and delivering constant fire' but Najaf
has been penetrated. Only narrow corridors are being held at Hilla and
al-Kut. On the Northern front: 'Kurds are mainly busy robbing neighboring
villages and transporting the stolen goods into their basic regions.
According to American special forces which have recently been replaced here,
sometimes after capturing a village up to half of the Kurdish squadron
abandon their positions. They load stolen property into captured cars and
leave for their homes to be back next morning for new salvage.' A general
breakdown in morale and in morality is affecting the British troops at
Basra]
*  6th April (1) [Dramatic six hour battle for the airport described:
'During the fight Iraqis lost up to 20 tanks, 10 APC, about 200 men killed
and up to 300 wounded. The American losses were up to 30 men killed, about
50 wounded, at least 4 tanks, 4 APC and 1 helicopter ... there are no
reasons to expect any serious attempts to capture the city in the nearest
future. By numerical strength the coalition troops that have reached the
city borders do not meet even the minimal requirements for storming and
heavy urban fights.' (The option of simply pounding the city from the air
doesn't seem to have occurred to them - PB.) 'All the claims made by
aviation commander of the coalition, general Michael Mosley, about "ŠIraqi
army, as an organized structure consisting of large units, exists no
longerŠ" are contrary to fact and, according to analytics, are probably
connected with severe pressure put on the military command by American
financial groups that desperately needed good news from the US-Iraqi front
by the end of the financial week.']
*  6th April (2) [Iraqis taken by surprise and suffered serious losses
during incursion into the city, 5th April. US forces at Nasariya, Najaf, Kut
and Diwaniya told to smash remaining Iraqi resistance quickly to reinforce
the besieging army at Baghdad. The Russian column attacked by US air force
was leaving Baghdad because the US had ordered the closure of the Russian
Embassy. Speculation that it was a deliberate ambush: 'The coalition special
operations HQ were sure that the embassy column would contain secret devices
taken from military equipment captured by Iraqis. In this connection one
cannot shut out the possibility of "revenge" from the coalition command.']
 *  7th April (a) [Tank incursion of 7th April, described as an attempt to
rescue c200 commandos engaged in an unsuccessful attempt to snatch
government officials.]
*  7th April (b) [Fuller account of the tank incursion. 'According to some
data most of the high command left the city after it had been blocked and
moved to a reserve command center located in the northern regions of Iraq
while the local command remaining in the city has not taken control over the
situation yet. Some officers in the coalition HQ presume that if this is the
case then even storming Baghdad will not finish this war and a "campaign to
the north", where quite an effective and large group of Iraqi troops
remains, might be necessary.' British take nine hours to seize new Basra.
Old Basra is still holding out. The Iraqis abandon Karbala but
L„pŹQq•-Nasiriya, AI@jaf, Al-Kut, An-Divaniya]
*  8th April ['According to reports by American commanders the resistance of
the Iraqis does not make an impression of them acting under a united
organized command and looks more like operations of autonomous groups.' This
is the last of these articles, which of course reinforces the impression
that there is no more coherent Iraqi military activity]
 *  Ramzaj discontinues operation [Explanation of why this interesting
exercise has been abandoned. It is made clear that it was not in fact a
direct product of Russian intelligence. The statement 'Direct TV broadcasts
are far more evident than any analytics' is surprisingly foolish]


_______________________________________________
Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.casi.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/casi-discuss
To contact the list manager, email casi-discuss-admin@lists.casi.org.uk
All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk