Informed Comment

Thoughts on the Middle East, History, and Religion

Juan Cole is President of the Global Americana Institute

Wednesday, September 03, 2008

Bombings in Mosul, Baghdad kill 11;
Maliki's Conflict with Kurds Deepens;
Anbar Sheikhs Angered by US Handover

DPA reports that "Seven people were killed in a car bombing in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul city Tuesday . . . a suicide bomber detonated his explosives-laden vehicle near an Iraqi army checkpoint in the eastern al-Quds neighbourhood, killing seven people and wounding seven. . . In Baghdad twin attacks that targeted police patrols left four people dead and 14 injured, the Voice of Iraq (VOI) news agency reported."

Reuters has more.

Among the dead was one US soldier, who died in a non-combat related incident.

Kurdistan president Masoud Barzani calls the al-Maliki government "totalitarian," comparing it to Saddam's tyranny. He warns that if a referendum is not held soon in Kirkuk province over whether it will join the Kurdistan Regional Government that Barzani heads, he will act to support the Kirkuk council's call for the city to be annexed into Kurdistan. Barzani's frustrations are clearly boiling over in this interview, and signal how near a military confrontation his Peshmerga security forces are with the Iraqi army and other Iraqi groups such a s Arabs and Turkmen.

Jonathan Steele's sources underline that if the Iraqi army insists on going into Kurdish regions in the north of Diyala Province, there could be a military confrontation between it and the Peshmerga. The crisis over control of security in the city of Khanaqin remains unresolved.

Joost Hilterman writing at Abu Aardvark also sees the situation as dire.

Time reports that America's tribal allies in al-Anbar province are angry that the US turned the province over to the Iraqi government. The Awakening Council and tribal leaders fear that the Baghdad government will use its control over the police and army to benefit the Iraqi Islamic Party, which currently controls the province but was elected with only 2% of the vote in January, 2005. The IIP is part of the Iraqi Accord Front, made up of Sunni fundamentalists, who recently rejoined the al-Maliki government. Money graf:


' Only a handful of the 40 or so Awakening leaders attended the ceremony in Ramadi, a snub that Sheikh Natah says was intended as a clear message to the government. At heart is a power struggle between the Awakening council and the Iraqi Islamic Party . . . Unlike the last time around in 2005, the Sunni tribal elders are eager to contest the polls, and say they wanted U.S. troops to remain in Anbar until after the elections to help ensure a free and fair ballot. They also want their key ally, police chief Major General Tareq Youssef al A'sal al Dulaimi, reinstated to the position he was ousted from just a few days ago. (Dulaimi was removed for unspecified "administrative" reasons.) The Awakening members say Dulaimi's sudden removal, which was approved by the Interior Ministry, has cemented their fears that their local Sunni rivals in the Iraqi Islamic Party are maneuvering to gain control of Anbar's 28,000-strong police force and purge it of tribal loyalists. . . . "If the Islamic Party continues to pressure the government to remove the Awakening members from the security forces ... then there is a high likelihood that Anbar will return to violence," Sheikh Natah says.'


Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that the US military has decided not to hand over security to the Iraqis in 6 ethnically mixed provinces until after the US elections. They include Salahuddin, Mosul, Baghdad, Diyala, Kirkuk and Hilla. The 12 provinces in which the US has given the lead to Iraqi forces on security are more ethnically or religiously homogeneous, in the Shiite south or the Kurdish north.

AP reports that Baghdad is still very dangerous despite lowered death tolls from political violence:
' Small scale bombings and shootings persist in the capital — each a reminder that the war is not over and that Baghdad remains a place where no trip is routine and residents are still guided by precautions. Most won't drive at night. Many try to avoid heavily clogged streets, remembering that suicide bombers and other attackers intent on killing large numbers of civilians favor traffic jams or congested areas . . . [in August] at least 360 civilians were killed and more than 470 wounded in violence throughout the country, according to an Associated Press count. '


That would be 4,320 civilians killed in political violence every year if the level stayed that low. (I take it this number excludes killed 'insurgents' and Iraqi security forces, so that actual number of war-related deaths would be much higher annually.)

It is estimated that 75,000 persons have died in the civil war in Sri Lanka since 1982, or 2800 a year.

Iraq is higher, just with regard to civilian casualties.

The Kashmir conflict is estimated to have killed 70,000 persons since 1988, or about 3500 a year.

Iraq is higher.

In the Lebanon Civil War of 1975-1990, it is estimated that at least 100,000 persons were killed, 75,000 civilians and 25,000 military.

If we extrapolated out Iraq's August death rate for civilians over 15 years, that would be 64,000 or not far from the toll in Lebanon's war.

Let me repeat: The level of violence at this moment in Iraq is similar to what prevailed on average during one of the 20th century's worst ethnic civil wars! It is still higher than the casualty rates in Sri Lanka and Kashmir, two of the worst ongoing conflicts in the world.

Only in an Orwellian society could our press declare the relative decline in monthly death tolls in Iraq to constitute "calm" in an absolute sense.

And that is if the August levels are taken as the baseline and if the numbers continue to be that low. If we averaged deaths during the previous 12 months, the baseline would be much higher.

The current Iraq Civil War is one of the world's most deadly continuing conflicts, worse than Sri Lanka and Kashmir and on a par with the 15-year long Lebanon Civil War!

Labels:

CNN Does its Job, McCain Punishes It

Campbell Brown of CNN asks McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds some hard questions about Sarah Palin's national security experience and refuses to let him get away with illogical and self-contradictory answers.



John McCain was furious (and no one can be furious the way he can) and cancelled his planned interview on CNN in a fit of pique.

Tuesday, September 02, 2008

Amy Goodman Manhandled, Arrested for Protesting Arrest of News Staff

Thousands of protesters rallied against the Iraq War at the Republican Convention on Monday.

The thousands of protesters were almost all peaceful. I had US cable news on all day off and on, and never saw anything on it about the protests. Some teenager was pregnant, which is not their business or mine, but that was what they were talking about. Protesting the Republican Party's warmongering and lethal corruption for the past 8 years-- a record that has made it impolitick for George W. Bush to attend the conference of the party he still technically leads-- now that was unworthy of public comment.

A few at the rally were accused of breaking windows or throwing bottles at the police. 284 arrests were made.

The press accounts suggest that in some instances police acted overly aggressively (i.e. unconstitutionally), moving in on protesters who were peaceful.

Over the weekend, police seized printed materials and protest plans from some of the organizers and arrested a handful, charging them with conspiracy to commit civil disorder. Gee, you could have arrested Martin Luther King every day of the week on that charge.

That something was very wrong with at least some of the police response in Minneapolis is demonstrated by the arrest and manhandling of Amy Goodman and two of her staff members. They were there as press. They were not throwing anything. I know them, and have been on the show numerous times. They are honest, committed people, and if they say they were wrongly treated, they were.

Over the weekend, Democracy Now! reporter Elizabeth Press had been arrested, apparently for planning to film police response to the protests.

Among those arrested was Amy Goodman (video below), who was later released.



This site gives Amy's side of the story:

' ST. PAUL -- Democracy Now! host Amy Goodman and producers Sharif Abdel Kouddous and Nicole Salazar have all been released from police custody in St. Paul following their illegal arrest by Minneapolis Police on Monday afternoon.

All three were violently manhandled by law enforcement officers. Abdel Kouddous was slammed against a wall and the ground, leaving his arms scraped and bloodied. He sustained other injuries to his chest and back. Salazar's violent arrest by baton-wielding officers, during which she was slammed to the ground while yelling, "I'm Press! Press!," resulted in her nose bleeding, as well as causing facial pain. Goodman's arm was violently yanked by police as she was arrested.

On Tuesday, Democracy Now! will broadcast video of these arrests, as well as the broader police action. These will also be available on: Democracynow.org.

Goodman was arrested while questioning police about the unlawful detention of Kouddous and Salazar who were arrested while they carried out their journalistic duties in covering street demonstrations at the Republican National Convention. Goodman's crime appears to have been defending her colleagues and the freedom of the press.

Ramsey County Sheriff Bob Fletcher told Democracy Now! that Kouddous and Salazar were arrested on suspicion of rioting, a felony. While the three have been released, they all still face charges stemming from their unlawful arrest. Kouddous and Salazar face pending charges of suspicion of felony riot, while Goodman has been officially charged with obstruction of a legal process and interference with a "peace officer."

Democracy Now! forcefully rejects all of these charges as false and an attempt at intimidation of these journalists. We demand that the charges be immediately and completely dropped.'


Ever since Bush and his gang came to power, there has been a concerted attempt to destroy the First Amendment right to peaceful assembly.

New York City recently settled with antiwar protesters illegally arrested in spring of 2003, paying $2 million. Those protesters, remember, had been trying to avert the catastrophe that was the Iraq War, or at least not have it go without public expression of dissent.

Ironically, Democracy Now! is among the few news programs that tries to deliver real news to the American public, not the babysitting pap that passes for such so often in the corporate media. Of course, in our Bushwellian State, its staff would have to be arrested for committing News.

Hang in there, Amy.

US Turns over Al-Anbar;
Is al-Maliki Too Cocky?

The US has handed over security duties in al-Anbar Province to Iraqi troops and police. Maj. Gen. John Kelly warns,however,that al-Anbar needs an infusion from the central government of cash for reconstruction if the province is to avoid going into insurgency yet again.

McClatchy reports on fears of American officials that Iraqi PM Nuri al-Maliki has become over-confident. Many of the relative successes his troops have had have depended on American close air support and logistical help, something these observers do not believe he can dispense with so soon.

There are also worries that al-Maliki wants to take over the Awakening Councils so that he can purge the Sunni Arabs serving in them.

The article also reveals that there has been a deterioration in the security situation in Basra in recent weeks, with a spike in assassinations. The American official who admitted this deterioration had to remain anonymous since his assessment is more negative than the facade put up by the Bush administration. It is a hell of a note when propaganda is the official story and people have to hide behind aliases if they just want to speak the truth.

Raed translates a leaked draft of the security agreement being negotiated between al-Maliki and Bush. Despite al-Maliki's emphasis in news conferences on preserving Iraq sovereignty, the draft agreement subordinates Iraq to the US military in several articles.

McClatchy reports political violence in Iraq on Sunday:

' Baghdad

Three civilians were injured by an adhesive bomb that was attached to their car. The incident took place in al Taharriyat intersection in Karrada neighborhood in downtown Baghdad around 12:30 p.m.

Around 7:00 pm. An IED explosion targeted the car of Emad Sa’id Jasim al Mish’hadani, the leader of the Sahwa council in Tarmiyah north of Baghdad. Al Mish’hadani was injured seriously.

Police found one unidentified body in Talbiyah neighborhood in east Baghdad.

Kirkuk

A child was killed and two other children were injured by a roadside bomb that targeted a patrol Kirkuk emergency forces in al Qadisiyah neighborhood in downtown Kirkuk city.

Ten people were injured including five guards work for Abdul Ameer Mahdi; the judge of Tuz Khurmatu court when a suicide car bomb targeted the convoy of Judge Mahdi on the road between Kirkuk and Tuz Khurmatu around 11:45 a.m.

Diyala

Three farmers (two brothers and their nephew were killed by a bomb that was planted inside the water pump of their farm in al Othmaniyah village south of Baquba on Monday evening.'

Labels:

Mills: The Dangerous Myth of Energy Independence

Robin M. Mills writes in an op-ed for IC

A pernicious myth has recently re-emerged: that oil is ‘running out’, that global production will soon peak and enter inexorable decline. What is the proper response to ‘peak oil’ – to attempt energy self-sufficiency, or to take military control of oil producing regions before the Chinese or Russians get there?

The current high energy prices emerge from a long period of low prices and under-investment, itself the fruit of the breakdown of international energy relationships in the oil crises of 1973-4 and 1978-80. Contrary to vocal ‘peak oil’ claims, high prices are not due to a lack of resources in the ground. There remains vast potential around the world for increasing recovery from existing fields, discovering new oil, as recently in deepwater Brazil, or in the largely untouched US offshore, and for ‘unconventional’ sources such as Canada’s famous ‘oil sands’, biofuels, synthetic fuels from natural gas and coal, and others.

Ideas about forestalling an oil crisis by ‘energy independence’, or by military action, are therefore mistaken. Indeed, such ‘solutions’ are likely to create the crisis they seek to mitigate. ‘Energy independence’ for the United States was touted by Nixon in 1974, by Ford in 1975, by Carter in 1977, by Reagan in 1981, by Bush Senior in 1991, by Clinton in 1992 and by Bush Junior in 2003, during which time American oil imports doubled. ‘Peak oil’ ideas, recent high oil prices and fears of Middle East hostilities seem to have made the quest more urgent. Campaigns encourage American consumers to boycott Middle Eastern ‘terrorist oil’, and laws are proposed to sue OPEC. When Arab countries, even staunch US allies, attempt to recycle their oil earnings into the faltering American economy, politicians whip up media storms to keep them out.

Such a climate, with elements of paranoia, racism and Islamophobia, is profoundly harmful to the proper objective of energy policy: not independence, but security. Energy security is achieved when suppliers find markets, and markets find supply, at prices permitting both of them economic stability and growth. This requires a complex web of inter-relationships between producers and consumers. As the oil company Chevron observes in its advertising, ‘There are 193 countries in the world. None of them are energy independent’, a fact well illustrated by the USA’s recent deal to supply nuclear power technology to the oil-rich United Arab Emirates. In a global market, like that for oil, no country can wall itself off - compare the flourishing state of energy-poor Japan or Singapore with the poverty of isolated Burma or North Korea. Attempts by a major nation to achieve energy self-sufficiency are very distorting to economic competitiveness, as is clear from the contradictory blunders of 1970s US energy policy.

It is even worse when bad relations with major energy suppliers, and conflicting messages about future energy policy, discourage much-needed investment. If one side believes they are buying oil from terrorists, and the other thinks they are selling to neo-imperialists, it is not surprising that oil prices are high, investment is lacking and most of world oil reserves are monopolised by state companies. In fact, the Middle Eastern nations have generally been very reliable suppliers, and use of a mythical ‘oil weapon’ is very unlikely – any régime would be reliant on its oil earnings to sustain the economy, while strategic reserves in the industrialised countries give some ‘staying power’ to outlast an embargo. Moreover, while terrorists might manage to penetrate the strong defences of an oil facility and mount a spectacular attack, it is unlikely that they could achieve major, long-running disruptions in global energy supplies.

Policies to encourage US domestic production, increase efficiency and introduce alternative energy sources are desirable, often for environmental rather than energy security reasons, but they have to be pursued with vigour and resolution. With its ‘pork barrel’ subsidies and the interminable, inconclusive debates over whether to open new exploration areas, build new pipelines and terminals for clean natural gas, extend support for renewable energy and increase mileage standards, United States energy policy has been more erratic and hostile to increasing output than most of the Middle Eastern countries. Promises to ‘jawbone’ OPEC into supplying more oil sit very oddly with the US’s uniquely comprehensive moratoria on offshore oil and gas production.

Because of the abundance of oil and other energy sources, an era of ‘resource wars’, predicted by some, is far from inevitable, and certainly not a desirable policy outcome even for the likely ‘winners’ of such wars. We should certainly not fall into the monomaniac trap of seeing every geopolitical conflict as rooted in oil policy. Military ‘control’ of oil is not achievable or cost-effective, as the Iraq war shows, and as we know already from the Japanese experience in World War II, and Saddam Hussein’s attack on Iran. The expenditure on such wars vastly exceeds the value of any oil ‘secured’, and while production can struggle along in war-torn areas, it is impossible to develop major new fields. ‘Police actions’ to deal with specific threats are entirely reasonable, as long as they are multi-lateral and proportional to the danger posed. It would be nice, although possibly a lot to ask, for them to be carried out competently.

Thus grandiose military adventures destroy the co-operation which is essential for global energy trade. ‘Energy independence’ is a chimera, expensive, unachievable, and swimming against the tide of greater global economic integration. The world is not running out of oil, but we need a rational and balanced dialogue about how to co-operate on bringing that abundant energy to consumers. If the profound misunderstanding of, and hostility towards, the Middle East, continues, the house of energy security is being built on sand.

Robin M. Mills, author of ‘The Myth of the Oil Crisis’ (Praeger, 2008)

ROBIN M. MILLS is an oil industry professional with a background in both geology and economics. Currently, he is Senior Evaluation Manager for Dubai Energy. Previously, he worked for Shell. Mills is a member of the International Association for Energy Economics and Association of International Petroleum Negotiators. He holds a Master's Degree in Geological Sciences from Cambridge University

Monday, September 01, 2008

Integration of Sunni Awakening Councils a Challenge;
Some Mahdi Army Fighters Reject Ceasefire;
Khanaqin Crisis with Kurds Unresolved

Al-Zaman reports in Arabic that hundreds of members of the Mahdi Army of Sayyid Muqtada al-Sadr are rejecting his call for a long-term ceasefire with US troops and their transformation into a service organization. The militants say they cannot conceive of their mission in life as anything other than violently opposing the presence of US troops in their country.

The US military is turning security in al-Anbar Province over to a largely Shiite government and army that "hates" the Sunni Awakening Councils that now provide much of the bulwark against radical Salafi fundamentalist guerrillas. Nevertheless, the Iraqi government is slated to take over payments to 55,000 of the Awakening Council fighters in October. Some doubt that this process will go smoothly.

One little-noted aspect of the struggle between the central government and the Awakening Councils is, as Sawt al-Iraq reports in Arabic, the conflict between the Iraqi Islamic Party (the Iraqi branch of the Muslim Brotherhood). Awakening leader Sheikh Mu'ayyad al-Hamishi complained Sunday that the Iraqi Islamic Party had attempted to piggy back on the Awakening movement by forming its own Awakening Councils, some of whom he implied were indisciplined and damaged the reputation of the movement as a whole. The Iraqi Islamic Party and its fundamentalist allies have 44 seats in Parliament and control several Sunni-majority provinces, and the IIP fears that the Awakening Councils as a political force will displace it in the upcoming provincial elections.

Al-Anbar Province will be a major test. US troop levels there have already declined from 37,000 in February to 28,000 today.

AFP profiles two members of a radical fundamentalist cell in Dhuluiyyah who have accepted an amnesty and laid down their arms, in part out of disgust at the foreign vigilantes' attacks on young Iraqi men they saw as collaborators.

The Iraqi government is mounting a campaign against what it calls 'squatters,' families who have moved into homes vacated because of ethnic cleansing. The campaign is part of PM Nuri al-Maliki's press for the return of Iraqi refugees from abroad. The some 200,000 refugees in Jordan are resisting al-Maliki's pressure on them to return. The United Nations High Commission on Refugees in Amman told me a couple of weeks ago that they do not consider it safe for Iraqis to go back. One big problem is that so many mixed neighborhoods have been ethnically cleansed of Sunnis that the latter do not actually have anywhere to return too-- their old neighborhood has been abolished in favor, of, e.g. a new Sadrist reality. That is why chasing the 'squatters' out won't do much good (and the squatters themselves are often victims of ethnic cleansing elsewhere. I doubt there are many Shiites left in al-Anbar province, e.g.). Al-Zaman says that a Sunni fundamentalist guerrilla attack on Sunday on Wathba near Baladruz in Diyala forced 48 families out, so that the ethnic cleansing is continuing. Al-Sharq al-Awsat says that 'al-Qaeda in Iraq' attacked the family of a local leader of the Awakening Council, killing 4, including two children, and frightening the other families into departing for provincial capital of Baquba. Many of these families had only recently returned to Wathba, in hopes security had improved.

Iraqi troops in Khanaqin ordered Kurdish political parties to vacate their offices, which apparently are in government-owned buildings. Khanaqin in northern Diyala Province was a stonghold of Faili Kurds, Shiites, who had been forced by Saddam over the border into Iran but who have returned in the tens of thousands since his fall. Many Kurds in Khanaqin want to join the Kurdistan Regional Government [KRG]. Ever since the Iraqi army went into Khanaqin and other Kurdish areas of Diyala Province, there has been tension between it and the Kurdish fighters or Peshmerga that had provided security to Kurdish areas. Al-Zaman reports in Arabic that parliamentarian Humam Hamudi of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (the main party backing al-Maliki) said al-Maliki had threatened any Peshmerga forces discovered in Iraq proper outside the KRG with prosecution. Hamudi implicitly threatened the Kurdistan government, saying that it is given 17% of Iraqi government revenue (from which the Peshmerga are paid) but that it should only be 13%.

Iraq's Chief of Staff, Gen. Babakr Zibari, insisted at a news conference on Sunday that Khanaqin is an indivisible part of Iraq and that the Iraqi military has the right to conduct operations in the city at will. Zibari is himself a Kurd.

Labels:

Palin Laughs at Cancer-Surviving Senator being called a "Cancer";
Green: Palin 'Not Qualified to be Governor'

She could have insisted these male shock jocks be civil or defended another woman politician, Lyda Green, from being dismissed with an expletive.

GOP VP pick Sarah Palin laughs at cancer surviving senator being called a "bitch"



The Republican head of the Alaskan Senate, Green reacted this way to John McCain picking Palin as his running mate:

' State Senate President Lyda Green said she thought it was a joke when someone called her at 6 a.m. to give her the news. "She's not prepared to be governor. How can she be prepared to be vice president or president?" said Green, a Republican from Palin's hometown of Wasilla. "Look at what she's done to this state. What would she do to the nation?" Green, who has feuded with Palin repeatedly over the past two years, brought up the big oil tax increase Palin pushed through last year. She also pointed to the award of a $500 million state subsidy to a Canadian firm to pursue a natural gas pipeline that is far from guaranteed.'


But then Palin's running mate said "how do we beat the bitch?" was a "good question" and laughed when some guy said the same question pertained to his own wife.

OSC: Qabbanji and Saghir: Kirkuk Crisis Endangers Shiite-Kurdish Alliance

The USG Open Source Center translates Iraqi sermons from Friday

Roundup of Iraqi Friday Sermons 29 Aug
Iraq -- OSC Summary
Saturday, August 30, 2008
Document Type: OSC Summary

... On the "crisis of Kirkuk and Khanaqin," [Sheikh Sadr al-Din] Al-Qabbanji says: "There is a crisis in Iraq now called the Kirkuk crisis. There are Arabs, Kurds, and Turkomans who say that Kirkuk belongs to us. We also have the Khanaqin crisis. The armed forces affiliated with the central government entered Khanaqin and the brothers in the Kurdish Peshmerga said that this entry is unwarranted and consequently we have our position on this entry. This is a crisis in the country. It is the Kirkuk and the Khanaqin crisis. In this regard, we stress that the Shiite-Sunni-Kurdish alliance is the side that protected Iraq. This alliance should not be relinquished under any circumstances. This is a red line for us. We will not relinquish or violate the strategic and holy alliance between us and the Sunnis. You have seen how we dealt with the sectarian sedition until it was buried. The alliance between the Shiites and Kurds is also a strategic one and we will not relinquish it. We will not relinquish this alliance because of some minor issues. For us, this is a great principle; namely, the Shiite-Sunni-Kurdish alliance. This is a firm position which we will not relinquish. In this regard, we should resort to reason, logic, and the spirit of amity. It is true that these are rights, but it is also true that rights without amity are bitter."

Al-Qabbanji adds: "It is not in the interest of anyone to foment sedition regarding the Kirkuk issue.The only group that has interest in this are the Ba'thists. These Ba'thists area group of wolves. We expelled them from the village and they are now thinking of attacking the village once again. They cannot attack and cause internal problems among the people of the village."

He says: "Based on this, we call on the Kurdish brothers just as we call on the Arab and Turkoman brothers in Kirkuk to be aware of the challenges. We have great challenges ahead of us. We have an enemy that wants to kill all of us. We do not want anyone to relinquish his rights. However, it is wrong not to think of priorities. What are these priorities? The priority is the safety of Iraq."

On the election issue,Sayyid Hasan al-Zamili says: "The mother of all problems in this regard is the Kirkuk issue. We believe that delaying the elections until 1 December,taking into consideration that some sides are trying to delay the elections until 1 December, will create a real problem in the country. This will create a legal and political vacuum."

He adds: "We call on the Council of Representatives to have as its first priority to vote on the Election Law. We strongly and firmly demand that the elections should take place on the set date. Delaying the elections harms the country and the political situation and causes us various vacuums and problems. The one who benefits from these problems is only the one who is lying in wait for us, the bankrupt, and the one who opposes the political process."

He calls for avoiding "party, parochial, ethnic, and sectarian interests," saying that"all entities and groups should adopt a real national position." . . .


Buratha News Agency in Arabic -- Shiite news agency with strong anti-Sunni sentiment and focus on news of the Iraqi Islamic Supreme Council, is observed to carry the following report on a Friday sermon by Shaykh Jalal-al-Din al-Saghir, imam and preacher of the Buratha Mosque:

In his Friday sermon,Al-Saghir says: "There is a defect that has nothing to do with this or that minister. In fact, there is a problem in the administrative and economic system in this country. If this defect is not solved, problems will not be solved.If we solve a problem here today, we will have another problem there tomorrow.This defect is the centralism of the state and its control on everything."

Al-Saghir then highlights the "private sector's" role in solving the problem of electricity and other problems in Iraq. He urges the government to "give a free rein"to the private sector to solve these problems. He says that the private sector can solve the problem of electricity "in one year."

On the elections and the Kirkuk issue, Al-Saghir says: "From the beginning I said that some sides want to use the Kirkuk issue as a bridge to cross to an agenda that is much bigger than the Kirkuk issue. One option is an ethnic war in Kirkuk. What does an ethnic war mean? It means that the situation will no longer be controlled by the Iraqis, but by all the neighboring states. This is because the neighboring states do not consider the Kirkuk issue as an issue that is particularly based on voting, but it is an issue that has to do with the ethnic issue that is connected with at least three major states; namely, Syria, Turkey, and Iran.This is in addition to the other states that are present in Iraq. If the situation proceeds toward an ethnic war, they will win. The side that has been tampering with the political process all this time will win. After they failed to ignite a sectarian war, incite the Shiites against the Sunnis and the Sunnis against the Shiites, and create a Shiite infighting and a Sunni infighting,they have come to try the other card; namely, to foment sedition between the Arabs and Kurds, between the Turkomans and Kurds, and then between the Turkomans and Arabs. So, the main goal is to create sedition and predicaments."

He says that the Kirkuk problem can only be solved by "political accords." He adds:"Now, I warn against what I have read and heard to the effect that Shaykh Jalal or the Iraqi Islamic Supreme Council (IISC) have sold Kirkuk to the Kurds. I say that this is shameful. Kirkuk does not belong to the Kurds, to the Arabs, or to the Turkomans. It does not belong to any other side. Kirkuk belongs to Iraq and to all Iraqis. It cannot be sold through voting or talks here and there. It cannot be dealt with this way. Where did this fabrication come from?"

Al-Saghir adds: "The Ba'thists and the orphans of the Ba'thists have never been truthful to any Iraqi. So, how can they be truthful regarding this issue? Kirkuk and other areas would not have been lost had it not been to the crimes of these people.Kirkuk was a city of brotherhood."

He says: "I stress that we will solve the Kirkuk problem only based on the Constitution. Any side that claims it has a right should obtain this right through constitutional mechanisms. The one who believes that he can be present through gangs,terrorism, and illegal acts should look at Baghdad. Terrorism, which used towreak havoc in Baghdad every day, has been eliminated, and it will eventually be eliminated in all areas. I say that the wise men should hold the reins of the initiative and they should not allow those who have been playing this game all this time to continue with their bad game. These sides tried to depict things as if the so-and-so Ba'thist leader was the hero of the liberation of Kirkuk. This is a disgrace. The Ba'thists have displaced and killed people. If they think that their hopes are pinned on these criminals, then this will be a great victory for the Ba'thists."

He says: "Some sides are trying to create a problem for Iraq with Kuwait or a problem for Kuwait with Iraq. There are various trends in Kuwait and in Iraq which want to strain relations between the two states." He adds that "we do not expect the Wahhabi trend at the Kuwaiti Parliament to say a good word to improve relations between the Iraqi and Kuwaiti peoples." He says that "we know that some sides have interest in disrupting the new diplomatic atmospheres that began to open on Iraq," adding that the "I call for a wise policy and say that the politicians should not allow the media to create atmospheres to strain relations between us and Kuwait." He says:"Yes, we have problems. We have problems with Syria and Jordan and we have problems with Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Iran. However, these problems can be solved through normal political and diplomatic means. We have relations that are more important than these problems."

Al-Saghir says: "I do not forget here to remind the state of the tragedy of Iraqis in the Saudi prisons. There are more than 600 Iraqi detainees in Saudi Arabia, some of whom are tortured and some others are killed away from the eyes of the Iraqi Government. For this or that reason a person crosses the border with Saudi Arabia and this happens between the neighboring states. However, we view this issue with concern because these 600 detainees or more than 600 are all affiliated with one sect. So, this is a different story that has other faces. Therefore, I call on the Interior Ministry and the Foreign Ministry an tell them just as Saudi Arabia asks you about the (Saudi) detainees in Iraq, you should form a committee to go there to check on the Iraqis who are detained there. Frankly speaking, I spoke with some of these detainees from inside the prisons through a mediator. He gave me startling facts about what takes place inside these prisons in Rafhah, Hafar al-Batin, and in several cities where these detaineesare."

Labels:

Sunday, August 31, 2008

McCain, Palin and New Orleans



McCain on Katrina

' Forty Senators and 100 members of Congress visited New Orleans before he [McCain] did; he finally got there in March 2006. He voted against establishing a Congressional commission to examine the Federal, State, and local responses to Katrina in med-September 2005. He repeated that vote in 2006. He voted against allowing up to 52 weeks of unemployment benefits to people affected by the hurricane, and in 2006 voted against appropriating $109 billion in supplemental emergency funding, including $28 billion for hurricane relief.'




McCain's False FEMA promise:
'In the Senate, he consistently voted against more funds for FEMA [the Federal Emergency Management Agency], against making it an independent agency as it had been in the 1990s, and even against the creation of a commission to investigate how the government failed after Katrina. That indifference to learning from experience and adjusting accordingly is a central characteristic of movement conservatism.'


McCain's initial response to Katrina was not exactly frantic.

"While looking at historical records, [Kerry Emmanuel,] the atmospheric physicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology found that the total power released by storms had drastically increased -- more than doubling in the Atlantic Ocean in the past 30 years."

Carbon emissions from burning oil, coal and gas are increasingly thought by scientists to be implicated in greater frequency and power of hurricanes, though weather is complex and other causes are also operating.

It is certainly the case that global warming will cause flooding of low-lying coastal areas, since warm water takes up more space than cold water and melting of the ice at the poles will raise levels, as well.

Sarah Palin does not think global warming is man-made! But then she thinks we should indoctrinate our children in the theory that Jesus rode a small dinosaur into Jerusalem, as well.

And, she is in favor of drilling pristine lands in Alaska (her husband works for British Petroleum):



McCain wants to spew more carbon into the atmosphere, by "drilling, right here, right now."

McCain falsely claimed that oil rigs can withstand hurricanes.

Does Al-Maliki's New Team Imperil Security Agreement?
Al-Maliki asks Peshmerga to stay beyond Blue Line

The LAT reports doubts in Baghdad about whether the security agreement between the Bush administration and the Iraqi government will be achieved. Al-Maliki abruptly dismissed his negotiating team and replaced it with three officials close to himself. MP Mithal al-Alusi is convinced that the change was intended to derail the talks.

Diyala Province is still dangerous.

Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has called on the Peshmerga paramilitary to honor the "blue line" that divides the Kurdistan Regional Government from Iraq proper. Peshmerga troops are in north-eastern Iraq cities such as Khanaqin, producing tension with the Iraqi army, which is going into those same cities as part of al-Maliki's security campaign.

Anwar J. Ali writes about her trip to Baghdad at the NYT blog:

'The streets in Baghdad after 9 p.m. are very dangerous and full of army, police and American checkpoints. Sometimes they can’t understand why you are out late and shoot, and sometimes they understand. . . The streets were empty, shops were closed. There was only us, the army and the blast walls. As we were driving in this dead city and empty neighborhood we saw a man who was only wearing shorts sitting half-naked in the middle of the road, at midnight. . . '


Aljazeera English reports on the Sunni Arab Awakening Councils in Iraq and Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki's current crackdown on them. It raises the question of whether a battle looms between the Iraqi government and these American-backed militias. Mithal al-Alusi and Nir Rosen are interviewed.

Labels:

Saturday, August 30, 2008

Sadrists Sign Oath to fight US Troops

Shiites from the Sadr Movement in Iraq have been signing oaths in blood to struggle against the foreign military occupation of their country. This ritual affirmation comes despite the command from Sayyid Muqtada al-Sadr to lay down their arms. Sadr has also spoken of creating a special forces unit to kill US and other coalition troops, despite the cease-fire he affirmed between his Mahdi Army and the US and Iraqi forces. Al-Sadr had called for these pledges signed in blood, but appeared to see them as binding the signers to a non-violent struggle. This AFP article suggests most of the signers do not see it that way.

A Sunni Arab member of parliament said Friday that he does not expect Iraq and the US to sign a security agreement. He thinks too many insuperable obstacles stand in the way,including that of immunity for US troops in Iraqi courts.

Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that Kurdistan officials are complaining that the government of PM Nuri al-Maliki is marginalizing them.

The 11,000 Palestinian refugees in Iraq, expelled from their homeland by the Israelis, now live in fear and some are dwelling in squalor in border camps. It is hell to be stateless-- and has disenfranchising consequences in the 21st century analogous to slavery in the eighteenth.

Speaking of slavery, Nepalese workers are suing Kellogg, Brown and Root for human trafficking, claiming that a subcontractor pressed them into involuntary labor in Iraq.

Sunni Arab Awakening Council members in Diyala Province are Complaining to the US military that the Iraqi Army is harassing them.

Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that the sermonizers at Friday prayers in Iraq on Saturday were pretty unanimous across age lines that the US must set a timetable for withdrawing US troops from Iraq..





Labels:

OSC: Russia- Iran Alliance?

The USG Open Source Center translates an article from the Russian press proposing a strategic alliance between Russia and Iran.


Pundit on Possible Russia-Iran Alliance To Counter 'Unfriendly' US Moves
Article by Radzhab Safarov, General Director of the Russian Center for Iranian Studies: "Iranian Trump Card. Russia Can Take Control of Persian Gulf"
Vremya Novostey
Friday, August 29, 2008
Document Type: OSC Translated Text

The recognition of South Ossetia's and Abkhazia's independence by Russia is a timely step to protect these republics from new Georgian aggression. However, taking into account the United States' plans to expedite Georgia's and Ukraine's accession to the NATO military-political bloc, the situation near the Russian border remains alarming. At the same time Moscow has a lot of possibilities to take balanced counter measures to the United States' and entire NATO's unfriendly plans. In particular, Russia can rely on those countries that effectively oppose the United States' and their satellites' expansion. Only collective efforts can help to create a situation which would, if not eliminate then at least reduce the risk of the Cold War's transformation into local and global conflicts.

For instance, Moscow could strengthen its military-technical ties with Syria and launch negotiations on the reestablishment of its military presence in Cuba. However, the most serious step which the United States and especially Israel fear (incidentally, Israel supplied arms to Georgia) is hypothetical revision of Russia's foreign policy with regard to Iran. A strategic alliance presuming the signing of a new large-scale military political treaty with Iran could change the entire geopolitical picture of the contemporary world.

New allied relations may result in the deployment of at least two military bases in strategic regions of Iran. One military base could be deployed in the north of the country in the Iranian province of Eastern Azerbaijan and the other one in the south, on the Island of Qeshm in the Persian Gulf. Due to the base in Iran's Eastern Azerbaijan Russia would be able to monitor military activities in the Republic of Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey and share this information with Iran.

The deployment of a military base on the Island of Qeshm would allow Russia to monitor the United States' and NATO's activities in the Persian Gulf zone, Iraq and other Arab states. With the help of special equipment Russia could effectively monitor whois sailing toward this sea bottleneck, from where, and with what cargo on board to enter the World Ocean or to return.

For the first time ever Russia will have a possibility to stop suspicious vessels and ships and inspect their cargo, which the Americans have been cynically doing in that zone for many decades. In exchange for the deployment of its military bases Russia could help the Iranians to deploy modern air defense and missile defense systems along the perimeter of its borders. Tehran, for instance, needs Russia's modern S-400 SAMs.

The Iranian leadership paid close attention to reports stating that the Georgian Government's secret resolution gave the United States and Israel a carte blanche to use Georgian territory and local military bases for delivering missile and bomb strikes against Iranian facilities in the event of need. Another neighbor, Turkey, is not only a NATO member, but also a powerful regional opponent and economic rival of Iran. In addition to this, the Republic of Azerbaijan has become the West's key partner on the issue of transportation of Caspian energy resources to world markets. The Iranians are also concerned at Baku's plans to give Western (above all American) capital access to the so-called Azerbaijani sector of the Caspian Sea, which is fraught with new conflicts, because the legal status of the Caspian Sea has not been defined to date.

Russia and Iran can also accelerate the process of setting up a cartel of leading gas producers, which journalists have already dubbed the "gas OPEC." Russia and Iran occupy first and second place in the world respectively in terms of natural gas reserves. They jointly possess more than 60 percent of the world's gas deposits. Therefore, even small coordination in the elaboration of a single pricing policy may force one-half of the world, at least virtually entire Europe, to moderate its ambitions and treat gas exporters in a friendlier manner.

While moving toward allied relations, Russia can develop cooperation with Iran in virtually all areas, including nuclear power engineering. Russia can earn tens of billions of dollars on the construction of nuclear power plants in Iran alone. Tehran can receive not only economic, but also political support from Russia in the development of its own atomic energy sector.

In addition to this,in view of the imminent breakup of the CIS from which Georgia already pulled out, Russia could accelerate the process of accepting Iran as an equal member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). By accepting Iran, one of the key countries of the Islamic world, the organization could change fundamentally both in terms of its potential and in terms of its regional role. Meanwhile, as an SCO member Iran will find itself under the collective umbrella of this organization, including under the protection of such nuclear states as Russia and China. This will lay foundations for a powerful Russia-Iran-China axis,which the United States and its allies fear so much.

(Description of Source: Moscow Vremya Novostey in Russian -- Liberal, small-circulation paper that sometimes criticizes the government)