On the False Analogy Between Iraq and South Korea

Bush is now talking about a "South Korea" model for Iraq. He likely got this nonsense from John Gaddis at Yale, who I heard talking it last November at the Chicago Humanities Fair.

So what confuses me is the terms of the comparison. Who is playing the role of the Communists and of North Korea? Is it the Sunni Arabs of Iraq? But they are divided into Iraqi/Arab nationalists and Salafi Sunni revivalists. (The secular Arab nationalists are the vast majority according to recent polling). So they are not a united force. They are fighting with one another in al-Anbar. And, the Arab nationalists and the religious Sunnis cannot both play the role of the Communists. Some Arab nationalists are allied with the United States (Egypt, Tunisia, etc.) Others are not (Syria). Some religious Sunnis are allied with the US (Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan). Others are not. So where is the analogy to International Communism? Who is China and who is the Soviet Union? Is it Syria and Iran? But both are ruled by Shiites, not Sunnis!

But let us say that the Sunni Arabs are North Korea. Who is South Korea? Is it the Shiites of Iraq? But they are allied with Iran (isn't it playing the role of China?) And the vast majority of them don't want US troops in Iraq according to polls. There is zero chance that the Shiites of Iraq will put up with a long term presence of US bases in their areas of Iraq. The British base in Basra takes heavy fire all the time.

The only place in Iraq that looks at all like South Korea is maybe Kurdistan. But it is also allied with Iran behind the scenes, and it is in a troubling way giving asylum to Turkish-Kurdish terror groups that are infliction harm on the US's NATO ally, Turkey.

Even as we speak, in Iraq's north, Turkish military forces and now 20 tanks are massing on the Iraqi border, apparently poised for "hot pursuit" of Kurdish guerrillas of the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK), who have safe harbor in Iraqi Kurdistan but go over to Turkey and blow things up. There is some danger that the US will be in the middle of all this, though it is allied with both the Kurds and the Turks. Last week US fighter jets based in Iraq made an unauthorized incursion into Turkish air space that the Turks are protesting.

Do we really want to be in the middle of that?

(But see the next, translated, item, below).

So, no, Iraq isn't like Korea in any obvious way, and in fact the analogy strikes me as frankly ridiculous.

Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari suspects that the Mahdi Army was behind the kidnapping of 5 Britons from the Ministry of Finance on Tuesday. British troops have been skirmishing with and capturing Mahdi Army forces in Basra, so this could be payback or an attempt to trade prisoners.

There were mortar attacks, bombings and firefights around Iraq on Wednesday. Ten died in a firefight in Khalis between Iraqi government troops and local Sunni Arab guerrillas (the city is under curfew after these heavy clashes). The US raided Sadr City looking, presumably, for those British security guards, and taking 5 men into custody.

23 bodies were found in Baghdad on Wednesday, according to McClatchy. Four uniformed policemen were kidnapped in Tikrit north of Baghdad.

Iran's foreign minister says that US-Iranian talks on security in Iraq may continue.

Iraq, Sudan, and Israel/Palestine are the most violent countries in the world, according to a new index.

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Iraqi Kurdistan Officials Deny US Bases to be Opened in Kurdistan Region

The USG Open Source Center translates the following newspaper article from Kurdish:

' Iraqi Kurdish Officials Deny US Bases To Be Opened in Kurdistan Region Unattribtued report: "Opening three US military bases and transfer of Incirlik base to Kurdistan" Hawlati Wednesday, May 30, 2007 Although it is expected that today responsibility for security will be handed over to the Kurdistan authorities, exclusive military sources have told Hawlati that the US forces intend to open three huge US military bases in the Arbil, Duhok, and Al-Sulaymaniyah areas. Meanwhile, senior peshmerga forces' officials expressed their pleasure at such a move. The three bases will be located in Qaradagh (south of Al-Sulaymaniyah), Zakho area (north of Duhok), while the third one will be based near Arbil. There is also a possibility that the Incirlik base in Turkey, opened in 1992, will be transferred to the Kurdistan Region, which is heralded as an important achievement by Kurdistan regional government military officials who said they would welcome such requests from the coalition forces. However, some officials said the issue was not mentioned and thought to be a remote possibility. Kurdistan Region Armed Forces Spokesman Maj-Gen Jabbar Yawar told Hawlati: "The coalition forces have not made such requests so far and nothing was mentioned about this in the general-command meeting of the armed forces with (Kurdistan) Region President (Mas'ud Barzani). However, we would welcome such a request because we and the US are allies. As far as I know, such a request was not made." Asked whether the US forces are unilaterally entitled to embark on such an action, the source said: "According to the memorandum signed between the coalition forces and the (Kurdistan) region president, they should inform us (of such actions). As far as I know, no such plans are in the pipeline. However, I do not know if such an action is considered for the future or if it was discussed it internally (presumably referring to the US)." The source ruled out the possibility of transferring Incirlik base to the Kurdistan Region, adding that "I do not think the US will do that since Turkey is an important country for the US and is a member of the NATO, whereas we are a region inside a federal country." The (Kurdistan) Region's minister for peshmerga affairs, Ja'far Mustafa, told Hawlati: "Such a request has not been tabled officially and I am not aware of it. If there is such a thing, the region's presidency and the government should be aware of it, especially given that responsibility for security will be handed over to the Kurdistan regional government today." Regarding the transfer of Incirlik base to the Kurdistan Region, he said: "If the US does that, we will welcome it and that would be a good and important achievement for us." A few months ago, US infantry and air force surveyed villages near Qaradagh administrative sub-district for a day, throughout which they neither allowed the locals to approach them nor allowed local officials to visit them. (Description of Source: Al-Sulaymaniyah Hawlati in Sorani Kurdish -- weekly independent newspaper)

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Guerrillas Ambush, Kill 10 US GIs
Over 100 Iraqis Killed or Found Dead
Muqtada condemns Iran for Talking to US

As best I can piece it together, Sunni Arab guerrillas in Iraq ran a sophisticated sting on US troops in Diyala province on Memorial Day, killing 8 GIs. First, they shot down a helicopter with small arms fire. Two servicemen died in the crash. The guerrillas knew that a rescue team would come out to the site. So they planted a roadside bomb that killed the rescuers. And, they knew that yet another rescue team would come out to see what happened to the first. So they planted roadside bombs and destroyed the second team, as well. Altogether 6 rescuers were blown up in this way. The guerrillas run this routine on Iraqi police and troops in the capital all the time. As US troops increasingly take on policing duties, they become vulnerable to the same operations that have wrought such mayhem on Iraqi security forces.

Also in Diyala, 21 bodies were found in the streets of Baquba, the capital of the province, according to Reuters.

Reuters reports that 2 other GIs were killed in a Baghdad roadside bombing. Two other, much bigger blasts then shook the downtown and the southwest, killing 44 persons between them:

' BAGHDAD - At least 23 people were killed and 68 others wounded when a powerful bomb in a parked bus exploded in central Baghdad, police said.

BAGHDAD - At least 18 people were killed and 41 wounded when a car bomb exploded in a busy market of a mainly Shi'ite neighbourhood in southwestern Baghdad, police said. '

Al-Zaman says that the bombs in the Shiite neighborhood actually targeted a Shiite religious edifice (Husayniya) (in the Amil district) and so was less random than it seems on the surface.

This is the second religious building to be hit in the past two days, with the Sufi shrine of Abdul Qadir Gilani suffering damage on Monday. Every day, Iraq's landmarks are more pockmarked and less whole, as if a leprosy were eating away at its features.

Al-Zaman also sniffs that this surge business doesn't seem to be working very well if you can get all this mayhem in a single day still.

Police found thirty bodies in the streets of Baghdad on Tuesday.

Then some other shadowy group ran a sophisticated sting on some high-powered British security guards at the Ministry of Finance (that kind of kidnapping is always in part an inside job-- someone at the ministry tipped the 40 gunmen to the presence of Britons in the ministry). I guess I just can't entirely understand how 40 guerrillas drive around downtown Baghdad, surround government ministries, and kidnap people from them. The Ministry had government police and guards. It just seems to me that this kind of thing cannot happen unless the Iraqi government security forces are in on it or wink at it.

I just want to express my admiration for the thoroughness and even-handedness of this Times of London (via Australian News) article on the kidnapping of the 5 Britons from the Finance Ministry on Tuesday. It is incredible that reporters in Baghdad can still gather news at all, much less this comprehensively.

Over two hundred civilian foreigners have been kidapped in the past 4 years, and over 60 of them were killed. It is my impression that most of those who survived were often secretly ransomed by family members (something the USG discourages because the ransom is essentially a contribution to the guerrilla war effort).

Al-Hayat reports that young Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr held a meeting with the governors of the southern, Shiite provinces. He agreed with them to form joint committees made up of Mahdi Army militiamen and police and army troops to prevent clashes between them. Muqtada also rejected the talks held on Monday between the US and Iran, criticizing Tehran for this "Iranian acceptance of an American-British-Jewish Mandate" over Iraq. (He used the word 'intidab,' a reference to the colonies or Mandates established by European Powers in the Middle East after they had defeated the Ottoman Empire in WW I. The League of Nations philosophy was that the Europeans should use this opportunity to grow the Middle Easterners up so that they could establish their own governments. The Middle Easterners mostly felt that they didn't need the help.)

Muqtada said, "It is most regrettable that generally they [the Iranians] are inadvertently or deliberately forgetting, in such negotiations, to demand that the Occupier depart." He said implicit Iranian acceptance of the Anglo-American-Jewish "mandate" is "completely rejected, and there is no excuse for it at all." He said that the lack of an official Iraqi government partner in the Iran-US talks denied them "the cover of legitimacy and of Law." He said that both the people and the religious authority were unhappy with the talks.

The respected editor of the weekly "Hawadith" in Kirkuk was assassinated in that city.

Tom Engelhardt on the mammoth US embassy in Baghdad and its significance.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Cole on "Heroes" and the Culture Wars

My column at Salon.com this week is on the television phenomenon "Heroes". [Spoiler alert: for anyone who hasn't seen the season finale, its details are discussed.] Excerpts:

Dick Cheney's least favorite TV show?

Why the worldview of "Heroes" clashes with the vice president's "1 percent doctrine" on terrorism.

May 30, 2007 | NBC's hit series "Heroes" was the most-watched new show on network television this year despite its demanding plot lines and stretches of subtitled Japanese. Its season finale, which aired May 21, dominated the 9 p.m. time slot. What explains the show's popularity, especially with younger viewers? I think it is that, like the Fox thriller "24," "Heroes" is a response to Sept. 11 and the rise of international terrorism. But while "24" skews to the right politically, "Heroes" seems like a left-wing response to those events. In fact, it functions as a thoughtful critique of Vice President Dick Cheney's doctrine on counterterrorism.

In Bush and Cheney's "war on terror," the evildoers are external and are clearly discernible. In "Heroes," each person agonizes over the evil within, a point of view more common on the political left than on the right. Each of the flawed characters is capable of both nobility and iniquity. In Bush's vision, the main threat remains rival states (Saddam's Iraq, Ahmadinejad's Iran). States are absent from "Heroes," as though irrelevant. "Heroes" makes terrorism a universal and psychological issue rather than one attached to a clash of civilizations or to a particular race.

In its commentary on terror, "Heroes" thus avoids the caffeinated Islamophobia of "24." And at a time when "24," a favorite of older Republicans, is fading in the ratings, "Heroes" may also be a better guide to where the thinking of the young, post-Bush generation is heading when it comes to terror. It's certainly where their eyes are going. NBC's "Heroes" runs opposite Fox's "24" on Monday nights and snags a higher total of younger viewers, while the median age of "24" viewers keeps rising. . .

The plot that drives the first season has to do with a prophetic painting . . . that shows New York City being blown up. The bomb is not mechanical but is a human being, a mutant, who cannot control his powers and will ultimately explode in the midst of the city if not stopped. . .

a . . . camp of wealthy and powerful figures, clearly on the political right, decide that the explosion cannot be avoided and must therefore be exploited to instill new spine and discipline into the soft American public. This clique, led by a Las Vegas mobster named Linderman (Malcolm McDowell), includes Angela Petrelli, the mother of Nathan and Peter Petrelli, both mutants. The Linderman faction strives to put Nathan Petrelli into office as a New York congressman by rigging the election, convinced that he will be in a position to lead America as a strong man after Gotham's immolation.

Some bloggers have detected overtones of Sept. 11 conspiracy theorizing in this plot element. . .

Part of my argument is that the Cheney Right (or what Anatol Lieven has called the "American nationalists") sees the war on terror as 'white hats vs. black turbans,' as a heroic, free, unblemished America facing off against Islamic fanatics and fascists. I argue that by making the "Heroes" morally ambiguous (Ali Larter's character Niki, when taken over by "Jessica," is a mass murderer), the vision of "Heroes" implies that terror derives from Self as well as from Other, that each human and each culture is capable of it.

I think this dispute, over a black-and-white American nationalism of the Cheney sort and a more nuanced recognition of our own flaws along with those of our enemies, underlies the culture wars now being fought in the US. The latter is exemplified by Mahmoud Mamdani's thesis about Washington's strategic use of 'good Muslims, bad Muslims'.

That continental rift is the reason for the great interest in Republican Presidential Candidate Ron Paul's argument with his rival Rudi Guiliani. Paul said in the recent debate that the US was attacked on 9/11 in part because of its prior involvement in Iraq.

Rudi Guiliani interrupted him, claimed he had never heard of that, and misrepresented Paul as justifying the attack.

But Paul was factually correct. In his 1996 fatwa declaring war on the United States, Bin Laden had said " . . .the civil and the military infrastructures of Iraq were savagely destroyed showing the depth of the Zionist-Crusaders' hatred to the Muslims and their children . . ."

Paul was saying that terror has a context, that the post-Gulf War US sanctions on Iraq in the 1990s that allegedly caused the deaths of 500,000 children helped produce hatred for this country in the Middle East.

In his reply to Guiliani's demand for a retraction, Paul said,

' “I believe the CIA is correct when it warns us about blowback. We overthrew the Iranian government in 1953 and their taking the hostages was the reaction. This dynamic persists and we ignore it at our risk. They’re not attacking us because we’re rich and free, they’re attacking us because we’re over there.” '

Likewise, comedian Rosie O’Donnell engaged in a shouting match with conservative View co-host Elizabeth Hasselback when the latter declined to defend O’Donnell from rightwing charges of treason. The previous week the two had discussed the meaning of terrorism and O’Donnell observed, "655,000 Iraqi civilians are dead. Who are the terrorists?” (O'Donnell was accused by the Right of calling US troops 'terrorists', which is not what she said, and she was upset with co-host Elizabeth Hasselback for not being willing to admit that the charge was propagandistic).

Both Paul and O’Donnell (a Libertarian and a liberal, respectively) were pushing back against the uncomplicated nationalism of the militaristic right in the US, maintaining that the menace of terrorism comes both from self and from other, both from small groups and from large states.

It seems to me that this is the continental rift in the contemporary culture wars, between those with a nationalist, black and white view of geopolitics, and those who can see past US actions as sometimes unfortunate (backing Islamic fanatics against the Soviets in Afghanistan) and as producing "blowback" [in Ron Paul's term] or boomeranging on us.

I am not saying that “Heroes” takes sides on such political issues, but I am saying that its moral vision would give little aid and comfort to the American nationalists. In "Heroes," a lot of characters are driven to do things they regret and to harm the people around them without fully intending to. Terror is not something produced by other people, with brown skins and different rituals, but is a danger within each human being, even within WASPs.


Thanks to Dennis Perrin for getting it!

Read the whole essay (which doesn't bring up Paul or O'Donnell) in Salon.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

First Formal US-Iran Talks since 1980

The US has dealt differently with Iran than with any other of its major enemies. Then President Ronald Reagan spoke directly with Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev even though the USSR had thousands of nuclear missiles aimed at the US. The US talks to North Korea. It talks to Venezuela. It doesn't talk to Cuba, but then Cuba is a small weak country of 11 million. Iran is an oil state with a population of some 70 million.

Do the United States and Iran have things to talk about? Yes. They have several common interests, which could be stressed and developed fruitfully.

1. Shiite Iran is a deadly enemy of al-Qaeda and the Taliban, which the US is also fighting. Instead of making up silly charges against Iran, the US could explore avenues of cooperation against these enemies.

2. Shiite Iran is a deadly enemy of the Iraqi Baath Party and of the radical Salafi Jihadis who are responsible for most of the violence in Iraq and for most of the killings of US troops. There are ways in which the US and Iran could cooperate in defeating these forces, which are inimical to both Washington and Tehran.

3. Shiite Iran is happy with the Shiite led government of Iraq and wants to see Iraq's territorial integrity maintained. Supporting the al-Maliki government and keeping Iraq together are also goals of the United States.

It is not true, as Robert Kagan once alleged to me on the radio, that if something is in Iran's interest, it will do it anyway, so that talks are useless. It is often the case that countries, like individuals, cut off their noses to spite their faces. Effective diplomacy can often lead a country to see the advantages of cooperation on some issues, so that its leaders stop sulking and actually turn to accomplishing something.

The way in which fighting the Salafi Jihadis and al-Qaeda can unite otherwise contentious forces is visible in Lebanon, where Nasrallah's [Shiite] Hizbullah supported the Seniora government's fight against [the radical Sunni] Fatah al-Islam. The leader of the latter had been close to the notorious Shiite-killer, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

Iran is not foredoomed to be a rejectionist state. It offered to initiate talks that could have led to a comprehensive peace with the US and Israel in early 2003. The US tossed away that opportunity, which won't come back as long as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is president (at least until 2009).

So let us hope it won't toss away more opportunities, and that Supreme Jurisprudent Ali Khamenei and Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani can reign in the hardliners around Ahmadinejad enough to reduce tensions.

Howard LaFranchi at the Christian Science Monitor reports on Monday's historic talks between the US and Iran in Baghdad.

I am quoted:

' "The talks would not be taking place unless Bush backed them and ... Khamenei backed them," says Juan Cole, an expert on Iraq and Shiite movements at the University of Michigan. "[President Bush] is to the point where he will try anything," he adds, but "it also points to the increased influence of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice" and the administration's new Iraq team: Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and his man in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, and Crocker, who recently arrived from Pakistan. '

and here:

' "The US-Iran talks are deeply unpopular among some elements in Washington and Tehran," says Mr. Cole. "The Cheney camp is reported to be opposed to them, and the arrests [in Iran] of Iranian-American academics in recent days may well be an attempt by some in the camp of [President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad to sabotage these talks." '

I wasn't so much referring to the case of Haleh Esfandiari, which goes back to December, though she was only recently put in Evin Prison, but of sociologist Kian Tajbakhsh. Patrick Seale lays out all the reasons for pessimism about the progress these bilateral US/Iran talks on Iraqi security will make.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

24 Killed,90 wounded;
Qadiriya Shrine Damaged in Blast

Reuters reports that 33 bodies were found in the streets of Baghdad on Monday. Karrada took mortar fire, which left 8 dead and 35 wounded. McClatchy reports that on Sunday night, guerrillas had taken 40 persons hostage in Salahuddin Province, in a bid to counter the operation of a new anti-Salafi tribal council. There were other bombings, shootings and assorted mayhem in Baghdad, Mosul and some other places.

But one above all took the cake. Guerrillas detonated a huge bomb in front of the shrine of Abdul Qadir al-Gilani (Jilani, Kilani) in central Baghdad on Monday, killing (according to Reuters, above) some 24 persons and wounding 90 according to late reports. The bombing damaged the dome and the base of the minaret of the mosque attached to the shrine.

Shaikh Abdul Qadir al-Gilani (d. 1166 A.D.) was a great mystic who founded the vast Qadiriya Sufi order.

An Ottoman mystic, Shaikh Muzaffer Ozak Efendi, later wrote of him,

' "The venerable 'Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani passed on to the Realm of Divine Beauty in A.H. 561/ 1166 C.E., and his blessed mausoleum in Baghdaad is still a place of pious visitation. He is noted for his extraordinary spiritual experiences and exploits, as well as his memorable sayings and wise teachings. It is rightly said of him that 'he was born in love, grew in perfection, and met his Lord in the perfection of love.' May the All-Glorious Lord bring us in contact with his lofty spiritual influence!" '

The Qadiri Sufi order is very important in Iraq, Nigeria, Senegal, Morocco, Turkey, Pakistan and India, among other places.

The shrine was likely attacked by radical Sunni Salafis, with several objects in mind. First, Salafis hate Sufi shrines (see below). Second, the Salafi Jihadis in Iraq are trying to mobilize all Iraqi Sunnis behind them, and do not want rivals from among the Sufi orders and tribal shaikhs. Third, the Salafi Jihadis want to throw Iraq into ever greater chaos, such that they strike at all national symbols. Fourth, they are probably hoping that at least some Sunni Arabs will blame Shiite militiamen for the attack, or will blame the Shiite government for not preventing it, so that the bombing has the effect of heightening sectarian tensions further. The guerrilla attack on the Shiite Askariya Shrine in Samarra in February, 2006, set off an orgy of sectarian violence, and was the most successful single act of terrorism the guerrillas have ever carried out.

One saving grace is that Sufis are oriented toward symbolic meaning, and physical places are therefore not central to their worship. One famous medieval Sufi, al-Hallaj, famously thought that it was better to visit God in your heart truly than to undertake a perfunctory pilgrimage to Mecca. (The orthodox were outraged.) It is a little unlikely, therefore, that there will be a backlash from this bombing in Nigeria or Senegal or India. For Iraqi Sunnis, likewise, it seems a little unlikely to produce further violence, since the imam himself blamed the radical Salafis (takfiris), themselves Sunni.

Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that Muhammad al-Isawi, the prayer leader and preacher at the mosque attached to the shrine, said, "I send condolences not only to myself but to all Iraqis for what befell this mosque for everyone, for Sunni and Shiite, for Turkmen and Kurd. Who venefits from blowing it up? We must be patient and resigned and deny any opportunity to the enemies, the Takfiri terrorists." [Takfiris are radical Salafis who declare Sufis and other non-Salafis to be non-Muslims and deserving of death.] He added, "They have idled the charitable works in the mosque, which provides food to widows, orphans and the needy; it also contains a library, to which seekers after knowledge resort. It was, truly, a cowardly act."


There are lots of strands of Sunni Islam. Many of them are better thought of as tendencies than as sects in their own right. If we make an analogy to Christianity, so there are scriptural literalists (fundamentalists), and there are mystics seeking union with God, and there is everything in between.

The mystics organized into orders or brotherhoods (tariqa) are called Sufis. (The etymology of 'Sufi' is disputed. Some say it refers to the early mystics' preference for woollen (suf) cloaks. Others say it is derived from the Greek Sophia or wisdom.) The mystics typically get together on a Thursday night (or other occasion) at the mosque and sit in a circle and chant spiritual verses and listen to the teachings of their spiritual master or shaikh (in Persian, pir). Some Sufi meetings, with their chanting and rhythmic dancing, resemble Pentacostal services in Christianity. When the shaikh died, often a shrine grew up around his tomb, which was thought a center of blessings and people would come there to touch it and be cured of infertility and other woes.

Sufism was so successful as an organized movement from about the 1100s that it took over Islam, and there were very few Muslims who were not in some sense Sufis in the period 1200 through about 1850. From the mid-1700s, Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab in Arabia began attacking Sufism. The attacks were taken up and refined by the Salafis (revivalists) of the late 19th and early 20th century. It began being argued, under Wahhabi and Salafi influence, that it was wrong to attend at shrines, wrong to seek the intercession of saints, wrong to chant and to dance for God. Modern Wahhabism (mostly a Saudi Arabian phenomenon) and Salafism (much more widespread) have a "Protestant" character to them, emphasizing puritanism and the casting down of all images (iconoclasm) and saints' shrines.

Sufism has rapidly declined in much of the Muslim world. The Sufi orders still have a central place in society and even politics in Senegal. The Sufis of Morocco are not inconsiderable. But they no longer are in the mainstream in Egypt and are minor affairs in Palestine, Syria and Jordan. The Sufis of the Hijaz in western Arabia are said to be having a bit of a revival, but Wahhabism has reduced them to a shadow of their former selves. Aside from Morocco, Iraq may have been the Arab country with the biggest Sufi presence, both among Sunni Arabs and among Kurds (a lot of Kurds in Iraq, Iran and Turkey are Sufis and some are Qadiris).

Some of the Sufi orders, including branches of the Qadiriya, have at one time or another joined the Sunni Arab insurgency (a major guerrilla leader at Falluja was a Qadiri shaikh). Other branches of the Qadiriya have, however, been quietists and avoided politics (the shrine keeper is in that category, another reason that the shrine may have been hit).

There is a whole web site on al-Gilani and his order by an adherent.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Embassy Memo Flap and the Decline of the Right Blogosphere

Glenn Greenwald and Iraqslogger on that memo about food shortages at the US embassy in Baghdad (which have ended for the moment).

The right blogosphere went crazy about this little memo and its authenticity. Uh, guys, I like State Department folks fine (certainly better than you do), but even they would admit that there are bigger issues than what choices they get at the cafeteria. Like for instance the mortar fire landing in the Green Zone or the bombing of the Abdul Qadir al-Jilani Sufi shrine on Monday that might well set off sectarian violence. The memo was not a big deal one way or another.

And as for the invocation of Dan Rather, why don't they look into Doug Feith's Office of Special Plans at the Pentagon if they want to look into fraudulent documents.

There was a guy named Curveball, who was far more important than Dan Rather because he helped get us into this quagmire of a war. Then there was the Niger forgery. So many rightwing forgeries, so little investigation by those with little green feet and balls.

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Memorial Day, 2007

A couple of months ago I was at Detroit Metro and two very young soldiers timidly approached me. They were changing planes there, but the airport deeply confused them. When and where was their flight? Their brows knitted beneath extreme crewcuts (they were the victims of an overenthusiastic army barber of a sort I well recollect). Did they have to pick up their luggage and get it on the new flight? I asked one to show me his ticket, then took him over to the screen at the terminal and showed him how to read it. They had about 20 minutes, though their gate was a good distance away.

I found the luggage sticker on the back of the ticket and showed the young man (my son's age) that it was marked with his final destination-- it had been checked through. They both seemed enormously relieved, and the anxiety drained away. They stood a little straighter in their khakis. I figured it was their first time flying a civilian airliner with a plane change.

They thanked me and shook my hand. I said, no, thank you for your service.

One looked up. "It's just a job, sir," he observed before heading off.

It is just a job. But it isn't. It is about the nation in a way that most jobs are not. It is about life and death in a way that most jobs are not. It is a heavy responsibility both for the "employee" and for the "employer" (i.e. for you and me).

There are lots of stories of heroism and tragedy to be told on this Memorial Day. You have to read the local newspapers, usually, to hear about them.

AP reported on May 27, on the funeral held on a gray, rainy day in Tipton, Iowa for Specialist David Behrle, age 20. An Iraqi guerrilla detonated a roadside bomb under his vehicle on May 19:

' The body of Behrle, who was 20, arrived in his hometown yesterday morning. Hundreds of supporters stood at attention despite heavy rains. Patriot Guard members accompanied the hearse, which was equipped with an Army seal on the side, to Fry Funeral Home in Tipton.

More than 300 American flags were donated by local businesses. They were distributed to the crowd before the hearse arrived.'

And there was this, closer to home for me, from Mike Wilkinson of the Detroit News. Casey Zylman was 23, from the small town of Coleman, Michigan, about 120 miles northeast of Detroit. He briefly went to Northwood University in Midland, but perhaps dropped out for lack of funds. His football coach, Joe Albaugh, said he thought Casey was planning to use the GI bill to pay for his college when he got out. He wanted to be an accountant. Wilkinson writes:

' COLEMAN, Mich. -- Casey Zylman was the kind of student others looked up to, a leader and athlete who cared about his fellow students. For his teammates, he was a motivator. "He wouldn't let you quit," said Joe Albaugh, the football coach at Coleman High School, where Casey graduated in 2003. He was an all-conference offensive lineman his senior year. . .

Zylman also played baseball at Coleman High, where he graduated with fewer than 100 others. He held a position on the executive committee of the student council. Mary Pitchford, who was principal at Coleman Middle School when he was a student, remembers Zylman. "He was just kind, caring, polite," she told The Detroit News on Friday.
. . "Coleman is a very small community," Pitchford said. "I'm sure there is great sadness, especially for Casey's family." '

It isn't about politics, today. They served our country, they gave us everything; they had nothing left to give after that. The press makes no mention of their girlfriends, their brothers and sisters, the people now less whole than they were. There was a downpour at David Behrle's funeral. Three hundred American flags were passed out in the rain. People stood at attention, dripping wet. He was 20. Casey Zylman, 23 was a motivator. He wouldn't let his team mates on the gridiron quit. He wanted to go to college, to be an accountant, but maybe needed money for tuition and so joined the military. His audits would have been thorough, upright. They did their job.

Our job as the citizens of a democratic Republic is to ensure that we only ask them to risk everything (everything) when our Republic is genuinely in danger. Not for any other reason. They did their jobs. "It's just a job, sir." Have we done ours?
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

10 US GIs Killed
44 Bodies in Baghdad
Al-Shamari Informs on Sadrists, Flees to US

Iraq had another bloody Sunday yesterday, with the US military announcing the killing of 10 US GIs.

Since last Memorial Day, nearly 1,000 US troops have died in Iraq.

Reuters reports that 44 bodies were discovered in the streets of Baghdad on Sunday, the highest number I can remember since the surge began. Reuters reports other civil war violence, including a grenade attack by guerrillas on Shorja Market in central Baghdad, which killed 2 persons and wounded 9 others. That is the market that John McCain visited with such great fanfare not so long ago. Other violence:

' BAGHDAD - Gunmen killed two people and wounded eight in the Bab al-Muadham area of central Baghdad, police said. . .

JURF AL-SAKHAR - A car bomb targeting an Iraqi army checkpoint killed two soldiers and wounded three near Jurf al-Sakhar, 85 km (53 miles) south of Baghdad. . .

NAHRAWAN - Gunmen killed two farmers and wounded nine others in a drive-by shooting in Nahrawan, 30 km (20 miles) south of Baghdad, police said. . .

BASRA - British forces killed three militants during a raid in Basra against those behind a complex attack involving roadside bombs . . .'

McClatchy adds that "In a marketplace in Ramadi a car bomb Sunday killed seven and injured 12."

Also, in Mosul, "Sunday morning, a car bomb explosion killed one person and injured five others in the Al-Dhubat neighborhood."

US troops in Diyala found and freed 41 captives of Salafi Jihadi radicals.

Al-Zaman makes the explosive [and uncorroborated] charge that former minister of health Ali al-Shamari, a member of the Sadr Movement, has successfully sought asylum in the United States in return for providing extensive intelligence on the Mahdi Army. He is said to have gotten on an American plane and flown to this country. Al-Zaman alleges that he provided the US military with details of Iranian funding of the Mahdi Army, of its links to the Revolutionary Guards, with the identities of many heretofore undercover commanders, and with the locations of the safe houses its commanders use for meetings. (Note that al-Shamari had broken with Sadr and wanted to go to the US, so that it is difficult to know how seriously to take his allegations; he may have said what he thought Washington wanted to hear).

The US began cracking down on the Sadrist-dominated Health Ministry last February, at a time when it was alleged that Sadr was running death squads out of it.

Young Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr held a meeting with major figures in his political party on Sunday to plan out a major change in the organization and "public face" of his movement. Its reputation has been besmirched by allegations that its paramilitary, the Mahdi Army, has engaged in death squad killings of Sunni Arabs.

Al-Zaman also says that the National Iraqi List of Iyad Allawi has decided against withdrawing from the al-Maliki national unity government for now.

It also reports that the Sadrists are claiming that some death squad activity against Sunnis in Baghdad is actually carried out by the Badr Corps of the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, and then falsely attributed to the Sadrists.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

8 US GIs Killed
US Bombs Sadr City

The US military announced the killing of 8 US GIs on Saturday. The Iraqi prime minister, Nuri al-Maliki, visited al-Anbar Province in the company of US Ambassador Ryan Crocker and Gen. David Petraeus, to highlight the increased security in the province since Sunni Arab tribal chieftains begain allying against extremist Salafis. Gen. Petraeus, always a straight shooter, underlined that al-Anbar is still "not paradise." [And right he is. Falluja is very dangerous and there is violence all over the province, and the Sunni Arab tribal sheikhs say that they are getting the radical Salafis out of the way so as to get a clearer shot at the al-Maliki government.)

The problems the US faces in standing up the Iraqi army are underlined by the arrest of Gen. Shakir Halil al-Kaabi, the commander of the 5th Division in Diyala Province. He is charged with being careless of prisoners from the Shiite militias, or of actively collaborating with them.

The US military raided Sadr City on Saturday and arrested a Mahdi Army commander whom they accused of being involved with smuggling weapons from Iran. The arrest provoked clashes, and the army called in air strikes on JAM positions, killing 5 persons. Bombing a city you militarily occupy is probably illegal in international law.

Reuters reports that police found about 20 bodies in Baghdad on Saturday. Other major civil war violence:

' BAGHDAD - At least five people were killed and 37 were wounded when a car bomb and several mortar rounds exploded in a crowded market of Baghdad's Shi'ite Bayaa district, police said. . .

DIWANIYA - Gunmen killed three off-duty Iraqi soldiers in the southern Iraqi city of Diwaniya on Friday, police said. . .

KUT - Iraqi and Polish forces killed four Mehdi Army militiamen and detained 20 others in the small town of Jihad, 80 km (50 miles) west of Kut, police said. . .

Also, a car bomber blew up an Iraqi army checkpoint in Ghazaliya, Baghdad, killing 2 soldiers and injuring 11 others.

Guerrillas sprayed a police checkpoint in al-Ria, southwestern Baghdad, with machine gun fire, killing 3 policemen and wounding 6.

The National Iraqi List had its party conference the past few days in Amman. Led by former appointed prime minister, Iyad Allawi, this list has 25 seats in parliament and most of its members are secular middle class Shiites, though it has some Sunni Arabs, as well. The list had been attempting to put together a new parliamentary bloc grouping the Islamic Virtue Party (Fadhila: Shiite fundamentalist), the Iraqi Accord Front (Sunni fundamentalist), and the National Dialogue Front (Sunni secular). Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that the effort has been postponed because Iraqi National List members objected to joining forces with Adnan Dulaimi, Mishaan Juburi, and Salih Mutlak, three Sunni Arab leaders. Judge Abdul Latif al-Waili is quoted as saying that the list has not yet decided whether to leave the national unity government of PM Nuri al-Maliki.

The National Iraqi List's failure so far to form a new coalition is good news for al-Maliki, who has looked increasingly vulnerable to being unseated in a vote of no confidence. The Iraqi constitution specifies that the largest bloc in parliament is asked first to form a government by the president. A coalition of Allawi's list with Virtue and the Sunnis would have had 98 members, more than the United Iraqi Alliance could claim if the Sadr Movement (32 members) declined to support al-Maliki (the movement has already pulled out of the national unity government). As it is, the National Iraqi list apparently has little hope of getting along with the Sunni Arabs. And, the Shiite United Iraqi Alliance is attempting to entice the Virtue Party back in, having unseated it in Basra Province just to show that there are disadvantages to bucking the big coalition.

Iran wants to develop joint oil fields with Iraq.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Logic Lessons on Iraq and Terror for Bush and McCain

The Palm Beach Post editorial on Bush's illogic does what newspapers are supposed to do. It questions the logicality of a politician's assertion. Last week Bush gave a news conference in which he was asked why Bin Laden hadn't been caught. He said, "because he is hiding." No one in the vaunted White House press corps replied to him, "Mr. President, that is a tautology."

So here is the logic lesson from Palm Beach:

'See if you can follow this argument: The United States has to be in Iraq to fight the terrorists who are in Iraq because the United States is in Iraq. '

Hear, hear.

Meanwhile, John McCain thinks Bin Laden will follow us home from Iraq if the US withdraws its forces from that country. Note to the senator: Bin Laden is not in Iraq and is unlikely even to be in much contact with it.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Basra Battle between Mahdi Army and British

In apparent retaliation for the killing of their commander, Mahdi Army militiamen launched a fierce 2 and a half-hour assault on a British base in the southern Shiite city of Basra. The British military must have been alarmed by the assault, since they called in an air strike on the militiamen. Basra crowds said that the airstrike killed 8 innocent civilians and held a public funeral procession for them.

You have the sense that both politically and militarily, the British are hanging on in Basra by their fingernails.

Only 17% of Britons approve of the Iraq War.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

6 US GIs Killed
Sunnis Reject Petroleum Bill

Reuters reports guerrilla violence on Friday. The killing of 6 US GIs was announced. Iraqi security forces in Basra supported by British troops tried to arrest a Mahdi Army commander as he was coming out of a mosque, and killed him and two of his bodyguards. Guerrillas in Baghdad damaged another important bridge.

McClatchy reports that 20 bodies were found in Baghdad on Friday. In addition, "2 civilians were killed and 7 were injured when a mortar shell hit Al Mail neighborhood south west Baghdad . . ." and "1 civilian was killed and 8 wounded when a mortar shell hit Abo Disheer neighborhood south Baghdad . . ." A car bomb in Muqdadiya east of Baquba in Diyala injured 4 policemen and 6 civilians.

Sawt al-Iraq reports in Arabic that member of parliament Husain al-Falluji of the Iraqi Accord Front [Sunni fundamentalist] said Friday that the IAF would never approve the new petroleum law until the constitution is first amended. He said that the party has made a firm decision in this regard.

The Friday prayers sermons, both Shiite and Sunni, complained that the Iraqi government still has no handle on security. Sayyid Husayn al-Safi of Karbala complained that this inability "derives from the [government] not enjoying wide prerogatives in its security missions." [That is, he is blaming the Americans for not letting al-Maliki do what needs to be done.]

Shaikh Husayn Tu`ayma of the Khalisiya Seminary demanded a timetable for the withdrawal of US troops and their replacement by international forces.

Shaikh Mahmud al-Sumaidaie [Sunni] urged the government to throw its weight behind establishing security, since lack of stability will undermine the government and throw the entire region into turmoil. He said that the government had had difficulty moving forward on this issue because the prerogatives of the American military trumped those of the Iraqi.

Abdullah Gul, the Turkish Foreign Minister, attempted to pull Turkey back from the brink on Friday. After a great deal of saber rattling this week by the prime minister, Tayyip Recep Erdogan and by Turkish generals, Gul said that the government had not asked parliament to authorize a strike into Iraqi Kurdistan. The latter is harboring some 5,000 guerrillas of the violent PPK [Kurdish Workers' Party], who occasionally blow up things in Turkey [and are suspected in a bombing of downtown Ankara this week). Turkish leaders have increasingly said that they will engage in hot pursuit of Kurdish extremists, over the border into Iraq, if they think it necessary.

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

US Public Skeptical of "Surge,"
72% Disapprove of Bush's Handling of Iraq

It isn't amazing that 61% of Americans think the US should never have invaded Iraq. [- Courtesy NYT/CBS.]

What is amazing is that 35% still think it was a good idea.

It isn't amazing that 76% (including 51% of Republicans) of Americans say that the increased US troop levels in Iraq have had no impact or are making things worse.

What is amazing is that 20% think that things have gotten significantly better.

It isn't amazing that 63% of Americans support a timetable for US withdrawal ending in 2008. What is amazing is that so many do not.

It isn't amazing that 13% want to cut off money for the Iraq War immediately, or that 69% want further funding to be tied to the meeting of specific benchmarks.

What is amazing is that %15 want the war funded with no conditions at all.

(By the way, that only 13% want to cut off all funding immediately goes a long way toward explaining the vote on the supplemental in Congress).

It isn't amazing that 72 percent of Americans disapprove of Bush's handling of Iraq.

What is amazing is that 23 percent approve. (Are these the horror movie fans in the Republican base?)

It isn't amazing that 65 percent disapprove of Bush's management of foreign policy.

What is amazing is that 25 percent approves. (They should be asked specifically of what they approve. The rest of us want to know.)

I won't say anything mean about the fall to a 38% favorability rating for the Republican Party. If I were a Republican, I'd want to impeach Cheney before it goes on down to zero. Given that a third of evangelicals voted Democrat in the last election, it is not impossible that the GOP will end up a minority taste for years to come.

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Cheney Conniving at Iran War
Says Bush Cannot be Trusted

Shorter Steve Clemons:

Cheney and his staff are colluding with the Neoconservatives at the American Enterprise Institute and with Israeli hawks to sideline Condi Rice's negotiations with Iran by getting up an Israeli cruise missile strike on Iranian civilian nuclear research facilities at Natanz, in hopes that this move will push the US into a war posture with Iran.

Clemons is very well connected in Washington and assures me he has multiple-sourced this story. It seems entirely plausible to me.

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Muqtada Renews call for US Departure

Sayyid Muqtada al-Sadr, the young Shiite nationalist cleric, preached openly at Kufa before about 1,000 worshippers for the first time in many months on Friday, AFP reports in Arabic at Sawt al-Iraq He preached in his kafan, or burial shroud, a sign of defiance and willingness to be martyred. See the picture, here].

He said, "I renew my demand that the Occupation depart or set a timetable for withdrawal."

He added, "I demand that the government not extend the Occupation even one day, since it has no authority to do so, especially after the signatures that were gathered from members of parliament and the million-man demonstration that came out to demand that [departure]."

On May 10, a majority of members of the Iraqi parliament signed a petition demanding a timetable for the withdrawal of American troops and presented it to speaker of the house, Mahmud al-Mashhadani.

At the end of his sermon, Muqtada chanted "No, no to evil! No, no to America! No, no to Israel! No, no to Satan! No, no to colonialism!" and his congregation shouted the slogans with him.

Muqtada appears to have reemerged in public on assurances that he would not be arrested (or killed) by the US military if he did so.

He also condemned fighting between his Mahdi Army and Iraqi government security forces, saying that such clashes were deliberately set up as a trap by the United States. This charge is probably his way of trying to rein in the more extreme commanders in the Mahdi Army.

He comes back in public at a pregnant moment in Iraq, with his main rival, Abdul Aziz al-Hakim of the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, undergoing chemotherapy in Iran. Muqtada may see an opportunity to have his Sadr Movement displace al-Hakim's SIIC. Al-Hakim visited the White House on Dec. 4, 2006, and called for US troops to remain in Iraq. Sadr's demand for a timetable for withdrawal is much closer to Iraqi public opinion (and that of the public in the US, as well).

The al-Maliki government is also very weak and in danger of collapsing, and some think Muqtada is maneuvering to have the Sadrists form the next government.

Greater Sadrist political influence, which is Iraqi nationalist and even nativist, would put pressure on the Bush administration to set a timetable for withdrawal of troops.

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Democratic Party Divided on Iraq Supplemental

Although everyone is syaing that September is now the potential turning point in congressional support for the Iraq War, I don't see how things will change much then. Supporters of the "surge" will be able to find some evidence of "progress" even if it is "slow." Unless there are mass defections to the anti-war side among the Republicans, there is no prospect of the Dems overturning a Bush veto. Thursday night's vote did not put a resolution of the Iraq quagmire off for only a few months. It put it off until a new president is inaugurated in January of 2009. Bush seems unlikely to significantly withdraw while still president, and the Dems can't make him if the Republicans won't turn on their own party's leader.

Iraq will be the central issue of the 2008 presidential campaign.

The congressional vote on the spending supplemental for Iraq tells us how divided the Democratic Party is on the issue of Iraq. I'd say that the Dems voted in three classes: in accordance with the likely reaction in their congressional disctrict if in congress, in their entire state if senators, and in Iowa and New Hampshire if running for president. The major exception here was Joe Biden of Delaware, who is running on his foreign policy experience-- a platform where you would not expect him to acquiesce in popular sentiment on issues he knows well.

The positions of the Washington State representatives and senators as described by the Seattle PI blog. Washington's six Democratic representatives split down the middle, with three for and three against. But the two senators, Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell, both voted for it. Cantwell in particular was elected with a very thin margin [the first time, which will have affected her view of tightwire politics]. Clearly, a lot of these Democrats feared that their Republican opponents in the next election might effectively paint them as unpatriotic, troop-hating cut-and-runners if they had voted against the funding supplemental.

Those of us not running for office think that they are being way too cautious, and that the Iraq civil war is so unpopular as a pastime that no significant part of the electorate will punish them for demanding an end to US involvement in it. But then we don't have to run against a well-heeled opponent with lots of money for television spots with which to rip off our faces in only a year.

Of the four sitting senators who are running for president as Democrats, three voted against the measure-- Hillary Clinton,Christopher Dodd and Barack Obama. Joe Biden voted for the bill because, he said, although it is flawed, it would be irresponsible to deny our troops support as long as they are there. Outside the senate, Dennis Kucinich also voted against the bill, in the House. And it was vocally opposed by John Edwards and Bill Richardson. In fact, Edwards argued against presenting the bill in this form at all.

Politicians are in some important part about getting reelected. Sometimes they will take a big risk for a matter of principle, but most of the time their principles and the interests of their constituencies overlap a fair degree (which is typically how they got elected in the first place). The Democratic senators who voted for the bill think their constituencies will not punish them for doing so, but might punish them if they had not. In the case of, e.g., Washington state, this calculation may well be correct.

But the presidential hopefuls do not have their eyes on local districts or state-wide races. They are focused on the primaries. Primaries are dominated by the most committed of the party's base. Democratic primaries are skewed to the left of the Democratic Party, and Republican primaries are way to the right of that party.

Traditionally, doing well in the first two is key to surviving long enough to win. That means making the Democratic base in Iowa and New Hampshire happy. Hillary's staff is already, notoriously, not happy with her place in the polls in Iowa, where voters have apparently not forgiven her for having voted for the Iraq War in the first place. A vote for the Iraq supplemental might well have sunk her in both of the first two primaries.

On the other hand, that South Carolina and Florida will come so closely on the heels of the two northern primaries this time may alter the dynamics. A more centrist or conservative Democrat who can hold on until South Carolina and Florida might get a second wind. Both Clinton and Biden must be banking on this sort of thing.

Meanwhile, the Senate select committee on intelligence will share with the public on Monday passages from secret CIA intelligence analysis warning of sectarian violence and guerrilla resistance if the US went to war in Iraq.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Sadr and Shiite Politics

Sawt al-Iraq carries a report that Muqtada al-Sadr is back in Najaf after travels in Lebanon and Iran.

The US military is cautiously reporting the same information, though with less certainty. It is thought possible that Muqtada will preach in Kufa on Friday.

Meanwhile, the US military announced on Friday morning that Iraqi guerrillas had killed 6 US GIs.

Reuters reports civil war violence in Iraq for Thursday. Major incidents:

FALLUJA - A suicide car bomb targeting mourners at a funeral killed at least 27 people and wounded more than 30 others in Falluja, 50 km (35 miles) west of Baghdad. . .

HDAD - Gunmen stopped a minibus at a fake checkpoint in a Shi'ite district on Baghdad's northern outskirts on Thursday and killed all 11 passengers, police said. A bomb hidden among the bodies then exploded, killing two civilians and wounding four people, including two policemen. . .

McClatchy details other attacks and notes that police found 22 bodies in the streets of Baghdad on Thursday.

A leader in the Sadr Movement, Sheikh Adnan al-Silawi, called on Britain Thursday to withdraw its troops from Basra.

Some analysts warn that if the British withdraw from the southern, largely Shiite port city of Basra, "The Mehdi Army and rival Shiite militias will attempt a coup to seize control of the entire official military and security establishments in Basra and other southern Iraqi cities."

A more proximate threat to Basra stability is the prospect of a strike by the Petroleum Workers' Union. They are threatening a work stoppage if the Petroleum Bill is not revised to be less of a give-away to Western oil majors. Almost all of the 1.6 million barrels a day of that Iraq exports goes through Basra.

Al-Khalij reports in Arabic that the head of the Council for the Salvation of al-Anbar, Hamid al-Hayyis said that a delegation from the Council met with the leadership of the Sadr Movement. They then ment with two cabinet members, the minister of state for national security affairs and the minister for national dialogue affairs. The Council delivered to the government a letter asking that it hasten national reconciliation and stop making sectarian speeches. Al-Hayyis said that this was the first major meeting of the two principal sects in Iraq, where national essentials were agreed upon and shedding Iraqi blood was prohibited.

al-Sharq al-Awsat reports in Arabic that MP Rida Jawad Taqi of the Shiite United Iraqi Alliance is saying that his bloc, the largest in parliament, realizes that it is being targeted. He said that the UIA (which groups the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, the Da'wa Party and several other religious Shiite parties) is negotiating with the Islamic Virtue Party (Fadhila) in an attempt to bring it back into the coalition. Virtue left with its 15 members of parliament some months ago. He said that for the first time there are reports that Virtue wants to come back in. Jawad insisted that despite their withdrawal from the cabinet of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, the Sadrists had not altogether left the United Iraqi Alliance inside parliament.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Guerrillas Kill 9 US GIs
Over 100 Dead in New Wave of Violence
Sectarian Killings at forefront Again

Sunni Arab guerrillas killed 9 US GIs in five separate attacks on Wednesday, bringing the death toll for May so far to 80. A tenth soldier was found floating in the Euphrates on Wednesday. He was one of three who had been captured the previous week.

Remember the Bush administration briefings in Iraq that touted a fall in "one type" of violence in Baghdad, sectarian killings? Alas, the bad news is that sectarian death squad attacks, which produce bodies in the street every morning, have crept back up. Sudarsan Raghavan of WaPo discovered that more people have been killed that way so far in May than had been in all of January, before the new security plan (the "surge") was implemented.

As if to underline Raghavan's point,
Reuters reports that on Wednesday, police found 30 bodies in Baghdad. Other major violence:

' MANDALI - A bomber wearing a suicide vest killed 20 people and wounded 30 in a cafe in Mandali, a predominantly Kurdish Shi'ite town about 100 km (60 miles) northeast of Baghdad, police said.

SAMARRA - A roadside bomb killed five policemen on patrol in central Samarra, 100 km (60 miles) north of Baghdad, police said. . .

BAGHDAD - Mortar bombs killed three people and wounded 14 in Karrada district in central Baghdad, police said. . .

RAMADI - The bodies of five people were found shot and tortured in different districts of the city of Ramadi, 110 km (70 miles) west of Baghdad, police said. . .

McClatchy adds, "This morning gunmen wearing the ministry of interior forces uniforms raided the famous Sinak market (not far away from the Green Zone) and tried to kidnap the shops owners. The gunmen clashed with the gunmen and later with U.S. and Iraqi troops, eye witnesses said helicopters attacked the attackers and burned two cars. The gunmen fled and 5 citizens were killed and 17 were injured, ministry of interior officers said."

This newspaper estimates that over 100 Iraqis were killed on Wednesday in a new wave of violence.

MoveOn.org is urging US voters to pressure Congress with regard to withdrawing troops from Iraq.

Iraqi rice farmers in the south are beginning to plant opium poppies as a cash crop. The Bush administration is turning Iraq into Afghanistan.

One of the problems for the Bush administration with regard to the history of their fiasco in Iraq is that they invited in so many eyewitnesses from among "the willing." Gradually they will start to talk. Col. Mike Kelly of Australia, for instance, has started spilling the beans about former US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. He says that he urged Rummy to stop the looting in April of 2003, and that Donald over-ruled him. He calls Rumsfeld "criminally negligent."
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

The Bushies Just Make it Up: Iraq & al-Qaeda

Bush was out there again on Wednesday trying to link Iraq to al-Qaeda and maintaining that the US was mainly fighting it in that country. In fact, No Mahdi Army Shiites are al-Qaeda. Almost all Sunni Arab guerrilla cells are Baathist or Salafi rather than al-Qaeda. Probably of 100,000 guerrillas fighting in Iraq, perhaps 2% could be categorized in some vague way as "al-Qaeda" if you take that term as referring to a franchise. They are mainly foreign fighters and if the US left Iraq, the local Sunni Arabs would slit their throats. Some slitting is going on even now, and the Bushies celebrate that while not seeming to recognize the implication that "al-Qaeda" doesn't amount to anything as an Iraqi political force.

But this making up things out of thin air is typical of W.'s Propaganda Presidency, or what Chris Floyd calls the "powerful odor of mendacity."

And all along the Bushies have invoked al-Qaeda with regard to Iraq. It doesn't matter what the real situation in Iraq is. Is it ruled by secular Sunni Arab nationalist Baathists who are afraid of al-Qaeda according to documents Bush himself captured and released? Nevertheless, Bushies find al-Qaeda in Iraq. Is Iraq dominated by Shiites allied to Iran? Bushies find an alliance with al-Qaeda. Like tax cuts, it is the answer to every problem.

On 25 July 2002, Doug Feith's Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy (OUSDP) issued a statement linking al-Qaeda to Saddam Hussein through a Dutch company named Vlemmo NV.

This sort of allegation was typical of Feith, who had been asked in January of 2002 to come up with material on the [imaginary] relationship of Bin Laden and Iraq by his superior (who had hired him apparently for this sort of purpose), Paul Wolfowitz.

Feith had been investigated by the FBI earlier in his career as a possible Israeli intelligence asset and was raised in a fringe, far-rightwing Zionist family. His father was a member of Betar, the organization devoted to teachings of fascist Zionist thinker Vladimir (Ze'ev) Jabotinsky and to "Greater Israel" expansionism. Persons in this tradition often believe that Israel extends into Iraq itself.

Now it turns out that Feith just made up the Netherlands firm. According to the Netherlands Foreign Minister, it does not exist. . Just like virtually none of the things Feith peddled to us has has any reality. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz put Feith in a position to lie our troops into harm's way, as the number three man in the Pentagon. Feith bears responsibility for his lies and fabrications. His superiors are even more culpable.

See Think Progress for more of the context here.

Update: Bob Harris discovers that Vlemmo existed, but was Belgian. That it was an operational link between Saddam and Bin Laden and that it was Netherlands were the two big fantasies.

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Starving the Americans Out

Someone in the Green Zone leaked the following memo, which shows that US personnel are now actually facing difficulties in getting food by convoy up from Kuwait. They avoid local food in the Baghdad region because of the danger guerrillas will poison it.

'Due to a theater-wide delay in food delivery, menu selections will be limited for the near future. While every effort will be made to provide balanced meals, it may not be possible to offer the dishes you are used to seeing at each meal. Fresh fruits and salad bar items will also be severely limited or unavailable.'

The informant adds his own comment:

The bottom line is that our troops depend on a ground supply line that runs from Kuwait to the various bases in Iraq. When I was in Iraq last year at the U.S. base in Balad I had the chance to eat four meals a day--breakfast, lunch, dinner, and midnight rations (midrats). If you like late nights the midrats were great--steak, eggs, pancakes. Pretty good food. Well, based on this memo, it looks like those were the good old days. We don't have enough convoys to give our troops three hot meals a day. '

See also Pat Lang's comments.

The veracity of the memo has been challenged at some rightwing sites, but whatever the justice of their complaints about the logo (which may not be original and may have been in fact put there to disguise the source of the leak), the US Embassy memo has been confirmed in the Washington Post.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Dems Blink on Timetable;
New Iraq Plan on the Ground

The Democratic leadership in the House and Senate blinked on a troop withdrawal timetable today. The Warner plan, which substitutes 19 benchmarks to be achieved by the Iraqi government for the exact departure dates of US troops, puts some reporting restrictions on Bush but essentially gives him free rein to continue to prosecute the Iraq War as he pleases. Despite now being technically in the minority, Warner in some ways is still leading the Senate on Iraq War policy. Since he says he does want the US out of Iraq eventually, this is not as bad a piece of news as it could be. But those who want a quick US departure, like Russ Feingold, are deeply disappointed.

Apparently the spending supplemental bill will be split into Iraq and non-Iraq items, and the two parts will be voted on separately. Many Democrats, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, are saying they will vote against their own bill. But the Republicans probably have enough Democratic allies to pass it in both bodies.

It turns out that if the American public really wanted out of Iraq in short order, it needed to elect about 11 more Democrats [or Hagel- Paul Republicans] to the Senate than it did. It is a little unlikely that Americans will, as John Edwards proposed, use Memorial Day as an occasiont to launch large numbers of massive demonstrations against the war. Edwards insists that only an American withdrawal can hope to force Iraqi Sunnis and Shiites to seek reconciliation with one another.

In the meantime, the Americans leading the Iraq mission on the ground have some ideas for how to bridge to the ultimate withdrawal, which has now been delayed.

Hamza Hendawi and Qassim Abdul Zahra of AP report that the Sadr Movement is positioning itself to take over Iraq if the al-Maliki government falls. The Sadrists would have to put together a pan-Islamic Sunni-Shiite alliance to form a government. They have 32, and might be able to get the 24 Da'wa delegates to join with them. The Sunni Arabs have 58, which would make 114 if the Sadrists could pull it off. They would have to be joined by 24 other Shiites, whether independents or Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council. Since the Mahdi Army harbors a lot of death squad murderers of Sunnis, the notion seems a bit far-fetched to me. But Sadrists and fundamentalist Sunnis do agree on a lot: 1) US troops out now, 2) Islamic canon law (shariah) as the law of the land, 3) strong central government rather than regional confederacies. And, I'm told that the Sunni delegates in parliament are mostly on good terms with Muqtada al-Sadr.

The Sadrists demand a US withdrawal from Iraq on a short timetable.

WaPo was leaked to on the subject of the new Crocker-Petraeus plan for Iraq. Key elements:

1. Back Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki rather than trying to organize a new government.

2. Expand and build up the Iraqi Army, which is less purely sectarian than some other security forces in Iraq.

3. And then implementation of 3 points:

a. Protect the local population from the insurgents so as to allow them to become independent actors in civil society.

b. Increase capacity and efficiency of government ministries and their integraton with provincial administrations.

c. Purge Iraq's government and security forces of "sectarian abusers," replacing them with "Iraqi nationalists."

Crocker and Petraeus are among the more capable US leaders ever to be involved in the Iraq misadventure, and they have excellent instincts about what needs to be done. Better, they have experience and information, and know how to analyze it.

But I think we have to be realistic about the possibilities here. The US is getting out of Iraq, if not in 2008, then surely in the period after the inauguration of the next president; and if not altogether, then very largely. As one officer quoted in the WaPo piece noted, there is going to be a "giant sucking sound" when the withdrawal occurs.

So by 2009 it is desirable that there be a functioning civil government and a much strengthened Iraqi army. (An unlikely outcome, admittedly, but people making practical policy in Baghdad have to at least try.) In essence, I don't see the Crocker-Petraeus plan as necessarily a bid to stay militarily in Iraq but as possibly a way of transitioning out of the occupation and toward an Iraq that can stand on its own two feet.

As a set of ideals, I don't find anything to criticize in the plan as presented. I can think of a lot of practical obstacles to its success.

I am not sure that Nuri al-Maliki is capable of leading the whole country in an even-handed manner. He was a key member of the De-Baathification Commission and finds it difficult to accept the need to seek reconciliation with ex-Baathists. It isn't just a matter of his character. Any old-time Islamic Da'wa Party apparatchik would feel pretty much the same. Al-Maliki has a blind spot when it comes to the Mahdi Army, moreover, seeing it as a kind of Shiite neighborhood protection committee and necessary to protect Shiite neighborhoods from [Sunni] Baathi and Salafi bombings.

Moreover, al-Maliki is very much a minority prime minister. He has lost the support of the Islamic Virtue Party (15 MPs of 275) and for the most part of the Sadrists (32 MPs). The Sunni Arab parties are still talking about withdrawing from the "national unity" government. I'd say on some issues his majority in parliament is probably razor thin by now, no more than 143 (you need 138 for a simple majority). Any 50 MPs can introduce a vote of no confidence against the PM, and the Sadrists are now threatening to do this. I agree with Crocker and Petraeus that since al-Maliki is the elected prime minister, the world is stuck with him. I'm just wondering if he can bear the burden the plan places on him.

I just wonder if there are any genuine Iraqi nationalists left who have any real political power or significant constituencies. Getting the really dirty death squad leaders out of the Ministry of Interior would be all to the good, if it can be done. But the abusers are likely Badr Corps, and Badr is supported by the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, which is the leading party in the Shiite south and has a leadership position in parliament and in several ministries. So a US purge of Badr is pretty difficult to pull off at this point. Badr even has members in parliament to push for their interests in the legislature.

Moreover, the Kurdish leaders seem to me not really committed to Iraq, with the possible exception of Talabani, and do not behave as "Iraqi nationalists." They are a net plus with regard to security and the economy, but they continually burrow away to weaken the central government and deny it prerogatives.

I also wonder if the goals of strengthening the Iraqi civil bureaucracy and army, and the implicit goal of a continued alliance between the US and the Kurds, are really compatible.

Probably the US leaders are coding Sadrists as abusive sectarians. But if you just marginalize the Sadrists, you are creating a world of trouble in Baghdad and the south. Playing good Sadrists and bad Sadrists will be very difficult, in part because it won't be easy to tell which is which. And, as we saw above, the Sadrists are a power to be reckoned with. If there are provincial elections, as the US calls for, they could do very well in the southern provinces now, assuming there isn't voting fraud by SIIC, their Shiite rival.

Some of the Sunni Arab parliamentarians and ministers, moreover, are linked to guerrilla groups such as the 1920 Revolution Brigades.

In addition, the Sunni Arab guerrilla movement is in a position to sabotage a lot of the progress that could be made by implementing this plan.

Toby Dodge is quoted in the WaPo article. He gave another recent interview in which he seemed pretty pessimistic about current plans working out. Replying to a question about the moment when the US embassy personnel will need to be evacuated by helicopter from Baghdad, he advised that the architects of the US embassy give it "a large roof." I fear that may indicate what odds he gives the new plan of succeeding.

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Effort to Amend Constitution Founders Again

Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that Iraqi parliamentarians proved unable to agree on key constitutional compromises. The sticking points included the establishment of further provincial confederacies, De-Baathification, the disposition of the oil city of Kirkuk, and the distribution of national wealth [this is where that would be done, not in the equally stalled petroleum legislation]. The parliamentary committee is asking for more time.

Al-Hayat discusses and then rejects the truth of rumors that Iyad Allawi is bieng groomed for a constitutional coup, in which he would put together the largest parliamentary block. This possibility is viewed as improbable by leading Iraqi politicians. The paper also reports the visit by anti-al-Qaeda Sunni tribal leaders from al-Anbar to see Sadrist leaders in New York

They also discuss the visit of the Sunni tribal leaders to the Sadrists in South

Reuters reports civil war violence in Iraq on Tuesday. Major incidents, not counting roadside bombs that killed or wounded Iraqi security forces and civilians, included:

' BAGHDAD - At least 25 people were killed and 60 wounded when a car bomb exploded near a popular market in Amil district in southwestern Baghdad, police said.

BAGHDAD - At least four college students were killed and 25 wounded in a mortar attack at Ibn al-Haitham college in Adhamiya district in northern Baghdad, police said . . .

NEAR GARMA - U.S. forces killed nine insurgents in a ground and air attack and freed 12 hostages held near the town of Garma, about 50 km (35 miles) west of Baghdad, the U.S. military said. . . [What is that about?]

McClatchy adds that a whopping 33 bodies were discovered on the streets of Baghdad on Tuesday. It adds:

' 9 students were killed including 2 female students and 2 injured (students in the Islamic education college) when gunmen attacked their mini bus in Tounis neighborhood east Baghdad around 2,30. '

The USG Open Source Center paraphrases Iraq newspaper articles for May 22.

' Dar al-Salam runs on the front page a 500-word report on the statement issued by the Iraqi Al-Tawafuq Front demanding the cancellation of the Interior Ministry's recent decision to reinstate former security officers. . .

Dar al-Salam publishes on page 2 a 400-word report citing Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi confirming that the Iraqi Al-Tawafuq Front has not cancelled its plans to withdraw from the government. Al-Hashimi explained that the withdrawal plans have been suspended and that the final decision will depend on the results of the current talks with the government regarding the previous agreements between political blocs. . .

Al-Sabah al-Jadid carries on page 5 a 300-word report entitled "Al-Bayyati: Constitutional Amendment Committee Refers Issues of Wealth Distribution, Federal Blocs' Authority, Article 140 to Bloc Leaders. . .

Al-Bayan carries on page 2 a 400-word report on the statement issued by 36 tribal chiefs from Karbala offering to defend the governorate. . .

Al-Mashriq carries on page 2 a 1,000-word interview with Salih al-Mutlaq, who says that Al-Maliki's government is legal, and that the Iraqi Islamic Party is responsible for amending the Constitution, because it urged Sunnis to vote in the general elections. . .

Al-Mada carries on page 3 a 150-word report citing [Sunni Arab] Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi announcing that a US-Iran dialogue harms Iraqi sovereignty. . .

Al-Mada carries on page 2 a 250-word report stating that the De-B'athification Committee considers the Interior Ministry's call for dissolved security services to return to work as a violation of the Constitution. . . .

Al-Bayyinah al-Jadidah carries on the front page a 270-word report citing a well-informed political source saying that Abd-al-Aziz al-Hakim has managed to "put out Iraq's fire" by calming the situation between the United States and Iran. . .

Al-Muwatin carries on the front page a 650-word report citing senior sources saying that the upcoming US-Iranian talks will achieve fruitful results to end violence in Iraq. The report adds that Al-Anbar's tribes are planning to form political coalitions as an alternative for the Iraqi Al-Tawafuq Front if it withdraws from the government. . .

Al-Muwatin carries on page 3 a 180-word report cites Aqil al-Fariji, member of the Basra Governorate Council, denying that Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has issued a decision to dismiss Basra Governor Muhammad Musbih al-Wa'ili. . .

Al-Bayyinah carries on page 4 a 750-word report on the Islamic Conference for Iraqi Tribes that was held in Al-Najaf on 20 May. . .

Al-Sabah carries on page 8 a 130-word report confirming plans to recruit 150 women police officers in Karbala Governorate.

Al-Mashriq carries on the front page a 400-word report on fierce clashes between Al-Mahdi Army and British forces near the governorate office in Basra . . .

Al-Mashriq carries on the front page a 350-word report citing the Ministry of Defense announcing that Baghdad plans to buy new weapons worth $5.1 billion. . .

Al-Mada runs on page 3 a 150-word report stating that tribes of Al-Obeydat and Al-Masu'd have driven out Al-Qa'ida terrorists after clashing and chasing them in the Mowaylha area in northern Babil Province. . .

Al-Mada carries on page 2 a 1,500-word report stating that 4,000 US Marines carried out a huge military operation in Al-Anbar Province. . .

Al-Muwatin carries on page 2 a 240-word report cites the Baghdad Governorate Council Chairman Mu'in al-Kazimi saying that 5,000 land tracts will be distributed to the former regime's victims. . .

Al-Muwatin carries on page 3 a 90-word report citing an Al-Muwatin's correspondent in Abu Ghurayb saying that clashes have erupted between Harith al-Dari's terrorists on the one hand and Al-Muthanna Brigade and citizens on the other. . .

Al-Muwatin carries on page 3 a 300-word report citing Basra citizens expressing satisfaction about the British decision not to send Prince Harry to serve in the governorate. . .

Al-Zaman publishes on page 5 a 320-word report entitled "Press Freedom Watch Denounces US Army for Breaking into Al-Da'wah Newspaper Headquarters." . .

Al-Mashriq carries on page 5 a 20-word report cited the governor of the Central Bank saying that hard currency reserves reached $21 billion. . .

Al-Mashriq carries on page 5 a 120-word report on the development of three oil fields in Maysan. . .

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

USG Defends Haleh

After many days of silence, the US government finally spoke out on Tuesday against the absurd charges lodged by the Iranian government against imprisoned Iranian-American academic Haleh Esfandiari.

Robin Wright has more, noting that Haleh is considered the "gold standard" with regard to academic scholarship.

The Ibn Khaldun Center for Human Rights of Cairo and a Kuwaiti organization have contributed to a Free Haleh website.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Chart of Enemy Attacks in Iraq

Here is a chart of guerrilla attacks in Iraq since 2003 through April 2007. It is from a GAO document on Iraq, "GAO-07-677 Iraq Electricity and Oil," p. 34. The original is in .pdf format here. I think it says it all. Note that all the activity related to the "surge" seems to have gotten the mayhem nearly back down to what it was in . . . July 2006, that veritable paradise of communal harmony.




See below for Tuesday's blog postings.

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Cole interview of Ali Allawi in Chronicle

My interview with Ali Allawi, author of The Occupation of Iraq: Winning the War, Losing the Peace is temporarily available at the Chronicle of Higher Education at this special site for non-subscribers.

Excerpt:

' Cole: Is the Iraqi government as it is now constituted really viable? Can it be expected to assert itself any time soon, given that it is internally deeply divided and has a weak, inexperienced, and often reluctant military and a police force wracked with corruption and absenteeism? Is there any chance that an international peacekeeping and reconstruction force could help shore it up in a way that the U.S. has not been able to?

Allawi: The Iraqi government relies on its continuity in power on deals made by its principal components, the Shia United Iraqi Alliance, the Kurdistan Front, the secular Iraqiya list [associated with the former interim prime minister, Ayad Allawi], and the Sunni Tawafuq bloc, which were brokered by the U.S. Embassy. So far this uneasy coalition, misleadingly called the "national unity" government, has remained mostly intact despite defections from the UIA and some rumblings inside the Tawafuq. A great deal depends on the position of the U.S., which has huge influence on the Kurds, the Sunni-led groups inside the governing coalition, and elements of the UIA.

So far the U.S. has continued to support the Maliki government, even though it is extremely uncomfortable generally about Shia Islamists in power. The risks of jettisoning the Maliki government at this stage are simply too high. That might change, however, and political rivals to Maliki are hovering around trying to fashion a new governing parliamentary majority if the security situation is not stabilized or more defections from the UIA take place. In spite of all the risks ahead, I believe the Maliki government will continue in power as a weak and divided government simply because of the absence of a credible alternative from within the current parliamentary majority. '

Read the whole thing .

Allawi put forward a peace plan for Iraq last winter.

Allawi served as minister of Trade and of defense in the appointed government of the Interim Governing Council 2003-2004.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Parliament Building Shelled
Iraqi Military Makes Plans for If the US Suddenly Decamps
Gulf States Fear Iraqi Violence

Guerrilla mortar shells hit the Iraqi parliament building on Monday. The air in the chamber filled with dust, but there were no casualties.

Reuters reports large numbers of bombings and attacks around the country, which on Monday tended to wound more people than they killed outright. About ten persons were killed, mostly police or Iraqi army, but including a British soldier in Basra.

Police found 24 bodies in the streets of Baghdad on Monday. McClatchy reports other Civil War news and ins't afraid to say so.

The Iraqi military is making plans for how to keep security if the US suddenly withdraws. Apparently the minister of defense (who is himself under fire from Sunni Arab parliamentarians) believes that Bush may abandon the Iraqi government this September.

AP adds,

' Senior Kurdish lawmaker Mahmoud Othman confirmed that U.S. pressure was mounting, especially on the oil bill, which was endorsed by the Iraqi Cabinet three months ago but has yet to come to the floor of parliament.

"The Americans are pressuring us to accept the oil law. Their pressure is very strong. They want to show Congress that they have done something so they want the law to be adopted this month. This interference is negative and will have consequences," Othman told AP. '

I have a friendly disagreement with Steve Walt and John Mearsheimer over petroleum as an impetus for the Iraq War. I think it was huge. And, that this petroleum law is what the Bushies really care about is obvious. At a time when the country is in flames, nearly 4 million people have been forced from their homes, unemployment is 60%, the Iraqi government and army are dysfunctional, etc., is a bill on foreign investments really the most important thing?

Another Bush "benchmark" for the Iraqis is amending the constitution to make it slightly more palatable to the Sunni Arabs. So far nothing has been done on that. Al-Zaman reports in Arabic that parliament has extended the deadline for the constitution revision committee to complete its work. The real problem is that politics in Iraq is consensus politics, and you can't get a consensus on most things nowadays because of the civil war. In the absence of consensus, people are reluctant to try to go forward. That is why the Iraqi parliament looks to us as though it is paralyzed. Moving ahead on an issue in the absence of consensus would be an affront to those who dissent, and might well start a feud and fuel violence.

The same report in al-Zaman says that US spokesmen in Baghdad admit that the US has been conducting back channel negotiations with the Sunni Arab guerrillas. One demand the guerrillas are making is that Washington must pressure Iran to cease so strongly supporting the Shiite militias with money and arms.

Al-Sharq al-Awsat reports in Arabic that Ammar al-Hakim, the son of Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, maintains that his father's health is stable and that Abdul Aziz can exercise his leadership role even as he is receiving medical treatment for cancer in Tehran. He said that there is also a 15-man SIIC politburo that meets daily and has a leadership role. I would have been far more reassured if Ammar had announced that in his father's absence, Adil Abdul Mahdi or some other respected figure in SIIC would take over for the time being.

The Sadr Movement in parliament has threatened Prm Nuri al-Maliki with a vote of no confidence if he renews the term of the Multi-National Forces in Iraq.

The Oil Gulf governments are worried to death about Iraq-inspired militancy spreading among youths of their countries, according to Reuters. The conservative and cautious Saudi Minister of the Interior, Prince Nayef, said:

' "The security situation in Iraq is deteriorating and terrorism is growing there. Iraq has become fertile ground for creating a new generation of terrorists learning and practising all forms of murder and destruction," he said. "The lax security situation in Iraq bears great dangers for our region and stability ... in our countries." '

Saudi officialdom usually doesn't say much publicly, and often is sphinx-like. If they are talking like this publicly, I infer that they are panicked and frightened nearly to death.

I suppose I have to link to this silly article by poor Simon Tisdall in of all places, The Guardian, whom someone is using to push a sinister agenda. Yes, its sources are looney in positing a coming offensive jointly sponsored by Iran, the Mahdi Army and al-Qaeda. Anyone who reads IC regularly will see immediately holes in this story. At a time when Sunni Arab guerrillas are said to be opposing "al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia" for its indiscriminate violence against Iraqis, including Shiites, we are now expected to believe that Shiite Iran is allying with it. And, it claims that the Iranian Revolutionary Guards are shelling the Green Zone. The parliament building that was hit to day by such shelling is dominated by the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council and its paramilitary, the Badr Organization. Who trained Badr? The Iranian Revolutionary Guards. And they are trying to hit their own guys . . . why? By the way, the US has 16,000 suspected insurgents in custody. Tisdall should ask how many of them are Iranian. (Hint: close to none. What, do they just run faster than the others?) The article even traffics in the ridiculous assertion that Iran is backing hyper-Sunni, Shiite-killing Taliban in Afghanistan. Why not just cut to the quick and openly say that Supreme Jurisprudent Ali Khamenei is in reality . . . Satan! It really is discouraging that Tisdall didn't report instead on what crazy things the US military spokesmen in Iraq told him. US military spokesmen have been trying to push implausible articles about Shiite Iran supporting Sunni insurgents for a couple of years now, and with virtually the sole exception of the New York Times, no one in the journalistic community has taken these wild charges seriously. But The Guardian?
For "cont'd" postings, click here.