The End of Bonapartism and the War on Terror

NYT columnist Tom Friedman's column, "9/11 is over," sounds the death knell for the Neoconservative use of 9/11 and is in particular an attack on Rudy Giuliani.

Friedman's main arguments are that the Bush administration's approach to dealing with al-Qaeda has so damaged the US image abroad, has so inconvenienced foreign travelers and visiting business investors, and has so diverted spending from essential US infrastructure such as bridges and airports, that it risks making the US economically backward in a globalizing world.

The column is significant because it argues that Bushism- Cheneyism is bad for business. The United States is the world's foremost business society, and virtually everything in the society (low taxes on the wealthy, no health care for the middle classes and poor, no protections for labor organizers, favoring of certain kinds of international trade over lower middle class job security, etc.) is arranged for the convenience of the business classes. If Friedman's conviction becomes widespread in that community, the pressures to abandon the 'War on Terror' will be irresistible.

Bushism-Cheneyism has aspects of Bonapartism, whereby the state rules in an authoritarian way and disregards the people, representing itself as the true representative of the business classes. In fact, it serves only a small spectrum of corporate cronies of the ruling elite, disadvantaging almost everyone else. It expands government, but not into provision of useful infrastructure (bridges, airports), but toward the provision of "security" (often just a label for make-work unnecessary jobs, such as extra al-Qaeda-fighting police in Wyoming) or of artificial "investment opportunities" such as an Iraq under US military occupation..

Friedman is the voice of the non-Libertarian business interests, the ones that recognize that certain necessary public goods will not be provided by corporations and so must be provided by government. He also represents those who are unafraid of global competition (thus his slamming of Lou Dobbs), and indeed are convinced that the big money-making opportunities on the horizon lie in globalization and in removal of barriers to international trade, investment and finance. (They are undeterred for some reason by the 1997 melt-down in Asia, which occurred precisely because governments unwisely opened the door to unregulated international speculation).

For the 'globalized business' crowd, the Iraq war was not a sacred mission, as it was for the Neoconservatives, but rather just another lowering of barriers to investment and business (which might also have opened the Arab world up, which would have been all to the good). The Iraq War worked in part precisely because both the Bonapartist and the global-capital fractions within the business classes could agree that it might end Arab socialism and end the barriers to doing business among the 300 million people of the Middle East.

Friedman writes:

' I’d love to see us salvage something decent in Iraq that might help tilt the Middle East onto a more progressive pathway. That was and is necessary to improve our security. But sometimes the necessary is impossible — and we just can’t keep chasing that rainbow this way. '

In other words, the Iraq War was a business investment, which was a bit of a risk but entirely justifiable at the time (you can hear the nervous CEO explaining to the Board of Directors). But the investment has gone south, isn't working out, and no successful businessman throws good money after bad.

The attack on Giuliani comes because he is still attached to the new acquisition and does want to go on hemorrhaging funds.

It is time, Friedman argues in contrast, to cut our losses and sell off this white elephant of an acquisition (the whole 'War on Terror' including Iraq), which is bleeding money, hurting the firm's image, scaring off investors, and forestalling needed new investments in key growth sectors.

USA, Inc. is moving on.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Iraq Preachers Lambaste Senate

The USG Open Source Center translates or paraphrases sermons given in Iraq on Friday, both Sunni and Shiite.

'Round-up of Iraqi Friday Sermons 28 Sep
Iraq -- OSC Summary
Saturday, September 29, 2007

Major Iraqi television channels - Baghdad Al-Iraqiyah, Baghdad Baghdad Satellite Channel, Baghdad Al-Sharqiyah, Baghdad Al-Furat, Cairo Al-Baghdadiyah, and Baghdad Al-Diyar - are observed on 28 September to carry the following reports on Friday sermons:

Al-Iraqiyah: Within its 1700 GMT newscast, Baghdad Al-Iraqiyah Television in Arabic - government- sponsored television station, run by the Iraqi Media Network - is observed to carry the following report on today's Friday sermons:

"In a Friday sermon, Shaykh Jalal-al-Din al-Saghir [Shiite], imam and preacher of the Buratha Mosque, warned those who conspire against the Iraqi Government and the political process in the country against what they do. At the same time, he urged the Iraqis to unite in order to safeguard the political plan and to defend it in any way."

Shaykh Al-Saghir says: "Plotting against the political process, although it targets the Unified Iraqi Coalition (UIC), goes far beyond the UIC. Although it now targets Dr Al-Maliki's government and those with this government, the plotting goes far beyond this."

He adds" "Our defense of the political process should also include the essence of this process. The essence of the political process is that it has liberated the people's will and kept this will in the hands of the sons of the people themselves."

The report adds: "Shaykh Dr Samir al-Sumayda'i [Sunni], imam and preacher of the Umm al-Qura Mosque, said that the Iraqis will not be affected by any decision that seeks to drag the country to a civil war. In his Friday sermon, Al-Sumayda'i called on the Iraqis to foil the plans of those who seek to partition the country through their unity and brotherhood."

Commenting on the "recent US Congress's decision," Al-Sumayda'i says: "The zealous sons of the country have no choice but to stand as one man and to unite in order to say no to the partitioning of the country and that we are one people, one country, one soul, and one hand."

He adds: "Every Iraqi, in the north, south, central, west, and east of the country is zealous. You should know that if we stand as one man we will find some people who support us in the south, in the center, and in the north. Thus, the occupier will never be able to divide us."

Baghdad Satellite Channel: Baghdad Baghdad Satellite Television in Arabic - television channel believed to be sponsored by the Iraqi Islamic Party - is observed to carry at 0915 GMT a Friday sermon from an unidentified mosque in Baghdad. Shaykh Dr Harith al-Ubaydi delivers the sermon.

In his Friday sermon, Al-Ubaydi discusses the responsibilities of "man" in this world since God has chosen him to "uphold the trust." He discusses the "status" of man in the "dialogue" between God and the angels in the Koran based on the following Koranic verse: "Behold, thy Lord said to the angels: "I will create a vicegerent on earth." They said: "Wilt Thou place therein one who will make mischief therein and shed blood? - whilst we do celebrate Thy praises and glorify Thy holy (name)?" He said: "I know what ye know not." (Koranic verse, Al-Baqara, 2:30)

In order to explain how God "honored mankind," the preacher also quotes the following verse from the Koran: "We have honored the sons of Adam; provided them with transport on land and sea; given them for sustenance things good and pure; and conferred on them special favours, above a great part of our creation." (Koranic verse, Al-Isra, 17:70)

He says that the main duty of mankind is to "implement God's laws on earth." He says that "God wants us to establish right and justice and to implement His Shari'ah."

The preacher says: "Human rights are guaranteed and protected in Islam, but the defect is in those who rule Muslims. These are rulers who are mainly preoccupied with their sensual delights and lusts."

He adds: "Their radio stations and space channels have nothing to do other than glorifying the ruler. They slaughter peoples, arrest the sons of these peoples, and torture them. They ask the peoples to celebrate their praises and glorify their status. So, the defect is in those who rule Muslims, and not in our Islam. True Muslims did not assume power, but they were deprived of it. Had they assumed power, the world would have seen the greatness of Islam and how it establishes justice and right."

Speaking about the conditions of Iraqi prisoners, the preacher says that some of them said that "they have raped us." He says: "Does Islam say rape them because they have committed a crime? Does humanity say torture them because they have committed a crime?"

Al-Sharqiyah: Baghdad Al-Sharqiyah Television in Arabic - independent, private news and entertainment channel focusing on Iraq, run by Sa'd al-Bazzaz, publisher of the Arabic language daily Al-Zaman - is not observed to carry any reports on Friday sermons for the day. Al-Furat:

Within its 1700 GMT newscast, Baghdad Al-Furat Television Channel in Arabic - television channel affiliated with the Iraqi Islamic Supreme Council (IISC) led by Abd-al-Aziz al-Hakim, carries the following report on today's Friday sermons:

"Shaykh Abd-al-Mahdi al-Karbala'i, imam and preacher of the Karbala Friday sermon, said that the religious authority will continue to act as a protective tent for all Iraqis. In his Friday sermon at the Al-Husayn Shrine, Shaykh Al-Karbala'i praised the recent visit by the delegation of the Al-Tawafuq (Accord) Front to Higher Religious Authority Imam Al-Sayyid Ali al-Husayni al-Sistani. He said that the religious authority will continue to serve as the safety valve for Iraq and the unity of its sons."

Al-Karbala'i is then shown delivering his sermon. (Al-Karbala'i's Friday sermon is covered separately as GMP20070928676002)

The report adds: "Friday preachers termed the visit by the delegation of the Al-Tawafuq Front to Higher Religious Authority Imam Al-Sistani as a step in the right direction of bolstering national unity. Other preachers criticized the nonbinding decision the US Senate has made on a plan to partition Iraq on sectarian basis."

Commenting on the recent US Senate's decision, Shaykh Muhammad al-Haydari, imam and preacher of the Al-Khillani Mosque, says: "This is a dangerous sign on partitioning Iraq. The Iraqis should understand this sign and approach. They should reject this decision and adhere to the unity of Iraq as well as the unity of the Iraqi people -- Sunnis, Shiites, Arabs, Kurds, Turkomen, and other minorities."

The channel carries an episode of its weekly "Friday Sermons" program at 2015 GMT, as follows:

The program begins with the Friday sermon delivered by Shaykh Jalal-al-Din al-Saghir, which is covered in Al-Iraqiyah's report within its 1700 GMT newscast.

Shaykh Muhammad al-Haydari, imam and preacher of the Al-Khillani Mosque, says: "You and the world have heard that the US Senate has made a nonbinding decision to partition Iraq into three regions; a Kurdish region, a Sunni region, and a Shiite region, along with having a weak central government."

He adds: "Of course, this decision is strange. Is it reasonable for a government or legislators in a state to legislate for another state?"

He adds: "This is a dangerous sign on partitioning Iraq. The Iraqis should understand this sign and approach. They should reject this decision and adhere to the unity of Iraq as well as the unity of the Iraqi people -- Sunnis, Shiites, Arabs, Kurds, Turkomen, and other minorities. All world states should understand that they do not have the right to interfere in the affairs of other states, including Iraq, although it is weak and occupied."

The station then carries Al-Karbala'i's Friday sermon, which is covered as GMP20070928676002.

Commenting on the Karbala incidents, Shaykh Sadr-al-Din al-Qabbanji, imam and preacher of Al-Najaf Friday sermon, says that these incidents "were preplanned on the financial, organizational, and political levels." He adds that "there was a political plan." He urges the Interior Ministry to announce the results of investigations into the Karbala incidents to the public.

Shaykh Hasan al-Zamili, imam and preacher of the Al-Diwaniyah Friday sermon, says: "You have heard in the news media that a group was arrested in Al-Najaf and another in Basra. These groups took part in assassinating some of the representatives of the religious authority."

He adds: "We call on the Council of Representatives to adopt a stand on this issue and to question the committee that has been formed. This also calls on the scholars to adopt an honorable and appropriate stand toward the Karbala incidents. The political parties also should know that the 15 Sha'ban incidents have pained the hearts and made them bleed. Silence on this issue is treason and silence on the blood that was shed is also treason. Consequently, this encourages the criminals. From this pulpit and other pulpits, we have repeatedly cautioned the government against procrastinating on this issue." . . '

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Saturday roundup

At the Global Affairs blog, Philip Cunningham, who teaches at Dosisha University in Japan considers the ways in which W.'s Iraq debacle has weakened the ability of the US to play a positive role in the Burma / Myanmar crisis.

Susie Madrak links to a real soldier who upbraids the chickenhawk Rush Limbaugh for calling veterans opposed to the Iraq War "phony soldiers". (No doubt he thinks the badly wounded among them are "phony handicaps" too; about 30,000 US troops have been killed or wounded bad enough to go to hospital, with perhaps 10,000 so very badly injured.)

At Tomdispatch: Guantanamo Forever, and "It's the Oil, Stupid."

At the Napoleon's Egypt blog, a frank admission by an officer, Dezirad, that war in the Middle East is hell: "Since we have been in Egypt we have done nothing but suffer. The immense fatigues which we experienced in the Desert, the prodigious heat of the sun, which sets the very ground on fire, the absolute want of food, and the necessity of continual marching, have carried off a vast number of volunteers, who dropt down dead at our feet from mere exhaustion."

Dropped dead while marching in the desert? We know what Rush would think of them!
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Iraqi Establishment Rejects US Senate Resolution Al-Maliki: A Disaster for Iraq and the Region

Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki on Friday rejected the US Senate resolution calling for a soft partition of Iraq. Reuters reports:

' "They should stand by Iraq to solidify its unity and its sovereignty," Maliki told Iraqi state television . . ."They shouldn't be proposing its division. That could be a disaster not just for Iraq but for the region." Maliki also called on the Iraqi parliament to meet and respond formally to the non-binding resolution, passed by the Senate on Wednesday, which called for the creation of "a federal system of government and ... federal regions". '

Al-Sharq al-Awsat reports in Arabic that Abdul Mahdi al-Karbala'i, the representative of Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani in the Shiite shrine city of Karbala south of the capital, called the Senate resolution "a step toward the breakup of Iraq." He said Iraqis of all religions and ethnicities should live at peace in a united country. He also called on the Arab states, especially the Arab countries neighboring Iraq, to prevent any such partition. He said, "It is a mistake to imagine that such a plan will lead to a reduction in chaos in Iraq; rather, on the contrary, it will lead to an increase in the butchery and a deepening of the crisis of this country, and the spreading of increased chaos, even to neighboring states."

I don't think Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani likes the Senate plan very much.

The Sunni Association of Muslim Scholars also denounced the plan, but said it came as no surprise, since the break-up of Iraq had been the motive for the US invasion of that country in the first place. The AMS said that the resolution issued from a well-known wing of the present American administration and from the Zionist lobby.

On the other hand, the office of the Kurdistan Regional Government's president, Massoud Barzani, issued a statement welcoming the resolution. It insisted that loose federalism does not equal partition, but rather voluntary unity.

Al-Sharq al-Awsat reports in Arabic that Iraqi Vice President Adil Abdul Mahdi appears to have rethought his initial rejection of the Senate resolution. He said in Cairo that one model for Iraq might be the United Arab Emirates, a loose association of fairly autonomous sheikhdoms. Likewise, Sawt al-Iraq says in Arabic, As'ad Sultan Abu Kalal, the governor of Najaf province, called for the implementation of loose federalism as the best system for Iraq.

The same report says that Sunni cleric Harith al-Dhari accused Prime Minister al-Maliki of having all along plotted to break up Iraq. (That Sunni leaders see him this way may explain al-Maliki's eagerness to distance himself from the US senate.)

The Gulf Cooperation Council, grouping six Persian Gulf oil states, also denounced the resolution, as did the Arab League and Yemen.

Kurdistan authorities denounced an agreement between Baghdad and Ankara to fight terrorism, which targets the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK), to whom Iraqi Kurdish authorities have given safe haven.

On how Bush hasn't after all liberated Iraqi women, maybe.

In fact, Sam Dagher of the CMS reports on how Basra has become increasingly Talibanized under the rule of Shiite militias, as the British troops have withdrawn from the city.

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee is driving the US toward a war against Iran, and authored the draft for the Kyl-Lieberman resolution passed overwhelmingly by the US senate.

Reuters reports civil war violence on Thursday and Friday. Major incidents on Friday:

'MOSUL - A truck bomb wounded 20 people and destroyed an overpass in Mosul, 390 km (240 miles) north of Baghdad, police said.

(McClatchy says: "- Around 2 p.m. a truck bomb destroyed a bridge in Al Shifaa area in Mosul. The bombing flattened the bridge and caused several injuries among civilians in the nearby houses especially, Iraqi police said."]

BAGHDAD - A U.S. air raid killed at least eight people in the Al Saha neighbourhood of Doura district in southern Baghdad, police and medical sources said. . .

[McClatchy adds:

Baghdad

- Around 2 a.m. U.S. military used aerial fire targeting a building in Al Doura area south Baghdad, Iraqi police said. The aerial fire targeted building number 139 in Al Siha district. 10 people were killed and 7 others were injured according to the Iraqi police sources. No U.S. military response was available by the time of publication of this report.

- Around 11 a.m. a mortar shell slammed in Al Ubaidi neighborhood. Two people were injured.

- Police found 5 dead bodies throughout Baghdad. . .

The Mosul bombing came on the heels of destructive suicide bombings on Wednesday. Mosul is in Ninevah Province, one of the provinces the US had hoped to withdraw from by now (this sort of insecurity has postponed that move until next summer.)

Some 130 Iraqis were killed or wounded on Thursday and Friday.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Senate Partitions Iraq

The US Senate voted for a soft partition of Iraq on Thursday. First they messed up Iraq by authorizing Terrible George to blow it up, now they want to further mess it up by dividing it. It makes no sense to me; the US Senate doesn't even have the authority to divide Iraq. Wouldn't that be for the Iraqi parliament?

The Iraqi political elite roundly condemned the Senate vote. Note that among the more vocal denunciations came from Shiite Vice President Adil Abdul Mahdi, whose own party, the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI), favors the creation of a Shiite superstate in the south.

Iraq expert Reidar Vissar dissects the Senate vote and says it is, in Iraqi terms, unconstitutional.


The Iraqi government is incapable of even rudimentary auditing and corruption-fighting, according to a US embassy in Baghdad report. The difficulties range from the poor security situation to violent militia elements inside government ministries.

Historian Roger Owen explains why Iraq is doomed to warlord rivalry and chaos in the short to medium term, whatever the US military does in that country.

At the Global Affairs blog, Part four of Barnett Rubin's excellent series on counter-narcotics policy in Afghanistan.

At the Napoleon's Egypt blog, an account of the Nile river battle of Shubrakhit (Chubrakhit, Chabreisse), by General Thomas-Alexandre Dumas, later the father of the author of the Count of Monte Cristo. The Dumas adventure novels were influenced by his father's exploits in the Napoleonic period, though he would only have known them second hand.

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Bush-Aznar Transcript: The War Crime of the Century

I made two claims about the transcript published by El Pais of Bush's conversations with Spanish leader Jose Maria Aznar on 22 February, 2003, at Crawford, Texas.

The first is that the transcript shows that Bush intended to disregard a negative outcome in his quest for a UN Security Council resolution authorizing a war against Iraq. Bush wanted such a resolution. He expressed a willingness to use threats and economic coercion to secure it. But he makes it perfectly clear that he will not wait for the UNSC to act beyond mid-March. He also explicitly says that if any of the permanent members of the UNSC uses its veto, "we will go." That is, failure to secure the resolution would trigger the war.

Uh, that is the opposite of the way it is supposed to work. If you can't get a UNSC resolution, and you haven't been attacked by the state against whom you want to go to war, then you are supposed to stand down.

Both because he set a deadline beyond which his "patience" would not stretch (the poor thing had already waited four months; I mean, is he a toddler that he lacks elementary patience?), and because he specified a UNSC veto as a signal for his launching of the war, Bush made it very clear that he was willing to trash the charter of the United Nations and to take the world back to the 1930s,to an era of mass politics when powerful states launched wars of choice at will on the basis of fevered rhetoric and fits of pique.

The second claim that I made was that Bush was aware of, and rejected, an offer by Saddam Hussein to flee Iraq, probably for Saudi Arabia, presuming he could take out with him a billion dollars and some documents on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. Both provisions were intended by Saddam to protect him from later retaliation. The money would buy him protection from extradition, and the documents presumably showed that the Reagan and Bush senior administrations had secretly authorized his chemical and biological weapons programs. With these documents in his possession, it was unlikely that Bush would come after him, since he could ruin the reputation of the Bush family if he did. The destruction of these documents was presumably Bush's goal when he had Rumsfeld order US military personnel not to interfere with the looting and burning of government offices after the fall of Saddam. The looting, which set off the guerrilla war, also functioned as a vast shredding party, destroying incriminating evidence about the complicity of the Bushes and Rumsfeld in Iraq's war crimes.

The claims by some pundits that Saddam's reported desire to take documents on his WMD programs out of the country proves he had such programs in 2003 or that he wanted to somehow retain specialized knowledge involved in them, are silly. Saddam had destroyed his chemical, nuclear and biological programs and stockpiles, which we know from the most extensive postwar inspections in the history of mammal life. Almost certainly, he wanted to keep with him the documents that showed precisely that-- that he was in fact in compliance with UN resolutions (which he was) and so could not on those grounds be subject to extraordinary rendition and delivered to the Hague. Also, as I say, he may well have wanted to keep with him documents with which to blackmail the Bush family, which in the 1980s had been involved in winking at and enabling his WMD capabilities.

(The objections of some observers that Saddam could have avoided the war by just admitting he had destroyed his WMD and providing the documentation ignore what we have since found out-- that Saddam was afraid that if the world knew he had no chemical weapons left, the Shiites, Kurds and Iranians would finish him off in no time. He could not hope to stay in power if he came clean on this matter, but once he left power he knew that his actions of the 1980s could get him convicted at the Hague and so he needed to keep with him documentation on his Reagan/ Bush partners in crime as a hedge.)

Aznar asked Bush if he would grant Saddam these guarantees, and Bush roared back that he would not. (That is the answer to those who want to know where in the text Bush declines Saddam's offer to flee. Nobody in his right mind would flee without guarantees; by declining them, Bush scotched the deal.)

By refusing to allow Saddam to flee with guarantees, Bush ensured that a land war would have to be fought. This is one of the greatest crimes any US president ever committed, and it is all the more contemptible for being rooted in mere pride and petulance.

Note that even General Pervez Musharraf allowed Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to go to Saudi Arabia with similar guarantees, even though Sharif was alleged to have attempted to cause Musharraf's death. A tinpot Pakistani general had more devotion to the good of his country, and more good sense, than did George W. Bush.

The passage in which Bush agrees with Aznar that it would be better if Baghdad fell without a fight refers to the possibility that the Iraqi officer corps would assassinate Saddam and decline to put up a fight. Bush would very much have liked such a fantasy to come true.

But he did not need to fantasize. He had a real offer in the hand, of Saddam's flight. He rejected it. By rejecting it, he will have killed at least a million persons and became one of the more monstrous figures in recent world history.

I have done a translation of the transcript, with some dictionary work. I would be glad of any corrections, but I think it is good enough for government work. No one can read it without recognizing that Bush was champing at the bit to go to war; that he only wanted the UNSC as a fig leaf and was determined to ignore it if it did not authorize the war; and that he had a deal on the table from Saddam but absolutely refused to pursue it, preferring instead either a sanguinary conflict or his adolescent fantasy of Baghdad falling without a shot.

=============

Transcript of Bush-Aznar Consultation in Crawford, February 22, 2003

President Bush. We are in favor of getting a second resolution in the Security Council and would want to do it quickly. We would want to announce it Monday or Tuesday [24 or 25 of February of 2003].

President Aznar: Better Tuesday, after the meeting of the Council of General Affairs of the European Union. It is important to maintain the momentum gained by the resolution at the summit of the European Union [in Brussels, Monday 17 of February]. We would prefer to wait until Tuesday.

Bush. It could be in the evening Monday, considering the time difference. In any case, the next week. We will see that the resolution is written so that it does not contain obligatory steps [for Iraq], that it does not mention the use of force, and that it states that Saddam Hussein has been unable to fulfill his obligations. That type of resolution can be voted for by many people. It would be something similar to the one passed regarding Kosovo [the 10th of June of 1999].

Aznar: Would it be presented to the Security Council before, and independently of, a parallel declaration?

Condoleezza Rice. In fact there would not be parallel declaration. We are thinking about as simple a resolution as possible, without many details regarding [Iraq’s] obligations--such that Saddam Hussein could use them as stages and consequently could neglect to fulfill them. We are speaking with Blix [head of the inspectors of the UN] and others of his team to get ideas that can serve to introduce the resolution.

Bush. Saddam Hussein will not change and will continue playing games. The moment has come to be rid of him. That’s the way it is. As for me, from now on I will try to tone down the rhetoric as much as possible, while we seek approval of the resolution. If somebody uses a veto, we will go. [Russia, China and France have, along with the U.S.A. and the United Kingdom the right to a veto in the Security Council by virtue of being permanent members]

Saddam Hussein is not disarming. We have to take him right now. We have shown an incredible degree of patience so far. There are two weeks left. In two weeks we will be militarily ready. I believe that we will get the second resolution. In the Security Council we have the three African members [Cameroun, Angola and Guinea], the Chileans, and the Mexicans. I will speak with all of them, also with Putin, naturally. We will be in Baghdad at the end of March. There is a 15% possibility that Saddam Hussein will die or flee. But that possibility will not exist until we have demonstrated our resolve. The Egyptians are talking to Saddam Hussein. It seems that he has indicated that he is willing to go into exile if he can take a billion dollars with him and all the information that he wants on weapons of mass destruction. [Muammar] Gaddafi told Berlusconi that Saddam Hussein wants to go away. Mubarak tells us that in these circumstances it is entirely possible that he will be assassinated.

We would like to act with the mandate of the United Nations. If we act militarily we will do it with great precision, tightly focusing on our objectives. We will decimate the troops loyal to him, and the regular army quickly will recognize what is going on. We have sent a very clear message to Saddam’s generals: we will treat them like war criminals. We know that they have accumulated an enormous amount of dynamite to demolish bridges and other infrastructure and to blow up the oil wells. We foresee occupying those wells very quickly. Also, the Saudis will help us by putting on the market all the petroleum that is necessary. We are developing a package of very extensive humanitarian aid. We can win without destruction. We are already planning for a post-Saddam Iraq, and I believe that there are good bases for a better future. Iraq has a relatively good bureaucracy and a civil society. It can be organized as a federal system. Meanwhile, we are doing everything possible to take care of the political needs of our friends and allies.

Aznar: It is very important to have a resolution. It is not the same to act with it as without it. It would be very advisable to have a majority in the Security Council that supported that resolution. In fact, it is important to have it passed by a majority, even if someone exercises a veto. Let us consider that the text of the resolution would have among other things to state that Saddam Hussein has lost his opportunity.

Bush. Yes, by all means. It would be better to have a reference to “necessary means” [a reference to the type of UN resolution that authorizes the use of “all necessary means”].

Aznar: Saddam Hussein has not cooperated, has not been disarmed; we would have to summarize his breaches and to send a more detailed message. That would allow, for example, Mexico to move [a reference to a change in its negative position on the second resolution, the extent of which Aznar could have known about from the lips of president Vicente Fox on Friday, February 21, in Mexico City].

Bush. The resolution will be custom-made in such a way that it will help you. I don't care much about the content.

Aznar: We will send you some sample texts.

Bush. We do not have any text. Only a criterion: that Saddam Hussein disarm. We cannot allow Saddam Hussein to drag things out until the summer. After all, this last stage has already lasted four months, and this is more than enough time to disarm.

Aznar: Having a text would allow us to sponsor it and to be its coauthors, and to arrange for many others to sponsor it.

Bush. Perfect.

Aznar: The next Wednesday [(2)6 of February] I will meet with Chirac. The resolution will already have begun to circulate.

Bush. It seems to me all very good. Chirac knows the reality perfectly. Their intelligence services have explained it to him. The Arabs are transmitting a very clear message to Chirac: Saddam Hussein must go. The problem is that Chirac thinks he is Mister Arab, but in fact he is making their lives impossible. But I do not want to have any rivalry with Chirac. We have different points of view, but I would like that to be all. Give him my best regards. Really! The less rivalry he feels exists between us, the better it will be for everyone.

Aznar: How to combine the resolution with the report of the inspectors?

Condoleezza Rice. Actually there will not be a report on February 28, but the inspectors will present a report written on March 1. We don’t have high hopes for that report. As with the previous ones, it will be a mixed picture. I have the impression that Blix will now be more negative than he was before, with regard to the Iraqis’ intentions. After the appearance of the inspectors before the Council, we must anticipate a vote on the resolution one week later. The Iraqis, meanwhile, will try to explain that they are fulfilling their obligations. It isn’t true, and it won’t be sufficient, though they may announce the destruction of some missiles.

Bush. This is like Chinese water torture. We must put an end to it.

Aznar. I agree, but it would be good to have the maximum possible number of people. Have a little patience.

Bush: My patience is exhausted. I don’t intend to wait longer than the middle of March.

Aznar. I do not request that you have infinite patience. Simply that you do everything possible so that it all works out.

Bush: Countries like Mexico, Chile, Angola, and Cameroon must realize that what’s at stake is the security of the United States, and they should act with a sense of friendship toward us. [Chilean President Ricardo] Lagos should know that the Free Trade Accord with Chile is awaiting Senate confirmation and a negative attitude about this could put ratification in danger. Angola is receiving Millennium Account funds [to help alleviate poverty] and that could be jeopardized also if he’s not supportive. And Putin must know that his attitude is putting in danger the relations of Russia with the United States.

Aznar. Tony [Blair] would like to wait until the 14th of March.

Bush: I prefer the 10th. This is like a game of bad cop, good cop. I don’t mind being the bad cop, and Blair can be the good one.

Aznar. Is it certain that any possibility exists that Saddam Hussein will go into exile?

Bush: The possibility exists, including that he will be assassinated.

Aznar. Exile with a guarantee?

Bush: No guarantee. He is a thief, a terrorist, a war criminal. Compared with Saddam, Milosevic would be a Mother Teresa. When we go in, we are going to discover many more crimes and we will take him to the Court the International Justice. Saddam Hussein thinks that he has already escaped. He thinks that France and Germany have ceased fulfilling their responsibilities. He also thinks that the demonstrations of the last week [Saturday, February 15] will protect him. And he thinks that I very am weak. But the people around him know that the things are otherwise. They know that his future is in exile or a coffin. For that reason it is very important to maintain the pressure on him. Gaddafi tells us through back channels that that is the only thing that can finish him off. Saddam Hussein’s only strategy is to delay, to delay and to delay.

Aznar. In fact the biggest success would be to win the game without firing a single shot and entering Baghdad.

Bush: For me it would be the perfect solution. I do not want war. I know what wars are. I know the destruction and the death that they bring with them. I am the one who has to console the mothers and the widows of the dead. By all means, for us that would be the best solution. In addition, it would save $50 billion.

Aznar. We need you to help us with our public opinion.

Bush: We will do everything we can. Wednesday I am going to speak on the situation in the Middle East, proposing the new peace plan with which you are familiar, and on weapons of mass destruction, on the benefits of a free society, and I will locate the history of Iraq in a wider context. Perhaps it will serve you.

Aznar. What we are doing is a very deep change for Spain and the Spaniards. We are changing the policy that the country had followed for the past two hundred years.

Bush: A historical sense of responsibility guides me just as it does you. When within a few years History judges us, I do not want people to ask themselves why Bush, or Aznar, or Blair did not face their responsibilities. In the end, what people want is to enjoy freedom. Recently, in Romania they reminded me of the example of Ceausescu: it was enough for a woman to call him a liar, for the entire repressive edifice to come down. It is the uncontrollable power of freedom. I am convinced that I will get the resolution.

Aznar. All to the good.

Bush: I made the decision to go to the Security Council. In spite of the disagreements in my Administration, I said to my people that we had to work with our friends. It will be wonderful to get a second resolution.

Aznar. The only thing that worries me about you is your optimism.

Bush: I am optimistic because I believe that I am in the right. I am at peace with myself. It has been up to us to face a serious threat to the peace. It irritates me a great deal to consider the indifference of the Europeans to the sufferings that Saddam Hussein inflicts on Iraqis. Perhaps because he is brown-skinned, far away, and Muslim, many Europeans think that everything is all right in his regard. I will not forget what Solana once said to me: why do we Americans think that the Europeans are anti-Semitic and unable to confront their responsibilities? That defensive attitude is terrible. I have to acknowledge I have just great relations with Kofi Annan.

Aznar. He shares your ethical preoccupations.

Bush: The more the Europeans attack me, the stronger I am in the United States.

Aznar. We would like to make your strength compatible with the esteem of the Europeans.

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Birk: Sectarian Numbers in Iraq

Sectarian Numbers

Guest comment by Joshua Birk

In his September report to Congress, General Petraeus claimed “the number of ethno-sectarian deaths was down by over 55%.” His assessment stands in sharp contrast with the Government Accountability Office report from earlier in the month, which concluded that “It is unclear whether sectarian violence in Iraq has decreased.” The analysis of sectarian violence had been fraught with ill defined, constantly shifting metrics that makes analysis of these numbers difficult and has relied on a pattern of undercounting. This undercounting all but guarantees recent months will always be seen as progress and cast a cloud of doubt over the veracity of the claims of diminished sectarian bloodshed.

The Defense Department periodically issues data on sectarian killings in its reports “Measuring Stability and Security in Iraq.” Comparing the last four of these reports, from October 2006, March 2007, June 2007, and September 2007 can be a maddening exercise which highlights the mutability of statistics on sectarian violence. The reports themselves use shifting terms to describe this violence, chart numbers only in imprecise graphs and frequently disagree on the number of killings which occur in any given month.

However, if you visually measure these reports against each other, a pattern begins to emerge. In the past two months the Pentagon has retroactively increased the numbers of sectarian deaths reported in previous reports. This trend gives rise to the concern that civilian deaths are being reclassified as sectarian killings in order to create the illusion of an improving security situation. If you compare the initial assessment of the post-surge period, June through August in the September ‘07 report, with the initial assessment of the pre-surge period, October through December ‘06, in the March '07 report, only a modest improvement in sectarian violence emerges. General Petraeus’ claim of a 55% drop in ethno-sectarian deaths only emerges when the numbers from October through November sharply increase.

The June 2007 report did not address these concerns and offered no explanation for the retroactively shifting numbers. It was only after facing question about these numbers from reporters that MNFI (Multi-National Force Iraq) Combined Intelligence Operations Center offered an explanation for the changing assessment of sectarian killings. The Iraqi National Command Center, which processed data on these killings, had been overwhelmed with increases in casualties during the fall of 2006. They had developed a tremendous backlog of cases, which were only now being classified as “sectarian murders.”

The September report continued to retroactively inflate numbers of sectarian deaths. In a September 25th article in the Washington Post, Defense Department officials explained the increase as a result of a shifting methodology. In previous reports, they had only calculated deaths that resulted from “murders with distinct sectarian characteristics” but were now charting, “deaths resulting from any sectarian incident.” Broadening the metric they assessed, resulted in another retroactive rise in the level of sectarian deaths. While public discussion of the increases in the September report focused on shifting methodology, the report itself added that the increases were also based on “further data not available for the June 2007 report.”

The lack of distinction between increases based on shifting methodology and increases based on backlogs and unavailable data make these reports exceptionally problematic. The existence of backlogs in particular creates a situation in which recent months will almost always seem to be successful in reducing violence. The illusion of progress may very well disappear by the time that data is processed, but, by that time, we will have a new report, once again incomplete because of backlogged data, and once again showing progress because it only charts a fraction of the sectarian violence in Iraq.

The June report, in which the accounts from February through April radically underestimated sectarian violence, according to the September report, serves as an example of this phenomenon. This undercount is almost certainly the result of unprocessed data, rather than changing methodology. In shifting to calculate “Sectarian Deaths” rather than “Sectarian Murders” the September 2007 report shows an increase of 20% from July 2006 to January 2007. No single month has an increase of more than 30%. That number represents, in rough terms, the impact of the shifting metric. The September report increases numbers of Sectarian deaths in the last months charted in the June report, February through April, by roughly 70%. The vast disparity between this number and the number from previous months suggests a massive undercount.

All of this statistical parsing is necessary to understand the most recent Pentagon reports and to evaluate the claims made about the improving security situation. Undercounts occurred in the June report and there is no reason to assume that the September forecast for the last few months is any more accurate. In fact, given that the report provides data on August, while previous reports stopped tracking two months before the report was issued, the September report may prove to be less accurate than its predecessors. If the undercounts in the September report parallel what we now know about the June report, the level of sectarian violence in Iraq is roughly equivalent to where it was in the summer of last year. This would be an improvement over the horrible chaos and bloodshed of fall and winter, but would fall short of the reduction which General Petraeus has asserted.

Because of the Pentagon’s refusal to release its data, much of this statistical parsing is reading tea leaves. Clarifying the source of these retroactive increases, data which the Department of Defense most certainly possess, would alleviate much of the mystery that surrounds these numbers. The American public has become increasingly doubtful about this war and the military’s constant claims of progress in Iraq. If the Department of Defense wants to reverse that trend, they must become more transparent with the data they release, and the way in which they explain discrepancies in their reports. Until that occurs both the American public and the media should treat all such numbers with skepticism.

Joshua Birk
Assistant Professor
Department of History
Eastern Illinois University.

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Transcript Reveals Impeachable Offenses by Bush Re: Iraq War

El Pais published a transcript of the conversation between George W. Bush, Jose Maria Aznar of Spain, and Condoleeza Rice held at Crawford before the Iraq War. Bush is typically bullheaded, impatient, conspiratorial, bullying, arrogant, ill-informed and way over-optimistic. The transcript shows the true colors of the man-- a sort of thuggish, ignorant Mafia don-- who destroyed the United States and destroyed Iraq. (The introductory El Pais article is translated here.)

At one point Aznar prophetically says, "The thing that worries me is your optimism."

The transcript, it seems to me, provides a whole rack of smoking guns that could be a basis for impeaching George W. Bush. The transcript shows that Bush consciously intended to go to war without a United Nations Security Council resolution. The United Nations Charter, to which the United States is a treaty signatory (so that it has the force of American law), forbids any nation to launch an aggressive war on another country. The only two legal mechanisms for war are either that it came in response to a direct attack or that the attacker gained a UNSC authorization. The transcript shows Bush actively plotting to sidestep the UNSC if he could not, gangster-like, threaten its members into compliance.

The second grounds for impeachment is that Bush rejected out of hand a deal brokered by the Egyptians whereby Saddam Hussein would leave the country with a billion dollars and some documents about his WMD program. Reuters reports:

'The Egyptians are speaking to Saddam Hussein. It seems he's indicated he would be prepared to go into exile if he's allowed to take $1 billion and all the information he wants about weapons of mass destruction," Bush was quoted as saying at the meeting one month before the U.S.-led invasion.'

The transcript in Spanish then says (my translation):

'Aznar: Is it certain that any possibility exists that Saddam Hussein will go into exile?

Bush: The possibility exists, including that he will be assassinated.

Aznar: Exile with a guarantee?

Bush: No guarantee! He is a thug, a terrorist, a war criminal.

Bush goes on to say, "Saddam won't change and he'll keep on playing games. The time has come to get rid of him. That's the way it is. We'll be in Baghdad by the end of March."

In other words, Bush could have sent Saddam off to exile in Saudi Arabia and avoided the whole war, but refused to do so because of the family vendetta between the Bushes and the Tikritis. Nearly 4,000 US soldiers have died and thousands have been wounded because Bush would not take the deal Saddam offered him. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis are dead, and millions displaced.

Going to war unnecessarily is an impeachable offense.

The whole immense catastrophe could have been avoided.

There is more evidence of thuggery in the transcript:

Excerpts courtesy Harper's:

' Bush to American Allies: support war or starve

[Condoleezza Rice has just described the diplomatic situation to Bush and Aznar, explaining that Iraq is continuing to insist that it has no weapons of mass destruction.]

Bush: This is like Chinese water torture. We have to put an end to it.

Aznar: I agree, but it would be best to have as much support as possible. Have a little patience.

Bush: My patience has ended. I’m not thinking of waiting beyond mid-March.

Aznar: I’m not asking that you have endless patience. Simply that everything is done to [have maximum international support].

Bush: Countries like Mexico, Chile, Angola, and Cameroon should know that what’s at stake is the security of the United States . . . [Chilean President Ricardo] Lagos should know that the Free Trade Accord with Chile is awaiting Senate confirmation and a negative attitude about this could put ratification in danger. Angola is receiving Millennium Account funds [to help alleviate poverty] and that could be jeopardized also if he’s not supportive…

Aznar: Tony [Blair] wants to wait until March 14.

Bush: I prefer the 10th. This is like a good cop, bad cop routine. I don’t care if I’m the bad cop and he’s the good cop.


Bush on Iraq: the future is bright

“We’re developing a very strong package of humanitarian aid. We can win [the war] without much destruction. We’re planning for a post-Saddam Iraq and believe there is a strong base to build a better future. Iraq has a good bureaucracy and relatively strong civil society.”

Bush on French President Chirac: Mister Arab

“Chirac knows perfectly well the reality. His intelligence services have explained. The Arab countries are sending Chirac a clear message: Saddam Hussein must go. The problem is that Chirac thinks he’s Mister Arab and is making life impossible.” '

Reuters has more:

' In case the war endangered energy supplies, "the Saudis would help us and put all the oil necessary into the market," said Bush, who considered Europeans to be complacent about Saddam.

"Maybe it's because he's dark-skinned, far away and Muslim, lots of Europeans think everything's okay with him," he said. . . '

He was accusing the Europeans of racism! He!
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Hundreds Dead and Wounded in Wave of Violence in Iraq Deadliest Bombing in Baghdad since July

McClatchy reports that a wave of bombings shook Iraq on Wednesday. In double bombing in the Baghdad market of Baya` left 32 dead and nearly that many wounded. From Sinjar in the north to Basra in the south, the country seemed consumed in a paroxysm of violence.

Reuters reports that on Wednesday,

' BAGHDAD - Two car bombs killed 32 people and wounded 28 shortly before dusk in Bayaa, a mainly Shi'ite district in southwestern Baghdad, police said. . .

SHIRQAT - Two car bombs killed seven people and wounded five in the town of Shirqat, 300 km (190 miles) north of Baghdad, police said. The first one targeted a police patrol in a crowded market and the second exploded near a police station.

MOSUL - A suicide truck bomber targeting a court under construction killed three workers and wounded 47 others in Mosul, 390 kilometers (240 miles) north of Baghdad, Nineveh police chief Major-General Wathiq al-Hamadani said. '

McClatchy has more on violence in Iraq for Wednesday:

Baghdad

- 7 unidentified bodies were found in Baghdad by Iraqi Police today. . .

Mosul . . .

- Suicide car bomb slammed into a construction contractor's house who is the son of one of the tribal Sheikhs of Shammar tribe, one of the largest tribes in the country in Um al-Diban village near the Iraqi Syrian border to the west of Sinjar at 07:30 this morning. The Kia minibus detonated killing 8 civilians and injuring 10. . . .

- Car bomb targeted an Iraqi military convoy on the highway from Mosul to Irbil ths afternoon injuring 3 Iraqi soldiers.

Basra

- IED explosion in Abu al-Khasib, Hamdan neighborhood, near Hathlool mosque, 15 km to the south of Basra city killed 5 civilians and injured 4. The IED detonated as people started leaving the mosque after evening prayers at around 07:30 pm.

Fallujah

- 12 gunmen attacked al-Shuhadaa Police Station, south Fallujah. 6 of the gunmen were killed, 5 captured and one escaped. 3 policemen were seriously injured.

- A suicide bomber detonated at a police checkpoint in west Fallujah this afternoon. No casualties were reported. . . '

Joseph Galloway at McClatchy is shrill, riffing on a shrill H. L. Mencken from 1920:

Mencken: ' " . . . all the odds are on the man who is, intrinsically, the most devious and mediocre — the man who can most easily (and) adeptly disperse the notion that his mind is a virtual vacuum. The presidency tends, year by year, to go to such men. As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." '

Meanwhile, Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani lashed out at pan-Arab satellite stations on Wednesday, according the Mehr News Agency. At a meeting with Shiite tribal leaders, he said:

' “Your country is rich and I want you to set aside differences between yourselves and your Sunni brothers and stand like a formidable mountain against attempts by certain satellite networks which try to disrupt this unity because these networks exaggerate about the reports of deaths and explosions and depict them in a way as if tribal war is underway in Iraq,” the statement read which was released by the information office of the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council. '

Iraqis frequently accuse Aljazeera and Al-Arabiya of being pro-Sunni and as exaggerating the sectarian violence in Iraq.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Iranian Border Closure Roils Kurdistan; Is Weapons Baiting a War Crime?

Sunni Arab guerrillas blew up an internal pipeline bringing petroleum from Baiji to the refinery at Doura in Baghdad. It is the second such act of sabotage in the past week.

A frightening spread of cholera and cholera-like symptoms up and down Iraq is now being reported, with cases in Basra in the deep south and also in the north. The outbreak is rooted in the breakdown of water purification plants and possibly in an interdiction of chlorine trucks by the US military, for fear the guerrillas will take them over and use them for truck bombings (it has happened). But at some point the US military will have to choose between the risk of chlorine truck bombs and the deaths or illness of thousands of Iraqis.

The bombing at the mosque in Baquba has ended up taking 26 lives, including that of the city's police chief, and wounding 50. Baquba has a Sunni Arab majority but is being ruled by the Shiite Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI).

The Iranian closure of the border with Iraqi Kurdistan has stranded whole lines of trucks on the Iranian side and raised the prospect of Iraqi Kurds being forced to buy more expensive goods from Turkey and Syria. Iran closed the border in part to protest the US military's kidnapping of an Ianian merchant and accused operative of the Revolutionary Guards.

The Washington Post's revelation of a 'baiting' operation by US snipers raises the possibility that it may have involved war crimes, according to Raw Story. The snipers put out material that could be used to make weapons, and then killed anyone who tried to pick it up. The problem is that Iraqis are extremely poor and you couldn't know why they were picking it up (most of the country's scrap metal is being sold off to China). Raw Story writes, 'The baiting program should be rigorously examined, says Eugene Fidell, the president of the National Institute of Military Justice, because it raises frightening possibilities. "In a country that is awash in armaments and magazines and implements of war," he said, "if every time somebody picked up something that was potentially useful as a weapon, you might as well ask every Iraqi to walk around with a target on his back." '

John Fout looks at the likely impact of loose federalism (soft partition) in Iraq on the oil industry and foreign contracts.

The Iraq parliament is crafting laws regulating foreign security firms in that country. There are tens of thousands of private contractors supporting the US military there. Parliament hasn't been able to pass a petroleum bill or to make and strides toward national reconciliation, but it has been galvanized by Blackwater's recent killing of 11 Iraqis.

AP argues that the prosperity in Iraqi Kurdistan is built on shaky foundations, especially with regard to banking and finance.

Reuters reports that

' Democratic Rep. Henry Waxman said State Department officials had told the Oversight and Government Reform Committee he chairs they could not provide details of corruption in Iraq's government unless the information was treated as a "state secret" and not revealed to the public. "You are wrong to interfere with the committee's inquiry," Waxman said in a letter to Rice. "The State Department's position on this matter is ludicrous," added Waxman, a vocal opponent of the Bush administration's Iraq policies. '

So obviously they wouldn't want to classify the extent of corruption in Iraq unless it was bad news for the Bush administration.

The SF Chronicle suggests that even if the Dems win the White House in 08, the US military will be in Iraq for some time to come.

British Foreign Secretary David Miliband conceded Tuesday that British involvement in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars had alienated millions of Muslims:

' He admitted that British foreign policy had alienated millions of Muslims. Speaking of a recent visit to Pakistan, he said: "I met young, educated, articulate people in their 20s and 30s who told me millions of Muslims around the world think we're not seeking to empower them, but to dominate them. So we have to stop and think. "The lesson is that it is not good enough to have good intentions. To assert shared values is not enough, We must embody them in shared institutions." He gave the example of Turkish membership of the EU, saying Europe must not be seen as a closed Christian club. '

If Tony "Lapdog" Blair were still PM, Cheney would just order him to fire Miliband for such frank and rational statements.

Reuters reports civil war violence on Tuesday; major attacks:

'DIYALA - A U.S. soldier was killed in Diyala province when an explosion hit his vehicle, U.S. forces said.

BAGHDAD - Two car bombs killed six people and wounded 20 in the Zayouna district of eastern Baghdad, police and hospital sources said. . .

BAGHDAD - Twelve bodies were found in different parts of Baghdad on Monday, police said.

BAGHDAD - A roadside bomb killed one person and wounded four in eastern Baghdad, police said.

BAGHDAD - A roadside bomb near a police station wounded seven people, including a policeman, in the Karrada district of central Baghdad, police said. . .

MOSUL - A suicide bomber wearing an explosives belt blew himself up near a police colonel, wounding the officer and nine others in Mosul, 390 km (240 miles) north of Baghdad, police said. . .

FALLUJA - A roadside bomb targeting a police patrol killed one policeman and wounded another in Falluja, 50 km (30 miles) west of Baghdad, police said. . .

BASRA - A suicide car bomb killed three people in an attack targeting a police station in the southern Shi'ite city of Basra, police and a health official said. Up to 20 people were wounded. Basra lies 550 km (340 miles) southeast of Baghdad. . .

KIRKUK - A roadside bomb wounded two people in southern Kirkuk, police said.

HAWIJA - Hussein Ali Saleh, head of Hawija City Council, was wounded when a suicide car bomber targeted his convoy on a road near the town of Hawija, 70 km (40 miles) southwest of the city of Kirkuk, police said. Two of his guards were wounded.'

The rash of bombings in Basra may force British troops back into the city.

At the Global Affairs group blog, Manan Ahmed on the "Bhutto complex.'
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

"There are no homosexuals in . . ." More Common a Sentiment than you Might think

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's bigotted statement that there are no homosexuals in Iran derived from his rightwing religious commitments. What he said is very serious. He erased gays right out of existence. The ultimate in denying people their rights is to deny they even exist (the nonexistent obviously have no rights.) There could be a debate over whether the gay lifestyle exists in Muslim countries, as a matter of identity politics, of course, but Ahmadinejad is not that sophisticated. He was saying that all Iranians are straight. Of course, gays are punished very severely in Iran, in reality.

It would be nice for the US Right to have us forget that they pull the Ahmadinejad act with regard to gays every day. Denying gays the right to marry is a way of erasing them from civil society. It is a way of denying that they really love one another, as straights do. It is a way of asserting that they do not exist.

The "don't ask, don't tell" policy in the US military (so unlike the one followed by many NATO allies) is also a way of erasing gays. They don't exist unless they themselves press the case that they exist. In order to remain in their jobs, they are forced to erase themselves by their silence. The 'don't ask, don't tell' policy is a way of pretending that there are no gays in the US military. For if it could be proven that anyone is gay, he is immediately expelled. It is just as silly as what Ahmadinejad said, and just as pernicious. That policy is supported by the entire American Right, which is no better than Ahmadinejad in this regard.

Here are a couple of Christian statements resembling the vile ones spewed by Ahmadinejad, just for comparison.

Catholic Ahmadinejads from Hannity and Colmes:

' COLMES: group that is where I am. Let me just show you another quote, and you'll be surprised at who's saying this.

"Based on the facts that are known to us, we continue to find it difficult to justify the resort to war against Iraq, lacking clear and adequate evidence of an imminent attack of a grave nature."

The Conference of Catholic Bishops saying that, Congressman, Dornan.

DORNAN: Did you watch the -- did you watch the debate? I watched six hours of debate, and I had a face-to-face fight with Cardinal McCarrick, who told me to my face there are no homosexuals in our seminaries. This is a discredited bunch of once holy men.

----FOX: HANNITY & COLMES, November 15, 2002 '

For the full irony of Dornan's reported conversation, see this link.

Evangelical Ahmadinejads. Bishop John Shelby Spong observes:

[Conservative] 'commentators have not mentioned the blatant homophobia in both Africa and Southeast Asia. Christian leaders in Africa still maintain that there are no homosexuals in their countries, or if homosexuality is admitted, that it was "caught" from white Europeans. Christians throughout the Third World still assert that homosexuals are either evil people who can be changed if they are converted, or that they are mentally sick people who can be healed if properly treated. Such theories are dismissed as nonsense in Western medical circles today. Homosexual people in Africa have told me that they risk murder if they come out of their closets. They believe that if they were killed, the act would be endorsed by many Christian leaders of that continent, who quote scripture to justify it.'

So if some American Republicans, Catholics and evangelicals want to have the standing to laugh at Ahmadinejad for his prejudice, they have some work to do at home first.

----

PS: to get a sense of what Iran is really like these days, see this slide show.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Shaman Drum Book Party for Napoleon's Egypt

Many thanks in advance to Karl Pohrt and his great independent bookstore Shaman Drum for this party.

Shaman Drum Events Calendar
Academic Reception:

Title: Napoleon's Egypt: Invading the Middle East
Author: Juan Cole
Location: Shaman Drum Bookshop

Time: Mon Oct 01, 4:00 PM

In this vivid and timely history, Juan Cole tells the story of Napoleon's invasion of Egypt. Revealing the young general's reasons for leading the expedition against Egypt in 1798 and showcasing his fascinating views of the Orient, Cole delves into the psychology of the military titan and his entourage. He paints a multi-faceted portrait of the daily travails of the soldiers in Napoleon's army, including how they imagined Egypt, how their expectations differed from what they found, and how they grappled with military challenges in a foreign land. Cole ultimately reveals how Napoleon's invasion, the first modern attempt to invade the Arab world, invented and crystallized the rhetoric of liberal imperialism.

Juan Cole, internationally respected historian, celebrated blogger, and Middle East expert, teaches history at the University of Michigan and is the former president of MESA. He lives in Ann Arbor, Michigan.


Bookshop | Events | Textbooks
Shaman Drum Bookshop | 311-315 South State St., Ann Arbor, MI 48104 | 734.662.7407

---------

Meanwhile, at the Napoleon's Egypt blog, two letters from Frenchmen trapped in Cairo with Bonaparte.

One, whose author is not identified, declares a failure Bonaparte's expedition to Salahiya to rescue the wealthy pilgrim caravan coming from Mecca from his nemesis, the Mamluk leader Ibrahim Bey. Bonaparte failed to rescue most of the caravan, and failed to trap or defeat Ibrahim, who escaped with much treasure and with the Ottoman viceroy, to Syria. Bonaparte's own accounts of Salahiya (Salhieh) hardly depict a failure.

The other writer, an officer named Benoit Pistre (18th Dragoon Regiment), tells us of the desperation of the French soldiers on finding themselves in a country of adobe huts, desert and plague:

' From the slight sketch which I have given you of Egypt, you may easily conceive that the army is by no means pleased with this expedition, to a country of which the usage, diet, and excessive heat, are totally repugnant to our manner of living in Europe. The major part of the army is labouring under a diarrhea and ALTHOUGH VICTORIOUS, WILL TERMINATE ITS CAREER BY PERISHING MISERABLY, IF OUR GOVERNMENT PERSISTS IN ITS AMBITIOUS PROJECTS. Many officers are throwing up their commissions; and I freely confess to you, that I would also throw up mine, if I had the least prospect of obtaining any thing in France . . . '

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Ahmadinejad lectures at Columbia University

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Huge Bombing in Baquba Iranians close border with Iraqi Kurdistan

Iran has closed its border with Iraqi Kurdistan. This move appears to come in part in reaction to the US kidnapping of an Iranian commercial agent, on the grounds that he is a covert operative, from Sulaimaniya (a city in Iraqi Kurdistan). In addition, Kurdish guerrillas of the PEJAK organization have been taking refuge in Iraqi Kurdistan and carrying out terrorist attacks inside Iran, in response to which Iran has shelled Kurdish border villages.

The closure of the border will hurt Kurdistan, which is landlocked and already has bad relations with Turkey and Syria, its other windows on the world.

McClatchy also reports on the Kurds that Iran is seeking.

The LAT reports on Iranian President Ahmadinejad's popularity in the Arab world, which is mostly Sunni. They take him as a symbol of anti-imperialism.

Reuters reports civil war violence for Monday:

' BAQUBA - A suicide bomber killed 26 people including the police chief of the city of Baquba in a mosque compound where local Shi'ite and Sunni Arab leaders were holding reconciliation talks, police said. They said 50 people were wounded in the attack in Baquba, 65 km (40 miles) north of Baghdad.

TIKRIT - A U.S. soldier died after being wounded by gunfire in Salahuddin province, the U.S. military said. . .

MOSUL - A suicide truck bomb killed at least six people, including two policemen and a soldier, and wounded 17 in an attack on a checkpoint near a village between Tal Afar and Mosul, 390 km (240 miles) north of Baghdad, police said.

KIRKUK - A bomb in a parked car wounded six people near a police brigadier-general's house in Kirkuk, 250 km (155 miles) north of Baghdad, police said.

KUT - Gunmen killed one man and wounded another in Kut, 170 km (105 miles) southeast of Baghdad, police said. . .

LATIFIYA - A roadside bomb killed one soldier and wounded three others in Latifiya, 40 km (25 miles) south of Baghdad, police said.

MOSUL - A roadside bomb killed one person and wounded three west of Mosul, police said.

BAGHDAD - Gunmen killed Jawad al-Daami, a journalist for Baghdadiya television, on Sunday in al-Qadissiya district of southwestern Baghdad, an Iraqi journalists' association said.

KIRKUK - Kirkuk province police chief Jamal Tahir escaped unhurt from a roadside bomb attack on his convoy in the city of Kirkuk, 250 km (155 miles) north of Baghdad, police said. One of his guards was wounded. . .

BAGHDAD - U.S. forces killed one suspected insurgent and arrested four members of an Iranian-backed special groups cell during an operation in eastern Baghdad, the U.S. military said.

KIRKUK - A car bomb targeting a local mayor's convoy killed one of his bodyguards and wounded seven, including three civilians in Kirkuk, police said. . . "

McClatchy has more, including the discovery of 9 bodies in the streets of Baghdad.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Iraqi Sermons

The USG Open Source Center translates or paraphrases Iraqi Friday Prayer sermons from last week.

"Round-up of Iraqi Friday Sermons 21 Sep
Iraq -- OSC Summary
Sunday, September 23, 2007

Major Iraqi television channels - Baghdad Al-Iraqiyah, Baghdad Baghdad Satellite Channel, Baghdad Al-Sharqiyah, Baghdad Al-Furat, Cairo Al-Baghdadiyah, and Baghdad Al-Diyar - are observed on 21 September to carry the following reports on Friday sermons:

Al-Iraqiyah: Baghdad Al-Iraqiyah Television in Arabic - government-sponsored television station, run by the Iraqi Media Network - is not observed to carry any reports on today's Friday sermons due to a technical failure.

Baghdad Satellite Channel: Baghdad Baghdad Satellite Television in Arabic - television channel believed to be sponsored by the Iraqi Islamic Party - is observed to carry at 0919 GMT a Friday sermon from an unidentified mosque in Baghdad. Shaykh Dr Harith al-Ubaydi delivers the sermon.

In this Friday sermon, Al-Ubaydi discusses the "great importance Islam attaches to the social field in life," as well as the special care, taking into consideration that the "foundation of the structure of societies is based on the organization of relations among the members of that society."

The preacher says that God created people with different languages and different colors. He says that this is one of the signs of God which urges people to cooperate with each other. The preacher then quotes the following verse from the Koran: "If thy Lord had so willed, He could have made mankind one people: but they will not cease to dispute. Except those on whom thy Lord hath bestowed His Mercy: and for this did He create them." (Koranic verse, Hud, 11:118)

The preacher urges "positive and peaceful relations" among peoples in order to exchange benefits. He then quotes the following verse from the Koran: "O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise (each other)." (Koranic verse, Al-Hujurat, 49:13) The preacher also urges solidarity and sympathy among Muslims.

On Muslims' relations with other non-Muslims, he says that God urges us to treat them kindly and with the best means based on the following Koranic verse: "And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better (than mere disputation)." (Koranic verse, Al-Ankabut, 29:46)

The preacher concludes by urging the government to achieve security to the citizens, adding that the "Armed Forces and the Internal Security Forces should play their national role in achieving security and peace for every Iraqi individual and family." He calls on the government to make efforts to "return the Iraqis who left Iraq to neighboring and other states and to compensate them so as to allow them to live in their country."

Al-Sharqiyah: Baghdad Al-Sharqiyah Television in Arabic - independent, private news and entertainment channel focusing on Iraq, run by Sa'd al-Bazzaz, publisher of the Arabic language daily Al-Zaman - is not observed to carry any reports on Friday sermons for the day.

Al-Furat: Within its 1700 GMT newscast, Baghdad Al-Furat Television Channel in Arabic - television channel affiliated with the Iraqi Islamic Supreme Council (IISC) led by Abd-al-Aziz al-Hakim, carries the following report on today's Friday sermons:

"Ammar al-Hakim has called on the blocs that withdrew from the government to return to it and to effectively participate in the political process. In a Friday sermon at the Buratha Mosque in Baghdad, Ammar al-Hakim said that the political process has witnessed a great impetus over the past period in favor of the government after achieving security successes in Baghdad and the governorates. He added that the withdrawals were among the negative phenomena of the political process, noting that this will not be confined to certain blocs. He said that this method weakens the political process."

The report adds: "His Eminence stressed that the Al-Tawafuq Front is an important and main partner in the political process. He called on it to return to the government to contribute to safeguarding the interests of all Iraqis. Ammar al-Hakim has also called on the Al-Sadr and Al-Fadilah blocs to return to the Unified Iraqi Coalition (UIC)."

Al-Hakim says: "From this holy place, and from the Friday pulpit, I call on the dear brother, Muqtada al-Sadr to make a brave decision, along with our honorable brothers in the Al-Sadr bloc, to return to the UIC and to seriously and persistently work to make the political process succeed, support the Iraqi Government, and avoid and solve any problems. Through serious and constructive dialogue we can solve problems and continue work to serve the citizens' interests."

The report adds: "Ammar al-Hakim rejected indiscriminate arrests of the Iraqis. He stressed the need that the security forces and the multinational forces should be accurate and do not target anyone other than offenders. Reacting to some statements to the effect that the agreement among the four effective forces was the reason behind the withdrawal of the Al-Sadr bloc, Ammar al-Hakim said that the UIC did not make it difficult to any side to conclude agreements in favor of the political process."

Commenting on the Petraeus-Crocker report, Al-Hakim says: "It spoke about great positive achievements in the political process and the successes on the security, political, and economic levels. It also spoke about the strong will the international community sees in the Iraqi leaders to advance forward and to make their achievements, including national reconciliation. However, despite its positive points, this report ignored many important and key files concerning the objective assessment of the developments of the situation in Iraq. Among the most important of these files is the role of the religious authority in this cohesion and national accord and in standing in the face of the civil war plan, which some others used to advocate, such as the takfiris (holding other Muslims to be infidel), Al-Qa'ida, and their likes. They issued statements and made speeches on this issue. The religious authority served as a safety valve. It supported and backed the entire political plan and called for self-restraint, something which calmed down many people and prevented a civil war."

The report says: "Ammar al-Hakim said that the Petraeus-Crocker has foiled many of the internal and regional wagering on disrupting the political process or harming the achievements of the Iraqi people."

The report adds: "Friday preachers in the country denounced attacks on the representatives of the religious authority, particularly in the Basra Governorate. They also called for expediting the results of investigation into the Karbala incidents and for revealing the criminals. Other preachers urged the government to work seriously to render services to the citizens after the improvement of the security situation." . . .

The channel carries an episode of its weekly "Friday Sermons" program at 1810 GMT, as follows:

The program begins with Ammar al-Hakim's Friday sermon, covered in the Al-Furat's above 1700 GMT report. Here, he says: "What contributed to the growing impetus of the political process is the sharp drop in the number of terrorist operations, which used to target citizens everywhere and led to the fall of entire areas which became outside the government's control. These areas were controlled by the terrorist, takfiri, and criminal gangs."

Shaykh Muhammad al-Haydari, imam and preacher of the Al-Khillani Mosque, says that "it is clear that the security situation is improving." He adds that the government and local councils should "benefit from this improvement to improve their performance." . . .

Shaykh Sadr-al-Din al-Qabbanji calls on the Al-Sadr bloc to return to the government and to "reexamine their position to see whether it is in the interest of the Iraqi house, or the Shiite house in particular." He adds: "We do not accept the fragmentation of the Shiite house. We also do not accept this to the Iraqi house. You are part of the Shiite house. You are a key element and component in the Shiite house. The withdrawal means a rift. We hope that they will reconsider their position and maintain their real, effective, and positive participation. We do not support the option of violence or the option of withdrawal. We say this to all sides. We said this to Al-Tawafuq (Accord) Front and to others."

Shaykh Hasan al-Zamili, imam and preacher of Al-Diwaniyah Mosque, says that the "government is called upon to provide security to the nation's scholars, preachers, and honest ones." He adds that the "government should implement the law against the criminals."

Al-Baghdadiyah: Cairo Al-Baghdadiyah Satellite Television in Arabic - Private Iraqi television known for its opposition to the US presence in Iraq - is not observed to carry any reports on the Friday sermons for the day. . . "

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Let Slip the Dogs of War and Demonize Ahmadinejad

My column at Salon.com is online: Turning Ahmadinejad into public enemy No. 1: Demonizing the Iranian president and making his visit to New York seem controversial are all part of the neoconservative push for yet another war." Excerpt:

'Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's visit to New York to address the United Nations General Assembly has become a media circus. But the controversy does not stem from the reasons usually cited.

The media has focused on debating whether he should be allowed to speak at Columbia University on Monday, or whether his request to visit Ground Zero, the site of the Sept. 11 attack in lower Manhattan, should have been honored. His request was rejected, even though Iran expressed sympathy with the United States in the aftermath of those attacks and Iranians held candlelight vigils for the victims. Iran felt that it and other Shiite populations had also suffered at the hands of al-Qaida, and that there might now be an opportunity for a new opening to the United States.

Instead, the U.S. State Department denounced Ahmadinejad as himself little more than a terrorist. Critics have also cited his statements about the Holocaust or his hopes that the Israeli state will collapse. He has been depicted as a Hitler figure intent on killing Israeli Jews, even though he is not commander in chief of the Iranian armed forces, has never invaded any other country, denies he is an anti-Semite, has never called for any Israeli civilians to be killed, and allows Iran's 20,000 Jews to have representation in Parliament. . .

The real reason his visit is controversial is that the American right has decided the United States needs to go to war against Iran. Ahmadinejad is therefore being configured as an enemy head of state. '

Read the whole thing.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Iraq Relents on Blackwater Bush to ask for Nearly $200 bn.

The Iraqi government is backing off its demand that the Blackwater security firm be expelled from Iraq in the wake of apparently unprovoked shootings that left 11 Iraqis dead, according to the LAT. Apparently the argument has been made to Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki that the 1,000 Blackwater guards who escort US embassy personnel would have to be replaced by troops, who would have to be pulled out of their current attempt to drive Sunni Arab militants out of Baghdad neighborhoods.

Tom Engelhardt analyzes the Bush administration legal framework that keeps US companies and personnel unaccountable in Iraq.

A big feature of the literature on decolonization is the delight leaders such as Gamal Abdul Nasser and Ruhollah Khomeini took in abrogating laws bestowing 'extra-territoriality' on colonial personnel and even just civilians from the metropole, while in the subject country. Now extra-territoriality is back with a vengeance; and, of course, no colonial enterprise can be run without it. One can't have persons of the superior race hauled before a native judge; bad show, old boy, to let the wily oriental gentlemen get the upper hand that way.

The argument about whether Cheney/Bush went into Iraq over petroleum is not interesting. Of course they did, one way or another. The question is what exactly they thought they were doing about Iraq's petroleum. I would argue that they threw public resources (perhaps as much as two trillion dollars worth when all is said and done) to secure profits for private companies. Otherwise, the US public will never, ever realize the sort of savings from the development of Iraqi petroleum that would compensate them for the blood and treasure they have spent in Iraq. (Not to mention the opportunity costs of squandering so many resources on a quagmire, when the public investment could have been put to much better uses).

Over twenty retired generals have now spoken out against the Iraq War, a gut-wrenching decision for these highly conservative lifelong Republicans.

Al-Sharq al-Awsat writing in Arabic reports that Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal warned against any partition of Iraq. He urged national reconciliation, instead. He also criticized Iran for intervening in Iraqi affairs and called for restraint among the country's neighbors.

At the Global Affairs group blog, Barnett Rubin imagines what he would say about accountability and the Bush administration if he were a politician rather than an analyst:

' The Bush-Cheney administration has surrendered much of Afghanistan to the Taliban and much of Pakistan to al-Qaida. They have turned most of Iraq over to Iran, creating the very danger over which they now threaten another disastrous war; they have strained the U.S. Armed Forces to the point of exhaustion, turned the Defense Department over to private contractors, the Justice Department over to the Republican National Committee, and the national debt over to foreign creditors, while leading a party whose single most basic belief is supposed to be that individuals must take personal responsibility for their actions. And they dare to lecture us on national security?'

Then Rubin restates the case from an analytical point of view. It is a beautiful thing to behold. Read the whole thing.


At the Napoleon's Egypt blog, Lacuee writes:

' Egypt has not the slightest resemblance to what has been said of it by our writers. Its soil, indeed, is fruitful, but there is little of it. Nature asks only to produce; but the land is bare, and almost uncultivated. The natives, degraded by slavery, are relapsed into the savage state, retaining nothing of their former civilization but superstition and religious intolerance. I have found them resembling, in every circumstance, the islanders of the South Sea, described by Cook and Forster.

In a word, this country is nothing at present. It merely offers magnificent recollections of the past, and vast, but distant hopes of the future. It is not worth conquering in its present condition: but if statesmen, above all, if able administrators should undertake the management of it for ten years;--if for the same space of time we should employ all our care on it, and sacrifice the whole of its revenues, it might become the most valuable colony of Europe, and effect an important change in the commerce of the world!

But where are they,--these able administrators? '

Where, indeed?
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Pentagon Report Gives Lie to Surge Success

Reprinted for Monday readers:

An article on how the schedule for turning Iraqi provinces over to the Iraqi army and police for security purposes has slipped to August 2008 notes of a new Pentagon report:

' The Pentagon report cited a litany of problems with the police. For example, it said as few as 40 percent of those trained by coalition troops in recent years are still on the job. Also, due to combat loss, theft, attrition and poor maintenance, a "significant portion" of U.S.-issued equipment is now unusable.'

Just to underline what is said here, 60 percent of the policemen who got even the very minimal training on offer to them have disappeared from the force; and not much is left of the weaponry ("equipment") that the US gave the Iraqi police.

The report is here (pdf).

The report also has two graphics that should make us very suspicious about all the declarations that the troop escalation or 'surge' has significantly reduced violence in Iraq. I cut the graphs in half, so they show only 2006 and 2007 and relabled them, but you can scroll down at the pdf link above to see the originals. I did not modify them in any other way.

The first graph shows average daily casualties (dead and wounded badly enough to go to hospital) by month in Iraq.



This graph shows that there was no significant reduction in daily casualties in Iraq this summer. June saw a dip, mainly in civilian Iraqi casualties; coalition and Iraqi security force casualties were as bad as ever. Since the reduction in civilian casualties was not sustained, it is not significant, and could just have been a fluke (a few car bombs in markets failed to kill as many people as usual, e.g.) Somewhere around 150 persons continued to be killed or wounded every single day according to this chart, with a very minor daily reduction in the hot months of the summer when it is harder to fight.

The second graph gives the number of attacks per month. Obviously, a lot of attacks produce no casualties. Mortars land uselessly in the desert, e.g.



This graph shows that with regard to attacks May and June (when the 'surge' was well under way) were two of the most violent months ever since the US occupation of Iraq began. The June average was 177.8, the highest ever seen. July was more like the violent fall-winter 2006 than it was like the slightly less violent summer.

The graph does show a reduction in attacks for August, but what I notice is that the reduction in attacks did not come with regard either to Iraqi civilians or Iraqi security personnel, which seem the same height as previous months. The only significant reduction for August was with regard to attacks on coalition forces. (Since troop casualties do not seem to have been down very much for August, this statistic suggests that there were fewer attacks but they were more deadly. That is not good news.)

The Pentagon is trying to give us the impression that August was a 'trend', but statistically that is silly, since it was just one month and what came before it was pretty horrible. The dip in attacks in August does not seem to have come with much of a dip in casualties, in any case. And if all that is happening is that fewer US troops are being attacked, but similar numbers are being wounded or killed, I'm not sure that is even significant. Since some of the attacks were on the British in the south, changes in the way they were deployed could have had a small impact on these statistics.

The Pentagon tells us that violence in Baghdad is back down to the levels of summer, 2006. But whether that is true or not, the generalization cannot be made for Iraq, by the Pentagon's own statistics. If you do a three-month rolling average for months prior to September, whether you look at numbers of attacks or numbers of casualties, there has not been a significant improvement with regard to violence in the country as a whole.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.