Alright.  Breathe deep.  I’m going to tackle it.  While the Chilcot enquiry in Westminster tries to sort this whole mess out.

The truth is out.  Not shouted from the rooftops, but uneasily tucked away in the consciences of most British citizens today:

• In 2003 Hans Blix told Tony Blair to his face there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq,
• MI6 dismissed the CIA’s claim that Saddam was linked to Al-Qaida -
• We know Bush had it on his agenda before he was elected, let alone pre-9/11…
• …and we also know that as late as March 2002 no UK ministers fancied it, and for good reason – ‘it had no basis in law’ – Sir William Patey, head of Middle Eastern Dept of Foreign office.  Regime change ‘not a legal basis for military action’, Lord Goldsmith Attorney General.

And yet the smiling politician took Britain to war.

He knew all this, he had all the info, but just didn’t have the guts to stand up to the administration across the pond.  Even a poignant (read toe-curlingly painful) scene in Love Actually of Hugh Grant as PM standing up to an American President failed to convince – take the hint, Tony!  Perhaps if old George had made a move at Cherie, tens of thousands of lives would have been saved.  Hindsight’s a bitch.  Hope a passing time-traveller sticks a Viagra in his Miller Lite someday…

So now we’re left with the legacy of having crippled a fairly well-off country, and a minor annoyance of a leader is out of the way at the cost of many dead lives, countless broken lives, a crippled economy and an even more volatile region.  And for some reason, suicide attacks suddenly seem so blasé…like we expect nothing better of them…

So what happens now?  What does administering justice look like in this situation?  Pretty much all our politicians voted the war through, apart from the Lib Dems, Robin Cook MP (only the insignificant and drastically under-informed post of FOREIGN SECRETARY!) and Claire Short MP – whose names I hope go down in history as being morally in the clear.  So we can’t exactly sack all remaining politicians as war criminals, or do really very much at all in any way.  I doubt we’ll ever really get any closure on this gigantic fuckup.  It’s sad to think the outcome will never be more than a blot on our national conscience and a lesson not to blindly obey spear-rattling cretinous neo-conservatives who can’t even pronounce Iraq properly.  Eye-rack?!

*Sigh*

Next time something like this comes along, I’ll remember to make my own spear-rattling in the opposite direction heard loud and clear.  Not in my name, Tony.

Oleh,

Ahmad Jailani Abdul Ghani

www.ustjai.wordpress.com

23/11/2009

Sepatutnya kita mengajar masyarakat tentang sifat Allah yang Maha Menerima Taubat. Tiada dosa yang tidak diampunkan Allah jika kita benar-benar bertaubat kepadanya.

Imam Bukhari meriwayatkan dalam sahihnya tentang seorang sahabat yang bernama Abdullah tetapi mendapat gelaran himar. Dia banyak menggembirakan Nabi SAW. Tetapi dia mempunyai sifat yang tidak baik iaitu minum arak. Pada suatu ketika, dia dibawa ke hadapan Nabi SAW untuk disebat lantaran kesalahan minum arak. Para sahabat yang lain mengutuk beliau ketika mana dia disebat. Lalu baginda menegah perbuatan mencerca Abdullah itu dengan mengatakan bahawa hati Abdullah sangat kasih kepada Allah dan Rasul.

Ramai orang soleh yang melakukan dosa, atau juga orang kebanyakan yang sangat jahat dalam kehidupannya, tetapi di penghujung kehidupannya, dia mencari Allah SWT. Kewajipan kita ialah sentiasa berbaik sangka dan berdoa agar orang yang derhaka itu diampunkan dosanya oleh Allah SWT, apatah lagi jika terdapat tanda-tanda taubatnya.

Mari kita lihat pandangan Shaikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi tentang Saddam Hussein yang sangat zalim itu tetapi terdapat tanda-tanda taubat di penghujung kehidupannya. Semoga kita berkasih sayang sesama manusia dan menghindari persengketaan.

Sekian,

Ahmad Jailani Abdul Ghani

www.ustjai.wordpress.com

23/11/2009

445

“The other argument for war, that Saddam’s evil is proved by his war against Iran and his treatment of Kurds, is poetic in its hypocrisy. It’s true he did both those things but we were backing him at the time. The Americans shot down a civilian Iranian plane, vetoed a United Nations resolution condemning the attacks on the Kurds and dismissed anyone who pointed out this barbarism.” -  Mark Steel

Mir fällt nichts weltbewegendes mehr ein…und dir?

Cooper to play The Devil’s Double for Tamahori

9 November, 2009 | By Jeremy Kay

Lee Tamahori (Die Another Day, XXX: State Of The Union) will direct to join what Corsan CEO Paul Breuls described as a taut action tale about the extraordinary life of Latif Yahia.

Corsan World Sales is talking to buyers here at AFM and the Paradigm Motion Picture Finance Group is representing domestic rights.

Yahia, a dead ringer for Saddam Hussein’s sadistic and widely despised son, was forced against his will to stand in for Uday in potentially dangerous situations. Through his role, Yahia gained access to Hussein’s inner sanctum and witnessed corruption, violence and debauchery.

Michael Thomas adapted the screenplay from Yahia’s books I Was Saddam’s Son and The Devil’s Double.

Cooper currently appears alongside Carey Mulligan and Peter Sarsgaard in An Education and his credits include Mamma Mia!, The Duchess and The History Boys. He will next be seen in Stephen Frears’ Tamara Drewe.

Lee Tamahori

Lee Tamahori arrived in Hollywood having helmed “Once Were Warriors“
and then wasted his talents on films like “xXx: State Of The Union” and “Next.” Well his next film, about the late Uday Hussein’s body double, actually sounds pretty interesting. Titled “The Devil’s Double” it’s based on the true story of Latif Yahia, a dead ringer for Uday, who was forced against his will stand in for the hated, crazed and sadistic son of Saddam in potentially dangerous situations. As a result, he got a first hand look inside the wild world of the Husseins and went on to publish three books about his experiences, two of which – I Was Saddam’s Son and The Devil’s Double – will serve as the foundation of the film. The picture will begin shooting in January in Malta, and Dominic Cooper is the first confirmed cast member, while Ludivine Sagnier is currently circling the project.

Noam Chomsky im Interview zu einigen interessanten Fragen unserer Zeit.

1.  Yet another ‘conspiracy theory’ that, like many, was from the beginning actually a conspiracy fact:

“Pentagon Domestic Propaganda

A DOD Inspector General investigation found no wrong doing on the part of the Pentagon, but that report was later found to be so flawed, it was retracted and removed from the DOD’s website. More recently, RawStory.com has published the results of its own investigation into the program, which has uncovered further evidence, as well as indications that the Pentagon’s efforts to manipulate public opinion are continuing under the Obama Administration”

http://www.911blogger.com/node/21790

2.  No kidding:

“The Media As Enablers of Government Lies

Why do politicians so easily get away with telling lies? In large part, because the news media are more interested in bonding with politicians than in exposing them. Americans are encouraged to believe that the media will serve as a check and a balance on the government. Instead, the press too often volunteer as unpaid pimps, helping politicians deceive the public.

In 1936, New York Times White House correspondent Turner Catledge said that President Roosevelt’s “first instinct was always to lie.” But the Washington press corps covered up Roosevelt’s dishonesty almost as thoroughly as they hid his use of a wheelchair in daily life.

…

The pursuit of respectability in Washington usually entails acquiescing to government lies. Many if not most members of the Washington press corps are government dependents. Few Washington journalists have the will to expose government lies. That would require placing one in an explicitly adversarial position to the government. It is not that the typical journalist is intentionally covering up government lies, but that his radar is not set to detect such occurrences. Lies rarely register in Washington journalists’ minds because they are usually supplicants for government information, not dogged pursuers of the truth. Raising troublesome questions will not help you get any “silver platter” stories.

The vast majority of the media docilely repeated Bush’s claims through most of his presidency. Television networks very likely devoted a hundred times as much air time to peddling government falsehoods as they did to exposing them. The constant barrage of falsehood drowns out the occasional blips of truth. The government only needs the number of people who recognize its lies to be small enough that its latest power play will not be thwarted. The goal is not to prevent well-informed citizens from being nauseated or disgusted by the president’s lies. Instead, it is to neutralize the mass reaction to presidential falsehoods, even those that have catastrophic consequences.

If Americans wish to retain the remnants of their liberty, they cannot trust the media to warn them about government tyranny. In order to recognize government deceit, there is no substitute for more citizens to make more effort to find the truth for themselves.”
http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0908c.asp

3.  “Many Afghan women are against a U.S. pullout, but Malalai Joya, who’s been called “the bravest woman in Afghanistan,” says the American occupation must end.

Malalai Joya, a 31-year-old activist and politician, was once called “the bravest woman in Afghanistan” by the BBC. During the Taliban years, she defied her country’s rulers by running underground girls’ schools. After the Taliban’s fall, she helped start an orphanage and a medical clinic, and eventually became the youngest member of Afghanistan’s legislature. She has been fearless in taking on the warlords who populate the government of Hamid Karzai—declared the presidential victor Monday after a runoff election was canceled—so much so that in 2007, her political opponents voted to suspend her from parliament on the grounds that she had “insulted” the institution. Calling for her reinstatement, six female Nobel Peace Prize laureates compared her to Burma’s Aung San Suu Kyi, describing her as “a model for women everywhere seeking to make the world more just.”

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-11-04/afghans-bravest-wants-us-out/

4.  But of course they would never do this against their own citizens, would they?

“Air Force: ‘Overwhelm Enemy Cognitive Abilities’ with Bioscience

Resisting stress is good, but destroying your enemy with stress is even better. “Conversely, the chemical pathway area could include methods to degrade enemy performance and artificially overwhelm enemy cognitive capabilities,” the Air Force call for proposals notes.”

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/11/air-force-wants-bioscience-to-overwhelm-enemy-cognitive-abilities/

5.  ““The [Head of One of the Biggest Dark Pools Said] the Amount of Money Devoted to High-frequency Trading Could ‘QUINTUPLE Between this Year and Next’”

Senator Schumer echoed this theme at last week’s hearing:

Market surveillance should be consolidated across all trading venues to eliminate the information gaps and coordination problems that make surveillance across all the markets virtually impossible today.

Let me repeat: market surveillance across all the markets is “virtually impossible today.” And none of the industry witnesses disagreed with Senator Schumer”

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2009/11/chief-executive-of-giant-dark-pool-said.html

6.  “Fear Turns People Into Sheep

An article yesterday in Alternet discussing the Sociological Inquiry article helps us to understand that the key to people’s active participation in searching for excuses for actions by the big boys is fear
…

Reasoned another: “Saddam, I can’t judge if he did what he’s being accused of, but if Bush thinks he did it, then he did it.”

Others declined to engage the information at all. Most curious to the researchers were the respondents who reasoned that Saddam must have been connected to Sept. 11, because why else would the Bush Administration have gone to war in Iraq?

…
A large body of evidence shows that momentarily [raising fear of death], typically by asking people to think about themselves dying, intensifies people’s strivings to protect and bolster aspects of their worldviews, and to bolster their self-esteem. The most common finding is that [fear of death] increases positive reactions to those who share cherished aspects of one’s cultural worldview, and negative reactions toward those who violate cherished cultural values or are merely different.”

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2009/11/investor-psychology-fear-turns-people.html

7.  More government lies:

“Official US Air Force Document Reveals the True Intentions Behind the US-Colombia Military Agreement

An official document from the Department of the US Air Force reveals that the military base in Palanquero, Colombia will provide the Pentagon with “…an opportunity for conducting full spectrum operations throughout South America…” This information contradicts the explanations offered by Colombian President Alvaro Uribe and the US State Department regarding the military agreement signed between the two nations this past October 30th. Both governments have publicly stated that the military agreement refers only to counternarcotics and counterterrorism operations within Colombian territory. President Uribe has reiterated numerous times that the military agreement with the US will not affect Colombia’s neighbors, despite constant concern in the region regarding the true objetives of the agreement. But the US Air Force document, dated May 2009, confirms that the concerns of South American nations have been right on target. The document exposes that the true intentions behind the agreement are to enable the US to engage in “full spectrum military operations in a critical sub-region of our hemisphere where security and stability is under constant threat from narcotics funded terrorist insurgencies…and anti-US governments…”

http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15951

A newly declassified Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) file indicates that an Israeli intelligence agent was among the staff members of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

“WFO files disclose that AIPAC is a powerful pro-Israel lobbying group staffed by US citizens,” says the August 13, 1984 document- a secret communication from the FBI Washington Field Office (WFO) to the FBI director.

“WFO files contain an unsubstantiated allegation that a member of the Israeli Intelligence Service was a staff member of AIPAC,” it adds.

The secret FBI document was declassified and handed over to the Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy (IRmep) after it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.

IRmep needed the documents to file a third amicus brief urging Judge T.S. Ellis not to drop the charges brought against AIPAC workers Steve J. Rosen and Keith Weissman under the 1917 Espionage Act.

On May 1, 2009, the Department of Justice dismissed the espionage charges against the two former AIPAC staffers.

Department of Defense Employee Col. Lawrence Franklin who was indicted along with the AIPAC workers in 2005, however, pleaded guilty to the charges, admitting that he had provided classified information about Iran to two AIPAC employees.

Apparently the Israeli agent had promised to facilitate the appointment of Harman as the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee in exchange for the information.

It is widely believed that the 1984 and 2005 espionage incidents were not isolated events.

As part of a defamation lawsuit he has launched against AIPAC, Rosen intends to show that obtaining and leveraging classified US government information in the service of Israel is common practice at AIPAC.

He claims it was unfair for AIPAC to fire and smear him in the press after he was indicted on espionage charges in 2005. AIPAC lawyers, however, are hoping to get the case thrown out on technicalities before it goes to trial in early 2010.

AIPAC, considered the most powerful and connected lobbying group in Washington, is known for the influence that it holds over US foreign policy.

Former US president Jimmy Carter has also accused AIPAC of putting a great deal of pressure on politicians running for office who do not share AIPAC goals.

A “SADDAM APOLOGIST”

Malcom Lagauche

www.uruknet.info?p=59750

  www.uruknet.info?p=59750

AMMAN: Deposed Iraqi president Saddam Hussein planned to escape from his US-run prison in 2006 with the help of loyalists, including former bodyguards, according to a book written by one of his lawyers. “Saddam’s plan to escape prison was supposed to take place in the summer of 2006, with the backing of the Iraqi resistance and a special force of bodyguards,” Khalil al-Dulaimi wrote in ‘Saddam Hussein Out of US Prison: What Happened’. “Under the plan, the Iraqi fighters were given orders to attack Baghdad’s Green Zone and the headquarters of the US Marines at the capital’s airport, before raiding his jail” at Camp Cropper near the airport, according to a copy of the 480-page book obtained by AFP this week. “He planned to flee to Anbar province in western Iraq to make a quick plan to unify Iraqi resistance groups and carry out an offensive on Baghdad,” Amman-based Dulaimi, himself an Iraqi, said in the book. “Saddam also wanted to free his comrades and other prisoners detained at US military camp Cropper near Baghdad,” Amman-based Dulaimi said. Dulaimi said the plan was dropped “after a shooting incident outside (Saddam’s) detention centre, which led to fortifying the facility and boosting security measures”. Six months later, Saddam was dead. He was hanged in December after being convicted of crimes against humanity for the killing of 148 Shia civilians following an assassination attempt against him in 1982. Saddam had been captured by US troops in December 2003, eight months after the fall of Baghdad, in a hole on a farm near his hometown of Tikrit. In the book, currently available only in Arabic and published this year in Khartoum, Saddam was quoted as telling his cell mates that “if Iraq is liberated, I would make the country flourish in seven years without the help of anybody”. “I would make Iraq better than a Swiss watch,” he said. He spoke about his American warders, “who always asked me to give them my autograph”. “I told them that after the liberation of Iraq, I would invite you to come visit my country. They were happy about this and promise to accept my invitation,” he said. “But the US soldiers refused to give me scissors to trim my beard and moustache because they were afraid I would commit suicide.” afp

In addition to the list of books that I recommended on this blog, there is a continually evolving selection of articles that present unique, informed perspectives on a variety of issues.  Below, I’ve listed a few of them that I came across during the past week. While these articles won’t necessarily all be about South Africa, or Africa in general, I hope you’ll enjoy them nonetheless.  I’ll try to do this every other week, so keep checking back (and of course, please comment with suggestions of your own)!

The Baby Bonanza

Is Africa an exception to the rule that countries reap a “demographic dividend” as they grow richer?

Breaking the Chain: The Antitrust Suit Against Wal-Mart

“It is now twenty-five years since the Reagan Administration eviscerated America’s century-long tradition of antitrust enforcement. For a generation, big firms have enjoyed almost complete license to use brute economic force to grow only bigger. And so today we find ourselves in a world dominated by immense global oligopolies that every day further limit the flexibility of our economy and our personal freedom within it.”

Saddam: Tales of the Tyrant

A bit of a blast from the past, but this piece of writing by journalist Mark Bowden (of Black Hawk Down fame) is excellent and provides excellent insight into the psychology of a dictator.

Kids Swap Suburbs for Township

The Luleka Exchange Programme, set up over eight years ago, gives boys from Rondebosch Preparatory School in the upmarket Cape Town suburb of Rondebosch and boys from the no-fees state-run Luleka Primary School in Khayelitsha township a chance to spend a day in each others shoes.

Will the Beautiful Women of the World Please Stand Up?

“My job is to focus on sustainable development, health, hygiene and sanitation; to make sure charity: water’s projects are working in 20 years. But nowhere on any of my surveys or evaluations was a place to write, “Today we made someone feel beautiful.””

In a gambit designed to make him appear a strong leader of a proud nation — in advance of a national election, of course — Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki ordered some security measures put in place earlier to be discontinued. In particular, he ordered some roads in Baghdad re-opened to vehicle traffic and security barriers discarded.

The street where the blasts occurred had been reopened to vehicle traffic just six months ago. Shortly after, blast walls were repositioned to allow traffic closer to the government buildings — all measures hailed by al-Maliki as a sign that safety was returning to the city.

Helpless civilians have paid for that, as the death toll from two huge blasts yesterday continues to rise.

As the floodwater from broken water mains and sewers drained away, workers continued to hunt for victims amid the wreckage from Sunday’s bomb blasts, recovering still more bodies on Monday as the death toll climbed to as much as 155 — including an uncertain number of children — with more than 500 wounded.
The extent of the damage was even worse than initially feared, with three major government buildings destroyed rather than the two reported in the hours after Sunday’s pair of suicide vehicle bombs.

This tragedy is likely to be followed by calls from U.S. neo-calls for President Obama to delay pulling U.S. troops of of Iraq, even as those same neo-cons demand Obama send tens of thousands more troops to Afghanistan. No. The U.S. should never have invaded Iraq; and we certainly shouldn’t be in the middle of sectarian warfare.
Besides, the Iraqis have asked us to leave. We should, sooner rather than later.

The inevitable Northern Middle East strategic block

(Report #30); (October 21, 2009)

            There would be much turmoil within the next five years in the Greater Middle East.  There is this inevitable trend toward forming a strategic and economic bloc in the northern Middle East region of Turkey, Iran, Syria, and Iraq.   Turkey and Iran are the main regional powers with the means to drive this trend to fruition.  Saudi Arabia is in line to supporting this bloc which will secure to the monarchy a new lease on life and not relying exclusively on the US Administrations.

            To prevent this new emerging bloc many superpowers are in a frenzy to obstruct this natural trend in economic and financial stability.  For example, this week the south eastern region of Iran witnessed a terrorist attack that decapitated the military leadership of the paramilitary Pasdaran or Guardian of the Islamic Revolution.  Iran is blaming Pakistan to facilitating the movements of the Sunni “Jund Allah” with full backing and finance from Britain and the USA. Personally, I tend to see indirect coordination of the Iranian regime in that attack: decapitating the paramilitary organization is the first phase into disbanding an organization that is no longer the guardian of the revolution but the military backer of the retrograded clerics working on maintaining their hold on the political climate in Iran.

            Another example is the terrorist blasting of a couple of ministries in downtown Baghdad.  This attack followed the signing of full diplomatic relation with Syria at the instigation of the US and France.  In retaliation of Syria cozying up with Maliki of Iraq without Iran’s full consent a prompt response sent the appropriate signal; Maliki promptly broke diplomatic ties with Damascus under lame excuses.  Syria got the message clear and loud not to cooperate with France, the US, or any regional power without prior coordination with Iran.  Syria is not about to ruin its internal security for any baits extended to it by the Western powers.

            The Arab Emirates are under pressures to kick out all Islamic Chiaa immigrants, starting with the Lebanese.  Israel is constantly pressuring the US to get militarily involved in Iran. Turkey is in excellent terms with Syria and Iran: it has canceled an air exercise with Israel and the US that was intended to cross the borders of Syria, Turkey, and Iraq; it is an exercise for Israel to take this alternative air route to blast Iran’s nuclear power stations.  Lebanon is unable to form a government for 4 months; it is waiting for green light of the new strategic block that is now backed by Saudi Arabia.  The US, Israel, and Egypt are counter blocking any unity government in Lebanon.

            The trend toward forming a strategic and economic bloc in the northern Middle East region started in 1979 as the Islamic revolution in Iran came to power and the Shah went to exile (Only Sadate of Egypt accepted the Shah to take political refuge in its land). Thus, the first clue goes back to 1979.  Iran of Khomeini, Syria of Hafez Assad, and President Bakr of Iraq decided on a rapprochement of Islamic sects (Sunni and Chiaa).  Saddam Hussein was chief of security and Vice President of Bakr; Saddam hated the Chiaa as well as Hafez Assad his archenemy to the leadership of the Baath Party.  At the instigation of Saudi Arabia and the green light from the USA Saddam deposed Bakr and swiftly executed all the Iraqi Baath members who supported this entente; these prominent members of the Iraqi Baath were mostly Chiaa. At the time the Saudi Defense Minister Sultan and the Interior Nayef (Sultan’s cadet brother) hated the Chiaa and were worried for their obscurantist and salafist Wahhabit Sunni sect. Thus, Saddam and the Saudi monarchs joined forces to destabilize Iran of Khomeini.  Many regional States, the US, France, and Britain would not allow a strategic and economical block in the Middle East to be formed of Iran, Iraq, Turkey, and Syria. Thus, Saddam was encouraged to invade Iran. After two years, Saddam had to retreat his troops from Khuzestan.  Iran wanted this war of attrition to resume as an excuse to clean and re-structure its Islamic regime; (this nonsense war lasted 8 years).  

            The second clue is after invaded Kuwait in 1990.  Saddam’s regime was publicly terribly weakened; the Chiaa in southern Iraq and the Kurds in the north were threatening to destabilize Saddam’s regime.  The US wanted to help Saddam by any means to prevent Iran from taking hold of Iraq and joining forces with Syria (Iran’s ally).  The short-term strategy was to give Saddam an external activity or a semblance of war to re-unite Iraq on a national excuse.  To that effect, the US lured Kuwait to pressure Iraq into refunding 50 billions in war loan.  Saddam amassed his troops on the borders with Kuwait. The unstable Saddam wanted to believe that he got effective green light to conquer Kuwait. Bush Senior formed a coalition and forced Saddam to retreat from Kuwait. Saddam was defeated and the US and coalition forces could easily enter Baghdad. The purpose of this war was not to depose Saddam but for Iraq to be a buffer zone between Iran and Syria.  Saddam was permitted to crush the Chiaa insurgency in the south and the Kurdish upheaval in the north. Turkey strengthened its relationship with Syria and Iran. Syria was given bait for a mandate over Lebanon. Moubarak of Egypt was ordered to accept the deal and help put an end to the civil war in Lebanon. These hot regions needed to be pacified while the US and Europe tends to bigger problems: the proper dismantling of the Soviet Union, stabilizing Europe, and overseeing the financial globalization.

            The third clue is the massive occupation of Iraq by the US troops in 2003. (Read my post “Why the massive occupation of Iraq?”).  After 9/11/2001, the US demoted the Taliban regime in Afghanistan but did nothing to finish off the job and stabilize Afghanistan: the US Administration had other strategic plan than worrying about Sunni salafist Al Qaeda “terrorism”: it was contained in northern Pakistan.         

            At the time of the invasion there was no nuclear program in Iraq and the Bush Junior Administration knew that fact.  Iraq had resumed the development of two other means of mass destruction: the biological and the chemical arms. Saddam Hussein prevented any further inspections by the UN for two years because he had these two arms programs functional.  Thus, the US employed Russia and France to misinform Saddam: Russia would displace and decontaminate the presence of the biological and chemical arms that it had supplied Iraq in return for vetoing any pre-emptive attack by the US in the UN.  This maneuver was effective and the inspectors found no arms of mass destructions in Iraq. It was when the US was totally confident that Saddam had no arms of mass destructions that it invaded Iraq; Saddam had nothing to counter the massive offensive of the US forces, especially that the officers in the field of the Iraqi army had no power but to wait orders from central commands:  that was how Saddam restructured his army since 1980 to prevent any army rebellion to his regime.

            Why the US had to completely occupy Iraq?  Saddam could have been deposed in many ways without any military invasion or at least a partial occupation of south Iraq with Chiaa majority and the north with Kurdish majority. Why the US did not invest one more year in Afghanistan to stabilize this country before turning on to Iraq?  Why the US failed to get out after Saddam his entourage were finished?  Why this occupying force is still there after seven years of the invasion?  The US wanted its physical presence in Iraq to prevent the formation of the Northern Middle East Block. Turkey was against this invasion and did its best to prevent the US troops crossing its territory to northern Iraq.  Syria and Iran played cats and mouse with the US to harass its presence in Iraq.

            Thus, deposing Saddam without US military presence in the field meant that Iraq will quickly link with Iran; the other bonus was to control oil production and distribution of the second largest oil reserve to put the squeeze on the giant economic power of China. This “pre-emptive” intervention didn’t turn right: first, radical Islam increased and proliferated even further; second, it was the catalyst for the severest financial crash ever, and it alienated Turkey. 

            What are the scores at this junction?  The Saudi Arabia click of (Sultan, Nayef, and Bandar) is deposed and Saudi Arabia is seeking stronger ties with Syria.  Turkey is increasingly improving its ties with Syria and de-linking with its former “strategic” ally Israel. Iran is recapturing its initial strategy of uniting the Islamic sects.  Pakistan will cooperate fully with Iran to stabilize Afghanistan and save the unstable State of Pakistan deeply involved militarily to crush the Taliban brand in northern Pakistan. Thus, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Armenia are changing their policies to join this bloc as allies if not partners.

            The trend is already inevitable and it cannot be stopped with the world economy and finance state in such disarray.  It is the movement of political leadership in the four States that is the driving force and not simply individual leaders. By the end of 2011 the US is to remove all its military troops from Iraq. During this period, the US, Russia, France, and Britain will coordinate efforts to keeping Turkey and Iran on tip tow; Syria and Iraq are to be frequently destabilized.

Two new departments to study mass graves in Iraq

By Anwar Umaa

Azzaman, October 7, 2009

Iraq’s Institute for Forensic Medicine has set up two new departments where students are to be specialized in the study and investigation of mass graves, the institute’s dean said.

Dr. Munjid Salahudeen said the departments were needed due to the large number of Iraqis buried anonymously in these graves.

There are two types of mass graves in Iraq. The first were a feature of the former leader Saddam Hussein where tens of thousands of people were killed and buried en masse.

The second type of mass graves came into being under U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq. While Salahudeen made no mention of such graves but many of them have been exposed in the past three years.

“There are seven stages which are a characteristic of mass graves and they range from the time the news about them spreads to the discovery of bones and their DNA tests,” he said.

He said Iraq could not continue relying on foreign assistance in this regard as such investigations “cost a lot of money.”

He said his institute, in coordination with the Ministry of Human Rights, has so far found mass graves in the southern provinces of Basra and Missan.

But of particular interest is the fate of the nearly 600 Kuwaitis who were taken prisoner during the 1991 Gulf war by the former regime and then killed and buried in different mass graves.

Salahudeen said Iraqi teams have so far identified 320 of the missing Kuwaitis “but we still have no information on the others.”

A joint Iraqi and Kuwait forensic team is working to identify the rest, he said.

Azzaman

  door H.J.A. Hofland

In de zomer van 1988 reisde ik met de trein van Oost-Berlijn via Warschau, Vilnius en Riga naar Tallinn, en van daar met het vliegtuig naar Moskou. De hervormingen van Michail Gorbatsjov waren in volle gang. Glasnost, openheid, en perestroika, herbouw. Deze vernieuwingen hadden ook de spoorwegen aangedaan. In Riga werd een bioscooprijtuig aan de trein gekoppeld. Daar kon je voor een paar roebel een film uit het Westen zien. Een verrassing. Het was Grüsse aus der Lederhose, een meesterwerk uit het Tiroler softpornorepertoire. Later, veilig in Moskou geland, nam ik een taxi naar de stad. Ergens langs de weg stonden een paar enorme Spaanse ruiters, constructies die met prikkeldraad zijn bespannen en dan als militaire versperringen dienen. Ze waren opmerkelijk groot, van grimmig beton. Ik vroeg de chauffeur waarom die dingen daar stonden. Dit, zei hij plechtig, is een beeld: tot hier zijn de Duitsers toen gekomen. Symbool van de onverbiddelijkheid. Het blijft een van de ontroerendste monumenten die ik ken.
In de laatste jaren van de Koude Oorlog werd steeds duidelijker dat het sovjetrijk ondanks alle pogingen tot reconstructie een verloren imperium was. De bewapeningswedloop ging onverminderd verder, de massa’s van het Oostblok waren aangeraakt door de wensen van het consumentisme, de collectivistische economie kon de toenemende vraag naar alles niet meer aan. Met de dag werd duidelijker dat het Oostblok in zijn geheel een maatschappij in doodsnood was. De belangrijkste vraag was op welke manier het einde zou komen: door een implosie met onvoorziene uitbarstingen van geweld, of langs de lijnen van geleidelijkheid. Hoe kon het Westen een soft landing from the Cold War bevorderen?
Op 12 juni 1987 hield president Ronald Reagan in West-Berlijn bij de Brandenburger Tor een rede waarin hij de gevleugelde woorden sprak: Mister Gorbatsjov, tear down this wall! Ruim twee jaar later was het zo ver. De Muur werd gesloopt, door de Berlijners, nadat in de weken daarvoor het Warschaupact als een oud gebouw in elkaar was gezakt. Nu wil de overlevering dat deze overwinning van de vrijheid met de beroemde woorden van Reagan is begonnen. Ik denk dat het een nuance anders is. Niet zozeer heeft het Westen de Koude Oorlog gewonnen, als wel de Sovjet-Unie de strijd verloren. En aan het staatsmanschap van beide kanten is het te danken dat het een soft landing is geworden, besloten met de opheffing van de Sovjet-Unie in 1991.
Nadat duidelijk was geworden dat de grote tegenstander van veertig jaar Koude Oorlog reddeloos was verslagen, raakte de publieke opinie in het Westen verdeeld. Conservatieve denkers riepen ‘het gelijk van rechts’ uit en wilden het over het algemeen bij die constatering laten; aan de andere kant ontstond een debat over de mogelijke besteding van het peace dividend. De bewapeningswedloop was ten einde, enorme kapitalen konden nu aan constructieve doelen worden besteed. Het is een bewijs van klassiek staatsmanschap: de voormalige tegenstander tot bondgenoot maken. Zo was het na de Tweede Wereldoorlog met Duitsland gebeurd. Lag het niet voor de hand de verslagen Russen economisch te steunen om daardoor mogelijke uitbarstingen van revanchisme te voorkomen?
Dit debat stierf een stille dood. Er waren plotseling dringender zaken aan de orde. Op 2 augustus 1990 begon Saddam Hoessein met de verovering van Koeweit. In september hield de nieuwe Amerikaanse president George Bush senior een rede waarin hij de Nieuwe Wereldorde uitriep, een internationale gemeenschap waarin alle staten elkaars soevereiniteit zouden garanderen. Tegelijkertijd begon hij met het vormen van een coalitie die Saddams verovering ongedaan moest maken. Het werd een bondgenootschap van 29 naties waaronder ook Arabische. Begin 1991 begon de aanval die met de bevrijding van Koeweit en de totale nederlaag van Saddam eindigde. De Iraakse dictator werd daarna met een politiek van containment in bedwang gehouden. De grote internationale vraagstukken leken opgelost, de Nieuwe Wereldorde verdween in de vergetelheid.
In plaats daarvan werd het Westen door de roaring nineties beslopen. Francis Fukuyama kondigde zijn vaak verkeerd begrepen End of History aan; na een korte recessie begon de economische groei; de massa’s van het Westen ontdekten de zich onweerstaanbaar uitbreidende elektronische snelweg; aan het einde van het decennium kondigden geleerden van naam zelfs de Nieuwe Economie aan, het tijdperk van de eeuwige economische groei. En intussen keek het Westen gewapend toe totdat in de Joegoslavische burgeroorlogen meer dan honderdduizend mensen waren vermoord. Dat is in het kort de nasleep van de gewonnen Koude Oorlog in het eerste decennium na de val van de Muur.
Toen barstte eerst de internetzeepbel. Het wereldpubliek werd getrakteerd op de Clinton-Lewinsky-affaire. Op 11 september 2001 is de grote politiek weer begonnen, met twee oorlogen waarmee we ons geen raad weten. Was het anders gegaan als we de Nieuwe Wereldorde van Bush sr. ernstig hadden genomen? Vergeefse vraag. We wilden het niet.

© H.J.A. Hofland / De Groene Amsterdammer

http://www.groene.nl/2009/42/Twintig_jaar_later