UN reports (December 14th): The resumption of the death penalty in Iraq earlier this year is a source of great concern to the United Nations, according to the world body’s latest report covering the human rights situation in the country.
“It is of particular concern that many persons are convicted on the basis of confessions often gathered under duress or torture, while their right not to be compelled to testify against oneself or to confess guilt is often violated,” the report said.
“Until these violations are addressed, the imposition of the death penalty by Iraqi courts will remain arbitrary and contrary to the international human rights standards.”
The number of people receiving capital sentences has risen, with 324 death sentences having been handed down by the High Judicial Council in the first half of 2009. http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=33244&Cr=iraq&Cr1=human+rights
Wednesday, 23 December 2009
Sunday, 29 November 2009
More corporate rip-off
An interesting story from The Times:
Iraqis spent $80m on ADE651 bomb detectors described as useless
The Times reports (November 28th): The Iraqi parliament is looking into the sale by a British company of “bomb detectors” costing millions of pounds amid claims that they do not work.
In the past two years Iraq’s security forces have spent more than $80 million (£47 million) on the detectors made by ATSC Ltd, based in Yeovil, Somerset.
The devices, which consist of little more than a telescopic radio aerial on a black plastic handle, were each sold for the price of a new car and are in use at army and police checkpoints across the bomb-ravaged country.
The Iraqi parliament is scrutinising the purchase after an article appeared in The New York Times in which the American Major-General Richard J. Rowe Jr, who oversees Iraqi police training for the US, said: “I have no confidence that these work.”
Read more at:
http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article6935574.ece
Iraqis spent $80m on ADE651 bomb detectors described as useless
The Times reports (November 28th): The Iraqi parliament is looking into the sale by a British company of “bomb detectors” costing millions of pounds amid claims that they do not work.
In the past two years Iraq’s security forces have spent more than $80 million (£47 million) on the detectors made by ATSC Ltd, based in Yeovil, Somerset.
The devices, which consist of little more than a telescopic radio aerial on a black plastic handle, were each sold for the price of a new car and are in use at army and police checkpoints across the bomb-ravaged country.
The Iraqi parliament is scrutinising the purchase after an article appeared in The New York Times in which the American Major-General Richard J. Rowe Jr, who oversees Iraqi police training for the US, said: “I have no confidence that these work.”
Read more at:
http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article6935574.ece
Sunday, 22 November 2009
5th from bottom
Outo of 180 countries surveyed by Transparency International, Iraq comes 176th, one of the most corrupt states on the planet, just ahead of Afghanistan. Any connection?
Something to take action over
Iraq planning to hang up to 126 women by year's end
Seattle Post Globe reports (November 19th): Iraq is planning to execute up to 126 women by the end of this year. At least 9 may be hanged within the next two weeks. Human rights groups say the only crime committed by many of these women was to serve in the government of Saddam Hussein. Others, according to human rights groups like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, were convicted of common crimes based on confessions that were the result of torture.
Amnesty reports that at least 1,000 men and women are now on death row in Iraq, a country that has one of the highest rates of execution in the world.
Read more at:
http://seattlepostglobe.org/2009/11/18/iraq-planning-to-hang-up-to-126-women-by-years-end
Seattle Post Globe reports (November 19th): Iraq is planning to execute up to 126 women by the end of this year. At least 9 may be hanged within the next two weeks. Human rights groups say the only crime committed by many of these women was to serve in the government of Saddam Hussein. Others, according to human rights groups like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, were convicted of common crimes based on confessions that were the result of torture.
Amnesty reports that at least 1,000 men and women are now on death row in Iraq, a country that has one of the highest rates of execution in the world.
Read more at:
http://seattlepostglobe.org/2009/11/18/iraq-planning-to-hang-up-to-126-women-by-years-end
Sunday, 15 November 2009
Iraq back in the news
Iraq is back in the news this week - for all the wrong reasons. Firstly, Brirish troops are again under investigation for the abuse of detainees - including allegations of the horrific rape of a sixteen year old boy. The Independent reports:
): Disturbing graphic allegations of sexual and physical abuse of Iraqi civilians by British soldiers are among 33 new torture cases being investigated by the Ministry of Defence (MoD).
The fresh claims include allegations that female and male soldiers sexually abused and humiliated detainees in camps in southern Iraq, prompting comparisons with the torture practices employed by US soldiers at the notorious Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad.
In one case, British soldiers are accused of piling Iraqi prisoners on top of each other and subjecting them to electric shocks, an echo of the abuse at the notorious US detention centre that came to light in 2004.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/british-soldiers-sexually-abused-us-claim-iraqis-1820973.html
Secondly, The Guardian has a story about a fifteenfold rise in birth defects in Fallujah, which saw some of the worst aerial bombardment of the conflict:
Doctors in Iraq's war-ravaged enclave of Falluja are dealing with up to 15 times as many chronic deformities in infants and a spike in early life cancers that may be linked to toxic materials left over from the fighting.
Dr Bassam Allah, the head of the hospital's children's ward, this week urged international experts to take soil samples across Falluja and for scientists to mount an investigation into the causes of so many ailments, most of which he said had been "acquired" by mothers before or during pregnancy.
Other health officials are also starting to focus on possible reasons, chief among them potential chemical or radiation poisonings. Abnormal clusters of infant tumours have also been repeatedly cited in Basra and Najaf – areas that have in the past also been intense battle zones where modern munitions have been heavily used.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/13/falluja-cancer-children-birth-defects
And thirdly, there are real fears of a slide towards dictatorship, as these two stories indicate:
Reporters face violence as Iraq cracks down on media dissent
The Guardian reports (November 5th): Iraqis are fearing a renewed crackdown on dissent as a crucial national poll draws near, with several journalists claiming to have been beaten by security forces and ministers issuing warnings about media coverage.
Iraq's communications minister, Faruq Abd Al-Qadir, has introduced a $5,000 (£3,000) licence fee for all broadcast media outlets and ordered the staff of the 58 media and television stations operating in the country to apply for work permits.
The new rules come after a summer crackdown on internet access in which communications authorities warned service providers and internet cafes they would to block access to websites deemed to be offensive.
The tighter controls have also been interpreted as evidence of a creeping police state, in which some hard-won freedoms of the last six years are being rolled back.
Three journalists this week reported having been beaten by soldiers while covering routine security stories.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/05/iraq-government-warn-media
Iraqi Armed Troops Fire at Peaceful Demonstration in Baghdad
ICEM reports (November 2nd):ICEM received a report from the Federation of Workers’ Councils and Unions (FWCUI) that a workers’ demonstration in Baghdad was fired upon by armed forces. The demonstration and use of armed force occurred on 6 October near the Green Zone in central Baghdad. The report the ICEM received from the FWCUI said many of the 2,000 protestors were hit with rubber bullets. The march on started at Al Tahreer Square, and crossed Al Jumhoria Bridge towards the Green Zone, where armed forces indiscriminately fired upon and beat demonstrators. Four workers were severely beaten and arrested.
http://www.icem.org/en/78-ICEM-InBrief/3469-
): Disturbing graphic allegations of sexual and physical abuse of Iraqi civilians by British soldiers are among 33 new torture cases being investigated by the Ministry of Defence (MoD).
The fresh claims include allegations that female and male soldiers sexually abused and humiliated detainees in camps in southern Iraq, prompting comparisons with the torture practices employed by US soldiers at the notorious Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad.
In one case, British soldiers are accused of piling Iraqi prisoners on top of each other and subjecting them to electric shocks, an echo of the abuse at the notorious US detention centre that came to light in 2004.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/british-soldiers-sexually-abused-us-claim-iraqis-1820973.html
Secondly, The Guardian has a story about a fifteenfold rise in birth defects in Fallujah, which saw some of the worst aerial bombardment of the conflict:
Doctors in Iraq's war-ravaged enclave of Falluja are dealing with up to 15 times as many chronic deformities in infants and a spike in early life cancers that may be linked to toxic materials left over from the fighting.
Dr Bassam Allah, the head of the hospital's children's ward, this week urged international experts to take soil samples across Falluja and for scientists to mount an investigation into the causes of so many ailments, most of which he said had been "acquired" by mothers before or during pregnancy.
Other health officials are also starting to focus on possible reasons, chief among them potential chemical or radiation poisonings. Abnormal clusters of infant tumours have also been repeatedly cited in Basra and Najaf – areas that have in the past also been intense battle zones where modern munitions have been heavily used.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/13/falluja-cancer-children-birth-defects
And thirdly, there are real fears of a slide towards dictatorship, as these two stories indicate:
Reporters face violence as Iraq cracks down on media dissent
The Guardian reports (November 5th): Iraqis are fearing a renewed crackdown on dissent as a crucial national poll draws near, with several journalists claiming to have been beaten by security forces and ministers issuing warnings about media coverage.
Iraq's communications minister, Faruq Abd Al-Qadir, has introduced a $5,000 (£3,000) licence fee for all broadcast media outlets and ordered the staff of the 58 media and television stations operating in the country to apply for work permits.
The new rules come after a summer crackdown on internet access in which communications authorities warned service providers and internet cafes they would to block access to websites deemed to be offensive.
The tighter controls have also been interpreted as evidence of a creeping police state, in which some hard-won freedoms of the last six years are being rolled back.
Three journalists this week reported having been beaten by soldiers while covering routine security stories.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/05/iraq-government-warn-media
Iraqi Armed Troops Fire at Peaceful Demonstration in Baghdad
ICEM reports (November 2nd):ICEM received a report from the Federation of Workers’ Councils and Unions (FWCUI) that a workers’ demonstration in Baghdad was fired upon by armed forces. The demonstration and use of armed force occurred on 6 October near the Green Zone in central Baghdad. The report the ICEM received from the FWCUI said many of the 2,000 protestors were hit with rubber bullets. The march on started at Al Tahreer Square, and crossed Al Jumhoria Bridge towards the Green Zone, where armed forces indiscriminately fired upon and beat demonstrators. Four workers were severely beaten and arrested.
http://www.icem.org/en/78-ICEM-InBrief/3469-
Monday, 12 October 2009
The thieves of Baghdad
very interesting piecein The Guardian about the legacy of the Occupation:
In the past month several high-profile incidents have highlighted what Major General Qassim al-Moussawi, the chief Iraqi military spokesman in Baghdad, described as the outbreak of "a frenzy of violent crime" in Iraq. Writing in the Times, Richard Kerbaj explained how "everyone is looking for a way to make a quick buck in Iraq, but none more so than the insurgents and gangsters". Indeed, present-day levels of crime in Iraq reflect the institutionalisation of criminality that may undermine the country's long-term development.
The disbanding of Iraqi security forces by the Coalition Provisional Authority included thousands of border guards, turning the country into a house without doors or windows. Smuggling – which had blossomed under sanctions – became rampant.
Iraq became a transit point in the flow of hashish and heroin from Iran and Afghanistan – the world's largest producer of opium poppies – to Gulf countries and Europe.
Corrupt security forces provide little break on crime, and children are being ransomed off for as much as £63,000. Children also find themselves the victims in prostitution syndicates. Time magazine reported earlier in the year that 11- to 12-year-olds were being sold into prostitution for up to $30,000.
More at:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/09/iraq-crime
In the past month several high-profile incidents have highlighted what Major General Qassim al-Moussawi, the chief Iraqi military spokesman in Baghdad, described as the outbreak of "a frenzy of violent crime" in Iraq. Writing in the Times, Richard Kerbaj explained how "everyone is looking for a way to make a quick buck in Iraq, but none more so than the insurgents and gangsters". Indeed, present-day levels of crime in Iraq reflect the institutionalisation of criminality that may undermine the country's long-term development.
The disbanding of Iraqi security forces by the Coalition Provisional Authority included thousands of border guards, turning the country into a house without doors or windows. Smuggling – which had blossomed under sanctions – became rampant.
Iraq became a transit point in the flow of hashish and heroin from Iran and Afghanistan – the world's largest producer of opium poppies – to Gulf countries and Europe.
Corrupt security forces provide little break on crime, and children are being ransomed off for as much as £63,000. Children also find themselves the victims in prostitution syndicates. Time magazine reported earlier in the year that 11- to 12-year-olds were being sold into prostitution for up to $30,000.
More at:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/09/iraq-crime
Sunday, 20 September 2009
US Sending 1,000 More Troops to Iraq
If you thought US troops were withdrawing from Iraq, the following amy be of interest:
Though the Iraq War has long since become an after-thought amid Obama Administration claims that the “drawdown” in on track, the Pentagon is reporting today that Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has approved a request to send about 1,000 additional troops to Iraq. The latest report comes less than a week after it was revealed that the Pentagon has added thousands of additional contractors to Iraq, ostensibly to replace US troops during the drawdown.
More at: http://news.antiwar.com/2009/09/15/us-sending-1000-more-troops-to-iraq/
Though the Iraq War has long since become an after-thought amid Obama Administration claims that the “drawdown” in on track, the Pentagon is reporting today that Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has approved a request to send about 1,000 additional troops to Iraq. The latest report comes less than a week after it was revealed that the Pentagon has added thousands of additional contractors to Iraq, ostensibly to replace US troops during the drawdown.
More at: http://news.antiwar.com/2009/09/15/us-sending-1000-more-troops-to-iraq/
Sunday, 13 September 2009
More news than ever
As media organisations scale down their operations in Iraq, there is no shortage of news about the ongoing effects of the six and a half year occupation of this country. Real concerns about the brutality of US-trained security forces continue to be voiced:
2 Iraqis slain in Baghdad raid by U.S.-backed security forces
LA Times reports (September 10th): Iraqi forces, backed by U.S. soldiers, entered a residential street in southeast Baghdad's Zafaraniya district early Wednesday during a security sweep. When the mission was over, two men were dead and their relatives and neighbours were accusing the Iraqi forces of murder.
Relatives and neighbours said troops set off explosives that knocked down the gates and doors to a home, where they detained an Iraqi military intelligence officer and killed two civilians. Their bodies were discovered with dog bites and gunshot wounds on a kitchen floor, which was streaked with blood, the witnesses said.
More at:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iraq-raid10-2009sep10,0,5056741.story
In Iraq's prisons, a culture of abuse
Christian Science Monitor reports (September 13th): In a room thick with heat and sweat, light from a small window falls on rows of squatting prisoners and plastic bags of belongings hung from nails on every inch of the wall. The guard explains that 74 men live in this room, which is roughly 10 by 20 feet. A further 85 are usually in the corridor, he adds, while 12 are kept next to the toilet.
This is Hibhib prison on the outskirts of Baquba, the dusty, volatile capital of Diyala Province roughly 40 miles from Baghdad.
It is just one of the prisons in the province where detainees and US forces allege overcrowding, lengthy pretrial detention, and torture used to extract confessions. While the conditions here may be more severe than elsewhere in the country, Iraq's national detention system as a whole has been harshly criticized by Western human rights organizations.
An Interior Ministry official who was inspecting Diyala prisons told the Monitor that the ministry "sent a committee to visit Rusafa, and it is not good. It is the same as the jails in Diyala Province, the same breaches of human rights."
"Yes, there is violence" in Diyala jails, the official confirmed, on condition of anonymity. "There are violent punishments, they hang them from their arms, beat them with sticks and [punch them], kicking, [using] electricity, stubbing out cigarettes on the skin." He described a practice, also detailed by former prisoners, in which prisoners are forced to drink water and then prevented from urinating by a method too unpleasant to be described here.
More at:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0912/p08s01-wome.html
To regularly access these and other stories, sign up to the Iraq Occupation Focus Newsletter, produced as a free service for all those opposed to the occupation. In order to strengthen our campaign, please make sure you sign up to receive the free newsletter automatically – go to: http://lists.riseup.net/www/info/iraqfocus.
2 Iraqis slain in Baghdad raid by U.S.-backed security forces
LA Times reports (September 10th): Iraqi forces, backed by U.S. soldiers, entered a residential street in southeast Baghdad's Zafaraniya district early Wednesday during a security sweep. When the mission was over, two men were dead and their relatives and neighbours were accusing the Iraqi forces of murder.
Relatives and neighbours said troops set off explosives that knocked down the gates and doors to a home, where they detained an Iraqi military intelligence officer and killed two civilians. Their bodies were discovered with dog bites and gunshot wounds on a kitchen floor, which was streaked with blood, the witnesses said.
More at:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iraq-raid10-2009sep10,0,5056741.story
In Iraq's prisons, a culture of abuse
Christian Science Monitor reports (September 13th): In a room thick with heat and sweat, light from a small window falls on rows of squatting prisoners and plastic bags of belongings hung from nails on every inch of the wall. The guard explains that 74 men live in this room, which is roughly 10 by 20 feet. A further 85 are usually in the corridor, he adds, while 12 are kept next to the toilet.
This is Hibhib prison on the outskirts of Baquba, the dusty, volatile capital of Diyala Province roughly 40 miles from Baghdad.
It is just one of the prisons in the province where detainees and US forces allege overcrowding, lengthy pretrial detention, and torture used to extract confessions. While the conditions here may be more severe than elsewhere in the country, Iraq's national detention system as a whole has been harshly criticized by Western human rights organizations.
An Interior Ministry official who was inspecting Diyala prisons told the Monitor that the ministry "sent a committee to visit Rusafa, and it is not good. It is the same as the jails in Diyala Province, the same breaches of human rights."
"Yes, there is violence" in Diyala jails, the official confirmed, on condition of anonymity. "There are violent punishments, they hang them from their arms, beat them with sticks and [punch them], kicking, [using] electricity, stubbing out cigarettes on the skin." He described a practice, also detailed by former prisoners, in which prisoners are forced to drink water and then prevented from urinating by a method too unpleasant to be described here.
More at:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0912/p08s01-wome.html
To regularly access these and other stories, sign up to the Iraq Occupation Focus Newsletter, produced as a free service for all those opposed to the occupation. In order to strengthen our campaign, please make sure you sign up to receive the free newsletter automatically – go to: http://lists.riseup.net/www/info/iraqfocus.
Wednesday, 9 September 2009
The myth of disengagement
Iraqi Journalist Detained for a Year Without Charge by US Forces Despite Iraqi Court Order
Democracy Now! Reports (September 2nd): A year ago, US and Iraqi forces raided the home of Iraqi journalist Ibrahim Jassam, a freelance photographer working for Reuters. Soldiers seized his computer hard drive and cameras. He was led away, handcuffed and blindfolded. For the past year the US military has held Jassam without charge. Ten months ago, the Iraqi Central Criminal Court ordered his release for lack of evidence, but the US military refused to release him, claiming he was a “high security threat.”
Read more at:
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/9/2/iraqi_journalist_detained_for_a_year
Democracy Now! Reports (September 2nd): A year ago, US and Iraqi forces raided the home of Iraqi journalist Ibrahim Jassam, a freelance photographer working for Reuters. Soldiers seized his computer hard drive and cameras. He was led away, handcuffed and blindfolded. For the past year the US military has held Jassam without charge. Ten months ago, the Iraqi Central Criminal Court ordered his release for lack of evidence, but the US military refused to release him, claiming he was a “high security threat.”
Read more at:
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/9/2/iraqi_journalist_detained_for_a_year
Sunday, 16 August 2009
Sexual torture in Iraq
An interesting piece by David Rosen at Counterpunch on a little-noticed report:
Will We Ever Know the Complete Truth?
Sexual Torture, Yet Again
By DAVID ROSEN
Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) recently released a little-covered report, “Broken Laws, Broken Lives: Medical Evidence of Torture by US Personnel.” The media’s failure to report on this important study is unfortunate. [PHR, “Broken Laws, Broken Lives,” June 2009]Like the proverbial faucet that drips drip by slow drip and finally gives way to a gushing flood, reports about Bush-era torture perpetrated upon alleged enemy combatants continue to drip out.
The PHR report is the most disturbing of the handful of reports and scores of news accounts that deal with the torture of alleged enemy combatants. Using case-study profiles, the PHR report details the treatment of eleven such combatants in Iraq and at Guantánamo. The report is all the more revealing because it pays careful attention to the medical, both physical and psychological, effects of the torture inflicted and medical treatment provided these detainees. It recounts the gruesome experience suffered by eleven apparently innocent men swept up in U.S. military round-ups and, after suffering painful torture and months of imprisonment, were released uncharged, but scared for life.
Most striking based on information presented in the PHR report, the men profiled are innocent, victims of arbitrary arrest, imprisonment and torture. None is accused of a crime; none has a lawyer; none face a trial; all were released. One is a farmer, another a businessmen; still others are retired military personnel and a manager. One is picked up in front of a mosque; others are seized during late-night raids of their homes by U.S. soldiers. Some go passively; others are seized and beaten protesting the beating of their wives and children. All are tortured and most receive some form of sexual torture, including forced sodomy.
The eleven men profiled in the PHR report are not notorious threats to national security like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Abu Zubaydah. They were waterboarded (or, as the International Red Cross calls it, “suffocation by water”) 183 times and 83 times, respectively. Rather, the men in the RHR report are what is euphemistically called “the fog of war.” Their innocence makes the villainy perpetrated against them by U.S. personnel all the more shameful.
A truism of modern life is that history, like war, is written by the victor. Bush’s war on terror will be recalled, like Johnson’s Vietnam war, as a military failure based on a president-initiated and media-facilitated lie. Like the false Bay of Tonkin attacks that provided the rationale for the Vietnam War, there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq to legitimize the invasion and occupation of a sovereign country. Today, Vietnam is in the Chinese orbit; tomorrow, Iraq will fall under the sway of Iran. American military interventions will turn out to be historical failures.
Most disturbing, Bush’s war on terror was marked by the sadism of power. The PHR report documents how war frees culturally sanctioned (masculine) prohibitions against the inflicting of sexual aggression on innocent people, prisoners. The rape and sexual torture inflicted as part of the war on terror was a military campaign expressing political power. Those in power, whether Bush and Rumsfeld or, a generation earlier, Johnson and McNamara, sanctioned torture and sexual degradation as legitimate tactics of a military campaign. While the Marquis de Sade could only dream of mass sexual sadism, America’s political elite, include its presidents, defense secretaries, military officer core and ground-level operatives, lived out a sadistic nightmare as the spoils of military power.
In a preface to the PHR report, Major General Antonio Taguba, author of a separate study for the U.S. military on Abu Ghraib, insists that the eleven men profiled in the study “deserve justice as required under the tenants of international law and the United States Constitution. And so do the American people.” Only a full-scale Congressional investigation, similar to the 1975-1976 Church committee hearing on the CIA, will provide a hopefully full account of the horrors committed by the U.S. military, intelligence agencies and private contractors in the “war on terror.”
* * *
The PHR report profiles eleven victims of U.S. torture. Their individual experiences are worth recounting for they tell much about the U.S. torture system. The report documents the torture techniques, those involving “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment,” used on the eleven prisoners. These practices include: waterboarding, beating, stabbing, kicking, electric shock, stress positions, sleep deprivation, forced shaving, arm suspensions, cold-water immersion, food, water and sleep deprivation, noise bombardment, pepper spraying, extended periods of isolation, snarling dogs, exposure to the cold, death threats and a host of sexual abuses, like naked pyramids, exposed genitals, simulated homoerotic encounters and forced sodomization.
None of the eleven combatants profiled in the PHR report was indicted or convicted of a crime. After release, all suffered physical problems and varying degrees of PTSD, their lives ruined.The report adheres to a policy of anonymous reporting, so the identities of the eleven prisoners remain private. The report also does not question the narrative stories presented by the detainees. Summary profiles, with special attention to the sexual abuse suffered, of the eleven detainees follow.The first group consists of Iraqis:
· Kamal – a former Iraqi military officer in his late-40s and a father of seven, he is arrested in his Baghdad home in the middle of the night and kept at Abu Ghraib and other prisons for 21 months; he suffers repeated acts of sexual humiliation, including being stripped naked, paraded before female interrogators and having his penis pulled.
· Hefez – a retired Iraqi manager in his 50s with two years of college, a father of four and grandfather of two, he is arrested in his Baghdad home in the middle of the night and kept at Abu Ghraib and Baghdad Airport for seven months; while he reports only having his penis and tentacles painfully pulled, he suffers a post-imprisonment lack of sexual desire.
· Laith – a former Iraqi soldier in his mid-40s had previous spent 18 months in prison under Saddam Hussein, he is arrested in his Baghdad home in the middle of the night, his pregnant wife and children beaten by U.S. personnel and she miscarries, he was kept at Abu Ghraib and other prisons for eight months; he reports being sodomized, including by an electrical device, and was forced to wear soiled underwear and drink urine; he suffers sexual dysfunction and anal scars.
· Yasser – a former teacher and educated farmer in his mid-40s, he is picked up for no apparent reason in front of Baghdad mosque; he is kept at Abu Ghraib and other prisons for seven months; he reports being sodomized on fifteen separate occasions and suffers rectal bleeding; once freed, he lives with deep depression.
· Morad – a retired Iraqi civil servant and small businessman in his late-50s who supports a wife and six children, he is arrested in his Baghdad home in the middle of the night and kept at Abu Ghraib and other prisons for eight months; he appears to have not been subject to extreme interrogation or sexual torture.
· Rahman – a small businessman in his early-40s, he is arrested in his Baghdad shop and held at Abu Ghraib for nine months; he is forced to stand naked and hooded for extended periods; once freed, he suffers sexual dysfunction.
· Amir – his image being pulled around with a leather dog’s leash is immortalized in photos taken at Abu Ghraib; he is a salesman in his late-20s and the sole support of his mother, his brother’s wife and three children, he is arrested in the early morning hours while sleeping in his Baghdad hotel room; he is held at Abu Ghraib and Camp Bucca for 18 months and is sodomized with a broomstick and suffers rectal bleeding, is urinated on and kept naked for extended periods; freed, he lives with the humiliation of the Abu Ghriab photos.
More at http://www.counterpunch.org/rosen08142009.html
Will We Ever Know the Complete Truth?
Sexual Torture, Yet Again
By DAVID ROSEN
Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) recently released a little-covered report, “Broken Laws, Broken Lives: Medical Evidence of Torture by US Personnel.” The media’s failure to report on this important study is unfortunate. [PHR, “Broken Laws, Broken Lives,” June 2009]Like the proverbial faucet that drips drip by slow drip and finally gives way to a gushing flood, reports about Bush-era torture perpetrated upon alleged enemy combatants continue to drip out.
The PHR report is the most disturbing of the handful of reports and scores of news accounts that deal with the torture of alleged enemy combatants. Using case-study profiles, the PHR report details the treatment of eleven such combatants in Iraq and at Guantánamo. The report is all the more revealing because it pays careful attention to the medical, both physical and psychological, effects of the torture inflicted and medical treatment provided these detainees. It recounts the gruesome experience suffered by eleven apparently innocent men swept up in U.S. military round-ups and, after suffering painful torture and months of imprisonment, were released uncharged, but scared for life.
Most striking based on information presented in the PHR report, the men profiled are innocent, victims of arbitrary arrest, imprisonment and torture. None is accused of a crime; none has a lawyer; none face a trial; all were released. One is a farmer, another a businessmen; still others are retired military personnel and a manager. One is picked up in front of a mosque; others are seized during late-night raids of their homes by U.S. soldiers. Some go passively; others are seized and beaten protesting the beating of their wives and children. All are tortured and most receive some form of sexual torture, including forced sodomy.
The eleven men profiled in the PHR report are not notorious threats to national security like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Abu Zubaydah. They were waterboarded (or, as the International Red Cross calls it, “suffocation by water”) 183 times and 83 times, respectively. Rather, the men in the RHR report are what is euphemistically called “the fog of war.” Their innocence makes the villainy perpetrated against them by U.S. personnel all the more shameful.
A truism of modern life is that history, like war, is written by the victor. Bush’s war on terror will be recalled, like Johnson’s Vietnam war, as a military failure based on a president-initiated and media-facilitated lie. Like the false Bay of Tonkin attacks that provided the rationale for the Vietnam War, there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq to legitimize the invasion and occupation of a sovereign country. Today, Vietnam is in the Chinese orbit; tomorrow, Iraq will fall under the sway of Iran. American military interventions will turn out to be historical failures.
Most disturbing, Bush’s war on terror was marked by the sadism of power. The PHR report documents how war frees culturally sanctioned (masculine) prohibitions against the inflicting of sexual aggression on innocent people, prisoners. The rape and sexual torture inflicted as part of the war on terror was a military campaign expressing political power. Those in power, whether Bush and Rumsfeld or, a generation earlier, Johnson and McNamara, sanctioned torture and sexual degradation as legitimate tactics of a military campaign. While the Marquis de Sade could only dream of mass sexual sadism, America’s political elite, include its presidents, defense secretaries, military officer core and ground-level operatives, lived out a sadistic nightmare as the spoils of military power.
In a preface to the PHR report, Major General Antonio Taguba, author of a separate study for the U.S. military on Abu Ghraib, insists that the eleven men profiled in the study “deserve justice as required under the tenants of international law and the United States Constitution. And so do the American people.” Only a full-scale Congressional investigation, similar to the 1975-1976 Church committee hearing on the CIA, will provide a hopefully full account of the horrors committed by the U.S. military, intelligence agencies and private contractors in the “war on terror.”
* * *
The PHR report profiles eleven victims of U.S. torture. Their individual experiences are worth recounting for they tell much about the U.S. torture system. The report documents the torture techniques, those involving “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment,” used on the eleven prisoners. These practices include: waterboarding, beating, stabbing, kicking, electric shock, stress positions, sleep deprivation, forced shaving, arm suspensions, cold-water immersion, food, water and sleep deprivation, noise bombardment, pepper spraying, extended periods of isolation, snarling dogs, exposure to the cold, death threats and a host of sexual abuses, like naked pyramids, exposed genitals, simulated homoerotic encounters and forced sodomization.
None of the eleven combatants profiled in the PHR report was indicted or convicted of a crime. After release, all suffered physical problems and varying degrees of PTSD, their lives ruined.The report adheres to a policy of anonymous reporting, so the identities of the eleven prisoners remain private. The report also does not question the narrative stories presented by the detainees. Summary profiles, with special attention to the sexual abuse suffered, of the eleven detainees follow.The first group consists of Iraqis:
· Kamal – a former Iraqi military officer in his late-40s and a father of seven, he is arrested in his Baghdad home in the middle of the night and kept at Abu Ghraib and other prisons for 21 months; he suffers repeated acts of sexual humiliation, including being stripped naked, paraded before female interrogators and having his penis pulled.
· Hefez – a retired Iraqi manager in his 50s with two years of college, a father of four and grandfather of two, he is arrested in his Baghdad home in the middle of the night and kept at Abu Ghraib and Baghdad Airport for seven months; while he reports only having his penis and tentacles painfully pulled, he suffers a post-imprisonment lack of sexual desire.
· Laith – a former Iraqi soldier in his mid-40s had previous spent 18 months in prison under Saddam Hussein, he is arrested in his Baghdad home in the middle of the night, his pregnant wife and children beaten by U.S. personnel and she miscarries, he was kept at Abu Ghraib and other prisons for eight months; he reports being sodomized, including by an electrical device, and was forced to wear soiled underwear and drink urine; he suffers sexual dysfunction and anal scars.
· Yasser – a former teacher and educated farmer in his mid-40s, he is picked up for no apparent reason in front of Baghdad mosque; he is kept at Abu Ghraib and other prisons for seven months; he reports being sodomized on fifteen separate occasions and suffers rectal bleeding; once freed, he lives with deep depression.
· Morad – a retired Iraqi civil servant and small businessman in his late-50s who supports a wife and six children, he is arrested in his Baghdad home in the middle of the night and kept at Abu Ghraib and other prisons for eight months; he appears to have not been subject to extreme interrogation or sexual torture.
· Rahman – a small businessman in his early-40s, he is arrested in his Baghdad shop and held at Abu Ghraib for nine months; he is forced to stand naked and hooded for extended periods; once freed, he suffers sexual dysfunction.
· Amir – his image being pulled around with a leather dog’s leash is immortalized in photos taken at Abu Ghraib; he is a salesman in his late-20s and the sole support of his mother, his brother’s wife and three children, he is arrested in the early morning hours while sleeping in his Baghdad hotel room; he is held at Abu Ghraib and Camp Bucca for 18 months and is sodomized with a broomstick and suffers rectal bleeding, is urinated on and kept naked for extended periods; freed, he lives with the humiliation of the Abu Ghriab photos.
More at http://www.counterpunch.org/rosen08142009.html
Sunday, 9 August 2009
More about Blackwater
The last week has seen several stories about Blackwater's activites in Iraq, which are increasingly under the spotlight following sworn testimony from two ex-employees.
The Times has this:
Iraqis speak of random killings committed by private Blackwater guards
The Times reports (August 7th): Guards employed by Blackwater, the US security company, shot Iraqis and killed victims in allegedly unprovoked and random attacks, it was claimed.
A Virginia court also received sworn statements from former Blackwater employees yesterday alleging that Erik Prince, the company’s founder, “views himself as a Christian crusader tasked with eliminating Muslims and the Islamic faith from the globe”.
They also accused the company of following a policy of deliberate killings and arms dealing and of employing people unfit or improperly trained to handle lethal weaponry.
More at: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6742135.ece
The Nation highlights the continued use of Blackwater, now Xe, under the Obama Administration:
US Still Paying Blackwater Millions
The Nation reports (August 7th): Just days before two former Blackwater employees alleged in sworn statements filed in federal court that the company's owner, Erik Prince, "views himself as a Christian crusader tasked with eliminating Muslims and the Islamic faith from the globe," the Obama administration extended a contract with Blackwater for more than $20 million for "security services" in Iraq, according to federal contract data obtained by The Nation. The State Department contract is scheduled to run through September 3. In May, the State Department announced it was not renewing Blackwater's Iraq contract, and the Iraqi government has refused to issue the company an operating license.
According to federal contracting records reviewed by The Nation, since President Barack Obama took office in January the State Department has contracted with Blackwater for more than $174 million in "security services" alone in Iraq and Afghanistan and tens of millions more in "aviation services."
More at; http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090817/scahill2
And most shocking are these allegations in Raw Story:
Ex-employees claim Blackwater pimped out young Iraqi girls
Raw story reports (August 7th): Since the revelation earlier this week of allegations by two former employees of security firm Blackwater that its owner was complicit in murder in order to cover up the deliberate killing of Iraqi civilians, explosive charges have continued to emerge.
Perhaps the most shocking of those charges — quoted by MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann on Thursday from the employees’ sworn declarations — is that Blackwater was guilty of using child prostitutes at its compound in Baghdad’s fortified Green Zone and that owner Erik Prince knew of this activity and did nothing to stop it.
The declarations describe Blackwater as “having young girls provide oral sex to Enterprise members in the ‘Blackwater Man Camp’ in exchange for one American dollar.” They add even though Prince frequently visited this camp, he “failed to stop the ongoing use of prostitutes, including child prostitutes, by his men.”
http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/08/07/blackwater-provided-child-prostitutes/
The Iraqi Government, on the other hand, has other priorities, pushing ahead with new censorship legislation:
Iraq Censorship Laws Move Ahead
NY Times reports (August 3rd): The doors of the communications revolution were thrown open in Iraq after the American-led invasion in 2003.
Now those doors may be shut again, at least partially, as the Iraqi government moves to ban sites deemed harmful to the public, to require Internet cafes to register with the authorities and to press publishers to censor books.
But opponents of the proposals question why Iraq would seek to impose the same sorts of censorship that had been among the most loathed aspects of daily life under Saddam Hussein and suggest that they are another example of Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki’s working to consolidate his power. The new policies will put Iraq more in line with neighboring Islamic states.
The new rules constitute a “return of dictatorship,” said Ziad al-Ajeeli, who directs the Society to Defend the Freedom of the Press, a nonprofit Iraqi group.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/04/world/middleeast/04censor.html?ref=middleeast
The Times has this:
Iraqis speak of random killings committed by private Blackwater guards
The Times reports (August 7th): Guards employed by Blackwater, the US security company, shot Iraqis and killed victims in allegedly unprovoked and random attacks, it was claimed.
A Virginia court also received sworn statements from former Blackwater employees yesterday alleging that Erik Prince, the company’s founder, “views himself as a Christian crusader tasked with eliminating Muslims and the Islamic faith from the globe”.
They also accused the company of following a policy of deliberate killings and arms dealing and of employing people unfit or improperly trained to handle lethal weaponry.
More at: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6742135.ece
The Nation highlights the continued use of Blackwater, now Xe, under the Obama Administration:
US Still Paying Blackwater Millions
The Nation reports (August 7th): Just days before two former Blackwater employees alleged in sworn statements filed in federal court that the company's owner, Erik Prince, "views himself as a Christian crusader tasked with eliminating Muslims and the Islamic faith from the globe," the Obama administration extended a contract with Blackwater for more than $20 million for "security services" in Iraq, according to federal contract data obtained by The Nation. The State Department contract is scheduled to run through September 3. In May, the State Department announced it was not renewing Blackwater's Iraq contract, and the Iraqi government has refused to issue the company an operating license.
According to federal contracting records reviewed by The Nation, since President Barack Obama took office in January the State Department has contracted with Blackwater for more than $174 million in "security services" alone in Iraq and Afghanistan and tens of millions more in "aviation services."
More at; http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090817/scahill2
And most shocking are these allegations in Raw Story:
Ex-employees claim Blackwater pimped out young Iraqi girls
Raw story reports (August 7th): Since the revelation earlier this week of allegations by two former employees of security firm Blackwater that its owner was complicit in murder in order to cover up the deliberate killing of Iraqi civilians, explosive charges have continued to emerge.
Perhaps the most shocking of those charges — quoted by MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann on Thursday from the employees’ sworn declarations — is that Blackwater was guilty of using child prostitutes at its compound in Baghdad’s fortified Green Zone and that owner Erik Prince knew of this activity and did nothing to stop it.
The declarations describe Blackwater as “having young girls provide oral sex to Enterprise members in the ‘Blackwater Man Camp’ in exchange for one American dollar.” They add even though Prince frequently visited this camp, he “failed to stop the ongoing use of prostitutes, including child prostitutes, by his men.”
http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/08/07/blackwater-provided-child-prostitutes/
The Iraqi Government, on the other hand, has other priorities, pushing ahead with new censorship legislation:
Iraq Censorship Laws Move Ahead
NY Times reports (August 3rd): The doors of the communications revolution were thrown open in Iraq after the American-led invasion in 2003.
Now those doors may be shut again, at least partially, as the Iraqi government moves to ban sites deemed harmful to the public, to require Internet cafes to register with the authorities and to press publishers to censor books.
But opponents of the proposals question why Iraq would seek to impose the same sorts of censorship that had been among the most loathed aspects of daily life under Saddam Hussein and suggest that they are another example of Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki’s working to consolidate his power. The new policies will put Iraq more in line with neighboring Islamic states.
The new rules constitute a “return of dictatorship,” said Ziad al-Ajeeli, who directs the Society to Defend the Freedom of the Press, a nonprofit Iraqi group.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/04/world/middleeast/04censor.html?ref=middleeast
Monday, 3 August 2009
Recent news
AFP reports that violent deaths in Iraq fell by a third in July, the first month that Iraqi police and troops were in charge of security in urban areas since the 2003 US-led invasion> Full story: http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jfYpXDl9nYybBF1Q_U7C-nWWnMKA
More back-pedalling on US troop withdrawal: the BBC reports: "Nearly a month after American troops officially withdrew from urban areas in Iraq, they are quietly going back in again, patrolling the streets of towns and cities where, despite improvements in security, violence remains an everyday occurrence."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8170562.stm
And Dahr Jamail: http://www.truthout.org/072909A
Meanwhile Huffington Post has a lengthy exclusive on US interrogation methods: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/23/hussam-mohammed-amin-form_n_243818.html#postComment
More back-pedalling on US troop withdrawal: the BBC reports: "Nearly a month after American troops officially withdrew from urban areas in Iraq, they are quietly going back in again, patrolling the streets of towns and cities where, despite improvements in security, violence remains an everyday occurrence."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8170562.stm
And Dahr Jamail: http://www.truthout.org/072909A
Meanwhile Huffington Post has a lengthy exclusive on US interrogation methods: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/23/hussam-mohammed-amin-form_n_243818.html#postComment
Thursday, 30 July 2009
New link
The official government inquiry into the Iraq war starts today. It remains to be seen how far its will unearth the tissue of lies, misinformation and deception that took this country into an illegal, devastating war. Here, meanwhile ,is an interesting website on the US road to war:
http://www.leadingtowar.com/?gclid=CNLu9Oba-5sCFWIB4wodGCgXAQ.
http://www.leadingtowar.com/?gclid=CNLu9Oba-5sCFWIB4wodGCgXAQ.
Tuesday, 28 July 2009
More signs of back-tracking...
Iraq PM admits US troops may stay
Al Jazeera reports (July 24th): The Iraqi prime minister has admitted US troops could stay in the country beyond 2011. Under the US-Iraq Status of Forces agreement, which sets out a timetable for the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq, American troops must exit the country by December 31, 2011. But Nuri al-Maliki sais: “If the Iraqis require further training and support we shall examine this at that time, based on the needs of Iraq."
For the full story, see:
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2009/07/2009723181757315574.html
Al Jazeera reports (July 24th): The Iraqi prime minister has admitted US troops could stay in the country beyond 2011. Under the US-Iraq Status of Forces agreement, which sets out a timetable for the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq, American troops must exit the country by December 31, 2011. But Nuri al-Maliki sais: “If the Iraqis require further training and support we shall examine this at that time, based on the needs of Iraq."
For the full story, see:
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2009/07/2009723181757315574.html
Sunday, 5 July 2009
Another kind of corporate abuse
Meanwhile, attempts to continue to hold US mercenary organisations accountable. The Blackwater group has changed its name to Xe, but the personnel and practices remain the same:
Xe-Blackwater Personnel Shot Iraqi Children, Others in Multiple Incidents
PR Newswire reports (July 1st): A spate of unprovoked civilian shootings by Xe-Blackwater personnel in Iraq between 2005 and 2008 are detailed in an amended lawsuit filed in Virginia federal court, according to the Washington, D.C. law firm that represents the families of those killed and wounded in the incidents.
The new allegations against several Blackwater-related defendants - now operating as Xe and other names under the control of chairman Erik Prince - include:
the shooting of three Iraqi families in a mini-van that killed nine-year-old Akram Khalid Sa'ed Jasim and wounded his three-month-old sister, who was shot in the face, his mother, his father, and uncle in July 2007;
the fatal shooting of 37-year-old Suhad Shakir Fadhil as she was driving home from work in the so-called Green Zone in February 2007;
the shooting of Maulood Mohammed Shathir Husein, a 31-year-old married professor of veterinary medicine at the University of Baghdad in August 2005;
the fatal shooting of 65-year-old Khalis Kareem Ali Al Qaysi, who was killed while he was being driven in Baghdad in March 2005;
the severe beating of 35-year-old Iraqi photographer Safeen Hameed Ahmed Qadir in April 2008 as he took photographs at a Ford automobile branch in the Arbil province that was visited by a U.S. diplomat, and;
the shooting of Husam Hasan Jaber, who was driving three passengers in Baghdad in a taxi cab he owns and operates.
Full article:
http://news.prnewswire.com/DisplayReleaseContent.aspx?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/07-01-2009/0005053634&EDATE
Xe-Blackwater Personnel Shot Iraqi Children, Others in Multiple Incidents
PR Newswire reports (July 1st): A spate of unprovoked civilian shootings by Xe-Blackwater personnel in Iraq between 2005 and 2008 are detailed in an amended lawsuit filed in Virginia federal court, according to the Washington, D.C. law firm that represents the families of those killed and wounded in the incidents.
The new allegations against several Blackwater-related defendants - now operating as Xe and other names under the control of chairman Erik Prince - include:
the shooting of three Iraqi families in a mini-van that killed nine-year-old Akram Khalid Sa'ed Jasim and wounded his three-month-old sister, who was shot in the face, his mother, his father, and uncle in July 2007;
the fatal shooting of 37-year-old Suhad Shakir Fadhil as she was driving home from work in the so-called Green Zone in February 2007;
the shooting of Maulood Mohammed Shathir Husein, a 31-year-old married professor of veterinary medicine at the University of Baghdad in August 2005;
the fatal shooting of 65-year-old Khalis Kareem Ali Al Qaysi, who was killed while he was being driven in Baghdad in March 2005;
the severe beating of 35-year-old Iraqi photographer Safeen Hameed Ahmed Qadir in April 2008 as he took photographs at a Ford automobile branch in the Arbil province that was visited by a U.S. diplomat, and;
the shooting of Husam Hasan Jaber, who was driving three passengers in Baghdad in a taxi cab he owns and operates.
Full article:
http://news.prnewswire.com/DisplayReleaseContent.aspx?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/07-01-2009/0005053634&EDATE
Oil, again
Both management and union in Iraq's Southern Oil Company oppose the current sell-off of Iraq's national wealth to western corporations:
The scramble for Iraq's 'sweet oil'
Al-Jazeera reports (June 30th): With proven oil reserves of around 112 billion barrels and up to another 150 billion barrels of probable reserves, Iraq is the greatest untapped prize for international oil companies.
The companies want a long-term share of the oil they produce under a Production Sharing Agreement, which allows them to book reserves in advance and tell the market exactly how much oil they expect to produce.
This is exactly the type of contract that Iraqis in the oil industry are opposed to. Fayad al-Nema, general manager of Iraq's South Oil Company, has written to Hussein al-Shahristani, the Iraqi oil minister, outlining his company's objections.
"We in the South Oil Company, that is all of its leadership, reject the first bidding round because it is against the interests of Iraq's oil industry."
Oil workers' unions in Iraq have also spoken out against the contracts. Hassan Joumah, president of the Federation of Iraqi Oil Workers Union, says: "Unfortunately, there are many problems with the first round of the allocation of Iraq's oil contracts, which have given huge advantages to the foreign companies to invest in Iraq's oil.
"Giving such returns to foreign companies will put Iraq's economy in the hands of foreign companies."
For the full article:
http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/2009/06/20096288505111580.html
The scramble for Iraq's 'sweet oil'
Al-Jazeera reports (June 30th): With proven oil reserves of around 112 billion barrels and up to another 150 billion barrels of probable reserves, Iraq is the greatest untapped prize for international oil companies.
The companies want a long-term share of the oil they produce under a Production Sharing Agreement, which allows them to book reserves in advance and tell the market exactly how much oil they expect to produce.
This is exactly the type of contract that Iraqis in the oil industry are opposed to. Fayad al-Nema, general manager of Iraq's South Oil Company, has written to Hussein al-Shahristani, the Iraqi oil minister, outlining his company's objections.
"We in the South Oil Company, that is all of its leadership, reject the first bidding round because it is against the interests of Iraq's oil industry."
Oil workers' unions in Iraq have also spoken out against the contracts. Hassan Joumah, president of the Federation of Iraqi Oil Workers Union, says: "Unfortunately, there are many problems with the first round of the allocation of Iraq's oil contracts, which have given huge advantages to the foreign companies to invest in Iraq's oil.
"Giving such returns to foreign companies will put Iraq's economy in the hands of foreign companies."
For the full article:
http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/2009/06/20096288505111580.html
Tuesday, 30 June 2009
Coincidence?
Despite bomb attacks that have killed 250 people in the last fortnight, today in Iraq is apparently 'sovereignty day' as the US withdraw troops a mere six and a bit years after they invaded.
Except that they aren't withdrawing, as the previous post on this blog explains. Channel 4 News reported that the 'withdrawal' of troops 'coincides' with the auctioning of lucrative oil contracts worth an estimated $16 billion. Presumably, such an auction might look more like plunder, if the military occupation still appeared to be in full force - as of course in reality it is.
Anyway, here's Mohamed Ali Zainy on the oil contracts (about 35 minutes from start of the BBC's World Today programme)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p003jc4q/The_World_Today_30_06_2009/
Except that they aren't withdrawing, as the previous post on this blog explains. Channel 4 News reported that the 'withdrawal' of troops 'coincides' with the auctioning of lucrative oil contracts worth an estimated $16 billion. Presumably, such an auction might look more like plunder, if the military occupation still appeared to be in full force - as of course in reality it is.
Anyway, here's Mohamed Ali Zainy on the oil contracts (about 35 minutes from start of the BBC's World Today programme)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p003jc4q/The_World_Today_30_06_2009/
Sunday, 28 June 2009
What US withdrawal?
I quote here the first few paragraphs of a very interesting analysis from Foreign Policy in Focus, which shows the Stae of Forces Agreement up for what it really is.
A Withdrawal in Name Only
Erik Leaver and Daniel Atzmon June 24, 2009
On November 17, 2008, when Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari and U.S. ambassador Ryan Crocker signed an agreement for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, citizens from both countries applauded. While many were disappointed about the lengthy timeline for the withdrawal of the troops, it appeared that a roadmap was set to end the war and occupation. However, the first step — withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009 — is full of loopholes, and tens of thousands of U.S. soldiers will remain in the cities after the "deadline" passes.
The failure to fully comply with the withdrawal agreement indicates the United States is looking to withdraw from Iraq in name only, as it appears that up to 50,000 military personnel will remain after the deadline.
The United States claims it's adhering to the agreement, known as the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), even with so many troops being left in the cities. But the United States is changing semantics instead of policy. For example, there are no plans to transfer the 3,000 American troops stationed within Baghdad at Forward Operating Base Falcon, because commanders have determined that despite its location, it's not within the city.
The original intent of moving troops out of the cities was to reduce the U.S. military role and send the message to Iraqis that the United States would be leaving the country soon. But troops that are no longer sleeping in the cities will still take part in operations within Iraqi cities; they will serve in "support" and "advisory" roles, rather than combat functions. Such "reclassification" of troops as military trainers is another example of how the United States is circumventing the terms of the SOFA agreement.
The larger loophole in the agreement is the treatment of military contractors. There has been little mention of the 132,610 military contractors in Iraq. Of these, 36,061 are American citizens, according to a recent Department of Defense report.
Since September 2008, only 30,000 troops have left Iraq. The 134,000 soldiers that remain are just slightly below the number of troops that were in Iraq in 2003. These numbers are likely to remain well above 100,000 until 2010.
Instead of sending soldiers stationed in cities home, the military has been expanding and building new bases in rural areas to accommodate soldiers affected by the June 30 deadline. And Congress just passed a war-spending bill that includes more funding for military construction inside Iraq.
http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/6211
A Withdrawal in Name Only
Erik Leaver and Daniel Atzmon June 24, 2009
On November 17, 2008, when Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari and U.S. ambassador Ryan Crocker signed an agreement for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, citizens from both countries applauded. While many were disappointed about the lengthy timeline for the withdrawal of the troops, it appeared that a roadmap was set to end the war and occupation. However, the first step — withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009 — is full of loopholes, and tens of thousands of U.S. soldiers will remain in the cities after the "deadline" passes.
The failure to fully comply with the withdrawal agreement indicates the United States is looking to withdraw from Iraq in name only, as it appears that up to 50,000 military personnel will remain after the deadline.
The United States claims it's adhering to the agreement, known as the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), even with so many troops being left in the cities. But the United States is changing semantics instead of policy. For example, there are no plans to transfer the 3,000 American troops stationed within Baghdad at Forward Operating Base Falcon, because commanders have determined that despite its location, it's not within the city.
The original intent of moving troops out of the cities was to reduce the U.S. military role and send the message to Iraqis that the United States would be leaving the country soon. But troops that are no longer sleeping in the cities will still take part in operations within Iraqi cities; they will serve in "support" and "advisory" roles, rather than combat functions. Such "reclassification" of troops as military trainers is another example of how the United States is circumventing the terms of the SOFA agreement.
The larger loophole in the agreement is the treatment of military contractors. There has been little mention of the 132,610 military contractors in Iraq. Of these, 36,061 are American citizens, according to a recent Department of Defense report.
Since September 2008, only 30,000 troops have left Iraq. The 134,000 soldiers that remain are just slightly below the number of troops that were in Iraq in 2003. These numbers are likely to remain well above 100,000 until 2010.
Instead of sending soldiers stationed in cities home, the military has been expanding and building new bases in rural areas to accommodate soldiers affected by the June 30 deadline. And Congress just passed a war-spending bill that includes more funding for military construction inside Iraq.
http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/6211
Sunday, 21 June 2009
Opposition to the corporate takeover
From the latest Iraq Occupation Focus Newsletter:
Iraq oil execs rebel over contract tenders
Reuters report (June 14th): The head of the unit that produces most of Iraq's crude said Sunday he opposed Baghdad's plan to auction off oil field service contracts, joining an apparently broad revolt against the country's first major foreign oil deals in 30 years.
South Oil Co. Director General Fayad al-Nema said the service contracts were "detrimental to the Iraqi economy" and asked Oil Minister Hussain al-Shahristani to cancel the first tender results, which are due to be announced June 29-30.
The protest by senior executives in the state-run industry added to growing discord around Shahristani, who faces criticism from parliament for not having boosted Iraq's oil output to beyond the level it was at before the 2003 U.S. invasion.
http://www.reuters.com/article/reutersComService_3_MOLT/idUSTRE55D1IY20090614
This was reinforced by a piece in today's Independent on Sunday:
The contracts have been heavily criticised inside Iraq as a sell-out to the big oil companies, which are desperate to get back into Iraq – oil was nationalised here in 1972, and Iraq and Iran are the only two places in the world where immense quantities of oil might still be discovered. Several of those criticising the contracts work in the Iraqi oil industry. "The service contracts will put the Iraqi economy in chains and shackle its independence for the next 20 years," said Fayad al-Nema, head of the state-owned South Oil Company, which produces 80 per cent of Iraq's crude. "They squander Iraq's reserves."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/oil-rush-scramble-for-iraqs-wealth-1711570.html
Iraq oil execs rebel over contract tenders
Reuters report (June 14th): The head of the unit that produces most of Iraq's crude said Sunday he opposed Baghdad's plan to auction off oil field service contracts, joining an apparently broad revolt against the country's first major foreign oil deals in 30 years.
South Oil Co. Director General Fayad al-Nema said the service contracts were "detrimental to the Iraqi economy" and asked Oil Minister Hussain al-Shahristani to cancel the first tender results, which are due to be announced June 29-30.
The protest by senior executives in the state-run industry added to growing discord around Shahristani, who faces criticism from parliament for not having boosted Iraq's oil output to beyond the level it was at before the 2003 U.S. invasion.
http://www.reuters.com/article/reutersComService_3_MOLT/idUSTRE55D1IY20090614
This was reinforced by a piece in today's Independent on Sunday:
The contracts have been heavily criticised inside Iraq as a sell-out to the big oil companies, which are desperate to get back into Iraq – oil was nationalised here in 1972, and Iraq and Iran are the only two places in the world where immense quantities of oil might still be discovered. Several of those criticising the contracts work in the Iraqi oil industry. "The service contracts will put the Iraqi economy in chains and shackle its independence for the next 20 years," said Fayad al-Nema, head of the state-owned South Oil Company, which produces 80 per cent of Iraq's crude. "They squander Iraq's reserves."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/oil-rush-scramble-for-iraqs-wealth-1711570.html
Tuesday, 16 June 2009
Petition Brown for a proper enquiry!
The announcement of an enquiry into the war on Iraq by the Government has all the hallmarks of previous investigations, slanted in advance by its choice of Chair, limited in scope and secret in process. Some are calling for a proper enquiry:
Yesterday afternoon Gordon Brown finally announced an inquiry into the Iraq war. He also announced that he intends it to be held in secret, not report until after the next election, and not apportion any blame. Does that sound like a proper inquiry to you? Brown is hoping that this inquiry will draw a line under the whole episode.Sign our urgent petition to send a clear message to Brown that the British people will only accept a genuine inquiry, held in public and free to draw its own conclusions. The Iraq war was declared in the face of fierce opposition. Serious questions about its justification and legality remain unanswered. Millions of us marched against the invasion, and many more felt betrayed when claims about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction turned out to be false. Countless thousands of Iraqis have died, as well as 179 British service men and women. If we're going to expect people to die for their country, we need to be certain that we're doing it for the right reasons. A genuine inquiry would be our chance to understand why all this happened and how to prevent it happening again. A stitched-up, secret inquiry will encourage future governments to think they can get away with the same again. Only last week, in response to the expenses claims scandal, Gordon Brown promised more transparent and open government. Together we can show Brown that if he is serious about open and transparent government, he should allow an open and transparent inquiry into the reasons we went to war. We'll be inviting MPs of all the parties, previous opponents and supporters of the Iraq war alike, to support our petition. If enough of us speak out right away we can make sure Brown doesn't get away with failing to deliver the proper inquiry we need. [
To sign the petition, go to http://38degrees.org.uk/page/s/IraqInquiry
Yesterday afternoon Gordon Brown finally announced an inquiry into the Iraq war. He also announced that he intends it to be held in secret, not report until after the next election, and not apportion any blame. Does that sound like a proper inquiry to you? Brown is hoping that this inquiry will draw a line under the whole episode.Sign our urgent petition to send a clear message to Brown that the British people will only accept a genuine inquiry, held in public and free to draw its own conclusions. The Iraq war was declared in the face of fierce opposition. Serious questions about its justification and legality remain unanswered. Millions of us marched against the invasion, and many more felt betrayed when claims about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction turned out to be false. Countless thousands of Iraqis have died, as well as 179 British service men and women. If we're going to expect people to die for their country, we need to be certain that we're doing it for the right reasons. A genuine inquiry would be our chance to understand why all this happened and how to prevent it happening again. A stitched-up, secret inquiry will encourage future governments to think they can get away with the same again. Only last week, in response to the expenses claims scandal, Gordon Brown promised more transparent and open government. Together we can show Brown that if he is serious about open and transparent government, he should allow an open and transparent inquiry into the reasons we went to war. We'll be inviting MPs of all the parties, previous opponents and supporters of the Iraq war alike, to support our petition. If enough of us speak out right away we can make sure Brown doesn't get away with failing to deliver the proper inquiry we need. [
To sign the petition, go to http://38degrees.org.uk/page/s/IraqInquiry
Thursday, 28 May 2009
Army chief says US ready to be in Iraq 10 years
This, from Associated Press. So much for the hype about withdrawal...
The Pentagon is prepared to leave fighting forces in Iraq for as long as a decade despite an agreement between the United States and Iraq that would bring all American troops home by 2012, the top U.S. Army officer said Tuesday.
The Pentagon is prepared to leave fighting forces in Iraq for as long as a decade despite an agreement between the United States and Iraq that would bring all American troops home by 2012, the top U.S. Army officer said Tuesday.
Gen. George Casey, the Army chief of staff, said the world remains dangerous and unpredictable, and the Pentagon must plan for extended U.S. combat and stability operations in two wars. "Global trends are pushing in the wrong direction," Casey said. "They fundamentally will change how the Army works."
He spoke at an invitation-only briefing to a dozen journalists and policy analysts from Washington-based think-tanks. He said his planning envisions combat troops in Iraq and Afghanistan for a decade as part of a sustained U.S. commitment to fighting extremism and terrorism in the Middle East.
Casey's calculations about force levels are related to his attempt to ease the brutal deployment calendar that he said would "bring the Army to its knees."
Casey would not specify how many combat units would be split between Iraq and Afghanistan. He said U.S. ground commander Gen. Ray Odierno is leading a study to determine how far U.S. forces could be cut back in Iraq and still be effective. Casey said his comments about the long war in Iraq were not meant to conflict with administration policies.
President Barack Obama plans to bring U.S. combat forces home from Iraq in 2010, and the United States and Iraq have agreed that all American forces would leave by 2012. Although several senior U.S. officials have suggested Iraq could request an extension, the legal agreement the two countries signed last year would have to be amended for any significant U.S. presence to remain.
As recently as February, Defense Secretary Robert Gates reiterated the U.S. commitment to the agreement worked out with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.
"Under the Status of Forces Agreement with the Iraqi government, I intend to remove all U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of 2011," Gates said during an address at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina. "We will complete this transition to Iraqi responsibility, and we will bring our troops home with the honor that they have earned."
The United States currently has about 139,000 troops in Iraq and 52,000 in Afghanistan.
Sunday, 24 May 2009
Journalists still targeted in Iraq
Here are a couple of interesting piecees from the next Iraq Occupation Focus newsletter about the continued targeting of journalists in Iraq, both by US forces and the puppet regime. For the full story, follow the link at the bottom of each excerpt.
U.S. holds journalist without charges in Iraq
LA Times reports (May 24th): Reuters cameraman Ibrahim Jassam has been held since September. The U.S. military rejected a court order to release him, saying he is a 'high security threat.' No evidence has been presented.
No formal accusations have been made against Jassam, and an Iraqi court ordered in November that he be released for lack of evidence. But the U.S. military continues to hold him.
The U.S. has routinely used the arbitrary powers it assumed after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorism attacks to hold journalists without charge in Iraq, the Committee to Protect Journalists said.None of the detained journalists has been convicted of any charge.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iraq-journalist24-2009may24,0,2581320.story
News website latest target in government’s offensive against independent media
Reporters Without Borders reports (May 20th): Reporters Without Borders condemns the Iraqi government’s continuing legal offensive against independent news media, which for the first time is also targeting Internet media. As a result of a lawsuit brought by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, a Baghdad court ordered the Iraqi news website Kitabat to pay 1 billion dinars (630,000 euros) in damages on 18 May.Although based in Germany, Kitabat uses reports provided by many correspondents inside Iraq and the ruling threatens its ability to continuing operating."The Iraqi government must stop this campaign against independent media," Reporters Without Borders said. "After bringing many lawsuits against newspapers and TV stations, websites are now being targeted, even those based abroad. This damages award of 630,000 euros is a threat to Kitabat’s survival."
http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=31404
U.S. holds journalist without charges in Iraq
LA Times reports (May 24th): Reuters cameraman Ibrahim Jassam has been held since September. The U.S. military rejected a court order to release him, saying he is a 'high security threat.' No evidence has been presented.
No formal accusations have been made against Jassam, and an Iraqi court ordered in November that he be released for lack of evidence. But the U.S. military continues to hold him.
The U.S. has routinely used the arbitrary powers it assumed after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorism attacks to hold journalists without charge in Iraq, the Committee to Protect Journalists said.None of the detained journalists has been convicted of any charge.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iraq-journalist24-2009may24,0,2581320.story
News website latest target in government’s offensive against independent media
Reporters Without Borders reports (May 20th): Reporters Without Borders condemns the Iraqi government’s continuing legal offensive against independent news media, which for the first time is also targeting Internet media. As a result of a lawsuit brought by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, a Baghdad court ordered the Iraqi news website Kitabat to pay 1 billion dinars (630,000 euros) in damages on 18 May.Although based in Germany, Kitabat uses reports provided by many correspondents inside Iraq and the ruling threatens its ability to continuing operating."The Iraqi government must stop this campaign against independent media," Reporters Without Borders said. "After bringing many lawsuits against newspapers and TV stations, websites are now being targeted, even those based abroad. This damages award of 630,000 euros is a threat to Kitabat’s survival."
http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=31404
Sunday, 17 May 2009
Iraq's once-envied health care system lost to war, corruption
Here's an interesting piece from the McClatchy agency:
The Teaching Hospital's emergency room is cleaner than most in Baghdad. In fact, it's widely considered the best in the Iraqi capital. Still, flies buzz overhead, and on busy days there aren't enough beds or oxygen tanks. Across the room, a crude sign made with binder paper and tape marks the department's two-bed cardiac unit, which lacks a reliable defibrillator.
Stories of missing drugs, of desperately ill-equipped doctors and of patients left to suffer the consequences are everywhere in Iraq's public health care system. Some hospitals are filthy and infested with bugs. Others are practically falling down. More and more, the blame is being placed on Iraq's U.S.-backed government, which by many accounts is infested with corruption and incompetence.
Health ministry workers routinely siphon drugs from hospital orders to make extra cash on the black market. Bribery is rampant. Millions of dollars meant for clinics and equipment have gone missing. Millions more have been wasted on government contracts to buy expired medicines.
For the full story, see http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/68193.html
Here's an interesting piece from the McClatchy agency:
The Teaching Hospital's emergency room is cleaner than most in Baghdad. In fact, it's widely considered the best in the Iraqi capital. Still, flies buzz overhead, and on busy days there aren't enough beds or oxygen tanks. Across the room, a crude sign made with binder paper and tape marks the department's two-bed cardiac unit, which lacks a reliable defibrillator.
Stories of missing drugs, of desperately ill-equipped doctors and of patients left to suffer the consequences are everywhere in Iraq's public health care system. Some hospitals are filthy and infested with bugs. Others are practically falling down. More and more, the blame is being placed on Iraq's U.S.-backed government, which by many accounts is infested with corruption and incompetence.
Health ministry workers routinely siphon drugs from hospital orders to make extra cash on the black market. Bribery is rampant. Millions of dollars meant for clinics and equipment have gone missing. Millions more have been wasted on government contracts to buy expired medicines.
For the full story, see http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/68193.html
Friday, 15 May 2009
Corporations eye up Iraq opportunities
Here's some interesting material from Greg Muttitt, formerly with Platform, on the corporate takeover of Iraq's oil. One of the central demands of Justice for Iraq is the restoration to the people of Iraq of full sovereignty over its economic resources.
“UK businessmen are champing at the bit to get into Iraq,” declared Michael Thomas, head of the Middle East Association trade promotion group, in March. “We just need someone to talk to.” On April 30, Thomas’ request was granted when the UK-sponsored ‘Invest Iraq’ conference took place in London. It occurred on the same day that British troops began their withdrawal from Iraq, handing their Basra base over to U.S forces. Speaking to representatives of over 100 major companies UK Secretary of State for Business Peter Mandelson noted that the British government had already arranged 19 investment visits to Iraq, generating US $10 billion of proposals. Lord Mandelson led the most recent of those visits – a delegation of 23 companies to Baghdad and Basra on April 6. The Invest Iraq conference aimed not only to bang the drum for investment in Iraq, but also to arrange one-to-one meetings for companies with Iraqi decision-makers. The delegation included five members of the cabinet, led by Deputy Prime Minister Barham Saleh. “Iraq is the largest greenfield investment opportunity on earth,” said Sami al-Araji, chair of Iraq’s National Investment Commission. “I could be exaggerating, but I’m not.” He did not need to convince anyone. The fact that the event was attended by several hundred businesspeople – with hundreds more having been turned away – spoke for itself.
For the full article: http://www.niqash.org/content.php?contentTypeID=28&id=2443&lang=0
Here's some interesting material from Greg Muttitt, formerly with Platform, on the corporate takeover of Iraq's oil. One of the central demands of Justice for Iraq is the restoration to the people of Iraq of full sovereignty over its economic resources.
“UK businessmen are champing at the bit to get into Iraq,” declared Michael Thomas, head of the Middle East Association trade promotion group, in March. “We just need someone to talk to.” On April 30, Thomas’ request was granted when the UK-sponsored ‘Invest Iraq’ conference took place in London. It occurred on the same day that British troops began their withdrawal from Iraq, handing their Basra base over to U.S forces. Speaking to representatives of over 100 major companies UK Secretary of State for Business Peter Mandelson noted that the British government had already arranged 19 investment visits to Iraq, generating US $10 billion of proposals. Lord Mandelson led the most recent of those visits – a delegation of 23 companies to Baghdad and Basra on April 6. The Invest Iraq conference aimed not only to bang the drum for investment in Iraq, but also to arrange one-to-one meetings for companies with Iraqi decision-makers. The delegation included five members of the cabinet, led by Deputy Prime Minister Barham Saleh. “Iraq is the largest greenfield investment opportunity on earth,” said Sami al-Araji, chair of Iraq’s National Investment Commission. “I could be exaggerating, but I’m not.” He did not need to convince anyone. The fact that the event was attended by several hundred businesspeople – with hundreds more having been turned away – spoke for itself.
For the full article: http://www.niqash.org/content.php?contentTypeID=28&id=2443&lang=0
From Iraq Occupation Focus Newsletter No. 121
More violence in Iraq
Dahr Jamail reports for Truth Out (April 27th): Last week brought the worst violence Iraq has seen in over a year, with at least 96 Iraqis killed and 157 wounded in two massive suicide bombings. Over 35 bombings have rocked Baghdad this month alone.
Violence most likely related to the growing battle between government forces and the Sahwa, who are stepping up attacks against government and US forces, continues.
A US military raid of a home in Kut brought the deaths of a man and his sister-in-law, who just happened to be the wife of a local clan leader; additionally, four Iraqis, one of them, a police officer, were arrested. Protests erupted as angry Iraqis denounced the raid. During a funeral procession in Kut where the cloth-draped coffins of the dead were carried, protesters called the Americans "criminal occupiers" and demanded the release of the seized men.
http://www.truthout.org:80/042709R
Torture and Impunity in Iraqi Prisons
Antiwar.com reports (May 5th): A new UN human rights report [.pdf] examining Iraq shows that torture of prisoners by Iraqi authorities is widespread and accountability is nonexistent. “The lack of accountability of the perpetrators of such human rights abuses reinforces the culture of impunity,” the UN bluntly states. The 30-page report by the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq examined conditions in Iraq from July to December 2008.
As of December 2008, there were 41,271 people being held in prisons throughout Iraq, 15,058 of them in the custody of the U.S.-controlled “Multi-National Forces.” The UN found that “many” of the prisoners “have been deprived of their liberty for months or even years in overcrowded cells” and expressed concerns “about violations of the minimum rules of due process as many did not have access to defense counsel, or were not formally charged with a crime or appeared before a judge.”
While the report primarily focused on Iraqi run prisons, it notes that in U.S.-run prisons “detainees have remained in custody for prolonged periods without judicial review of their cases.”
http://original.antiwar.com/scahill/2009/05/04/torture-and-impunity-in-iraqi-prisons/
This IOF Newsletter is produced as a free service for all those opposed to the occupation. In order to strengthen our campaign, please make sure you sign up to receive the free newsletter automatically – go to: http://lists.riseup.net/www/info/iraqfocus.
More violence in Iraq
Dahr Jamail reports for Truth Out (April 27th): Last week brought the worst violence Iraq has seen in over a year, with at least 96 Iraqis killed and 157 wounded in two massive suicide bombings. Over 35 bombings have rocked Baghdad this month alone.
Violence most likely related to the growing battle between government forces and the Sahwa, who are stepping up attacks against government and US forces, continues.
A US military raid of a home in Kut brought the deaths of a man and his sister-in-law, who just happened to be the wife of a local clan leader; additionally, four Iraqis, one of them, a police officer, were arrested. Protests erupted as angry Iraqis denounced the raid. During a funeral procession in Kut where the cloth-draped coffins of the dead were carried, protesters called the Americans "criminal occupiers" and demanded the release of the seized men.
http://www.truthout.org:80/042709R
Torture and Impunity in Iraqi Prisons
Antiwar.com reports (May 5th): A new UN human rights report [.pdf] examining Iraq shows that torture of prisoners by Iraqi authorities is widespread and accountability is nonexistent. “The lack of accountability of the perpetrators of such human rights abuses reinforces the culture of impunity,” the UN bluntly states. The 30-page report by the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq examined conditions in Iraq from July to December 2008.
As of December 2008, there were 41,271 people being held in prisons throughout Iraq, 15,058 of them in the custody of the U.S.-controlled “Multi-National Forces.” The UN found that “many” of the prisoners “have been deprived of their liberty for months or even years in overcrowded cells” and expressed concerns “about violations of the minimum rules of due process as many did not have access to defense counsel, or were not formally charged with a crime or appeared before a judge.”
While the report primarily focused on Iraqi run prisons, it notes that in U.S.-run prisons “detainees have remained in custody for prolonged periods without judicial review of their cases.”
http://original.antiwar.com/scahill/2009/05/04/torture-and-impunity-in-iraqi-prisons/
This IOF Newsletter is produced as a free service for all those opposed to the occupation. In order to strengthen our campaign, please make sure you sign up to receive the free newsletter automatically – go to: http://lists.riseup.net/www/info/iraqfocus.
Tuesday, 10 February 2009
NO! It is not all over in Iraq!
Gordon Brown has announced the complete withdrawal of British troops from Iraq by mid-2009. The Guardian’s Jonathan Steele hails the State of Forces Agreement as a “deal [that] gives Iraq's national resistance almost everything it fought for.” Really? Is the occupation all but over?
On the contrary. As Sami Ramadani explains in The Guardian:
“Encircled by US tanks and marines, stationed in and around the heavily fortified Green Zone in Baghdad, Iraq's ‘sovereign’ parliament has approved two military, economic, cultural, and diplomatic pacts with the USA.”
The one that captured the headlines is the status of forces agreement (Sofa). Much more important is the strategic framework agreement (SFA), which slipped through almost unnoticed. A copy was not available even to the US Congress.
“The SFA is an open-ended pact, which ties Iraq to the USA militarily, economically, culturally and diplomatically. No more, no less.”
And while Sofa states that all US forces will withdraw by the end of 2011, reality lies in another sentence found in the SFA pact, which states that the US will not seek a ‘permanent’ military presence or bases in Iraq.
There to stay?
But how long is non-permanent? More than half a century, as in Korea? Or 100 years as John MaCain mused? Ramadani again:
“The Iraqi government made much of the clause that US soldiers would come under Iraqi jurisdiction. The caveats are such that this is rendered meaningless. For a US soldier or civilian to be arrested
by Iraqi authorities, before they are handed over to the US forces ‘after 24 hours,’ they have to be both ‘off duty’ and have committed ‘grave’ crimes outside US facilities and bases. How many off-duty US soldiers, one might ask, would venture into the streets of Baghdad, let alone those of Najaf or Fallujah?
“Considering that the Sofa is supposed to cover the three years up to the full withdrawal of the US forces, it is important to note that the open-ended SFA has one ‘principle’ that opens the door for renewing Sofa after the 3-year deadline for withdrawal: ‘The temporary presence of U.S. forces in Iraq is at the request and invitation of the sovereign Government of Iraq.’
“A pro-US, corrupt regime in Baghdad, that is hated by its own people, will obligingly ’request’ and ‘invite’ the occupiers to stay. That is if the people haven't toppled it by then.”
“It is obvious, when one reads the tens of SFA clauses relating to the military, security, cultural, economic, energy, health, environmental, information technology and judicial spheres, that the US is going to impose on Iraq a series of ’agreements’ during its ‘legitimised’ occupation of the country in the next three years. They will start with the infamous hydrocarbon law to totally control Iraq's oil resources.”
US strategy in Iraq
Sami Ramadani concludes that US troops will remain in Iraq to:
· Strengthen and secure a pro-US government in Baghdad
· Support such a government by all means possible, including the use of US combat forces stationed at numerous massive military bases
· Strengthen the Iraqi armed forces, which will pursue US interests and replace US forces in fighting the anti-occupation resistance. This is a strategy similar to Vietnamisation that will be pushed forward under the banner of fighting al-Qaida terrorism, which is detested by the Iraqi people. To further reduce its own casualties, the US will rely heavily on aerial bombardment and Apache helicopter gunships
· Secure lucrative economic contracts, particularly after forcing the oil law through the Iraqi parliament
· Exercise control over the Middle East’s oil, which remains a key US objective
· Use Iraq [as a base from which] to back US strategy in the Middle East: ie. escalate the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan, strengthen Israel, weaken Iran Syria, the Palestian people and the Lebanese resistance
See: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/nov/28/iraq-middleeast
British withdrawal
Seumas Milne, again in The Guardian, has made a realistic assessment of the situation:
“If British troops are indeed withdrawn from Iraq by next June, it will signal the end of the most shameful and disastrous episode in modern British history. Branded only last month by Lord Bingham – until recently Britain's most senior law lord – as a ‘serious violation of international law’, the aggression against Iraq has not only devastated an entire country and left hundreds of thousands dead, it has also been a political and military humiliation for the invading powers.”
Milne confirms the true nature of the SFA:
“Since his November triumph, Obama has gone out of his way to emphasise his commitment to maintaining a ‘residual force’ for fighting ‘terrorism’, training and protection of US civilians – which his security adviser Richard Danzig estimated could amount to between 30,000 and 55,000 troops.”
See: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/dec/11/iraq-withdrawal-comment-debate
Justice for Iraq!
If Britain does become the latest in a long line of US allies to leave Iraq, will it simply be ‘withdraw and forget’? What hope will there be of justice for the people of Iraq, reparations for the damage done, compensation for the victims, prosecution of the war criminals who launched this unprovoked invasion? What restitution for the million dead Iraqis, the million left disabled, five million orphans, five million refugees, the economic destruction and permanent damage to the country’s cultural heritage?
Iraq Occupation Focus has launched a campaign for Justice for Iraq. Last July, a conference of over 100 activists, many of them Iraqis, adopted the following statement:
We call on those states responsible for the invasion and occupation of Iraq to terminate their illegal and immoral war, and express our solidarity with the people of Iraq in their struggle for peace, justice and self-determination.
In particular we demand:
· An immediate end to the occupation
Urgent action to address the humanitarian crises facing Iraq's people, including help for the more than three million refugees and displaced persons
An end to all foreign interference in Iraq's affairs, including its oil industry so that Iraqis can exercise NO! It is not all over in Iraq
Gordon Brown has announced the complete withdrawal of British troops from Iraq by mid-2009. The Guardian’s Jonathan Steele hails the State of Forces Agreement as a “deal [that] gives Iraq's national resistance almost everything it fought for.” Really? Is the occupation all but over?
On the contrary. As Sami Ramadani explains in The Guardian:
“Encircled by US tanks and marines, stationed in and around the heavily fortified Green Zone in Baghdad, Iraq's ‘sovereign’ parliament has approved two military, economic, cultural, and diplomatic pacts with the USA.”
The one that captured the headlines is the status of forces agreement (Sofa). Much more important is the strategic framework agreement (SFA), which slipped through almost unnoticed. A copy was not available even to the US Congress.
“The SFA is an open-ended pact, which ties Iraq to the USA militarily, economically, culturally and diplomatically. No more, no less.”
And while Sofa states that all US forces will withdraw by the end of 2011, reality lies in another sentence found in the SFA pact, which states that the US will not seek a ‘permanent’ military presence or bases in Iraq.
There to stay?
But how long is non-permanent? More than half a century, as in Korea? Or 100 years as John MaCain mused? Ramadani again:
“The Iraqi government made much of the clause that US soldiers would come under Iraqi jurisdiction. The caveats are such that this is rendered meaningless. For a US soldier or civilian to be arrested
by Iraqi authorities, before they are handed over to the US forces ‘after 24 hours,’ they have to be both ‘off duty’ and have committed ‘grave’ crimes outside US facilities and bases. How many off-duty US soldiers, one might ask, would venture into the streets of Baghdad, let alone those of Najaf or Fallujah?
“Considering that the Sofa is supposed to cover the three years up to the full withdrawal of the US forces, it is important to note that the open-ended SFA has one ‘principle’ that opens the door for renewing Sofa after the 3-year deadline for withdrawal: ‘The temporary presence of U.S. forces in Iraq is at the request and invitation of the sovereign Government of Iraq.’
“A pro-US, corrupt regime in Baghdad, that is hated by its own people, will obligingly ’request’ and ‘invite’ the occupiers to stay. That is if the people haven't toppled it by then.”
“It is obvious, when one reads the tens of SFA clauses relating to the military, security, cultural, economic, energy, health, environmental, information technology and judicial spheres, that the US is going to impose on Iraq a series of ’agreements’ during its ‘legitimised’ occupation of the country in the next three years. They will start with the infamous hydrocarbon law to totally control Iraq's oil resources.”
US strategy in Iraq
Sami Ramadani concludes that US troops will remain in Iraq to:
· Strengthen and secure a pro-US government in Baghdad
· Support such a government by all means possible, including the use of US combat forces stationed at numerous massive military bases
· Strengthen the Iraqi armed forces, which will pursue US interests and replace US forces in fighting the anti-occupation resistance. This is a strategy similar to Vietnamisation that will be pushed forward under the banner of fighting al-Qaida terrorism, which is detested by the Iraqi people. To further reduce its own casualties, the US will rely heavily on aerial bombardment and Apache helicopter gunships
· Secure lucrative economic contracts, particularly after forcing the oil law through the Iraqi parliament
· Exercise control over the Middle East’s oil, which remains a key US objective
· Use Iraq [as a base from which] to back US strategy in the Middle East: ie. escalate the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan, strengthen Israel, weaken Iran Syria, the Palestian people and the Lebanese resistance
See: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/nov/28/iraq-middleeast
British withdrawal
Seumas Milne, again in The Guardian, has made a realistic assessment of the situation:
“If British troops are indeed withdrawn from Iraq by next June, it will signal the end of the most shameful and disastrous episode in modern British history. Branded only last month by Lord Bingham – until recently Britain's most senior law lord – as a ‘serious violation of international law’, the aggression against Iraq has not only devastated an entire country and left hundreds of thousands dead, it has also been a political and military humiliation for the invading powers.”
Milne confirms the true nature of the SFA:
“Since his November triumph, Obama has gone out of his way to emphasise his commitment to maintaining a ‘residual force’ for fighting ‘terrorism’, training and protection of US civilians – which his security adviser Richard Danzig estimated could amount to between 30,000 and 55,000 troops.”
See: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/dec/11/iraq-withdrawal-comment-debate
Justice for Iraq!
If Britain does become the latest in a long line of US allies to leave Iraq, will it simply be ‘withdraw and forget’? What hope will there be of justice for the people of Iraq, reparations for the damage done, compensation for the victims, prosecution of the war criminals who launched this unprovoked invasion? What restitution for the million dead Iraqis, the million left disabled, five million orphans, five million refugees, the economic destruction and permanent damage to the country’s cultural heritage?
Iraq Occupation Focus has launched a campaign for Justice for Iraq. Last July, a conference of over 100 activists, many of them Iraqis, adopted the following statement:
We call on those states responsible for the invasion and occupation of Iraq to terminate their illegal and immoral war, and express our solidarity with the people of Iraq in their struggle for peace, justice and self-determination.
In particular we demand:
· An immediate end to the occupation
Urgent action to address the humanitarian crises facing Iraq's people, including help for the more than three million refugees and displaced persons
An end to all foreign interference in Iraq's affairs, including its oil industry so that Iraqis can exercise their right to self determination
Compensation and reparations from those countries responsible for war and sanctions on Iraq Prosecution of all those responsible for war crimes, human rights abuses and the theft of Iraq's resourcetheir right to self determination
Compensation and reparations from those countries responsible for war and sanctions on Iraq Prosecution of all those responsible for war crimes, human rights abuses and the theft of Iraq's resource
On the contrary. As Sami Ramadani explains in The Guardian:
“Encircled by US tanks and marines, stationed in and around the heavily fortified Green Zone in Baghdad, Iraq's ‘sovereign’ parliament has approved two military, economic, cultural, and diplomatic pacts with the USA.”
The one that captured the headlines is the status of forces agreement (Sofa). Much more important is the strategic framework agreement (SFA), which slipped through almost unnoticed. A copy was not available even to the US Congress.
“The SFA is an open-ended pact, which ties Iraq to the USA militarily, economically, culturally and diplomatically. No more, no less.”
And while Sofa states that all US forces will withdraw by the end of 2011, reality lies in another sentence found in the SFA pact, which states that the US will not seek a ‘permanent’ military presence or bases in Iraq.
There to stay?
But how long is non-permanent? More than half a century, as in Korea? Or 100 years as John MaCain mused? Ramadani again:
“The Iraqi government made much of the clause that US soldiers would come under Iraqi jurisdiction. The caveats are such that this is rendered meaningless. For a US soldier or civilian to be arrested
by Iraqi authorities, before they are handed over to the US forces ‘after 24 hours,’ they have to be both ‘off duty’ and have committed ‘grave’ crimes outside US facilities and bases. How many off-duty US soldiers, one might ask, would venture into the streets of Baghdad, let alone those of Najaf or Fallujah?
“Considering that the Sofa is supposed to cover the three years up to the full withdrawal of the US forces, it is important to note that the open-ended SFA has one ‘principle’ that opens the door for renewing Sofa after the 3-year deadline for withdrawal: ‘The temporary presence of U.S. forces in Iraq is at the request and invitation of the sovereign Government of Iraq.’
“A pro-US, corrupt regime in Baghdad, that is hated by its own people, will obligingly ’request’ and ‘invite’ the occupiers to stay. That is if the people haven't toppled it by then.”
“It is obvious, when one reads the tens of SFA clauses relating to the military, security, cultural, economic, energy, health, environmental, information technology and judicial spheres, that the US is going to impose on Iraq a series of ’agreements’ during its ‘legitimised’ occupation of the country in the next three years. They will start with the infamous hydrocarbon law to totally control Iraq's oil resources.”
US strategy in Iraq
Sami Ramadani concludes that US troops will remain in Iraq to:
· Strengthen and secure a pro-US government in Baghdad
· Support such a government by all means possible, including the use of US combat forces stationed at numerous massive military bases
· Strengthen the Iraqi armed forces, which will pursue US interests and replace US forces in fighting the anti-occupation resistance. This is a strategy similar to Vietnamisation that will be pushed forward under the banner of fighting al-Qaida terrorism, which is detested by the Iraqi people. To further reduce its own casualties, the US will rely heavily on aerial bombardment and Apache helicopter gunships
· Secure lucrative economic contracts, particularly after forcing the oil law through the Iraqi parliament
· Exercise control over the Middle East’s oil, which remains a key US objective
· Use Iraq [as a base from which] to back US strategy in the Middle East: ie. escalate the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan, strengthen Israel, weaken Iran Syria, the Palestian people and the Lebanese resistance
See: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/nov/28/iraq-middleeast
British withdrawal
Seumas Milne, again in The Guardian, has made a realistic assessment of the situation:
“If British troops are indeed withdrawn from Iraq by next June, it will signal the end of the most shameful and disastrous episode in modern British history. Branded only last month by Lord Bingham – until recently Britain's most senior law lord – as a ‘serious violation of international law’, the aggression against Iraq has not only devastated an entire country and left hundreds of thousands dead, it has also been a political and military humiliation for the invading powers.”
Milne confirms the true nature of the SFA:
“Since his November triumph, Obama has gone out of his way to emphasise his commitment to maintaining a ‘residual force’ for fighting ‘terrorism’, training and protection of US civilians – which his security adviser Richard Danzig estimated could amount to between 30,000 and 55,000 troops.”
See: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/dec/11/iraq-withdrawal-comment-debate
Justice for Iraq!
If Britain does become the latest in a long line of US allies to leave Iraq, will it simply be ‘withdraw and forget’? What hope will there be of justice for the people of Iraq, reparations for the damage done, compensation for the victims, prosecution of the war criminals who launched this unprovoked invasion? What restitution for the million dead Iraqis, the million left disabled, five million orphans, five million refugees, the economic destruction and permanent damage to the country’s cultural heritage?
Iraq Occupation Focus has launched a campaign for Justice for Iraq. Last July, a conference of over 100 activists, many of them Iraqis, adopted the following statement:
We call on those states responsible for the invasion and occupation of Iraq to terminate their illegal and immoral war, and express our solidarity with the people of Iraq in their struggle for peace, justice and self-determination.
In particular we demand:
· An immediate end to the occupation
Urgent action to address the humanitarian crises facing Iraq's people, including help for the more than three million refugees and displaced persons
An end to all foreign interference in Iraq's affairs, including its oil industry so that Iraqis can exercise NO! It is not all over in Iraq
Gordon Brown has announced the complete withdrawal of British troops from Iraq by mid-2009. The Guardian’s Jonathan Steele hails the State of Forces Agreement as a “deal [that] gives Iraq's national resistance almost everything it fought for.” Really? Is the occupation all but over?
On the contrary. As Sami Ramadani explains in The Guardian:
“Encircled by US tanks and marines, stationed in and around the heavily fortified Green Zone in Baghdad, Iraq's ‘sovereign’ parliament has approved two military, economic, cultural, and diplomatic pacts with the USA.”
The one that captured the headlines is the status of forces agreement (Sofa). Much more important is the strategic framework agreement (SFA), which slipped through almost unnoticed. A copy was not available even to the US Congress.
“The SFA is an open-ended pact, which ties Iraq to the USA militarily, economically, culturally and diplomatically. No more, no less.”
And while Sofa states that all US forces will withdraw by the end of 2011, reality lies in another sentence found in the SFA pact, which states that the US will not seek a ‘permanent’ military presence or bases in Iraq.
There to stay?
But how long is non-permanent? More than half a century, as in Korea? Or 100 years as John MaCain mused? Ramadani again:
“The Iraqi government made much of the clause that US soldiers would come under Iraqi jurisdiction. The caveats are such that this is rendered meaningless. For a US soldier or civilian to be arrested
by Iraqi authorities, before they are handed over to the US forces ‘after 24 hours,’ they have to be both ‘off duty’ and have committed ‘grave’ crimes outside US facilities and bases. How many off-duty US soldiers, one might ask, would venture into the streets of Baghdad, let alone those of Najaf or Fallujah?
“Considering that the Sofa is supposed to cover the three years up to the full withdrawal of the US forces, it is important to note that the open-ended SFA has one ‘principle’ that opens the door for renewing Sofa after the 3-year deadline for withdrawal: ‘The temporary presence of U.S. forces in Iraq is at the request and invitation of the sovereign Government of Iraq.’
“A pro-US, corrupt regime in Baghdad, that is hated by its own people, will obligingly ’request’ and ‘invite’ the occupiers to stay. That is if the people haven't toppled it by then.”
“It is obvious, when one reads the tens of SFA clauses relating to the military, security, cultural, economic, energy, health, environmental, information technology and judicial spheres, that the US is going to impose on Iraq a series of ’agreements’ during its ‘legitimised’ occupation of the country in the next three years. They will start with the infamous hydrocarbon law to totally control Iraq's oil resources.”
US strategy in Iraq
Sami Ramadani concludes that US troops will remain in Iraq to:
· Strengthen and secure a pro-US government in Baghdad
· Support such a government by all means possible, including the use of US combat forces stationed at numerous massive military bases
· Strengthen the Iraqi armed forces, which will pursue US interests and replace US forces in fighting the anti-occupation resistance. This is a strategy similar to Vietnamisation that will be pushed forward under the banner of fighting al-Qaida terrorism, which is detested by the Iraqi people. To further reduce its own casualties, the US will rely heavily on aerial bombardment and Apache helicopter gunships
· Secure lucrative economic contracts, particularly after forcing the oil law through the Iraqi parliament
· Exercise control over the Middle East’s oil, which remains a key US objective
· Use Iraq [as a base from which] to back US strategy in the Middle East: ie. escalate the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan, strengthen Israel, weaken Iran Syria, the Palestian people and the Lebanese resistance
See: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/nov/28/iraq-middleeast
British withdrawal
Seumas Milne, again in The Guardian, has made a realistic assessment of the situation:
“If British troops are indeed withdrawn from Iraq by next June, it will signal the end of the most shameful and disastrous episode in modern British history. Branded only last month by Lord Bingham – until recently Britain's most senior law lord – as a ‘serious violation of international law’, the aggression against Iraq has not only devastated an entire country and left hundreds of thousands dead, it has also been a political and military humiliation for the invading powers.”
Milne confirms the true nature of the SFA:
“Since his November triumph, Obama has gone out of his way to emphasise his commitment to maintaining a ‘residual force’ for fighting ‘terrorism’, training and protection of US civilians – which his security adviser Richard Danzig estimated could amount to between 30,000 and 55,000 troops.”
See: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/dec/11/iraq-withdrawal-comment-debate
Justice for Iraq!
If Britain does become the latest in a long line of US allies to leave Iraq, will it simply be ‘withdraw and forget’? What hope will there be of justice for the people of Iraq, reparations for the damage done, compensation for the victims, prosecution of the war criminals who launched this unprovoked invasion? What restitution for the million dead Iraqis, the million left disabled, five million orphans, five million refugees, the economic destruction and permanent damage to the country’s cultural heritage?
Iraq Occupation Focus has launched a campaign for Justice for Iraq. Last July, a conference of over 100 activists, many of them Iraqis, adopted the following statement:
We call on those states responsible for the invasion and occupation of Iraq to terminate their illegal and immoral war, and express our solidarity with the people of Iraq in their struggle for peace, justice and self-determination.
In particular we demand:
· An immediate end to the occupation
Urgent action to address the humanitarian crises facing Iraq's people, including help for the more than three million refugees and displaced persons
An end to all foreign interference in Iraq's affairs, including its oil industry so that Iraqis can exercise their right to self determination
Compensation and reparations from those countries responsible for war and sanctions on Iraq Prosecution of all those responsible for war crimes, human rights abuses and the theft of Iraq's resourcetheir right to self determination
Compensation and reparations from those countries responsible for war and sanctions on Iraq Prosecution of all those responsible for war crimes, human rights abuses and the theft of Iraq's resource
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)