|
Thursday,
August 23, 2012. Chaos and violence continue, a former US Ambassador
to Iraq is arrested, either a Syrian plane or another country's plane en
route to Syria violated Iraqi airspace today . . . or it didn't, the
secretive Erbil Agreement gets some attention, a member of the National
Alliance has an arrest warrant issued against him, Veterans for Peace
announce their plans for the next few weeks, Ian Wilder calls for Gallup
to include Jill Stein's campaign in the presidential polling and more.
Former US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker is in the news today. It's not good news. January 15, 2009,
Crocker was at the White House being presented with the Medal of
Freedom by Bully Boy Bush. Condi Rice, John Negroponte and Laura Bush
among the one watching.
Members
of the Foreign Service bring this valor and professionalism to their
work every single day. And there is one man who embodies these qualities
above all: Ambassador Ryan Crocker. Over the years, Ryan has earned
many honors, including the Presidential Meritorious Service Award and
the rank of Career Ambassador. Today I have the privilege of honoring
Ambassador Crocker with the highest civil award I can bestow: the
Presidential Medal of Freedom. It has not been bestowed yet. The son of
an Air Force officer, Ryan Crocker has never been your typical diplomat.
For social engagements, he likes to tell guests, "no socks
required." For language training, he once spent time herding sheep with a
desert tribe in Jordan. For sport, he has jogged through war zones, and
run marathons on four continents. And for assignments, his preference
has always been anywhere but Washington. During his nearly four decades
in the Foreign Service, Ryan Crocker has become known as America's
Lawrence of Arabia. His career has taken him to every corner of the
Middle East. His understanding of the region is unmatched. His exploits
are legendary. He has served as ambassador to five countries. He has
repeatedly taken on the most challenging assignments. The man has never
run from danger. As a young officer during the late 1970s, Ryan
catalogued Saddam Hussein's murderous rise to power. In 1983, he
survived the terrorist attack on the American embassy in Lebanon. In
1998, as the Ambassador to Syria, he witnessed an angry mob plunder his
residence. After any one of these brushes with danger, most people
would have lost their appetite for adventure. Not Ryan Crocker. In the
years since September the 11th, 2001, I have asked Ryan to hold numerous
posts on the front lines of the war on terror, and he has stepped
forward enthusiastically every time.
on
August 14 by the Washington State Patrol for hit-and-run and DUI in
Spokane Valley." The driver of the other vehicle (a semi) was not
harmed in the accident that Crocker is charged with. In addition, he is
alleged to have then fled the scene. When police found apprehended
him, his low score on the breathalyzer was .152 (he blew twice).
When
he was awarded the honor in January 2009, then-White House spokesperson
Dana Perino declared, "It was a surprise for Ryan Crocker, that he was
getting the Presidential Medal of Freedom -- a surprise, I think, for
everybody. But we kept that a secret because he is a very humble
person, Ambassador Crocker. And I can't think of anybody more
deserving." And today, the humble person is in the news for reasons no
one wants to be in the news. He continued as Ambassador to Iraq under
President Barack Obama until Barack nominated Chris Hill and, in 2011,
Barack nominated him and the Senate confirmed as US Ambassador to
Baghdad -- a post he held until last July. Hopefully, if this is an
alcohol problem, he'll get the help he needs. If this was less of a
disease and more of bad jugment, hopefully, he'll learn a lesson from
it. Regardless, I take no joy in his arrest for drunk driving and hope
he addresses whatever took him to this point.
From
what is known to what is unknown at this time: Did fighter jets fly
over Iraq into Syria and did they do so with Nouri al-Maliki's approval?
Alsumaria also reports that Iraqiya MP Hamid al-Mutlaq states that military aircraft breached Iraqi airspace to fly into Syria and drop bombs. All Iraq News adds that a warplane was seen over Husaybah and that it went into Syria and bombed Abu Kamal repeatedly. Alsumaria also notes that Nouri's spokesperson Ali al-Moussawi is denying that any warplane entered Iraqi air space to bomb Syria. However, AFP reports that an unnamed Iraqi official tells them the plane was Syrian and that it did enter Iraqi air space.
Husaybah
is a city in Anbar Province on the Euphrates River right next to the
Syrian border. Syria is one of the countries that Iraq shares a border
with, the others being Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iran.
The
alleged plane and its nationality are still in doubt (again, an unnamed
official told AFP it was a Syrian airplane which would have left
Syria's air space to fly briefly in Iraqi airspace before doing a
u-turn). If it wasn't a Syrian plane and it didn't enter Iraq from
Syria?
With 15,000
US troops in Kuwait it might be a natural conclusion that the plane
launched from Kuwait. However, Kuwait is on the south east corner of
Iraq and Syria is on the north west. If the plane came from Kuwait,
Basra and Najaf, among other major cities, should have spotted it unless
it did a major climb from Kuwait over Muthanna Province and became
more visible (decreased altitude) as it passed over Anbar Province.
Saudi Arabia is the south and southwest and a plane could have flown
over Iraq from Saudi Arabia to Husaybah (and then to Syria) in much the
way a plane would have flown from Kuwait. Jordan is right below Syria
and borders Iraq on the west (slightly south) and a plane from there
would have to make a half circle to enter Syria through Husaybah as
would a plane from Turkeky which is directly above Syria and shares a
northwest border with Iraq.
It
is possible that a war plane, even a US war plane, could have flown
from Jordan, Turkey, Saudi Arabia or Kuwait. If it originated in Jordan
or Turkey and flew that path into Syria, it would have done so to
conceal that it was originating from Jordan and Turkey. The most likely
explanation would be that it was a Syrian plane that, for whatever
reason, flew out of Syria and then right back in. After that, the most
likely explanation would be that it was a US war plane that flew from
Kuwait. If the flight originated from Iraq, it would have to be a
foreign plane (due to Iraq's lack of air power) and would have best
originated its flight from Al Asad Air Base which is in Anbar Province
and near the Euphrates River. The Wall St. Journal's Sam Dagher Tweeted:
From the unknown to the know, All Iraq News reports
that MP Kazam al-Sayadi survived a sniper's assassination attempt on
his motorcade today in Kut (Wasit Province). In addition, Alsumaria reports that a Syrian artillery shell landed on a Anbar home and two Yazidis were kidnappend in Mosul. Clashes also took place in nothern Iraq. Reuters notes
that the Turkish government is claiming that "Turkish troops have
killed 16 Kurdish guerrillas in an operation in southeast Turkey
targeting militants who launched a bomb attack on a military convoy that
killed five soldiers, the local governor's office said on Thursday."
Aaron Hess (International Socialist Review) described the PKK in 2008,
"The PKK emerged in 1984 as a major force in response to Turkey's
oppression of its Kurdish population. Since the late 1970s, Turkey has
waged a relentless war of attrition that has killed tens of thousands of
Kurds and driven millions from their homes. The Kurds are the world's
largest stateless population -- whose main population concentration
straddles Turkey, Iraq, Iran, and Syria -- and have been the victims of
imperialist wars and manipulation since the colonial period. While
Turkey has granted limited rights to the Kurds in recent years in order
to accommodate the European Union, which it seeks to join, even these
are now at risk." Press TV states,
"At least 21 people have lost their lives in fresh clashes between
Turkish army and militants of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers' Party
(PKK) in the volatile southeastern Turkey." Al Jazeera notes
that the Turkish government states their actions were "in response to a
bomb attack [by the PKK] on a military convoy that killed five
soldiers."
What
are we to make of the increase in violent deaths in Iraq during June
and July? Is it a sign of a long-term upsurge in violence since the U.S.
troop withdrawal? Who are the culprits?To begin with, it should be
noted that violence in Iraq often follows cyclical patterns. That is,
insurgent groups normally step up their operations as summer begins, and
around the time of religious festivals, when pilgrims (frequently
traveling on foot) are easily exposed to attacks. Thus, in June, there
were waves of bomb attacks targeting Shiite pilgrims who were
commemorating the death of Moussa al-Kadhim, the great-grandson of the
Prophet Mohammad.
That is why one should be
careful in extrapolating from short-term trends to warn of growing
sectarian tensions and a return to civil war in the near future. Today,
the insurgent groups responsible for attacks on civilians and a large
number of attacks on government officials are entirely Sunni, since
Shiite militant groups such as Kataeb Hizbullah have disbanded following
the pullout of U.S. forces.
The two main
organizations are Al-Qaeda in Iraq, now virtually a native force, and
the Baathist Naqshibandia, which is led by Ezzat Ibrahim al-Douri, who
is still at large. He appeared in a video last April to denounce the
regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad and complain of an
Iranian-American-Israeli conspiracy to take over Iraq.
Today AP reported
that the Islamic State of Iraq had issued a statement proclaiming they
were behind violent incidents "from late June until the second half of
July." Meanwhile Alsumaria reports that the Iraqi judiciary has issued
an arrest warrant for Anbar Salvation Council president Hamid al-Hayes
accusing him of terrorism. The outlet notes that Haydes had condemned
the recent waves of attacks, including as late as the start of the
week. Hamid al-Hayes is Sheikh Hamid al-Hayes and a member of the Iraqi
National Alliance (Nouri's State of Law, the Islamic Supreme Council of
Iraq, Moqtada al-Sadr's bloc and others make up the National
Alliance). In 2009, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace noted:
Anbar Salvation Council
- Leader
- Hamid al-Hayes
- Date of Founding & Notable Moments
- September 2006
- Seats in Parliament
- None, at the time of the 2005 elections the founders of the movement were still cooperating with al-Qaeda.
- Seats in 2009 Provincial Elections
- 2/411
- Notes
- One of the three groups to grow out of the Awakening councils in Anbar province, the Anbar Salvation Council is the first major Sunni organization to join the INA.
Al-Hayes' position is very close to that of Hatem al-Suleiman and his Anbar National Salvation Front, who joined the State of Law coalition. The two share a strong opposition to the Iraqi Islamic Party.
The division between them appears to be mostly the result of a
struggle for leadership and a different tactical decision about which
alliance to join.
Sheikh al-Hayes told Alsumaria
today that he was prepared to "accept and respect" the arrest warrant
and surrender himself, stating that the gates to his houe are open. He
calls the charges frivilous and say they result from police chief being
angry at him.
Back to the issue of the Kurds, Hemm Hadi (AKnews) reports,
"British MP Nadhim Zahawi has created an e-petition in the British
government in a bid to get recognition of the genocide against Kurds in
Iraq." The petition reads:
We
urge the Government to recognise formally the Genocide against the
people of Iraqi Kurdistan and to encourage the EU and UN to do likewise.
This will enable Kurdish people, many in the UK, to achieve justice for
their considerable loss. It would also enable Britain, the home of
democracy and freedom, to send out a message of support for
international conventions and human rights. The Genocide perpetrated
over decades, known collectively as the Anfal, began with the
arabisation of villages around Kirkuk in 1963. It involved the
deportation and disappearances of Faylee Kurds in the 1970s-80s, the
murder of 8,000 male Barzanis in 1983, the use of chemical weapons in
the late 1980s, most notably against Halabja, and finally the Anfal
campaign of 1987-88. Hundreds of thousands of innocent people perished,
families were torn apart, with continuing health problems, and 4,500
villages were destroyed between 1976 and 1988 undermining the
potential of Iraqi Kurdistan's agricultural resources.
The petition currently has 2,373 signatures.
Tuesday,
Gen Martin Dempsey, Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, traveled to
Baghdad. With all the problems in Iraq, you might think Dempsey was
there to use 'soft power' and press for aims that involved something
other than murder. You would be wrong. Sunday's New York Times boasted James Risen and Duraid Adnan's " U.S. Says Iraqis Are Helping Iran to Skirt Sanctions"
about the White House's knowledge that Iraq is helping Iran "skirt
economic sanctions" and how Barack was "not eager for a public showdown
with Nouri." But Dempsey rejected the notion that he'd even raise that
issue when he spoke to Dan De Luce (AFP),
"The four-star general said he would not press the Iraqi government on
reports that it may be allowing Iran to ferry supplies to the Syrian
regime through Iraqi territory or helping Tehran circumvent financial
sanctions." Sunday, AEI's Max Boot weighed in at the right-wing Commentary on the the Times' article and Iraq:
A
great deal of that success [in Iraq] has been undone, alas, by two bad
decisions made by President Obama: First the decision to back a
coalition headed by Nouri al Maliki in forming a government even after
Maliki finished second in the 2010 election. If the U.S. had gone all
out to support the winning slate, led by Ayad Allawi, the result might
well have been a government in Baghdad far less amenable to Iranian
influence than the current one.
This
initial mistake was made much worse by Obama's failure to negotiate an
accord to allow U.S. troops to remain in Iraq past 2011.
And
the whole point of Dempsey's visit was the Syrian war. Despite the
increasingly loud whispers at the State Dept grow about another secret
prison in Baghdad run by Nouri's forces, you might think Dempsey
explored that issue but you would be wrong there too. Nor were the
rights of prisoners -- many of whom have been held for years without
trial -- addressed.
Though Gen Ray Odierno frequently had to
address the political situation with Nouri when Odierno was the top US
commander in Iraq and though Iraq is in the midst of a political crisis
initiated by Nouri's refusal to honor the Erbil Agreement (after he used
it to get his second term as prime minister), Dempsey had no interest
in raising that issue either.
Following
Iraq's March 2010 elections, the country entered a political stalemate
due to Nouri al-Maliki. He wanted another term as prime minister yet
his State of Law slate had come in second to Ayad Allawi's Iraqiya. Per
the Constutiton, per the will of the voters, Ayad's group should have
had first crack at forming a government (one of them -- most likely
Allawi -- should have been named prime minister-designate and given 30
days to form a Cabinet -- form a Cabinet means full Cabinet, not
partial, not I'll-do-it-later -- you transfer from prime
minister-designate to prime minister based on whether or not you're able
to form a Cabinet). Nouri refused to let it happen, Nouri dug in his
heels and pouted. The White House backed Nouri (this is Barack's
administration -- and that's what Max Boot is talking about above).
They didn't back the Iraqi people or the Iraqi Constitution. After
eight months, they went to the political blocs and basically asked,
"What do you want in exchange for allowing Nouri a second term as prime
minister?" And from this was drawn up the US-brokered Erbil Agreement
which was then signed of on by the leaders of the political bloc in
November 2010. But Nouri got named prime minister-designate (and a
month later moved to prime minister -- despite not having named a full
Cabinet -- nearly two years later, he's still never nominated people to
head the security ministries) and then tossed aside the Erbil
Agreement. Since the summer of 2011, the Kurds, Iraqiya and Moqtada
al-Sadr's group have been calling for a return to the Erbil Agreement.
Question:
To date, Iraqi citizens do not know the content of the first convention
of Arbil, and I do not think they will know it. The question is why is
there a blackout regarding this issue?
A:
The convention in Arbil has really turned into a mystery baffling the
Iraqis. It seems that the convention has terms, which the signing
parties do not want to reveal either because these provisions are
inconsistent with the constitution or contradictory to what some parties
say to the media. I hold all signing parties responsible. It seems to
me that there is a tacit agreement, imposed by the interests, that no
party shall reveal the real text of terms that have been agreed upon.
Veterans For Peace216 South Meramec Ave
St. Louis MO 63105http://veteransforpeace.org(314) 725-6005(office)(314) 725-7103 (fax)
For Immediate Release - August 23, 2012
Why Veterans For Peace will protest the RNC and the DNC
Veterans
For Peace will have members protesting at both the Republican National
Convention in Tampa and the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte.
VFP President Leah Bolger explained why:
"Social
change, including the abolition of war, does not come from supporting
one political party over another, but from changing the culture and
influencing all major parties. Women did not vote themselves the right
to vote. The civil rights movement did not trade in nonviolent action,
education, and mobilization for electoral campaigns. The labor movement
was not built by what the labor movement spends its money on today. And
when our grandparents passed the Kellogg-Briand Pact banning war, they
did so by placing the criminalization of war in the platforms of the
four largest parties in the country.
"A peace
movement that only opposes wars when the president belongs to one party
is not a peace movement. It's a partisan campaign that uses the
pretended desire for peace as bait and activists as props. What we need
far more than campaigning is movement building. We need to organize
people to bring our popular demands to the government as a whole. The
government is no longer divided into the three traditional branches. The
two branches are the two major parties. Congress members and even
Supreme Court Justices are loyal to their parties. We must demand that
both parties adopt platforms for peace. Our economy cannot withstand
further war preparation any more than our consciences can bear the
consequences.
"We also need to help the
public abandon the pretense that one of the parties is already peaceful.
President Obama in the past three-and-a-half years has escalated war in
Afghanistan and continued it in the face of overwhelming public
opposition. He's invented a new kind of war using drones and launched
such wars in numerous nations, building intense hostility toward the
United States. He keeps a list of "nominees" for murder. On the list are
adults and children, Americans and non-Americans. He holds meetings
with his staff on Tuesdays to decide whom to kill next, and then kills
them.
"President Obama launched a war on
Libya against the will of Congress. The military is larger and more
expensive now than it ever was under President Bush. It's more
secretive, with the CIA fighting some of the wars. It's more privatized.
It's more profitable. It's in more nations. And it's swallowing a
greater share of government spending. President Obama has forbidden the
prosecution of CIA torturers. He has created a legal and bipartisan
acceptance of what we recently protested as scandalous outrages,
including imprisonment without trial. And now he has announced that the
United States, without Congressional authorization or public approval,
is engaged in assisting one side in a civil war in Syria -- even while
continuing to threaten war on Iran.
"Veterans
For Peace knows that both parties are responsible for the deaths of
millions of people. Military spending is the sacred cow that neither
party will touch. It matters little which party is in power. The
Congressional-Military-Industrial-Media Machine just keeps humming
along.
"Veterans For Peace will be in Tampa
not to protest the Republican Party, but to protest our government's
grotesque military spending. We will be in Charlotte not to protest the
Democratic Party, but to protest the abominable killing and destruction
being done in our name. VFP will continue to point an accusing finger at
the military monster that is our government, and to protest its illegal
actions and misplaced priorities in every way we can."
Veterans
For Peace was founded in 1985 and has approximately 5,000 members in
150 chapters located in every U.S. state and several countries. It is a
501(c)3 non-profit educational organization recognized as a
Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) by the United Nations, and is the
only national veterans' organization calling for the abolishment of war.
##
Ian Wilder (On The Wilder Side) notes
that Jill Stein's being ignored and left out of the Gallup poll and
Ian's providing ways that you can let Gallup know they need to include
Dr. Jill Stein:
AP reports
today that the Stein - Honkala ticket will be on the ballot in
Pennsylvania. Candidates who are not part of the Democratic-Republican
duopoly have to fight for ballot access at election time -- just to be
on the ballot they have to fight. Roseanne Barr and Cindy Sheehan are
right now attempting to get on the ballot in Hawaii, Wyoming, Kansas,
Nebraska, South Dakota, Lousiana, Montana and Michigan:
|
Sam Dagher 
BarrSheehan2012 
Roseanne Barr 
