Wednesday,
October 28, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the US military
announces another death, still no election law in Iraq, more on the
Iraqi govenrment's desire to go nuclear, Najaf gets a new bank, the KRG
gets a new cabinet, and more.
The
US military announced yesterda:
"CAMP VICTORY, Iraq – A Multi-National Corps-Iraq Soldier died today of
a non-combat related injury at Camp Victory. The name of the deceased
is being withheld pending notification of next of kin and release by
the Department of Defense. The names of service members are announced
through the U.S. Department of Defense official website at
http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/.
The announcements are made on the Web site no earlier than 24 hours
after notification of the service member's primary next of kin. The
incident is under investigation."
DoD identifes
the fallen as Maj David L. Audo from Saint Joseph, Illinois who was
35-years-old. The announcement brings the total number of US service
members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war to
4352.
"How stable is Iraq?" asked
Riz Khan last night on his self-titled Al Jazeera program.
"Stable enough for national elections in January?" He was joined by a
panel consisting of Iraqi Laith Kubba, the New America Foundation's
Steven Clemmons and one-time director of the US Coalition Provisional
Authority in Iraq J. Scott Carpenter.
Riz
Khan: Let me ask a question that came from our Facebook page, and I'll
put this to Steven Clemmons here, this came from Ninveh Albazi in
California, Steven, here in the US. And Ninveh says, "The longer the US
military stays, the more terrorists will come in Iraq to fight. If they
leave, more bombings over power will occur. Either way the Iraqi people
will suffer." How do you feel about that -- the presence of -- US
presence actually being a trigger for these kind of attacks?
Steven
Clemmons: Well I think that there are some people in society -- and
we've seen it throughout the Middle East -- that react very viscerally
and negatively to the sense that they're being occupied by foreign
troops. In Afghanistan, it's one of the things that's driving Pashtun
resistance beyond the question of, uh, the Taliban. And-and so, I think
it would be wrong to-to-to argue that in fact the American troop
presence doesn't drive some violent minorities. I think on the whole,
Iraqi society has felt as if the United States has done more beneficial
things recently and so those feelings are not as widespread. But-but
certainly there are people like Robert Pape at the University of
Chicago among others that have shown that foreign troop deployments do
drive a kind of -- drive suicide bombings, drive some of the more
radical responses from societies. So there is some truth to it. I don't
think I would agree with the-the decibel level of the questioner's
comments though.
Riz
Khan: Well, Laith, this came in via Twitter to us, a viewer by the name
of Mosharraf Zaidi who says, "Even with stability in Iraq, does Maliki
have the sense to ensure a free and fair process? Is it even up to him?"
Laith
Kubba: Well, I mean, the good news is there is sufficient, I think,
awareness and organization in Iraq to have elections that are,
generally speaking, fair and free. I think the last elections had a
high turnout -- about 70%. Of course, there were cases of fraud. But by
and large, I think it was representative. So that's on the good side.
But I think on the negative side, even if you had representatives in
Parliament, the system is in a grid-lock because it's a parliamentary
system, not a presidential system. It does not produce an effective
executive that takes the country and move forward. You have,
ultimately, a quote over power and that paralyzes government.
Riz
Khan: I'll get to the intracacise of that in a moment because there are
some interesting intracacies to the elections in Iraq but, Scott, if I
could put this to you from LiveStation chat room, people are online
here, Crane in the USA says, "How can fair and transparant elections be
ensured when there are repeated bombings?" And let me ask you, do you
think the elections will go ahead in January with all the delays and
potential problems?
J.
Scott Carpenter: I do. I'm a perinally optimist about this, that at the
last minute -- however late the last minute is, the Iraqis will find
some way to have these elections because they see how important they
are to the political future of Iraq, to American withdrawal -- frankly.
I do think there will be elections that are credible in Iraq because
people don't trust each other and so there will be lots of observation
which is what drove the credibility and legitimacy of the provincial
elections is that there were so many political party observers watching
one another that when the results were broadcast, no one really
questioned the legitimacy of the results.
Riz
Khan: Steven Clemmons, do you think the west, there are those who think
the west is really pushing for the elections as a way of closure to
finally dust their hands and finally close the chapter on Iraq.
Steven
Clemmons: I don't think it's just to dust their hands and put a
punctuation point. I mean I think everyone would like to see that what
we did there succeeded in something. But I think that we've seen Iraqi
society already get near ripping itself in shreds internally and the
reason why elections and civil institution building and these
democratic processes which J. and Laith were speaking about are so
important is it creates opportunites for cohesive and collaborative
governance within Iraq. That if it doesn't proceed and move forward,
the place has a high possibility of pulling itself apart. So I think
it's much more than us saying we're done with this -- with this
experiment although, clearly, I would like us to move on as well and
see Iraqi society take responsibility for itself succeed. But on the
other hand, I think that this is an important part of showing that the
Iraqi government can have some durability and sustainability after we
begin to much more greatly downsize our troop presence.
Riz
Kahn: We have this came in, I'll put this to you, Laith, this comes in
from Facebook as well and it's from Cambodia where a viewer by the name
of Heidi Aljani in Pursat says, "We were warned of the United States'
prolonged military presence when Obama spoke of Iraq. The new excuse:
Iraqi people and their government are to blame for the inability to
govern themselves." Now do you believe that the elections are definite
and looking at this issue that Iraq has too much of an issue trying to
govern itself. What's your view?
Laith
Kubba: Well two things. Number one, I think elections will take place,
that's not the issue. Yes, there is a problem currently in finding the
right formula on how Iraq should govern itself. But I think by and
large, it is the right thing to do is to leave Iraqis to work it out
for themselves; however, that does not mean walking out. I think it's
really too idealistic. I think that will create enough power vacuum and
might lead to escalating violence where the US has to send back some
troops and intervene again.
Staying with the issue of the elections, this morning
Dow Jones reports
that the KRG's represenative Qubad Talabani is stating that, following
the January elections, the draft oil law may "finally pass."
Sahar Issa and Hannah Allam (McClatchy Newspapers) report that a bill may be presented "to parliament for a vote within days".
Qassim Abdul-Zahra (AP) reports
that KRG President Massoud Barzani "demanded" today that Kirkuk become
a part of the Kurdistan Region. Kirkuk is disputed territory due to
Saddam Hussein forcing Kurds out of the region during his reign. Both
the Baghdad-based government or 'government' and the KRG claim Kirkuk
really belongs to them. This is not a new issue. It is so not a new
issue that the 2005 Iraqi Constitution addressed the issue and mandated
that a referendum be held on the matter. Article 140 has never been
followed. The issue has not been resolved. It is repeatedly pushed
aside. Sort of like the draft election law. Weeks ago was the deadline
for passing the elections law and the deadline was missed.
Appearing before the US House Armed Services Committee last week, the Pentagon's Michele Flournoy insisted that time remained:
Although
the government of Iraq's self-imposed deadline of October 15th for
passing the elections law has passed, we judge that the COR [Council Of
Representatives] still has another week or two to come to some kind of
an agreement on the elections law before it will put the January date
-- the early January date -- in jeopardy in terms of the election
commission's ability to actually physically execute the, uh, the
election. If a new law with open lists is not passed, the fall back
solution for them is to return to the 2005 election law which is based
on a closed list system. But that could be used for upcoming elections,
the COR would simply have to vote on an election date. If that law is
not passed in the next two weeks, they will be looking at slipping the
date to later in January which would still be compliant with the
[Iraqi] Constitution but would be later than originally planned. It
is now one week since Flournoy claimed Iraq had two weeks. There is no
progress. The same day she was testifying to Congress, "
Rod Nordland (New York Times) reported,
"The Iraqi Independent High Electoral Commission and United Nations
elections experts have said Iraq needs at least 90 days to adequately
prepare for the vote. Iraq's existing election law was declared
unconstitutional by its highest court, which said it needs to be
replaced or amended." The court ruling would appear to render obsolete
Flournoy's claim that the law for the 2005 elections could still be
used with just passage of legislation for a new date. In addition, 90
days? There are 3 days left in this month, 30 in November and 31 in
December. That's 64.
90 days needed. 90 minus 64 (check my math
always) is 26 days. That would be January 26th, if legislation passed
Parliament today. If. And maybe. The Iraqi Freedom Congress' Amjad Ali
weighs in with "
Amid violence, Iraq Freedom Congress calls for a sovereign, secular, transitional government" (
Flesh & Stone):
Over
nearly seven years the "political process" did not result in anything
but ferocious fighting between the forces and the parties that were
part of this process in order to gain as much privilege, influence,
power and wealth as possible. This conflict resulted in prolongation of
the political chaos, an insecurity in Iraq, exacerbated poverty and
destitution, and curtailed social and health services.
The
elections, one of the mechanisms of imposing the "political process,"
have never solved the issue of the power struggle because none of the
elections held changed the sectarian and ethnic quotas. And that means
the elections merely reproduced the same forces that are currently in
power.
All of the elections have been characterized by farces such
as fraud, political assassinations, and the delayed announcement of
voting results until agreements among the influential forces had been
reached. However, after every election, we witnessed an increase of
violence and terrorist activities as part of political arm twisting
among these forces.
National reconciliation was one of the themes
to bring together the political movements that did not participate in
power sharing with the forces that supported the war and occupation.
The reconciliation was projected by the occupation administration to
involve the pan-Arab nationalist forces who were excluded from the
formation of a new Iraq to impose security and political stability.
However, fears of the parties in power (political Islam, Shiite in
particular, and Kurdish nationalists) has undermined national
reconciliation.
In the midst of the current political situation,
neither the occupation nor the successive governments have been able to
establish a state in Iraq. The conflict among the parties and the
forces has always been a key factor in that lack of progress. Moreover,
the conflict over what would be the identity of the state -- whether an
Islamist Shiite, a Islamist Sunni, Arab nationalist, or federal
moderate Islamist --is another obstacle to the establishment of an
Iraqi state.
The ongoing violence, which is another form of
political conflict, will not end through a political process that was
brought by the occupation. And the experience of nearly seven years of
conflict between the political forces taught us that the violence would
not be terminated. In fact, it would only reproduce more violence and
terror. What is happening today, such as restructuring old alliances
and forming new ones and the escalation of the conflicts within the one
party, is an explanation of how deep the crisis is. As a result we
could hear the prime minister and a number of political parties calling
for an end to the rule of consensus or democracy through consensus.
Whenever
the elections take place, they'll be the first national elections since
2005. In January 2009, provincial elections were held in 14 of Iraq's
18 provinces. In July the Kurdistan Region's three provinces held their
elections.
Today KRG Prime Minister Barham Salih's cabinet was sworn in:
"Dr Salih was appointed Prime Minister by the Kurdistani List
coalition, which won the Kurdistan Region parliamentary elections in
July with 58 percent of the vote, and voter turnout of nearly 80
percent. Mr Azad Barwari, a senior member of the Kurdistan Democratic
Party, was appointed Deputy Prime Minister."
AFP reports the swearing in was "clouded by several MPs walking out after a refusal of separate votes for each minister."
Vahal (Mideast Youth) offers this:
In
a ceremony attended by the president of the region, Mr. Massoud
Barzani, the outgoing PM, Mr. Nichervan Barzani as well as the Iraqi
first lady, Mrs. Hero Ibrahim Ahmad, the sixth cabinet was sworn in at
the Parliament.
The new cabinet will have
only one woman, Asos Najib Abdullah who will be the minister of labor
and social affairs.
Here is some poetic
justice, the man who sentenced Saddam Hussein to death by hanging,
judge Ra'ouf Rashid will now be the minister of Justice in Barham
Salih's cabinet.
Sunday's bombings resulted in many deaths which means many burials.
Saad Fakhrildeen (Los Angeles Times) reports,
"The cars streamed into Najaf over the last two days as families buried
loved ones killed in Sunday's double bombing in Baghdad. By Tuesday
afternoon, what was thought to be the last of the dead were brought to
the Valley of Peace cemetery, the most sacred burial ground for Iraq's
Shiite majority. Undertaker Mehdi Assadi had listened to mourners'
screams as at least 80 of the estimated 155 killed in Sunday's Baghdad
bombings were buried in the Valley of Peace."
Deutsche Presse-Agentur reports
approximately 60 children are still missing following Sunday's Baghdad
bombings with some believing they may be buried/trapped under the
rubble and the Iraqi military rejecting the assertion with the
following statement: "There is no truth in reports that there are
bodies under the rubble of the Ministry of Justice in Baghdad. All the
martyrs and injrued have been taken to hospitals." The military is
awfully sure of themselves. Suprising when you consider Monday's report
by Miguel Martinez on ABC's
World News Tonight with Charlie Gibson
where Martinez showed some of the destruction and noted, "This is the
hole created by the explosion. It goes down about twenty-five feet. The
blast was so powerful they burst a water main, flooding this section of
Baghdad. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki who faces re-election in
January has campaigned on his ability to make Iraq safer. His opponents
say this bombings proves the military is infiltrated." If you saw the
broadcast, you know no one could see to the bottom of the crater -- the
very wide crater -- because it was filled with water. On Sunday's
bombings,
an Iraqi correspondent for McClatchy poses a number of questions at Inside Iraq,
beginning with: "Is it completely correct to keep accusing only the
neighboring countries all the time? If we assume they are involved, who
implement their plans in Iraq?"
Yesterday's snapshot noted
Martin Chulov (the Guardian) report
on Iraq attempting to "become a nuclear player [. . .] The Iraqi
government has approached the French nuclear industry about rebuilding
at least one of the reactors that was bombed at the start of the first
Gulf War. The government has also contacted the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA) and United Nations to seek ways around resolutions
that ban Iraq's re-entry into the nuclear field." Today
he does an audio report at the
Guardian on the issue.
Martin
Chulov: I think Iraqi politicians are looking around and they're seeing
that they're out of options as far as delivering services to their --
to their constituents. It's got no electricity capacity, or very
little. It has very little water capacity. And not much for science and
technology so they figure now that a new reactor may help them serve
their energy needs and all sorts of other scientific and health needs
that might lead them forward.
Jon Dennis: Iraq hasn't had a very happy history with its nuclear technology.
Martin
Chulov: It certainly hasn't. Three decades of Saddam during which he
attempted to make good and maintain a nuclear program ended in
catastrophe. All three nuclear reactors were bombed and destroyed. And
he was invaded twice, partly on the basis that he had these reactors.
So it's been a long and fraught and ultimately fruitless history with
nuclear energy in Iraq but now, six years after Saddam was ousted, the
Iraqis are looking to have another go at it.
Jon Dennis: But how could Iraq ensure that any new nuclear facility would be secure?
Martin
Chulov: And this is indeed the problem and this is going to be a giant
step -- a giant obstacle in getting any sort of approval. Iraq is a
signatory to a number of non-proliferation treaties that were -- that
were imposed after the invasion and which a number of yellow cake vials
did, in fact, go missing. There are some contaminets out here in the
Iraqi community that have not been recovered in six years since. Iraq
has shown a very limited capacity to ensure its essential sites
including four of its ministries which have been destroyed over the
past three months by suicide bombers who have been able to drive
straight up to the gates.
The report is a segment of
Guardian Daily, the newspaper's daily audio broadcast. Today
Oliver August (Times of London) observes:
Iraq's
new masters insist they have no intention of trying to develop nuclear
bombs. "We are co-operating with the IAEA and expanding and defining
areas of research where we can implement nuclear technology for
peaceful means," the Science and Technology Minister, Raid Fahmi, told
the Guardian.
That is unlikely to reassure Iraq's neighbours,
however, given the chaotic conditions that reign in the country.
The
insurgency is by no means subdued, with a group linked to Iraqi
al-Qaeda claiming responsibility for the latest bombings, which killed
more than 155 people on Sunday. The Sunni extremist group said on a
website that its "martyrs . . . targeted the dens of infidelity".
The
New Zealand Herald adds,
"Iraq has also begun lobbying the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA) and the United Nations to overturn resolutions which ban Iraq
using atomic energy."
At Iran's Press TV, a commentator named Jaled Ali Ayoub shares this opinion,
"wake up, stupids they destroyed all irak with their amunitions and
know they are going to reconstract irak with the companies, owned by
them and paid by all the irakis population. You cannt by more
ignorents, because when the morality of the iraks gain the power of
irak, i sware that they will destroy it again. look to another horizon
the green go and the english, they only represents death to all arabs
and muslim. 10 of billions of US$ was stolen from your country."
Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Jenan Hussein (McClatchy Newspapers) reports
a Baghdad roadside bombing which wounded six people, a Baghdad sticky
bombing which claimed the lives of 3 women and left four men injured
and a Mosul roadside bombing which claimed 4 lives and left six people
injured.
Reuters notes a Tikrit roadside bombing "blew up an oil tanker" claiming 2 lives in the process ("the driver and his assistant").
Lin Zhi (Xinhua) reports
a Diyala Province bombing which left three people injured (one female,
two males) and a Diyala Proinvce "makeshift bomb" wounded a father and
son.
Shootings?
Reuters notes that Iraqi and US forces "killed a suspsected al Qaeda member" in Mosul yesterday.
Meanwhile
Mu Xueuqan (Xinhua) reports
Ban Ki-moon, UN Secretary-General, stated today that the UN will send
someone to the country "for preliminary consulations related to Iraq's
security and sovereignty."
Khaled Farhan (Reuters) reports
Najaf has a new bank, "In one of Shi'ite Islam's holiest cities, a bank
has opened a branch only for women, hoping to tap a potentially large
market and meet pent-up demand from Muslim women for financial services
that meet their needs."
The Iraq War drags on and, if you doubt that, you're not paying attention. In the US,
Pamela E. Walck (Savannah Morning News) reports
Fort Stewart is sending 400 soldiers from the 2nd Heavy Brigade Combat
Team, 3rd Infantry to Iraq for a year. Jessica Fitzgerald's husband
(Spc Kevin Fitzgerald) is among those deploying and she tells Walck,
"This is his second deployment. It's not any easier this time." Spc
Carla Robinson tells Walck, "I'm really feeling pretty positive right
now. The sooner we get there, the sooner we can come home." And Sgt
Brandon Bodily states, "This is my first deployment. I'm just hoping I
come back safely."
P. Norman Moody (Floriday Today) reports,
"Florida National Guard soldiers from Cocoa began intense training this
week for deployment in January to Iraq and Kuwait. The Guard's 53rd
Infantry Brigade kicked off the training for 2,500 troops in what's
expected to be the largest single-unit deployment of the Florida
National Guard since World War II." Meanwhile
Sify News reports
that India qill not be sending troops to Iraq or Afghanistan according
to Defense Minister A.K. Anthony. That declaration came on the same day
that
UPI reports,
"U.S. and Indian forces wrapped up their largest joint military
exercise to date, practicing a set of maneuvers simulating environments
in Iraq and Afghanistan."
Turning to the US.
Tony Perry (Los Angeles Times) reports
the US military believes they've stumbled onto a category of people
with an advanced level of detection when it comes to roadside bombs:
"Military researchers have found that two groups of personnel are
particularly good at spotting anomalies: those with hunting
backgrounds, who traipsed through the woods as youths looking to bag a
deer or turkey; and those who grew up in tough urban neighborhoods,
where it is often important to know what gang controls which block."
You have to wonder why the military can spend money studying that but
they can never seem to study rape within the ranks? That issue was a
topic
yesterday on Democracy Now! (link has text, video and audio) as Amy Goodman and Sharif Abdel Kouddous spoke with a director of a new documentary.
AMY GOODMAN: Rape in the Ranks: The Enemy Within
is a documentary that focuses on the cases of three female service
members victimized by rape and other forms of sexual assault. One of
the victims, Tina Priest, she was found dead in Iraq in March 2006,
just weeks after she had accused a male soldier of raping her. Her
family was told she took her own life, but they don't believe that.
They think she may have been killed because she came forward with the
rape accusation. In this scene from the film, Tina Priest's mother, Joy
Priest, visits her daughter's gravesite.
PASCALE BOURGAUX: How did she die?
JOY
PRIEST: She died in Iraq from what the Army says was a self-inflicted
gunshot wound to her chest. That's what the Army says. I don't -- I
don't know how she died. I want to find out how she died.
PASCALE BOURGAUX: What do you think?
UNIDENTIFIED: Don't know what to think.
JOY
PRIEST: There are so many different opinions. I don't -- I don't see
her killing herself. But if she did, I can understand why --
PASCALE BOURGAUX: Why?
JOY
PRIEST: -- she did. Yes, because of the trauma that she had been
through with the rape and the way that people treated her afterwards.
And so, I can see how she would be depressed enough to do that. But
it's not like her.
AMY GOODMAN: An excerpt of Rape in the Ranks: The Enemy Within.
For more, we're joined by the film's director, Pascale Bourgaux, a
French journalist and filmmaker. The film had its premiere last night
here in New York at the Independent Film Festival.
Welcome to Democracy Now! Talk about Tina and the other three women you profile.
PASCALE
BOURGAUX: So, Tina, the -- you've seen in the excerpt, it's -- I mean,
the family is still looking for the truth, because they're convinced
that she didn't commit suicide, that she was killed. But the case is
dead. They asked answer -- they ask answer to the Army, but they never
-- you know, they never answer those questions they raised. And then,
the three other cases. There is Suzanne. She was raped by her command.
She deserted. She refused to go back to Iraq to escape from her
commander. And then she was in jail.
Finally, Grammy, Academy Award and Golden Globe winning singer-songwriter
Carly Simon appeared on
NBC's Today Show this morning and
performed "You Belong To Me." The Carly classic (which Carly co-wrote with the Doobie Brothers'
Michael McDonald) is part of a new album released this week,
Never Been Gone.
Carly offers two songs she hadn't previously recorded for commercial
release as well as ten of her best-loved classics that she's reimagined
to find diferent levels in and meanings to including "You're So Vain,"
"Anticipation," "Let The River Run," "The Right Thing To Do," "Boys In
The Trees" and "That's The Way I've Always Heard It Should Be."
Thursday she's on
Tavis Smiley (PBS) and also on NPR's
Talk Of The Nation.
Click here to watch Carly on Monday's
Good Morning America (ABC).
