Thousands of Sadrists Protest Security Pact With US; Sistani Aide Demands Parliament Vote

Thousands of followers of Shiite leader Sayyid Muqtada al-Sadr peacefully protested across southern Iraq on Friday, according to McClatchy. They prayed and then stood silently in solidarity against the security agreement being negotiated by PM Nuri al-Maliki with George W. Bush.


Sadrists Demonstrate in Kufa. Courtesy Amara.net, a Sadrist site.

(On both the Iraqi and American side, this agreement is being characterized as a mere understanding between two executives. It is not being categorized as a treaty and there is no plan to submit it either to the Iraqi parliament or to the US Congress. It seems that the Bush team hopes it will take on the force of law just by virtue of existing and having been signed by the two leaders.)

Aljazeera had a debate between Hasan Salman, who supports al-Maliki, and Nizar al-Samarra'i, a Sunni dissident, this afternoon. Salman said that the agreement might be stipulated to be only for one year, so as not to detract from Iraqi sovereignty. He also said he welcomed the Sadrist demonstrations because they strengthened al-Maliki's negotiating position.

Except that I don't think the demonstrations are intended to help al-Maliki, but rather to delegitimize and bury him.

Even Jalal al-Din Saghir, a member of parliament from the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, which is allied with al-Maliki, preached a sermon at the Buratha Mosque in north Baghdad, saying, according to McClatchy:

'"The Iraqi people should see every single letter in (the agreement) and it should be transparent. What the people accept we do and what they reject we do," said ISCI lawmaker Jalal al Din al Saghir in his Friday sermon. "Most of what the Americans offered was against Iraq's sovereignty. If this treaty is done it won't be on Iraq's sovereignty, constitution and its land." '

Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that there is broad Sunni and Shiite uneasiness with the agreement, even inside Iraqi governing circles.

Al-Hayat says that those familiar with the current draft of the agreement says that it speaks of the establishment of 400 US military sites and bases through the country, of legal immunity for American troops and citizens, and an abrogation of any undertakings previously made, to share in the reconstruction of the country.

Another source told al-Hayat that US Ambassador Ryan Crocker is pressing for language permitting permanent US bases, and removal of other language forbidding the US to attack a third country from Iraqi soil. (This source does not sound reliable to me. US officials have repeatedly said they do not want "permanent" bases, and the provision disallowing the use of Iraqi soil as a launching pad for one country to attack another is in the Iraqi constitution.)

The Iranian Speaker of the House, Ali Larijani, called on Iraqis to resist the security agreement with the US with the same courage that they oppose the Occupation itself.

Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani is also said to oppose provisions of the agreement.

The source told al-Hayat that there tensions pervade the US-Iraqi relationship because of disputes over the text of the agreement.

Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, leader of the Islamic Supreme Council in Iraq, the largest bloc in parliament and cornerstone of the al-Maliki government, issued a statement through his office. He spoke of the existence of:

' a national consensus on rejecting many of the points put forward by the American side in the agreement, because they detract from national sovereignty." He said that such a consensus existed in the National Security Council, which is composed of the leaders of the major political blocs in the parliament.'

Unlike the Sadrists, who reject the agreement altogether, al-Hayat says that ISCI simply has problems with some specific provisions. For instance, it objects to US troops being able to arrest Iraqis at will and hold them, and to be able to use deadly force at will without coordinating with the Iraqi government. It also objects to extraterritoriality (immunity from prosecution in Iraqi courts) for American troops, civilians and private security guards.

Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi, a Sunni Arab and leader of the fundamentalist Iraqi Islamic Party, agreed with al-Hakim's stance. He said in a statement issued on Friday that Iraq's sovereignty is a "red line".

Al-Hayat's sources also say that US Ambassador Ryan Crocker privately told the Iraqi government that the US rejects the holding of a national referendum on the provisions of the agreement. He is alleged to have brandished the threat that if the agreement was not reached, Iraq would remain under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter, i.e. in a sort of receivership to the UN Security Council.

If this allegation is true, it puts Crocker on a collision course with Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, since, Al-Hayat maintains, Sistani is absolutely insistent that the provisions of the agreement be submitted to a popular referendum.

In Karbala, Sistani's representative, Sheikh Ahmad Safi, said in his Friday sermon that the agreement must not be allowed to shackle future generations of Iraqis, and must not detract from Iraqi sovereignty. He insisted that the agreement would be null and void if it was not voted on by the elected Iraqi parliament.

(I don't think it will be voted on by parliament.)

On another front, al-Hayat says, former prime minister and former Da'wa Party leader Ibrahim Jaafari has founded and new nationalist political current that will seek to reach out across ethnic and sectarian divides to unite Iraqi nationalists across the board.

Meanwhile, the CSM reports on rogue Mahdi Army splinter groups in Risala, in Baghdad, and the way they terrorize residents.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Suicide Bombers Kill 20, Wound Dozens in North; Firefight with Jihadis in Tikrit; VP Abdul Mahdi Praises IranP

At least 35 persons died in political violence in northern Iraq on Thursday. Suicide bombers killed 20 persons and wounded dozens in three attacks on police and recruits, with the largest attack at Sinjar. In Tikrit, Awakening Council tribesmen armed and paid by the US shot to death 15 jihadis in a tanker headed for Baghdad with suicide belt bombs when the driver and his passenger opened fire at a checkpoint. (Details below).

"Turkish warplanes struck 16 Kurdish guerrilla targets in northern Iraq on Thursday morning . . . The statement on the General Staff's Web site said the operation against the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) rebel group, launched at 0800 GMT, had been completed successfully. "

Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that Adil Abdul Mahdi, one of two Iraqi vice presidents, is in Tehran for a visit with President Mahmud Ahmadinejad. Abdul Mahdi, considered close to the Americans in Baghdad, is nevertheless also a leader of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, the leading political party that was founded in 1982 in Tehran for Iraqi expatriates by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

In Tehran, Abdul Mahdi spoke at a news conference with Ahmadinejad, saying he considered the Iranian president's recent trip to Baghdad "a turning point in the history of the relations between the two countries." He added, "The people and government of Iraq have long valued Iranian support for Iraq and its role as the path of their progress." He said that his visit to Iran is for the purpose of "discussions of economic issues and services, as well as political and security matters."

Gee, that's not how the US talks about Iran. Yet here is Iraq's elected Vice President, and he doesn't seem to agree with John McCain's characterization of Iran's role in Iraq.

For his part, Ahmadinejad said that the "enemies" are afraid that Iraq might turn into a base against global arrogance (i.e. Western imperialism). He said the Iraqi government and people have a bright future.

Christopher Cerf and Victor Navasky at Tomdispatch.com examine John McCain's actual stances on the Iraq War from 2003 and find that he didn't actually initially oppose it and that he sounded at every point just like Bush. At the same site this week, Frida Berrigan on how the Pentagon has been turned into the Swiss Army Knife of bureaucracies by the Bush administration.


Tom Engelhardt points out that "the U.S. military has, in the last two months, fired at least 200 Hellfire missiles into the Iraqi capital, according to the Washington Post, most of them into Sadr City, the vast, heavily populated Shiite slum in east Baghdad. ("Just six" had been used in Baghdad in the previous three months.)"

Well no one is more happy than I that US military casualties are way down in May. But apparently it is because US troops didn't have to fight in Sadr City so much, because we like bombed it back to the Stone Age, with all those civilians densely packed in there. And no wonder the Mahdi Army suddenly decided to let al-Maliki's troops in. 200 missiles is a lot of missiles to rain down on your extended family.

The proselytizing Marine at Fallujah has been removed from the checkpoint and is under investigation. Apparently it was just one guy flying solo. It will take some time to repair the damage he did.

McClatchy reports political violence on Thursday:

' Baghdad

Gunmen throw a hand grenade in a Kia minibus as both vehicles were driving down Muthanna Military Base Street heading towards Alawi al-Hilla, central Baghdad at 10 am Thursday. The hand grenade detonated severely injuring 6 civilians.

2 unidentified bodies were found in Baghdad by Iraqi Police today. 1 in Saidiyah and 1 in Palestine Street.

General Manager of a private Iraqi oil company, Hussein Ali Abdulhussein survived an assassination attempt in al-Masbah neighbourhood in Karrada at around 9.30 pm. He is now in the neurosurgery hospital being treated for his wounds.

Nineveh

16 recruits killed and 21 others, some severely injured when a suicide bomber wearing an explosive belt detonated in a crowd of young men queuing in front of the Directorate of Police in the southern part of the town Sinjar, 120 km to the west of Mosul at 10.30 am Thursday. They were applying for positions in the police force. The Chief of Police of Sinjar has been deposed as a result of this incident.

2 policemen killed and 10 people, 5 policemen and 5 civilians injured when a suicide car bomber detonated targeting a Rapid Response Force patrol in the Ghabat area to the north of Mosul. The suicide bomber was dressed in police uniform and driving a police vehicle, said the commander of RRF battalion. The explosion also caused a great deal of material damage in the area.

Diyala

A roadside bomb targeted an Iraqi Army patrol in Bizayiz Buhruz, 20 km to the south of Baquba at 10 am Thursday, killing 2 servicemen.

A roadside bomb exploded on he main route between Khanaqeen and Qara Teppa 70 km to the northeast of Baquba seriously injuring a man and his son. Rasheed Nebeel and his son Husam are both in hospital.

Salahuddin

A tank truck was stopped at a Sahwa checkpoint at the northern entrance to Tikrit. The truck that was headed towards Baghdad was stopped and the driver was asked to open the tanker for searching. Instead of complying with the order, the driver and his assistant took out weapons and started shooting. The Sahwa members and the security forces returned fire and killed them both. Then they opened the tanker and found at least 10 men with explosive belts on. They took them out and executed them." '

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Haeri Fatwa Against Security Agreement; Al-Alam: Basra Pols Oppose Security Agreement with US

The USG Open Source Center translates the fatwa of Ayatollah Kadhim al-Ha'iri (Haeri) condemning any security agreement between Iraq and the United States (Via BBC Monitoring). Haeri, an Iraqi, lives in Qom because he refuses to reside under foreign military occupation. He is sometimes called Iraq's 'fifth grand ayatollah.' The other four live in Najaf and are less involved in politics than Haeri.

OSC also translates a program of the Iranian Arabic-language satellite channel, al-Alam (The World) on opposition by Iraqi politicians in the southern Shiite port city of Basra to the proposed US-Iraqi security agreement. The report quotes a member of the al-Da'wa Party but that party has 2 branches and it is not clear if it is Prime Minister al-Maliki's branch. It also quotes Sadrist Salah al-Obeidi. The allegation is made that there are fatwas from Iraqi Shiite ayatollahs forbidding the agreement.

'May 29, 2008 Thursday

IRAQ'S AYATOLLAH AL-HA'IRI ADVISES AGAINST SECURITY AGREEMENT WITH US

Text of report by Lebanese-based Shi'i News Agency website

[Shi'i News Agency headline: "Statement by Religious Authority Al-Sayyid Al-Ha'iri on the US Government Agreement with the Iraqi Government"]

The religious authority, His Eminence Grand Ayatollah Al-Sayyid Kazim al-Husayni al-Ha'iri, may his shadow lasts, has issued a statement on the US agreement with the Iraqi government. The following is text of the statement:

In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate. praised be God, and may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon Muhammad and his good, chaste family members. "And incline not to those who do wrong, or the Fire will seize you" "Islam rises above all and none rises above it." [Koranic verses]

My dear sons in our occupied Iraq: May the peace and blessings of Allah be upon you.

You are aware that the occupiers of Iraq want to legalize their illegitimate presence on our land so that it will be possible for them to tamper with the security of the homeland and the citizen and to continue to plunder the country's resources and thus increase the poverty and deprivation. They want to force the Iraqi Government to agree, under the excuse of removing Iraq from the Seventh Chapter of the UN Charter, to completely concede Iraq's independence and resources and make its presence and future go with the wind, where it will not have authority or sovereignty, and force it to agree to provisions that will stamp the stigma of humiliation and disgrace on Iraq's forehead forever.

Such enforcement on the government will not leave any dignity or sanctity to the individual. They want their dog, which is squatting on Iraq, protected from any accountability by the government or the nation. They want all Iraq's political and legal entities: The presidency, Prime Ministry, and Council of Representatives, as well as the nation to be accountable to the Americans. "If they enter a country, they despoil it, and make the noblest of its people its meanest. Thus do they behave." [Koranic verse]

Besides, the American, who has entered Iraq with the slogan of liberation, soon announced himself an occupier. He did not fulfil any promise. Therefore, is any goodness expected from such agreements?

From the position of fatherhood, I give my advice to every official in this nation not to stain himself with such an agreement. Let him fear God for what is left of his dignity.

Let everyone know also that such an agreement will not be binding to anyone, except to the one who signs it. No one should ever think that he can plot against our nation despite its preoccupation with its tragedies; the killing, destitution, starvation, and deprivation. All this is the work of the Americans and their supporters. The nation, whom Prophet Muhammad, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, awakened, will not accept humiliation and disgrace. Here is his grandson, Al-Husayn, peace be upon him, crying out defiantly: "Never will we be humbled."

Our zealous sons, we are going through a difficult test. We have no other choice but to adhere to the truth together. Do not ignore what is being plotted against you and do not busy yourselves with trivial matters that lead to differences between you. This is the wish of your enemy, who is lying in wait for you.

Place your trust in Allah, close your ranks, stay alert, and watch out of your enemy.

I address the occupation from my place here by repeating the words of our Lady Zaynab, peace be upon her: "Go ahead and plot and do what you like, but by God you will never wipe out our Koran and revelation."

Dear sons: Let me tell you. The blessed religious seminary in Iraq is dearer, cleaner, higher, and nobler than the recognition of the legitimacy of such an agreement.

May the peace and blessings of Allah be upon you.

[Signed] Kazim al-Husayni al-Ha'iri, 15 Jumada al-Ula 1429 Hegira

Source: Shi'i News Agency website, Mount Lebanon, in Arabic 21 May 08'


'Al-Alam TV: Basra's Political, Religious Leaders Oppose Security Treaty With US
Al-Alam Television
Thursday, May 29, 2008

(Newsreader) Representatives of political, religious parties and currents in Basra were unanimous in their rejection of the security treaty which Washington plans to conclude with Baghdad. Shaykh Salah al-Ubaydi, representative of the Sadrist Trend in Basra, said that the Trend was committed to fatwas issued by religious authorities which prohibited such treaties.

(Reporter) A political and popular rejection of the security treaty to be signed between Iraq and the United States was voiced by representatives of political and popular forces in Basra. Basra's representatives in the Iraqi parliament rejected the treaty on the grounds that it is an infringement on Iraq's sovereignty and a threat to neighboring countries. It goes against the Iraqi constitution which specifies that Iraq must not be used as a springboard for aggression against neighboring countries.

(Abd al-Musawi, Al-Dawah Party MP) We should not sign a treaty with the US which threatens our neighbors. We do not accept for Iraq to become a base from which to launch attacks on our neighbors or to set up bases in Iraq which threaten our neighbors or seek to interfere in their interests.

(Salah al-Matat, member of Basra's Provincial Council) If this treaty is not clear and not formed on the basis of parity, then it will represent a future threat. We want Iraq to be independent and not to fall under anyone's protection.

(Reporter) The spokesman of the Sadrist Trend Shaykh Salah al-Ubaydi reiterated his rejection of the treaty and said that it aims to solidify the US presence in Iraq, a matter which religious authorities have prohibited.

(Shaykh Salah al-Ubaydi) The office of the Martyr Al-Sadr has made clear its position on the security treaty between the US and Iraq. It is rejected and is unacceptable and there are many fundamental reasons why it is unacceptable. One of these is the verdict of the religious authorities in this regard. Sayid al-Ha'iri has issued a statement in which he rejected (the security treaty) and also the office of Sayid Al-Sistani has clarified in a number of oral questions a rejection of the treaty.

(Reporter) On the fringes of a human rights meeting, the leaders of Basra's religious and political blocs have urged the Iraqi government to reject the security treaty with the US forces and replace it with treaties with Iraq's neighbors that guarantee Iraq's security and sovereignty. The US-Iraqi treaty thus faces popular and political rejection because it is seen as an infringement on Iraq's sovereignty and a cause of concern for the region's security.

(Description of Source: Tehran Al-Alam Television in Arabic -- IRIB's 24-hour Arabic news channel, targetting a pan-Arab audience)'

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Sadr demands Referendum on SOFA; Sistani said to Support Referendum

CNN is reporting that Shiite leader Sayyid Muqtada al-Sadr is demanding that any US-Iraqi security agreement be submitted to a national referendum.

Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that he is in good company:

' Sources close to the office of the Shiite Supreme Exemplar, Ayatollah Ali Sistani, told al-Hayat that he called on the Iraqi prime minister during the latter's visit to Najaf recently, to deal cautiously with the agreement and called on him to organize a national referendum on it.'

So the idea of a national referendum on any Status of Forces agreement seems to be spreading. In my view, one impetus for this adoption of a California-style referendum approach is that the Iraqi parliament is not seen as strong enough to express the will of the people. Parliament often cannot hold a session because it lacks a quorum. The United Iraqi Alliance and the Kurdistan Alliance run it as a tyranny of the majority, when the UIA can get Shiite independents to vote with it. Often if al-Maliki is afraid he cannot get a law passed, he will avoid holding a precise one-by-one vote of the parliamentarians. Rather he'll ask for general assent without a voice vote. In essence, Iraq is being run by the cabinet, which often doubles as both executive and legislature (functioning as a sort of senate).

In 2006, the Sadrists in parliament demanded that the Iraqi government request for the renewal of the UN mandate for US and other foreign forces in Iraq be submitted to parliament before it was sent to the UN. Al-Maliki rejected that demand.

So if the legislature is rendered relatively toothless, it loses a great deal of legitimacy.

Hence the demand for a national referendum.

Any opposition of the Shiite religious leaders to a US-Iraqi security treaty could put it in question, in a big way.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Sunni Arabs Pull out of Talks with al-Maliki; Bush Benchmark in Doubt; Marines Proselytize Sunnis with Gospel

On Wednesday, the Sunni fundamentalist Iraqi Accord Front (IAF, Tawafuq) withdrew from talks on rejoining the government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki of the Shiite fundamentalist Islamic Mission Party (Da'wa).

Despite the confidence of Iraqi Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi, a Sunni, that his bloc would eventually rejoin the government, the development was a blow to al-Maliki. Al-Sharqiya television had reported on Tuesday (via USG Open Source Center and BBC Monitoring):

"The United Nations has committed Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to present the names of the new ministers to his government before the beginning of the International Compact Conference on Iraq that will be held in the Swedish capital, Stockholm. Informed sources said that Al-Maliki held a meeting with Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi after Al-Tawafuq Front MPs suddenly escalated their tone against the Iraqi Government, accusing it of impeding a settlement and of humiliating the Front, as was said by Al-Tawafuq Front MP Zafir al-Ani. Umar Abd-al-Sattar, key leader in the Iraqi Islamic Party, expected the collapse of the negotiations. The sources added that the meeting between Al-Maliki and Al-Hashimi tried to salvage the negotiations, and anticipated the announcement of the new names of Al-Tawafuq ministers before the beginning of the Stockholm conference so as to give a boost to the prime minister in front of the participants, namely, that his government is a unity government."

As it happened, al-Maliki had to show up in Stockholm without his Sunni Arabs in tow.

The collapse of these talks and the failure of al-Maliki to achieve substantial reconciliation with Sunni Arabs are blows to the success of the US troop escalation ("surge"), which was advertised as necessary to move Iraq toward communal peace. This Sunni-Shiite reconciliation was one of four major benchmarks announced by George W. Bush in January of 2007, which he said should be achieved by June, 2007. In the subsequent year and a half, al-Maliki's national unity government collapsed, the Sunnis have remained in the opposition, and hundreds of thousands of Sunni Arabs have been ethnically cleansed from Baghdad in the meantime. Many of them are sweltering in Syria as refugees, their life savings dwindling, their former homes occupied by Shiite squatters.

Iraqi Sunnis have just gotten the bad news that they will need visas for Jordan. There are between 500,000 and 750,000 Iraqis in Jordan, almost all of them Sunnis, with some 360,000 being there illegally. (Jordan's population is only a little over 6 million).

Many Sunni Arab Iraqis, once the country's ruling elite, now feel oppressed by Shiite, Kurdish and American Christian dominance. The story that Marines are passing coins to Sunnis in Falluja with Christian messages on them is felt as a further humiliation, especially coming after the incident of the US soldier using the Qur'an for target practice. The coins passed in Fallujah had John 3:16 inscribed on one side, "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life." This verse is not a good place to begin a Christian-Muslim dialogue. The Qur'an explicitly rejects the idea that the One God can have a "son" as polytheistic. Some Islamic theologians have argued that the phrase "Son of God" is a metaphor, which cannot be translated literally into Arabic. In any case, there are lots of Gospel verses that Muslims might find interesting, but they would generally take this one as a clear signal that Bush's Christian Soldiers consider Iraqi Muslims to be supine and abject.

The USG Open Source Center translates an Aljazeera report on the withdrawal of the IAF or Tawafuq from negotiations about rejoining the al-Maliki government. The report says that the negotiations collapsed because al-Maliki rejected a cabinet nominee of the Iraqi Islamic Party (IIP), one of three components of the IAF. The IIP, an Iraqi offshoot of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, is headed by Tariq al-Hashemi, one of Iraq's two vice presidents. Apparently IIP's coalition partners did not agree on that slate of candidates for inclusion in the cabinet. The report says that the collapse of the negotiations may reinforce a Sunni conviction that al-Maliki's government is biased against them.


'May 28, 2008 Wednesday

IRAQI AL-TAWAFUQ FRONT WITHDRAWAL MAY HAVE "SERIOUS" EFFECTS - AL-JAZEERA

LENGTH: 580 words

Doha Al-Jazeera Satellite Channel Television in Arabic at 0507 gmt on 28 May carries the following announcer-read report over video: "Iraqi Al-Tawafuq Front has decided to suspend its talks with Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki regarding its return to the government. Dr Salim al-Juburi, official spokesman for the Al-Tawafuq Front said that the decision to withdraw the candidates was taken following Al-Maliki's objection to a candidate who was proposed by the front to occupy cabinet posts."

The channel then carries a three-minute video report by its correspondent Aziz al-Mirnisi, who speaks about "a new crisis on the horizon of the Iraqi political scene." He says: "After long talks with the government on some cabinet posts, the Sunni bloc, represented by the Iraqi Al-Tawafuq Front, decided to stop its talks seeking to return to Nuri al-Maliki's government. The front, which has five ministers and one deputy prime minister in the current government, said that Al-Maliki's government, which is dominated by Shi'is and Kurds, did not respond to the front's demands regarding a list of nominees that it proposed to occupy cabinet posts. The front justified this decision as being a result of Al-Maliki's objection to one of the nominees to the post of deputy prime minister for security affairs."

Speaking about repercussions of the withdrawal decision, Al-Mirnisi says: "The withdrawal decision may provoke once again accusations against Al-Maliki's government of bias against the Sunnis in Iraq, which may have serious political and security effects on the political process as a whole if the matter is not addressed by the government. Convincing the front to rejoin the government's makeup is a main US policy objective, and a step that many consider necessary to realize national reconciliation among Iraqis."

Immediately afterwards, the channel's anchorwoman Fayruz Zayyani interviews Khalaf al-Ulayyan, National Dialogue Council chairman and Al-Tawafuq Front MP, via telephone from Baghdad on the front's suspension decision.

Al-Ulayyan says: "We were not aware of such a list, neither the first nor the second. This matter was only limited to the Iraqi Islamic Party [IIP], who nominated a number of figures from within the IIP and others close to the IIP to occupy these positions without consulting other members in Al-Tawafuq Front. We did not know anything regarding this list; we expressed our objections to the prime minister and nominated a number of independent technocratic ministers and asked the prime minister to choose whom he deems suitable to occupy cabinet positions."

When asked if he could confirm leaked news by the Iraqi Government on disagreements within the Al-Tawafug Front, Al-Ulayyan says: "This is true; there are disagreements. Our brothers at the IIP want to dominate the entire [Al-Tawafuq] Front in addition to the nominated ministers as happened in the past, not leaving the chance for others to participate in decisionmaking or nominating any figure for any cabinet positions."

Speaking on possible consultations with the front on the current disagreement with the IIP, Al-Ulayyan says: "We tried, for several times, to sit with the IIP leaders to discuss these issues; however, the IIP obstinacy made this matter almost impossible. Moreover, Dr Adnan al-Dulaymi, who is head of the [Al-Tawafuq] Front, is extremely biased towards the IIP and does not care about others."

Source: Al-Jazeera TV, Doha, in Arabic 0507 gmt 28 May 08 '
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Halliburton and Iran

The moral of the below: If you can't join them, beat them.

Reddit readers have dug up an article by Jason Leopold alleging that Halliburton, of which Dick Cheney was CEO in 1995-2000, and which did business in Iran until 2007, supplied Iran with equipment that could have been useful to its nuclear program. Among Halliburton's Iranian partners was Cyrus Nasseri, who was also a point man in the Iranian nuclear program. Leopold's update shows that Cheney lobbied intensively on behalf of Iran in Congress in the late 1990s. (He also tried to get the boycott on Saddam Hussein's Iraq lifted).

The USG Foreign Broadcast Information Service, as carried by BBC Monitoring, translated this article from an Iranian newspaper in 2005. It supports the substance of Leopold's article. It contains a twist, though, accusing Halliburton of espionage on the Iranian nuclear program.

'January 18, 2005, Tuesday

Iran's nuclear negotiator said behind contract with USA's Halliburton

SOURCE: Resalat web site, Tehran, in Persian 17 Jan 05

LENGTH: 387 words

Text of report entitled: 'An explanation of the dimensions of the cooperation of a senior diplomat in Iran's nuclear negotiations with senior officials of the American government, " published 'by Iranian newspaper Resalat web site on 17 January

An informed source has explained the new dimensions of the joint economic cooperation of the senior diplomat in Iran's nuclear negotiations with senior officials of the American government.

In an interview given to Fars News Agency he stated that a study of the contract signed between the Iranian government and the American Halliburton Company shows that the main individuals who paved the way for the contract were Dick Cheney, the American Vice President, and Sirus Naseri, the lynchpin in Iran's nuclear negotiations and special adviser of the Supreme National Security Council.

He added: The participation of Iran's valuable oil contract with the Halliburton Company involving drilling 12 wells in phases nine and 10 of Southern Pars oilfields goes back to early 1383 year beginning 21st March 2004 .


In phases nine and 10 in Southern Pars gas is expected to be found in Iran's land and marine sections over 52 months up to 1385, and 50 million cubic meters of natural gas and 400 tonnes of sulphur is expected to be extracted.

He added: With a proposal worth 282 million dollars Halliburton wanted to achieve success in this phase of the Southern Pars project.

According to this informed source, before this, too, the American company, along with the American Schlumberger, wanted to participate in phases two and three of the region, something that it failed to achieve.

Stating that there were several aspects to Halliburton's new participation in Iran, the informed source added: The first of this is that the contact concluded with Halliburton is nearly 70 billion tumans more than the amount the company had sought. That is to say, while Halliburton had asked for nearly 23 million dollars for drilling each of the oil wells, amounting to a total of 282 million dollars for drilling the 12 wells in Oslavieyyeh, the Iranian government, in the contract that has been signed, has granted some 360 million dollars to the Halliburton-Oriental consortium, which is nearly 70 billion tumans more than the amount asked for in the bid.'
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

McClellan: Bush in Permanent Campaign Mode, Less than Forthright on Iraq

Former White House press spokesman Scott McClellan has come to the realization that Bush's presidency veered badly off course and that the Bush White House was in "permanent campaign mode"-- by which he appears to mean that the honesty and transparency necessary to govern were foregone in favor of constant propaganda of the sort it is only decorous for an out-of-power candidate to deploy.

Now if only we could get past the idea that a temporary campaign mode is legitimate, if by "campaign" one means propagandizing.

McClellan writes:

' “History appears poised to confirm what most Americans today have decided: that the decision to invade Iraq was a serious strategic blunder. No one, including me, can know with absolute certainty how the war will be viewed decades from now when we can more fully understand its impact. What I do know is that war should only be waged when necessary, and the Iraq war was not necessary.” '

Gee, that's not what I hear from John McCain. But of course, he might be in "permanent campaign mode."

The former official cannot quite let go of the idea that Bush had good intentions but was misled:

' “I still like and admire President Bush,” McClellan writes. “But he and his advisers confused the propaganda campaign with the high level of candor and honesty so fundamentally needed to build and then sustain public support during a time of war. … In this regard, he was terribly ill-served by his top advisers, especially those involved directly in national security.” '

But elsewhere he says,

' Bush was “clearly irritated, … steamed,” when McClellan informed him that chief economic adviser Larry Lindsey had told The Wall Street Journal that a possible war in Iraq could cost from $100 billion to $200 billion: “‘It’s unacceptable,’ Bush continued, his voice rising. ‘He shouldn’t be talking about that.’”'

But if Bush had been honest and sincere, only misled, then wouldn't he want to know why Larry Lindsey had come to that conclusion (he under-estimated the cost by about a factor of 10)? No, Bush was about suppressing anything but his own party line.

McClellan's revelations about the 'permanent campaign mode' and Bush's anger at straight talk on costs help explain the current narrative about Iraq shaped by his spinmeisters. On the one hand he is telling us that the Iraqi Army imposed itself on Basra and Mosul. On the other, the Pentagon comes out and says violence has fallen to March, 2004 levels in the country as a whole. But if the Iraqi army is engaged in hard-fought battles for control of entire cities with a tenacious insurgency, surely violence levels would be up? Then you start to notice that there haven't actually been any battles in Mosul.

In the permanent campaign, as in the permanent war, assertions made to the public about how well the victory is going do not have to be consistent or make sense.

McClellan lays to rest the myth of the 'liberal media.':

' “If anything, the national press corps was probably too deferential to the White House and to the administration in regard to the most important decision facing the nation during my years in Washington, the choice over whether to go to war in Iraq. “The collapse of the administration’s rationales for war, which became apparent months after our invasion, should never have come as such a surprise. … In this case, the ‘liberal media’ didn’t live up to its reputation. If it had, the country would have been better served.” '

He clearly seems surprised that network news, owned by rightwing corporations obsequious toward the US government, did not cover the rationales for the war critically! Was he expecting GE to instruct NBC to move to the left? (Though to be fair, NBC has recently gone some way toward redeeming itself, with Matt Lauer's recognition in 2006 that Iraq had fallen into civil war, and with MSNBC's backing for Keith Olbermann's courageous and honest evening magazine show. Bush's White House is signalling to General Electic that it should rein NBC in; the rich and powerful are not used to hearing criticism from channels owned by their friends and the beneficiaries of their largesse.)

Then there is this about Plamegate:

' “There is only one moment during the leak episode that I am reluctant to discuss,” he writes. “It was in 2005, during a time when attention was focusing on Rove and Libby, and it sticks vividly in my mind. … Following [a meeting in Chief of Staff Andy Card’s office], … Scooter Libby was walking to the entryway as he prepared to depart when Karl turned to get his attention. ‘You have time to visit?’ Karl asked. ‘Yeah,’ replied Libby.

“I have no idea what they discussed, but it seemed suspicious for these two, whom I had never noticed spending any one-on-one time together, to go behind closed doors and visit privately. … At least one of them, Rove, it was publicly known at the time, had at best misled me by not sharing relevant information, and credible rumors were spreading that the other, Libby, had done at least as much. …

“The confidential meeting also occurred at a moment when I was being battered by the press for publicly vouching for the two by claiming they were not involved in leaking Plame’s identity, when recently revealed information was now indicating otherwise. … I don’t know what they discussed, but what would any knowledgeable person reasonably and logically conclude was the topic? Like the whole truth of people’s involvement, we will likely never know with any degree of confidence.” '

The only time two people have to try hard to get their stories straight is when they have done something wrong and are planning to lie about it.

A primer on the Plame scandal is here.

Oh, and about that "permanent campaign mode" thing. That's nothing compared to the "permanent war mode."
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Sadr Threatens Weekly Demos; The Forgotten Refugees; Same old Retired Guys on the Take, on TV

Muqtada al-Sadr is urging Iraqis to hold weekly demonstrations after mosque prayers on Fridays against the proposed security agreement being negotiated by the al-Maliki government with the US. Sadr fears al-Maliki will give up too much of Iraq's sovereignty.

McClatchy says that Bush wants to give $600 million for the Iraqi police; but he wants to cut back support for American police!

Blue Girl reminds us about the millions of displaced Iraqis, whose lives have not improved despite Bush's renewed optimism on Iraq.

Not only did the corporate television news channels ignore the NYT report outing their "defense analysts" as deeply intertwined with private defense contractors and privy to special briefings by Bush's Pentagon, but they apparently intend to go on shamelessly serving up the same fare.

Let's just imagine that you are a retired senior officer, and that you have a cushy deal with a corporation that depends on Pentagon contracts. And lets say you are asked if it is a good idea to get up a war with Iran. Remember, your friends' contracts and your own retirement home in Palm Springs depend on it.

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Cole in Salon: John McCain's Arab-American Problem

My fortnightly column in Salon.com is now out: "John McCain's Arab-American Problem".

Excerpt:

' Arab-Americans do, however, have some distinctive concerns in common. They are more likely to care about the Iraq war and the Arab-Israeli peace process than other Americans. They are also particularly sensitive to racial profiling and assaults on civil liberties.

That has put them at odds with the Bush administration and the Republican Party, and has contributed to a hard swing toward the Democrats. After a plurality voted for Bush in 2000, the community favored Kerry in 2004 and has been increasingly trending Democratic. About 40 percent have been consistently Democratic since 2000, but the proportion identifying themselves as Republicans nationally has fallen in the past eight years from 38 percent to 26 percent.

Arab-Americans are both very likely to vote -- their turnout is 20 percent higher than that of the general population -- and they are concentrated. Two-thirds of them live in just 10 states, including the swing states of Florida, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia. In Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida, Arab-Americans have made up 2 percent of the electorate in recent elections. That sounds like a small proportion, but in a close race it can make a difference. In 2000, Bush won the Arab-American vote over Gore by 7.5 percentage points. Bush took Ohio that year by only 165,000 votes. He and Gore virtually tied in Florida in the popular vote.

The Arab-American presence is most significant in Michigan. An estimated 300,000 Arab-Americans reside in the southeastern portion of the state. More than a third of Michigan's Arab-Americans have Lebanese ancestry; most of that population is Shiite. Another third of the state's Arab-Americans are Iraqi, and many of those residents are Christian.

In other words, up to 5 percent of Michigan's vote is Arab-American. The Democratic candidate has won the state in each of the last two presidential elections by no more than 200,000 votes. Recent polling suggests that in a head-to-head contest between John McCain and Barack Obama, the two would split the state down the middle. Many analysts believe that the Democrats cannot win in November without winning Michigan.'

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

2 GIs Killed, 4 Wounded on Memorial Day; Bike Bomber kills 6, wounds 18;

In a grim Memorial Day reminder of the risks facing US troops in Iraq, two sets of guerrillas used roadside bombs to kill and wound GIs on Monday. Sunni Arab guerrillas hit a US convoy in Salahuddin Province, killing one and wounding 2. Then in southern Iraq, a dissident Shiite group blew up a US vehicle in Qadisiya province southeast of the holy city of Najaf, also killing one and wounding 2.

In Baghdad, , "A suicide bomber on a motorcycle killed at least six members of a U.S.-backed neighbourhood patrol and wounded 18 others on Monday, police said. The attack took place at a checkpoint in Tarmiya, a town just north of Baghdad."

Al-Zaman reports in Arabic that differences over Kirkuk between the United Iraqi Alliance and the Kurdistan Alliance may delay the holding of the provincial elections.

McClatchy reports that some educational institutions in Baghdad are still closed because of sectarian violence, leaving students high and dry.

Amit Paley profiles Sayyid Muqtada al-Sadr's attempt to gain respectability. It seems a little unlikely that he will ever be thought a great scholar. But since he is clearly a talented sectarian leader, he may go on to great things. The word for trained religious jurisprudent, by the way is 'mujtahid', meaning to exert oneself, i.e. in deciding what the law is based on scripture and other sources.

The USG Open Source Center translates a transcript of a news broadcast in Iraq:

' During its evening bulletins on 25 May, Al-Sharqiyah Television highlighted the lack of services in Baghdad and Mosul, Al-Sadr Trend's position on latest government measures pertaining to Friday prayers in Basra, and various security developments.

Within its 1300 gmt newscast, the station reported the following: . . .

"The Al-Sadr Trend has threatened to quiz the Iraqi prime minister in the Iraqi Council of Representatives against the backdrop of what he termed as his ongoing violations of the constitution and for not allowing the supporters of the trend to perform their religious rituals, including Friday prayers in Basra, southern Iraq. In press statements, Al-Sadr Trend Deputy Aqil Abd-al-Hasan said that the fact that trucks - with the support of security agencies - demolished the fence of one of the squares designated for hosting Friday prayers in the Kamsah Mil area in the Basra Governorate is considered a clear message to the Al-Sadr Trend that it will not be allowed to perform Friday prayers from now on, noting that this will make the trend pursue all peaceful and legal means to stop these violations against its supporters." '

The same Sharqiya broadcast included these reports:

-"Citizens in Baghdad and other cities complained of the decline in water and electricity services, especially in the previous week. Citizens in Baghdad said to Al-Sharqiyah that there has been a power outage in some areas on the Al-Karkh side for more than five days. In the meantime, citizens in Al-Rusafah side said that the power is on for only one hour everyday. The residents of Baghdad are now facing a new problem represented by the sudden cut off of potable water to all areas that lasted throughout yesterday, without knowing the reasons. The Baghdad Mayoralty did not outline the reason for the water cut off. "

And with regard to Mosul, a city of 1.7 million hundreds of miles north of Baghdad:

-"The residents of Mosul have appealed to the Trade Ministry's officials to make available the items of the ration card, stressing the scarcity of the items that are received, not to mention that many of the items are received after months of delay, noting that the validity date of some items expired. They also indicated that living conditions have deteriorated, and that unemployment and prices have sharply risen." -" Mosul Governor Durayd Khashmulah strongly attacked those who criticized him, in a reference to the deputies who accused him of distancing himself from the city, terming them as insignificant. Kashmulah stressed that he deals in a very impartial manner with all of the people's problems and concerns. "

McClatchy reports political violence in Iraq for Monday:

' Baghdad

Five civilians were injured when a bomb exploded inside a park near Abbas Ebin Firnas intersection in west Baghdad around 10:00 a.m.

Five people were killed (3 Sahwa council members and 2 policemen) and eleven others were injured (5 police and 6 Sahwa council members) when a suicide motorcycle bomb targeted a Sahwa checkpoint near the supporting forces headquarters in Tarmiyah district in north Baghdad around 10:30 a.m.

Two civilians were injured when a roadside bomb exploded near a moving bus in Shaab neighborhood in north Baghdad around 11:00 a.m. some commercial shops and private cars were damaged by the explosion.

Around 4:00 p.m. a mortar shell hit al Muthanna airport in west Baghdad. No news about casualties.

An Iraqi soldier was killed and eight others were wounded in a parked car bomb in the entrance of Hurriyah neighborhood in west Baghdad around 6:00 p.m.

Police found two unidentified bodies in Baghdad. The first body was found in Shaab neighborhood while the second body was found in Amil neighborhood.

Kirkuk

A driver of an ambulance and a civilian were injured when a roadside bomb exploded in Tuz Khurmatu town south of Kirkuk on Monday morning.

A source in the Kurdish security forces (Asayish) said that a bomb exploded near the house of a Turkmen teacher in al Askari neighborhood in downtown Tuz Khurmatu south of Kirkuk city on Monday morning.

A source in the Iraqi army said that a force of the Iraqi army raided on Monday morning al Rashad area west Kirkuk city and arrested a person that is called the prince of the Iraqi Islamic state in that area.

Najaf

A roadside bomb exploded in the al Shamiyah area south of Najaf at around 9 p.m. on Sunday. A source from the Iraqi army has told us that an American humvee was destroyed, a soldier was killed and two others were injured. US military said in an emailed reply that they confirm the new of the death of a coalition soldier.

Nineveh

A source in the Iraqi army said that an insurgent attacked a patrol that was joining the director of the tribes affairs in the ministry of interior affairs Major General Marid abdul Hussein. The source said that the insurgent attacked the patrol with the grenades in Sarj Khana area in downtown Mosul city north Iraq. Seven people were injured in the attack including one of the guards of the director.

Police forces arrested six young boys who were accused of being suicide bombers. The boys were arrested in one of the houses in Sumer neighborhood in west Mosul.

Diyala

Gunmen from al Qaida attacked Mohammed Taha , a village east of Baquba city on Monday morning. A member of Sahwa councils was killed and two others were wounded.

A policeman was killed and two others were injured when gunmen attacked Abi Saida village east of Baquba city

A policeman was killed and his six years old son was injured when a bomb exploded near the policeman’s house in Bani Saad district south of Baquba.'

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

White: UK Deportation of Yezza "Orwellian"

Ben White writes from Nottingham, UK with a guest editorial:

“I don’t like to use clichés, but this is really Orwellian”. So said my friend Hicham Yezza, speaking to me this weekend from Colnbrook Immigration Removal Centre where he was being held awaiting deportation. Moved last night to Campsfield detention centre near Oxford, for “Hich”, the nightmare continues, almost two weeks after his initial arrest by Nottinghamshire police using ‘anti-terror’ powers.

Hich, a 30 year old Nottingham University employee and former PhD student, was arrested along with student Rizwaan Sabir. The two were detained without charge for six days before being released. Hich, however, was immediately re-arrested for an alleged immigration-related offence.

The original arrests came after Sabir, while researching his dissertation on “the American approach to ‘al-Qaida in Iraq’” downloaded an al-Qaida document from a US government website. He sent the 1,500 page file to Hicham in order to save on printing costs; and after a tip off, police arrested both men, raided their homes and seized personal items.

Hicham was initially told his immigration hearing would be held in July. Inexplicably, however, the charges were suddenly dropped as the Home Office moved for an emergency deportation. Not only is Hicham facing the possibility of losing the life he has built for himself in Nottingham over 13 years, but there is also the worry that on arrival in Algeria, he will be at risk of further human rights violations given the circumstances of his deportation.

Concern – and suspicion – has been expressed by Nottingham South MP Alan Simpson, who wrote in a letter to Minister Liam Byrne:

"I can see no reason for an emergency deportation of Mr Hicham Yessa other than to cover the embarrassment of Police and Intelligence services…To race him out of the country will only provoke widespread protests against an arbitrary deportation with no right to a proper hearing. Mr Hicham Yessa was scheduled for a hearing on 16th July 2008. I can see no reason why you should race this forward and would urge you to revert to the original timescale with which a proper hearing and proper representations can be made."

This is not the only suspicious aspect of the whole affair. Hicham was an influential member of the peace movement, and during the investigation, police apparently “‘regularly attempted to collate information about student activism and peaceful campaigning’”, including “numerous questions about the student peace magazine ‘Ceasefire’”, of which Hicham was the editor.

The worrying wider context, threats to academic freedom, as well as the latest government attempts to increase the length of time people can be held without charge or trial.

For now, there is still every chance that Hicham’s deportation can be prevented. A campaign is well under way, which needs support and donations; you can join a Facebook group, as well as contact your own MP and the Home Office. On Wednesday, meanwhile, there will be a protest about the arrests themselves in Nottingham.

Ben White
Nottingham, UK
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

War without End

Hoda Abdel Hamid of Aljazeera English has made a multi-part documentary on the Iraq conflict from January, 2006, through the present, entitled "War Without End." Truth in advertising: I make a couple of appearances as a commentator.

This is Part I:



and here is Part II:

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Trotta: Take Obama Out

Liz Trotta, a veteran journalist who helped pioneer a place for women at the front as war correspondents, was being interviewed on Fox News on Sunday by Eric Shawn, when she commented on Hillary's Clinton's reference to RFK's assassination:

' "And now we have what some are reading as a suggestion that somebody knock off Osama, uh Obama. Well, both, if we could." She laughed. '

Here's the video:



She laughed.

And Mr. Shawn did not stop her, did not say "Surely you do not mean that," and just went on with the interview:

' "But do you really think that--she didn't mean that she thinks that he going to get assassinated, and she apologized--

Trotta: "Well, that's beside the point, whether she meant it or not."

Shawn: "And she's just using it in a historical context?"

Trotta: "She's tone deaf, because it's a radioactive word. And the whole question of the first black man becoming a candidate for presidency of the United States has all kinds of overtones and all kinds of caveats that really have to be considered in this thing. And his security has been a real issue. He's had bodyguards earlier than anybody else. Surely this woman had to know that that was a third rail to say 'assassination.' And it's hard to argue for her on this, because it isn't the first time she's made this step." '

And Trotta thinks that Hillary Clinton is tone deaf!

Trotta appeared to have no remorse whatsoever for what she had said.

Is this what Rupert Murdoch's petty, spiteful, poisonous media have brought us to in this country, jokes about killing our presidential candidates and pairing their names with those of mass murderers? Under the rules of the Federal Communications Commission as they existed before the Supreme Court gutted the Fairness Doctrine in 1987, Fox would have been hugely fined or closed as a thinly disguised Republican Party House organ. (As for the argument that there are lots of news points of view to choose from now, I'm still waiting for the Socialist Party to have its cable station available in almost all US markets.)

Some are petitioning for Trotta to be banned from Fox, but it seems to me what is actually appropriate is an apology, from Rupert Murdoch himself, for all the false and vicious things he has purveyed to the American people through his phony bought and paid for "journalism." And if he won't apologize and reform, maybe it is time for a consumer boycott of Fox's major advertisers. In our corrupt corporate media system, Shawn's interview of Lotta was actually rented out to advertisers; so who paid for that piece of excrement to be on the air? Should we be buying that product?

If we analyze Trotta's brief, murderous faux pas, the language issues come to the fore.

Americans need to be told that Usamah Bin Laden does not own the name Usamah, and there are lots of wonderful people named Usamah. It is just a classical Arabic word for "lion." It is given by Christian as well as Muslim families, and some of the physicians who heal us of serious maladies are named Usamah. Moreover, there is no "o" in Arabic. It is not Osama but Usamah. It does not rhyme with Obama and is not related in any way to it. Obama is an African (presumably Dholua or other West Nilotic) word, not a Semitic one.

Then can we ban this euphemism, "take out"? In its tertiary sense, according to Merriam Webster,, it means to "eliminate, kill, destroy." If that is what it means, then say it, damn it.

Bush used to always talk about "taking out" Saddam. Well, we now know that what he meant was "to have him lynched by the fanatical Shiite Mahdi Army." A euphemism like "take out" seems less innocuous, perhaps, than just "kill." But killing should not be made to seem innocuous. People should say what they mean. If you want to kill someone, be brave enough to admit it.

Journalists Shawn and Trotta have just brought the US presidential campaign to a new low of innuendo, viciousness, cavalier disregard for the sanctity of life, and peculiar lack of self-reflection. But in most ways, they are just continuing the Fox and Murdoch house traditions.

Tone deaf, indeed.

--

Update: Trotta apologized, sort of, on Monday morning. But Fox cleverly put the apology very deep into an interview on the same subject, suggesting that Trotta retained the ability to function as a dispassionate analyst on this subject! In her apology she talked about 'falling all over herself' to make it appear as though she wished Obama "or any other candidate" harm. To fall all over yourself to do something is not to behave awkwardly but rather to be eager to do something. Was this a Freudian slip? And, why bring up other candidates. It was only Obama she wanted offed.

This "apology" is completely unacceptable and people should keep the pressure on Fox. Shawn must apologize for not interrupting her and demanding she explain herself right there.

Or maybe it is all right electronically to lynch some people, with impunity.

Here is the site of the petition to Fox to have her sacked.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Sistani Opposes SOFA; "As Long as he is Alive; Al-Maliki Advisor seems to, Too; 5 Killed, 22 Injured in Baghdad

Mark Kukis at Time reports on Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani's insistence with Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki that Iraq recover its sovereignty on all levels.

The report is bolstered by this one on Iran's al-Alam channel:

The USG Open Source Center translates transcripts of Arabic language satellite stations reporting on the controversies over recent statements of Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani. (Via BBC Monitoring). Note that Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's adviser on cultural affairs went on Iranian television and slammed the US positions in the negotiations for a Status of Forces Agreement. .

'May 25, 2008 Sunday

AL-SISTANI NOT TO ALLOW US-IRAQ AGREEMENT "AS LONG AS HE IS ALIVE" - AL-ALAM TV

LENGTH: 271 words

Text of report by state-run Iranian Arabic-language television news channel Al-Alam on 25 May

[Presenter] There have been further reactions to the security agreement, which the US occupation and the Iraqi government intend to sign. A source close to the [Shi'i] religious figure Ayatollah Sayyid Ali al-Sistani has said that Al-Sistani told Prime Minister Al-Maliki, during their meeting in the holy city of Al-Najaf, that he totally rejects the agreement.

He [Al-Sistani] said he would not allow the signing of the agreement as long as he is alive. However, at the same time, he voiced support to the Iraqi government and to efforts by Iraqi officials and people to establish security and stability in the country.

Mr Husayn Barakah al-Shami, advisor to the Iraqi prime minister for cultural affairs, said that through this agreement, the US wants Iraq to be a launch pad to control the region. He added that Iraqis and their political leaders and religious figures have a lot of reservations about the agreement and its implications.

[Al-Shami] Iraq is very serious about getting out of Chapter 7 [of the UN Charter]. The Americans have their special project and their strategy in the region and in Iraq. They want Iraq to be their launch pad to control the region and to strengthen their influence there. The Iraqi people, political leaders and religious clerics voiced their reservations about this agreement. But they must enter this agreement [after seeking] clarifications on the issues of military bases, arrests, prisons and the use of Iraq's air space.

Source: Al-Alam TV, Tehran, in Arabic 1700 gmt 25 May 08 '

Sawt al-Iraq writes in Arabic that a close associate of Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani in Karbala, who declined to be identified, denied that he had prepared a fatwa of jihad against foreign troops in Iraq. He said that Sistani urged resistance to the occupation, but wanted Iraqis to deploy non-violent means to end the foreign troop presence.

[While this statement is true, it does not actually address the legal issue. Sistani was said by AP to have replied privately to Shiite militiamen who asked him about the legitimacy of attacking multi-national troops in Iraq. He was said to have confirmed, in private and in person, that in Shiite law, attacking a foreign occupier is legitimate. There is no contradiction between him holding those views as a matter of considered opinion on the law, and his actual policy of encouraging peaceful resistance.]

The Kuwait News Agency carried the following with regard to reports that Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani was issuing private statements to Shiite militiamen that it is legitimate to attack foreign troops:

' BAGHDAD, May 23 (KUNA) -- An Iraqi MP Friday brushed aside reports suggesting Sayyed Ali Sistani had issued a religious fatwa permitting armed resistance against foreign forces, and affirmed that the Shiite cleric had called, since collapse of baathist regime, for peaceful resistance.
Sheikh Jalaluddin Al-Saghir, head of the United Iraqi Alliance (UIA) bloc at the parliament, told KUNA these press reports about the alleged fatwa "are totally baseless." He said the policy of Sistani was based "on resisting the occupiers via peaceful means and he is still supporting the political process therefore there these claims are false." A source close to Sistani in Najaf said the senior cleric did not issue the fatwa, and was still committed to his previous position which emphasized that Iraq was not a scene for "jihad or armed confrontation." The source, speaking to KUNA on condition of anonymity, said Sistani's position was clear since the toppling of Saddam Hussein's regime. "He had called repeatedly for peaceful resistance to get the foreign forces out of Iraq," he added.
Iraqi and Western media working in Iraq said Sistani has issued a number of fatwas permitting armed resistance against foreign forces.'

Sistani's fatwa against selling food to the Americans would be consistent with what these officials are saying. One wag in the blogosphere called it, a "No soup for you!" policy.

Najaf, where Sistani lives has told the US that it does not want the "Awakening Council" model but will accept US development aid.

The Iraqi parliament has still not passed an elections law, a prerequisite for holding provincial elections-- which are therefore likely to be delayed. Al-Arabiya t.v. had a program on this issue, and I came away from it pessimistic that the law would soon be passed or that provincial elections would actually be held in 2008.

McClatchy reports political violence on Sunday:

' Baghdad

- Around 10am, a roadside bomb targeted a police patrol at Al-Maghrib Street in Adhamiyah neighborhood (north Baghdad) near the Turkish embassy .Five people were injured including two policemen.

- Around 1pm,a car bomb targeted the Babil governor’s convoy near Yarmouk hospital at Yarmouk neighborhood (west Baghdad). 11 people were injured (7 guards who were with the convoy and 4 other civilians).

- Around 1:15pm,a roadside bomb targeted an American patrol at al-Ghadeer neighborhood of new Baghdad(east Baghdad). No casualties reported.

- Around 4pm,a roadside bomb exploded at Suleikh neighborhood(north Baghdad).One civilian was killed and four others were wounded.

- Around 4:15pm, a mortar shell hit Wihda section in Karrada neighborhood(downtown Baghdad). Two people were injured in that incident.

- Police found 4 dead bodies in the following neighborhoods in Baghdad: 2 were found in Karkh bank(west Baghdad); 1 in Hurriyah and 1 in Mansour while 2 were found in Risafa bank (east Baghdad); 1 in Jisr Diyala and 1 Suleikh .

Kirkuk

- Before noon, a roadside bomb targeted a police patrol at Al-Tiseen neighborhood in downtown Kirkuk .Four policemen were injured.

Anbar

- Around 10am, a roadside bomb targeted the Sheikh Mishhin Mohammad Abbas’ convoy in Gharma (east of Falluja).Three of his guards were injured in that incident. Sheikh Mishhin is the head of Jamila tribes and the Sahwa leader in the area. A curfew was announced for further notice on vehicles and pedestrians.

Diyala

- Around 8am, gunmen attacked an Iraqi army check point at Imam Weis village (37 miles north of Baquba).A tanker driver was killed . Then, a roadside bomb targeted an army patrol in the same area killing one officer and injuring four soldiers.

- Around 7am, gunmen opened fire on police patrol at Al-Mafraq (west Baquba).One civilian was killed.

- Around 10am,a random shooting by gunmen at Azzat village (west of Baquba) led to kill a member of the Sahwa in the area.'

Jimmy Carter, still talking sense in his 80s-- on an Iraq withdrawal timetable, on lifting the siege of Gaza, on talking to Iran.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Memorial Day, 2008

Memorial Day is about honoring those who have sacrificed themselves for the nation, in our armed forces. We cannot honor them properly unless we know the full extent of their sacrifice.



We have to count the victims of Post Traumatic Distress Syndrome, what we used to call being shell-shocked, as victims of the war. The number of those victims has been covered up.

Investigative reporters at CBS News found that in 2005, 6,250 veterans took their lives, nearly 18 a day. Emanuel Margolis writes,

' Dr. Ira Katz, chief of mental health services for the Department of Veterans Affairs, sent an e-mail to a VA colleague this past February that read:

"Shh! Our suicide prevention coordinators are identifying about 1,000 suicide attempts per month among the veterans we see in our medical facilities. Is this something we should (carefully) address ourselves in some sort of release before somebody stumbles on it?"'

Margolis charges that Katz covered up this startling statistic, showing 12,000 attempted suicides a year while in VA care, when he testified before Congress.

Have 30,000 veterans died of suicide in the past 5 years? Have 60,000 tried to? Shouldn't these deeply depressed men and women be added to the casualty tolls? Is war a plague on the mind of those who fight it?

Margolis writes,

' • 120 veterans commit suicide every week.

• 1,000 veterans attempt suicide while in VA care every month.

• Nearly one in five service members returning from Iraq and Afghanistan (approximately 300,000) have post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms or major depression.

• 19 percent of post-Iraq and Afghanistan veterans have been diagnosed with possible traumatic brain injury, according to a Rand Corp. Study in April.

• A higher percentage of these veterans suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder than from any previous war because of "stop loss" or an involuntary extension of service in the military (58,300), multiple tours, greater prevalence of brain injuries, etc. '

19 percent of returning vets from Iraq and Afghanistan would also be nearly 300,000 persons, suffering from traumatic brain injury.

Wounded vets often face quality of life issues for the long term.



Others face profound moral dilemmas growing out of a conviction that they have been ordered to commit atrocities. The warping of the moral being may not be an inevitability of war but it is a severe risk.

Active duty soldiers in a war zone have a fear of becoming mere statistics, a fear I've had expressed to me in correspondence from Iraq. The LA Times profiles those soldiers from California who have given their lives to this war. The LAT says,

' Kelsey Johnson remembered that her husband, Marine Cpl. Stephen P. Johnson, 24, told her that he had "a really bad feeling" about an upcoming mission. Johnson, of Yreka, was among 31 troops killed when their helicopter crashed in the Iraqi desert.

"I dropped down on the ground and started screaming," she said. She was 19 when her husband was killed. . .

Army Spc. Daniel F. Reyes told his mother that if he died, he wanted to be buried next to his brother, Roberto Esparza, who was 21 when he was killed in a bike accident in San Diego.

Reyes was survived by his wife, Rebekah, 23, and year-old son, Daniel Fernando. "He was always thinking of us," she said. "He called me every morning in Iraq."

Like many of those killed, the severity of Reyes' wounds from an explosion precluded an open-casket service. Mortuary affairs personnel in the war zones have developed a word for such cases: unviewable.'

But in a way, all of the casualties from the Iraq War are "unviewable."

We aren't told the scale of the sacrifice by our corporate media or Washington officials. Michael Munk has done a fine job of focusing in like a laser on the real numbers of casualties for the Iraq War. Here is the last dispatch I have from him, dated May 6, 2008:

'US military occupation forces in Iraq suffered at least 108 combat casualties in the week ending May 6, as the official casualty total reached at least 65,500. The total includes 33,325 dead and wounded by what the Pentagon classifies as "hostile" causes and 32,175 (since over a month ago on March 1) dead and injured from "non-hostile" causes.*

The actual total is over 85,000 because the Pentagon chooses not to count as "Iraq casualties" the approximately 20,000 casualties discovered only after they returned from Iraq -mainly brain trauma from explosions.**

In addition, a rare report showed that 1,123 "US civilian contractors" has been killed since the invasion, including a record 353 in 2007. No numbers are available on the wounded and injured, nor about casualties among the "contractors" who are not US citizens. (Houston Post, Feb. 9, 2008.)

US media divert attention from the actual cost in American life and limb by routinely reporting only the total killed (4,073 as of May 6) and rarely mentioning the 30,004 wounded in combat. To further minimize public perception of the cost, they cover for the Pentagon by ignoring the 31,325 (as of March 1)*** military victims of accidents and illness serious enough to require medical air evacuation, although the 4,058 reported deaths include 752 (no change last week ) who died from those same causes, including 145 suicide as of March 1.

* The number of wounded is updated weekly (usually Tuesdays) by the Pentagon at this site (pdf.). The dead are reported by Iraq Coalition Casualties .

** see USA Today, Nov. 23, 2007

*** the number of "non combat" injured is reported by Iraq Coalition Casualties.

Visit my website '

I think all of us Americans fall down crying this time every year. We want it to be over with.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Sistani Forbids Feeding Americans; Warns against Security Agreement; Hundreds of Sadrists Arrested

Fars News reproduces in Persian on May 24, 2008, another anti-American fatwa by Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani of Najaf. It says that its correspondent in Najaf reports that an Iraqi Shiite submitted the following to Sistani:

'I sell foodstuffs. Sometimes the Occupying Powers or their associates come to my establishment. May I sell them foodstuffs?'

Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani replied:

' Selling foodstuffs to the Occupying Powers is not permitted.'

Last I knew, the US military in Iraq does not buy its food from Iraqis but rather imports it, for fear that Iraqi nationalists might poison it. But I'm told US soldiers do buy food and snacks from Shiite shops in Baghdad when out on patrol. So the fatwa would affect the latter but not the former. But if Sistani is laying the grounds for a Gandhi-style non-cooperation movement, he certainly could put a crimp in the American military's style in Iraq. I can't imagine US troops could function in the Shiite south or much of Baghdad without Shiite cooperation. Sistani still has a great deal of moral authority, and would be backed by less cautious clerics such as Muqtada al-Sadr and Ayatollah Jawad al-Khalisi.

This fatwa is significant in light of the reports that Sistani has been orally permitting attacks on US troops by Shiite militiamen loyal to the Shiite religious authorities in Najaf.

Then an Iranian news service reported yesterday that Sistani is also coming out against the proposed mutual security agreement between the United States and Iraq that is intended to serve as a Status of Forces Agreement after the United Nations Security Council authorization for US troops to be in Iraq expires in December.

The report says:

' The Grand Ayatollah has reiterated that he would not allow Iraq to sign such a deal with "the US occupiers" as long as he was alive, a source close to Ayatollah Sistani said. The source added the Grand Ayatollah had voiced his strong objection to the deal during a meeting with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki in the holy city of Najaf on Thursday. '

Sistani may have been forced to take a stand on this issue because his clerical peers and rivals are coming out vocally on it.

The man some consider the 'fifth Grand Ayatollah of Iraq,' Sayyid Kadhim al-Ha'iri (who resides in Qom, Iran because he cannot abide the Occupation regime in Iraq) has denounced the proposed security agreement in no uncertain terms.

Fars News had reported in Persian on May 22 that al-Ha'iri (Haeri) rejected the security agreement. "Every knows that America intends to legitimize its illegitimate presence in our country," so as, he said, "to loot its wealth and spreak poverty and deprivation." Haeri argues that the US is hoping to use the new bilateral security agreement to escape from Chapter 7 of the UN Charter, which subjects its actions in Iraq to the authority of the UN security council.

Haeri said that the US wants to ensure that "even American dogs in Iraq are reassured and protected from any threat of being tried by the state or the people, while all political institutions and courts, including the president of the republic, the prime minister, the representatives in parliament and the populace of Iraq must be answerable to the Americans."

He called on Iraqis to work toward their liberty and said that America had never honored any of its treaties. He warned Iraqis against so humiliating themselves, quoting a saying from the Prophet Muhammad, "Beware abasement!" He called on Iraqis to unite against the conspiracies of the enemy.

On Friday, Arch-conservative Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami of Iran weighed in on the debate, saying in a sermon:

' “American forces will keep the ministries of defense, interior and intelligence under their supervision for 10 years”. . . “Iraqi tribunals will not be able to judge American military personnel and employees of firms who work for the US military”, Khatami added. [The] Iranian cleric also uttered: "It is open-ended slavery." “It is the worst humiliation… Any hand that signs such an agreement will be considered by Iran as a traitor to Islam, to Shiism and to the Iraqi people," he added. '

So Sistani no doubt feels he has to make himself heard on all this or become irrelevant.

The agreement will specify how many bases the US may have in Iraq, where, and for how long. It will probably also grant US troops extraterritoriality, that is, a guarantee that they will not be tried in an Iraqi court for any crime committed on Iraqi soil.

The extraterritoriality of foreign troops was a common legal feature of colonial arrangements in the region. It was one of the things the nationalist movements campaigned about, and typically they abrogated it as soon as they came to power. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini made the legal immunity of US troops in Iran in the 1960s and 1970s a plank in his platform of revolution against the Shah.

Both the US and the Iraqi government appear to recognize that US bases in Arab Iraq are likely to be contentious, and apparently the thinking is now increasingly to site most of them in Kurdistan, where the population is more welcoming. That scenario, however, seems to me to have severe drawbacks. Iraqi Kurdistan is harboring guerrillas of the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK), who have frequently hit Turkey and provoked strong Turkish reprisals. You want to put US troops in the middle of that? The bases would have to be provisioned via Incirlik Air Force Base in Turkey, so the Turks could always blackmail the US military into supporting them against their Kurdish hosts! Kurdistan is landlocked and surrounded by potentially hostile powers-- Iran, Syria, and and the arab provinces of Iraq. Is that the sort of place it is wise to site thousands of US troops?

Meanwhile, Al-Sharq al-Awsat reports in Arabic that a wave of arrests of between 200 and 400 Sadrists by US troops and interventions to prevent them gathering for prayers by the Iraqi military is threatening the truce.

The Australian has more. The arrests were apparently made during prayer times in largely Shiite, Sadrist areas such as Bayaa.


My recent appearance on the PBS News Hour with Jim Lehrer, regarding PM Nuri al-Maliki's recent security campaigns, is now available in transcript and streaming video.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Clinton Touches off National PTSD

Senator Clinton's reference to the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy in June of 1968 does not seem to me consequential, for all the brouhaha it has provoked. She was just saying that many previous primaries have gone on into June, including that of Bobby Kennedy before he was cut down.

The idea that she was thinking of the possibility that her rival, Barack Obama, might meet a similar fate is absurd. But I saw pundits on cable t.v. intimating that it was plausible.

I fear she inadvertently stumbled into a hornet's nest, though.

Because fears for Obama's safety are widespread, and they are shared by Homeland Security, which gave him Secret Service protection 18 months ago.

It is well known that Colin Powell's wife did not let him run for president because she was afraid he would be assassinated. Imagine the power of that fear to shape American life. Imagine if Powell had run and won, forestalling W. from ever coming to power.

Former Republican presidential aspirant (and apparently huge tool) Mike Huckabee recently went so far as to joke about Obama being shot at. He was speaking at a National Rifle Association event:

' Huckabee made an off-color joke during his speech in Louisville, Kentucky, when a loud bang was heard off-stage. "That was Barack Obama," Huckabee quipped, "He Just tripped off a chair. He was getting ready to speak. Somebody aimed a gun at him and he…he dove for the floor." '

The shadow that falls on African-Americans who devote themselves to public service at the highest levels is that of Dr. Martin Luther King.

In evoking the tumultuous year of 1968, Clinton was trying to remind people of the long and divisive Democratic primary. But without meaning to, she reminded them of April 4, not June 5, of MLK along with RFK.


I don't think it is healthy that the information age causes such memes to circulate with such velocity that they are given far more significance than they deserve. Seeing Hillary abjectly and in a stunned voice apologize for any offense made me feel sorry for her. When you speak in public, you always risk misspeaking or having the audience misunderstand your intent. We make our presidential candidates speak constantly in public for 2 years straight, now. It is like a medieval form of torture. It is amazing that anyone runs this gauntlet.

Elections should be about issues, not about this sort of hothouse speculation about personalities.

But there is one sense in which her campaign, at least, bears some responsibility for her current straits. Clinton operatives behind the scenes have been smearing Obama as a Muslim, and it was they who dug up that photo of him in Kenyan clothes. Clinton even said Obama was not a Muslim "as far as I know." The malice demonstrated in those actions laid the groundwork for people to believe that Clinton was capable of such hostility toward Obama.

The incident, it seems to me, does tell us two other things.

The first is that the strategy of the Clinton camp, of continuing to campaign even after victory at the polls became numerically impossible--in hopes that Obama might stumble and alienate sufficient numbers of superdelegates--was not crazy. I don't approve of it, but that it could work or could have worked seems clear. It could easily have been Obama who stumbled yesterday. Ironically, it was Clinton.

The second thing the incident tells us is how traumatized the nation still is by those horrible killings 40 years ago, and how much unfinished business of healing those wounds there is. Hillary didn't mean to pick at the scab. But she did. And we bled a little, all over again.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

6 Marines Injured, 1 Soldier Killed; Sistani Aide: Jihad Fatwa May Come; Karbala'i: Punish Blasphemous GI

Al-Sharq al-Awsat writing in Arabic carries a follow-up article on the AP story regarding Sistani's oral rulings on the permissibility of attacking multinational troops in Iraq. The article seems to me to reverse the best practices of journalism. It interviews two Sistani aides, one far away from Iraq in London and one in Najaf. It highlights the London interviewee and relegates the Najaf one to the very end. So I am reversing them:

"An official in the office of Sistani in Najar said that he neither denies nor affirms that the fatwas were issued in a special form, but he did indicate that an open call for jihad might come at a future time."

As for the London representative of Sistani, Sayyid Sa`id al-Khalkhali, he said he thought it unlikely that Sistani would issue such fatwas, and insisted that if they actually existed he would know about them. He also disputed AP's report that the fatwas were private and oral and therefore secret. He said that fatwas are public and bear the jurisprudent's seal.

Al-Khalkhali is not on the scene, however, and he is just saying what he thinks likely. His point is correct, that what the AP described was a set of private conversations in which an opinion was expressed, not a fatwa, which must be written down and sealed. But what you call the opinion is not the most important thing.

Al-Khalkhali, moreover, would be under some pressure from the British government to deny that attacks on British troops in Basra are legitimate.

Britain has moved so far toward being a national security state that a Ph.D. student researching Islamic radicalism was himself arrested and held by police for 8 days for having downloaded an al-Qaeda manual.

The phone conversation that Al-Sharq al-Awsat had with the aide in Najaf suggests that if Sistani hasn't already started authorizing attacks on foreign soldiers in Iraq, he may not be far from it. I see that graf as more or less confirmatory of the AP story.

There are lots of reasons for Sistani to be furious with the US these days. Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that Sistani's representative in Karbala, Abdul Mahdi al-Karbala'i, in hisFriday sermon demanded the severest punishment for the US soldier who used the Qur'an for target practice. Al-Karbala'i said that the desecration "was a direct insult to all Muslims in Iraq and in the world." He added, "Muslims must not satisfy themselves with the apology proffered by the officers of the Occupation forces to the local officials and tribal sheikhs, since this incident concerns not just the Muslims in that area but rather everyone." He said the incident constituted "open enmity toward Muslim sanctities, a violation of their nobility, and an abasement of their sacredness." He demanded an official US apology "to all Muslims in the world, and the expulsion of the soldier from Iraq, and the trial of perpetrator, such that a just punishment would be meted out to him, so that he can serve as an object lesson to others, such that they might not repeat the offense."

[Note that he called the US military "Occupation forces." That is the language of political opposition in Iraq and is not the discourse of the ruling establishment, which has pleaded with the Arabic press not to use the phrase.]

Sheikh Hasan Tu`ayma, the sermonizer at the Khalisiyyah Seminary in Kadhimiya, said a stop must be put to the offenses being committed in some quarters against Islam and Muslims." He said that the incident proved that the Occupation forces have contempt for the things Muslims hold sacred.

Meanwhile the fragile peace in Basra was disturbed, according to AP:

' Iraqi soldiers fired in the air over supporters of anti-U.S. Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr to prevent them from gathering for Muslim prayers Friday in the southern city of Basra, enraging the worshippers and straining a fragile truce with the government. In another worrisome sign, a top aide to al-Sadr accused Iraqi forces of violations of a separate truce in Baghdad's Sadr City, where thousands of Iraqi troops have deployed in what has so far been a peaceful campaign to impose control. '

Some reports that one man was killed and two were injured in the confrontation, though the Basra morgue could not confirm it. Saddam used to prevent Shiites from gathering for large Friday prayers services, and it is a little surprising that the al-Maliki government, itself religious Shiites, would use armed force to prevent people from going to the mosque.

In the Sunni Arab areas west of the capital, UPI reports that "A roadside bomb near Falluja killed an Iraqi interpreter and wounded six U.S. Marines Friday, military officials said. . . The military also announced that a U.S. soldier was killed Thursday by a bombing southwest of Baghdad."

Alexandra Zavis has more details of violence in al-Anbar Province, which she says has provoked fears that "al-Qaeda" is attempting to return to strength in its former stronghold:

"There was at least one other explosion in the city during the day, underscoring fears that Sunni Arab militants loyal to Al Qaeda in Iraq may be attempting to stage a comeback in their former stronghold. . . . However, the province recently has been hit by a string of bombings targeting U.S. and Iraqi security forces and their tribal allies. A U.S. military statement said the Marines were attacked by unknown assailants northwest of the city. In a separate incident Friday, Fallouja police chief Col. Faisal Ismail Hussein said an explosives-laden car detonated as officers took the vehicle inside their compound to be defused, injuring four officers."

You know how the NYT blew the whistle on the 'independent' Pentagon analysts we see on t.v. all the time? And how the cable television networks refused to cover their own peccadilloes? Well at least Congress is looking into it.

Farideh Farhi explains the way the Shiraz mosque bombing is playing out in Iranian politics, and why Tehran is now laying the blame for it at the feet of the Bush administration.

In an alarming turn of events, the leader of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood praises Usamah Bin Laden as a holy warrior and says he supports its attacks on occupying forces, but not on civilians. The Muslim Brotherhood is the second most important party in Egypt.

See also Phillip J. Cunningham's pieces on Burma and China at our joint Global Affairs blog.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Will Sistani Declare Jihad on US?

Hamza Hendawi and Qassim Abdul Zahra of AP get the scoop: Their sources in Najaf tell them that young Shiite men belonging to the "Troops of the Ayatollahs" (Jund al-Marja`iyyah) militia that protects the leading Shiite clerics in the Middle Euphrates have been imploring Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani for a fatwa or formal legal ruling about whether it is permissible to attack US and other foreign troops. Hendawi and Abdul Zahra report that whereas in the past Sistani had dodged the question or given a vague answer, in recent months he has begun verbally affirming to visitors that such attacks on foreign occupation troops are permissible.

Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki met with Sistani on Thursday to discuss the security situation. Maliki and a government spokesman tried to spin the grand ayatollah's position as one of pure support for al-Maliki's assault on the Mahdi Army. Al-Sharq al-Awsat writes in Arabic that Sistani's brother-in-law, in Najaf, said that the Grand Ayatollah does not enter into details, but generally supports a rule of law and obedience to the government.

But Sistani's representative in Karbala, Abdul Mahdi Karbala'i, had said last week that Sistani was opposed to al-Maliki's attempt to disarm the Mahdi Army, and also opposed his threat to exclude the Sadr Movement from running for office in the forthcoming provincial elections. (Full quote at end-- scroll down).

So, the questions are, "why" and "why now?"

I can only speculate, since Sistani isn't issuing communiques that would explain what is on his mind. But let us look at the context.

First, Sistani was under a lot of pressure from his Shiite followers to denounce the US siege, blockade and aerial bombing of the civilian district of Sadr City in East Baghdad, which went on for weeks. People were actually lacking in food. And, apartment buildings were incinerated. The full horror of the siege was carefully kept from the American public, but the Shiites of Iraq knew about it all right. I think that the brutality of the US intervention against the Shiite masses, and the risk that his silence would produce a backlash against him in favor of Muqtada al-Sadr, may have helped impel Sistani toward this militancy. Aerial bombardment of civilian areas as a tactic has increased significantly this spring.

Americans tend to dismiss the aerial bombardments, in which civilians are often killed, as the cost of doing business in a war zone. But many Iraqis really, really mind these killings and you can only imagine what Sistani thinks of them. Likewise, while the incident of the US soldier using the Qur'an for firing practice only happened recently and wouldn't be the impetus for Sistani's new militancy, such desecrations have occurred before and the hatred of Islam by US military figures like Gen. Boykin is well known.

Second, as Steve Chapman points out, the American Right is clearly trying to get up a war on Iran by rather fantastically painting it as a "threat". Sistani is an Iranian, born in Mashhad in 1930, who resided there until late 1951. He does not like the Khomeinist system of government. But since Sistani has seen what Bush's tender mercies have done to Iraq, he must be alarmed by the idea that Washington might bestow the same "liberation" on his native land. Obviously, the US is in a worse position to attack Iran if it lacks Iraq as a base, and one way of forestalling Cheney's mad bombers would be to try to force the US out of Iraq.

Third, PM Nuri al-Maliki has several times expressed the conviction that the Iraqi army could handle Iraq by the end of 2008. If he is telling Sistani that, and Sistani believes it, then the Grand Ayatollah may feel that there is increasingly no down side to multinational forces leaving Iraq. Al-Maliki's campaigns in Basra, Sadr City and Mosul were probably intended as a demonstration that the Iraqi army can handle the country on its own. The intrepid Leila Fadil reports from Basra that al-Maliki has in fact achieved greater security and trade in Iraq's ports through his Assault of the Knights operation. When al-Maliki and Abdul Aziz al-Hakim feel strong enough domestically, their first order of business will be to vastly reduce American military influence. They represent the Islamic Mission (Da`wa) Party and the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (founded by Ayatollah Khomeini), after all. There is likely a limit to this marriage of convenience.

Sistani also follows American politics, and he knows that the US is transitioning away from Bush, so he may see an opportunity to push the new administration in a different direction.

I have all along believed that Sistani would ultimately issue a fatwa saying that it was illegitimate for there to continue to be foreign troops on Iraqi soil. I think he would have gone in that direction if Bush had not given in on the January, 2005, elections. But he had been concerned about a resurgence of the Baath, about the rise of the Salafi Jihadis (radical Sunnis, which are in my view mistakenly called 'al-Qaeda'), and about the weakness of the Shiite government.

Ironically, the more success the Americans have in reducing sectarian violence and strengthening the Iraqi state, the more likely it is that Sistani will put his foot down about the foreign military presence.

This likelihood is one reason I find it difficult to take seriously the plans of the Pentagon and the American Right for a long-term US military presence in Iraq. I just don't think the Shiites will put up with it. And, the constant bombardment of the small British contingent down at the Basra airport likely points to the fate of any division of US troops left in the country.

Those tempted to dismiss the possibility that a frail old man in Najaf can get up a social movement powerful enough to thwart US plans should read Michael Schwartz's essay at Tomdispatch.com on the way Iraqi popular movements got in the way of the Project for a New American Century.

The American Right often tries to make an analogy between occupied Japan after WW II and occupied Iraq. It is a highly flawed analogy, as the prescient John Dower pointed out before the invasion. He pointed to the legitimacy of the US occupation of Japan, acknowledged by the world and by the Japanese. That is what the US lacks in Iraq. As long as Sistani does not give The Fatwa, Washington can go on pretending that it has that legitimacy. But it does not, and the fatwa, if and when it comes, will definitively declare the emperor to be without clothes. It would be as though Hirohito had called on Japanese to expel US troops. Can you imagine? And, the Japanese were afraid of the Soviet Union and China, which is one reason they put up with US bases in Okinawa. The Iraqi Shiites are not afraid of anyone in the region, and the American argument to them that they should be afraid of Iran (and that Washington will protect them from Tehran) just strikes them as silly.

Sistani's web site says he was born in August of 1930, so he is 77. He is said not to be in great health. He may feel that the expulsion fatwa would be the crowning achievement of his career. Certainly, it would restore the respect for the grand ayatollah in the Shiite south, which has slipped as a resentful population has turned to the Sadr Movement.

Sistani's two likely successors, the Afghan Ishaq Fayyad and the Pakistani Bashir Najafi, may have different views than Sistani on this matter. It is hard to know. I believe Ishaq Fayyad may be more pro-American, based on anecdotes I have from an eyewitness. In contrast, I know Najafi gave a sermon in which he bitterly attacked the US for having allowed the Shiites to be massacred by Saddam in spring of 1991, after Bush senior had called on the Iraqi people to rise up.

Sistani has all along expressed his discomfort with a foreign military occupation of Iraq. The first public statement he made after the fall of Saddam, which I paraphrased at that time at IC, went like this:

' *Al-Hayat for April 18 [2003] has an interview with Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani of Najaf. It says that Sistani "affirmed his rejection of any foreign power after the war to which the country had been subjected." His son Muhammad Rida Sistani conveyed from his father "his rejection of any foreign power that would rule Iraq, emphasizing that he himself would not interfere with the form of the national government that the Iraqi people choose to rule the land." He said that his father is still in seclusion in Najaf. The son said his father's conception of religious leadership was that it must soar above factions and parties. He denied that his father had been protected by US troops, saying there were local Shiite youth (i.e. the tribesmen) available for the purpose. He called for unity among all Muslims--Sunni and Shiite-and among all Iraqis. He said he read his father accounts of Shiites attacking Sunni mosques in mixed neighborhoods. Grand Ayatollah Sistani immediately denounced such acts as sinful and said they should be seen against his own framework of love for the Sunnis and giving donations for the building or rebuilding of their mosques. He said the Grand Ayatollah had regretted the loooting of libraries, and had said that "Iraqi is for the Iraqis. They must administer Iraq, and it is not for them to do so under any foreign power." He ended by saying it had been the custom of the clerics of early last century to go to battle alongside their children against the British occupation. '

Sistani in that last bit was referring to the Iraqi Revolution of 1920 against British colonial rule, which was largely Shiite and some leaders of which were Shiite clerics such as Shaikh Mahdi al-Khalisi and members of the al-Sadr family (yes, those Sadrs). He was announcing, right from 2003, his willingness to lead a Shiite revolt if he thought it necessary.

Sistani also invoked the symbology of 1920 in winter 2004 when he was demanding that Bush hold open, one-person, one-vote elections in Iraq.


As for al-Maliki's current conflict with the Mahdi Army, Al-Hayat reported (as translated by the USG Open Source Center and carried by BBC Monitoring on May 17):

' In a related development, Al-Ubaydi asserted, "all the religious authorities do not approve the dissolution of the Al-Mahdi Army; even Al-Sayyid al-Sistani does not approve". He pointed out that "Muqtada al-Sadr does not make decisions except after consulting the religious authorities and taking their opinion. Moreover, the religious authority does not approve the exclusion of the Al-Sadr Trend from the political process or from any other process". In his Friday sermon, Al-Sistani's representative Shaykh Abd-al-Mahdi al-Karbala'i made a reference to this when he said, "The religious authority does not approve the exclusion of political components from the political process. This is very clear". He went on to say that Al-Sayyid al-Sistani rejected the idea on which the government and the occupation are focusing; namely, disarmament because that is unacceptable in the current balances that exist. Other sides have armed militias within the sight and hearing of the state, such as "The Awakening", "Al-Asayish" [Kurdish security force], and others. So why does the government focus on the Al-Mahdi Army? He added that some that are close to Al-Sistani's office say that the Al-Mahdi Army constitutes a balancing stick regarding what is happening in Iraq. Even if the religious authority has reservations on some behaviour, it approves that very clearly. Moreover, Al-Sayyid al-Sistani personally told Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki indirectly during his first visit after assuming power that "The Al-Mahdi Army is your winning card on the political level. Do not lose this card". '

But Sistani also had a counter-reading of 1920, which is that the revolt pushed the British to depend on Sunnis and so led to Shiites being marginalized for the rest of the century. He thought that if the Shiites could avoid a direct confrontation with the US, then eventually they would inherit Iraq from it. But that scenario depends on the US being willing to go quietly. If it isn't, it may get The Fatwa.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Hagee Anti-Semitism and Endorsement of McCain

John McCain actively sought and accepted the endorsement of pastor John Hagee.

Breaking News: CNN is reporting that McCain has just repudiated Hagee, specifically over these remarks on Hitler as God-sent hunter of Jews. Now, what about Rod Parsely? Or is that OK? And, when will AIPAC, JINSA, etc. also repudiate Hagee and his ilk?



Hagee says that God sent Hitler as a "hunter" to track down the Jews and kill them, in accordance with the Book of Ezekiel, and that the Jews in Israel currently have "dead souls."



Hagee elsewhere condemned the Roman Catholic church as being like Hitler and 'drinking the blood of the Jews.'

McCain is of course not close to Hagee. But if you ask someone for his endorsement and say you are proud to have it, you are closely associating yourself with him. McCain has to come clean on this. He still says he is glad to have Hagee's endorsement.

He is?

How embarrassing.

He keeps hugging the most objectionable people.


For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Cole on Newshour

The Newshour with Jim Lehrer will be doing an Iraq segment this evening on the Public Broadcasting Service, and I will be one of the commentators.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Assassinations of High Officials; 36 Killed, Wounded in Baghdad; Iraqiya Rebuffs al-Maliki

Signs that things weren't that calm in Baghdad on Wednesday: Guerrillas assassinated Colonel Abdul Kareem Muhsin, the director of the protection department in the ministry of transportation, in East Baghdad.

An attempted assassination by car bomb of an Iraqi court judge who has his seat in Abu Ghraib left him severely wounded.

Then "Four civilians were injured in a bomb explosion in Beirut intersection in east Baghdad around 8:00 a.m."; and "Three civilians were killed and nine others wounded in a parked car bomb near Sa’a restaurant in Mansour neighborhood in west Baghdad around 3:00 p.m."; and "Four civilians were wounded in a parked car bomb in Harthiyah, part of Mansour neighborhood in west Baghdad around 3:00 p.m."

Police found five bodies in the streets of the capital.

In al-Obeid near Sadr City,, militiamen hit a US convoy with a roadside bomb, prompting US retaliation, which left 11 militiamen dead.

Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, head of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, on Wednesday regretted the attack earlier this week in Kadhimiya on Iranian embassy personnel in Iraq. He said that such an attack is an assault on "the new Iraq." The Iraqi ambassador in Tehran visited the wounded and expressed his hopes for more cooperation between the two countries. Gee, they don't sound to me as though they are worried about Iranian influence in Iraq.

At the same time, Iraqi army troops moved into the southern edges of Sadr City. They did so by agreement with Mahdi Army militiamen, who faded away and promised not to maintain heavy weaponry. In return, the al-Maliki government gave representations that US troops would not come into the slum. Apparently Bush hasn't actually won hearts and minds. It is not envisaged that the troops will go beyond the southern corner. This geography suggests that the main goal of the operation is to keep the Green Zone from being subjected to mortar fire from nearby Sadr City, as was happening in March. I wonder how many of the troops being sent in are actually drawn from the Mahdi Army, from which al-Maliki recruited a lot of soldiers in 2006.

The US military is saying that violent attacks are down 85 percent in Mosul. But this conflict is a guerrilla war, so wouldn't you expect guerrilla forces melt away when conventional ones confront them? Al-Maliki's "campaign" in Mosul appears to have involved not one major battle with the enemy. So the guerrillas are lying low for the moment. So what? Can al-Maliki keep his conventional forces in Mosul at that strength for a long time? Can they actually win a battle if they have to fight one? When will the guerrillas begin striking again?

And, how significant is it that al-Maliki just hired 5,000 former Baath troops, putting them back into the army? Are things quieter in Mosul because the guerrillas are now being paid off?
If so, all well and good; but then it isn't exactly a measure of military prowess on al-Maliki's part.

The other thing you wonder about is whether $130 a barrel petroleum has finally given al-Maliki the financial superiority over his enemies to begin bribing them and the rest of the population. That is after all the way it is done in oil states. But, last I knew, al-Maliki was declining to spend what must be increasingly impressive reserves.

Apparently the provincial elections scheduled for October have had to be postponed to November because the Iraqi parliament hasn't been able to get it together to pass an elections law. If Bush was hoping to give McCain a bounce with the good news story of these provincial elections, he can probably forget about it. The upside? At least the papers won't be reporting that Muqtada al-Sadr took over most of the provinces in the Shiite South.

Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that negotiations are ongoing between the (Sunni fundamentalist) Iraqi Accord Front and the government of Nuri al-Maliki about their coming back into the government. The negotiations are said to be not far from success, though the cabinet suggestions of one of the three components of the IAF, that of Khalaf al-`Ulyan, have been rejected by al-Maliki and his Da`wa (Islamic Mission) Party.

Al-Zaman reports in Arabic that, in contrast, the Iraqiya List has refused another invitation to come back into the government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, according to MP Usama al-Nujayfi. He said that the party, which has 19 seats in parliament (and includes former interim PM Iyad Allawi) does not consider the overtures serious. Instead, The Iraqiya List is exploring a coalition with a set of opposition parties, including Fadhila (the Islamic Virtue Party), the Sadr Movement, Khalaf al-`Ulyan's Dialogue Council, and the Arab Dialogue Front of Salih Mutlak.

Those talks have been going on forever, and it is a little difficult to imagine such a coalition of secular, Sunni fundamentalist and Shiite fundamentalist parties lasting for more than a day or so even if they managed to strike an agreement.

Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that the Iraqi government wants to conduct a census in Iraq, preferably before the November provincial elections. It argues that the security situation would now permit it, and that it would increase the legitimacy and transparency of the provincial elections.

One problem is that it is not clear that the security situation really would allow a proper census. And, those 4 million displaced persons will be a challenge to count. Another problem is that the census requires enabling legislation, and the parliament isn't exactly quick on the draw.

McClatchy reports political violence in Iraq beyond Baghdad for Wednesday:

' Diyala

Gunmen attacked a checkpoint in Sheikh Baba district, part of jalawla northeast of Baquba city killing four Kurdish security members known as (Asayish). The Asayish forces attacked al Shawathib area in the same district and arrested 15 young men. Two hours later, the bodies of two of the 15 young men were found while no information provided about the others.

An Iraqi army force raided al Gobba area northeast of Baquba. The force arrested three suspects and found a weapon cache in a mosque of Qaida supporters.

Iraqi army found two mass grave yards in al Abbara area south of Baquba city. The first grave included three corpses while the second grave included seven corpses.

Nineveh

Gunmen kidnapped 12 members of the rapid respond near al Ba’aj village southwest of Mosul city on Monday night killing eleven of them and injuring the last soldier in his leg.

Anbar

A member of Sahwa was killed and three others were injured in a suicide attack done by a suicide woman wearing an explosive vest. The woman attacked one of the headquarters of Sahwa councils in the center of Rutba city 280 miles west of Baghdad on Wednesday morning. '

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Appeasement Breaks out Everywhere

After all that trouble George W. Bush caused with his foolish speech before the Israeli Knesset condemning negotiation with bad guys, it turns out that no one in the Middle East, including Israel, is paying the slightest attention to him. Even his own secretary of state seems to be disagreeing with him in public. Such are the wages of the lame duck, more especially when his favorability rating is 22%.

It turns out that Israel has been negotiating indirectly through Turkey with Syria, over Bush's strong objections.

This interview with Imad Moustapha, the Syrian ambassador to the US, on the Israel-Syria negotiations.



And now the March 14 Movement in Lebanon has come back from Doha, Qatar with an agreement hammered out with Hizbullah. The agreement was made necessary because Bush had been pushing the Lebanese government to take on Hizbullah, and when it did, Hizbullah beat the pants off them. Although it is being said that the agreement makes Hizbullah powerful, actually it seems to me just to take us back to the status quo ante of 2005-2006 when Hizbullah was part of a national unity government and there was a relatively pro-Syrian general as president. (Gen. Michel Suleiman may have become more independent of Damascus recently, but he has a long history of close cooperation with Syria.)

Aljazeera on the Doha Agreement:



See also Josh Landis, Syria Comment.

Bush has painted himself into the corner of irrelevance. It isn't just that he is a lame duck. It is that his policy prescriptions are completely impractical and end up making his allies cut off their noses to spite their faces.

Bush had said last week,

' "Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along," said the president. "We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: 'Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided.' We have an obligation to call this what it is -- the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history." '

His aides told reporters on background that the reference was to Barack Obama's stated willingness to negotiate with Iran. (Obama had said he would not talk to Hamas, though John McCain has admitted that such talks are inevitable).

Then Dana Perino and other Bushie sold-souls denied that the reference was to Obama, once they figured out that Bush's performance had not gone over well with the American people (sniping at an American political opponent from a perch abroad, speaking to another government, is generally considered bad form).

McCain took the hint Bush was offering him, and piled on.

Obama defended himself ably:



So this is the reality of the Middle East. Rivals who hate each other nevertheless talk with one another. It is called tawassut or mediation. It is an old social institution.

American voters have a choice of a Bush clone who will drive our allies into reckless wars they cannot win; or someone with the sense to keep the lines open. Everyone else does.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Poll: Americans Want their Iraq News

The Zogby news release, below, about a new poll demonstrates that Informed Comment is giving the American people what they want in the way of Iraq news: "When asked about the news coverage of the Iraq war, most (80%) say the coverage has been fair or poor. When respondents were asked to pick what coverage they would like to see more of, stories about the Iraqi government and the Iraqi people were the two most chosen (68% each) . . ." They also said that the war is having an impact on their local communities, and a fifth had had a relative serve in Iraq! Nearly half knew community members who had served or were serving.

Television news has largely dumped Iraq as a story, quite unwisely according to this poll. Almost as many Americans learn about Iraq from the internet (28%) as from television (33%). We in the blogosphere are not far from overtaking television on this one! Even when they were covering it, the US channels almost never reported on the Iraqi government or people. There have been few interviews with Iraqi government or opposition figures. Virtually no one has explained the difference between Abdul Aziz al-Hakim's Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq and Muqtada al-Sadr's Sadr Movement, both Shiite religious parties. Yet what has been happening in south Iraq and Baghdad lately has been largely a feud between al-Hakim and al-Sadr, with PM al-Maliki having switched to taking al-Hakim's side.

One reason the American public so easily believes implausible assertions about Middle East politics is that our mass media gives them little context for judging how plausible assertions are.

The poll:

'Released: May 21, 2008

New Survey Reveals that the Public is Well Informed about the War in Iraq, More than Half Have Seen Memorable Story

A new online survey from The Poynter Institute measures the public's satisfaction with news coverage of the Iraq war, revealing that most indicate that they are well informed about the war and have seen at least one memorable story about the war's impact at home. More than 50 percent indicate that they have been touched by the war.

St. Petersburg, FL (PR Web) May 21, 2008 - According to a new survey released today by The Poynter Institute and funded by The McCormick Foundation, three-quarters of respondents (75%) state that they are well informed about the war, and more than half (60%) indicate that they have seen at least one memorable story about the war's impact at home. The survey's publication coincides with a three-day conference at The Poynter Institute entitled "Covering War at Home."

Conducted by Zobgy International, the online survey measures the public's satisfaction with coverage of the Iraq war and included 8,683 adults that were representative of the U.S. population. Other top line survey findings include:

Memorable war coverage includes impact at home and healthcare issues

More than half (60%) say they have seen at least one memorable story about the war's impact at home, and most (80%) say they have followed stories regarding healthcare of those returning from Iraq and an astonishing 88% say they are aware of the Walter Reed story. Three out of four (76%) say they have read or heard about the economic impact of the war.

War impacts us at home

Not surprising, the vast majority (86%) believe that the war has an impact on life in the U.S. Nearly half (46%) say that members of their community have died in the war, and 4 in 10 (39%) say that community members are serving in the war. One in five (21%) had a relative serve or is now serving (18%) in the war.

The public wants more stories about the Iraqi government and the Iraqi people

When asked about the news coverage of the Iraq war, most (80%) say the coverage has been fair or poor. When respondents were asked to pick what coverage they would like to see more of, stories about the Iraqi government and the Iraqi people were the two most chosen (68% each), followed by stories about returning soldiers (58%), stories about how war has impacted communities here in the U.S. (57%), and news about areas in Iraq where there is not regular conflict (56%). Casualty reports (32%) were the least chosen area of coverage.

Television, Web sites are the top destinations for news about impact

A third of all respondents (33%) say they learn about the impact of war at home through television, while 28% say they learn about it through Internet sites. Fewer (12%) say they learn about the impact of the war at home via newspaper or radio. Men (32%) are more likely than women (24%) to say they learn about the impact of war at home from Internet sites. Nearly all survey respondents, 90%, indicate they are active consumers of news.

"This survey gives journalists and newsroom leaders a chance to reflect upon what the public wants to know about the impact of the Iraq war at home. It also reflects the acceleration of the need for journalists to deal with multiple ways to tell their stories, as the Internet is a key platform for consumers to learn about the conflict and the impact,"says Howard Finberg, director of interactive learning at The Poynter Institute.

For more information about the survey, visit Poynter Online.

About The Poynter Institute

Founded in 1975 in St. Petersburg, Fla., The Poynter Institute (www.poynter.org) is one of the nation's top schools for professional journalists, future journalists and journalism educators. Poynter offers training throughout the year in the areas of online and multimedia; leadership and management; reporting, writing and editing; TV and radio; ethics and diversity; journalism education; and visual journalism. Poynter’s News University (www.newsu.org) offers newsroom training to journalists and journalism students through interactive e-learning modules and links to other journalism education and training opportunities.

About The McCormick Foundation

The McCormick Foundation is a nonprofit organization committed to making life better for our children, communities and country. Through its charitable grantmaking programs, Cantigny Park and Golf, Cantigny First Division Foundation and the McCormick Freedom Museum, the Foundation positively impacts people's lives and stays true to its mission of advancing the ideals of a free, democratic society. For more information, please visit the Web site www.McCormickFoundation.org.

About Zogby International

Zogby International is a public opinion, research, and business solutions firm with experience working in more than 70 countries around the globe. Founded and led by John Zogby since 1984, Zogby International ranks as one of the industry's leaders thanks to its reputation for superior accuracy and reliability. Zogby specializes in telephone, Internet, and face-to-face survey research and analysis for political, corporate, non-profit, and governmental clients. The firm is headquartered in Utica, New York, with offices in Washington D.C., Miami, and Dubai, United Arab Emirates.

Contact:

Howard Finberg, director of interactive learning

The Poynter Institute

727-553-4371

hfinberg@poynter.org

(5/21/2008) '

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Reuters/Zogby: Obama Opens up 10 Point Lead on McCain

Zogby Polling has permitted the reprinting of the below. What I take away from it is that in a four-way race Nader would hurt Clinton more than he would hurt Obama, and Barr could be deadly for McCain. Reuters/Zogby find that Obama is starting to do better with the Democratic base than Clinton, and he does very well among middle-aged people as well as youth.

'Released: May 21, 2008

Reuters/Zogby Poll: Obama Opens Double-digit Lead Over McCain in National Test

Third-party candidates Nader and Barr show signs of strength in key demographic groups

UTICA, New York – Democrat Barack Obama has sprinted out to a 10-point lead over Republican John McCain in a four-way presidential contest including Libertarian Bob Barr and Liberal Ralph Nader, the latest Reuters/Zogby telephone poll of likely voters nationwide shows.

Obama does well among his Democratic base, winning 79% support – an indication that the party faithful may be coming together behind his campaign as a bruising nomination campaign nears the end. He also does well among non-aligned voters, as independents favor him over McCain by a 48% to 32% margin.
Data from this poll is available here

The live-operator telephone survey was conducted May 15-18, 2008, and included 1,076 likely voters nationwide. The poll carries a margin of error of +/- 3.0 percentage points.

Obama leads in the East, the West, and in the South, while the two are essentially tied in the central part of the country, including the Midwest and the Great Lakes region, the poll shows. He leads among all voters under age 65 – including by huge percentages among those voters under age 30 - but trails McCain among those older voters by a 45% to 34% margin. Interestingly, Obama holds a 13-point edge among those voters age 50 to 64.

The survey hints that Libertarian Bob Barr could do some serious damage to McCain by stealing support among the very conservative and libertarian voters. Barr wins 10% support among those self-described “very conservative” voters, and wins 22% among philosophical (not necessarily “capital L”) libertarians. As McCain continues to angle for moderate support on the campaign trail, Barr could create havoc for him among McCain’s political base.

2008 General Election Match-ups


John McCain


37%

Barack Obama


47%

Ralph Nader


4%

Bob Barr


3%

Not sure/Other


10%

There is less evidence that Ralph Nader would cause as much trouble for Obama, but he still wins persistent support, including 6% support among mainline liberals and 3% support among progressives.

Ten percent said they were undecided or favored another candidate in a prospective contest featuring Obama and McCain.

2008 General Election Match-ups


John McCain


40%

Hillary Clinton


41%

Ralph Nader


4%

Bob Barr


3%

Not sure/Other


12%

McCain and Democrat Hillary Clinton, who lags behind Obama in the race for the Democratic Party presidential nomination, are essentially tied in the latest Reuters/Zogby polling. Clinton won 41% support compared to 40% backing for McCain.

Clinton wins less support from her Democratic base than does Obama when paired against McCain – 74% of Democrats said they would vote for her, while 8% would vote for McCain, 4% support Nader, and 13% of Dems were either undecided or favoring someone else.

McCain wins 77% of the GOP base in this latest polling against Clinton, while she wins 8% of the Republican vote.

Clinton leads McCain by a 40% to 33% margin among independents, while Nader wins 7% support and Barr wins 4% among non-aligned voters, and 16% were uncertain about whom to support in the prospective match-up.

Among progressives, Clinton wins just 60% support against McCain, hampered by Nader, who wins 13% backing from the most liberal of voters. At the other end of the philosophical scale, Libertarian Bob Barr wins 10% support to McCain’s 76% backing among the “very conservative,” while Barr and McCain tie at 24% among libertarian-minded voters in a match-up including Clinton.

Against McCain, Clinton wins just 70% support from African Americans – fully 25% less than Obama wins in that Demographic. And McCain leads her among whites by a 47% to 36% margin. Among women, Clinton leads McCain, 46% to 38%. Among men, McCain holds a 41% to 37% lead over Clinton.

Obama Builds Lead Over Clinton in National Contest

As he moves ever closer to wrapping up the Democratic Party presidential nomination, Obama is also opening up a big lead over Clinton among Democrats nationwide. In a national preference test, he leads her by a 59% to 33% margin, the latest Reuters/Zogby poll shows.

He completely dominates among those voters under age 35, winning more than 80% support, but also leads among all voters under age 70, where she holds a solid advantage. Obama also now leads among almost all likely Democratic voters according to political philosophy – moderates, mainline liberals, and progressives. Clinton leads only among conservative Democrats.

Obama also leads Clinton among both Catholics and Protestants, and among those who claim no religious affiliation.

For a detailed methodological statement on this survey, please visit [this link].


(5/21/2008)
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

American Idol and American Politics

I find it a little eerie how closely the finale of the television program American Idol resembles the presidential race.

Here you have an older male from the school of hard knocks; a younger, soulful man who inspires his peers; and a woman candidate who shows amazing resilience.

In a way, both Idol and the presidential race exemplify a sort of 'family romance' of American society.

Syesha Mercado was in the bottom three on a number of occasions, but she remained in the competition almost to the end. Don Kaplan wrote of her:

' Every week the bubbly brunette . . . has been on the verge of going home. And every week, it's been someone else who gets the boot . . . "Idol" fanatics have been saying for weeks that each episode of "Idol" would be Mercado's last. "But she keeps breaking through," says Michelle Boros . . . Boros thinks the singer has been underestimated by the experts because "she doesn't quite have that personality X-factor that the 'Idol' people like." . . . Kid Kelly, Sirius radio's vice president of music programming believes Mercado is hanging on because "she's a chameleon. She has this ability to transform herself each week - and at the end of the day, she's very talented." '

So you have the woman candidate who is a determined survivor even though it was pretty clear early on that she would not be the winner (winners don't keep being sent to the endangered zone). Ms. Mercado is said to have gotten through the stress of all those close calls by depending on her man.

As for the younger man in the competition, his fans complained that it was unfair to say that David Archuleta was 'inexperienced'. They pointed to his extensive experience on 'Star Search.'

Angie Mohr disagrees, writing:

' David Archuleta, being 17, appeals to younger teens and tweens and that is where his fanbase lies. He is the "pretty boy" of the two and his shy, halting interview responses highlight his youth and inexperience. '

Despite his charisma and almost cult-like following, Archuleta was dogged by controversy and upstaged by a key mentor who proved so disruptive that in the end he had to be banned from the set.

Mohr adds of rocker David Cook:

' David Cook has the rebel just-crawled-out-of-bed, tousled look that draws older teen and early twenties girls but also speaks to the boys-turning-men in the same age range. '

Simon Cowell said of David Cook on Late Night with Jay Leno,

' "Who would I like to win? I'm going to say David Cook," the acerbic judge told Leno. "Only because the guy started off working in a bar. You know, I kinda feel he deserves to win more. Where the other guy, you know, he's 17, cute, you know, hasn't had to work quite as hard as the other one." '

So why do I think there are these, like, cosmic parallels?

Oh, it is just a function of genre. You see, when you cover an election as though it is a talent contest and you zero in on personalities rather than issues, then this is pretty much the sort of melodrama you can construct. It becomes about determined women, less experienced young men, and more hardened older men who know how to mix a stiff drink. You would find these personalities in any tubby novel for sale at an airport bookstore. Mercado, Archuleta and Cook are far more complex and interesting persons than the stock characters that the media has imposed on them. But at least the wrong done them by simplification is minor; they are after all entertainers, and if they attain their potential they will have plenty of opportunity to tell their real stories.

With regard to our political leaders, the infotainment approach obscures the most weighty matters ever to face our Republic, and does a grave disservice to voters whose fate hangs in the balance.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

4 Awakening Council Members Killed; Iraqi Army enters Sadr City; Provincial election Date provokes Row

The Iraqi Army moved into part of Sadr City without meeting resistance on Tuesday, according to McClatchy.

Raheem Salman of LAT blogs the scene in Sadr City.

Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that Iraqi security forces began their search of Sadr City (East Baghdad) in an operation aimed at imposing a rule of law on the district. They met no resistance from the Mahdi Army, which said that the operation did not constitute a breach of its agreement with the United Iraqi Alliance coalition of other Shiite parties. Mahdi Army leaders did express their fear that the official security forces would attack ordinary citizens. The Mahdi Army itself begain withdrawing from government buildings in Baghdad and the provinces. MP Maha al-Duri said that Muqtada al-Sadr himself had ordered the government buildings abandoned.

Government armored vehicles came into the district for the first time since fighting began 8 weeks ago. In some instances they cut off the road to the north and began search and destroy operations. An army spokesman said that they had discovered 100 roadside bombs, and that the operation enjoyed the backing of Muqtada al-Sadr in restoring law and order to the district. Another spokesman more or less admitted that because the district was so densely populated, it depended for success in capturing arms caches and arresting guerrillas on tips from the inhabitants of Sadr City. [I wouldn't count on it getting much information about most Mahdi Army personnel; maybe commanders local consider rogues. The Mahdi Army like all good guerrilla groups will melt away and lie low while the conventional forces are around.]

Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that a political fracas is brewing over the provincial elections now scheduled for November (I had thought, October?). Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki had announced last Sunday that the government will hold the elections for provincial councils over several days so as to guarantee their uprightness, to ensure that they are not interfered with, and to guarantee the safety of the voters.

Umar Sattar reports from Baghdad that Iyad Allawi, leader of the Iraqi National List and former appointed PM, has expressed doubts about whether the elections will be fraudulent.

Also, Salim Abdallah of the Iraqi Accord Front [Sunni fundamentalist] said, "The Front would prefer that the elections be held in all the provinces on the same day if it is desired that their probity be guaranteed. But the government is the decider in setting the election dates, according to the election law that it presented to parliament." He worried that the results of the election in one province might affect those in another province if they were not held simultaneously. He said he hoped that the United Nations would be deeply involved in the holding of the provincial elections, and that Iraqi military forces would be careful to remain neutral.

Speaker of the Iraqi parliament Mahmud al-Mashhadani also came out against holding the elections over several days. He argued that it would be easier to arrange security through curfews if the elections were held on the same day throughout the provinces.

Iyad Allawi sent a letter to several governments and to the UN, expressing his fears that the elections may be fraudulent.

Bush is clearly intent on keeping 140,000 troops in Iraq throughout the rest of hist term. He called up 7 combat brigades to replace those who are cycling out.

Rami El-Amine sums up the state of the 'Surge' as it winds down.

McClatchy reports political violence on Tuesday in Iraq:

' Baghdad

A roadside bomb targeted a US military convoy in al-Qanat Street, near the Talbiyah traffic fly over bridge at 7.45 am Tuesday. One hummer vehicle was damaged.

A roadside bomb targeted civilians in Zayuna in the service lane at 9 am injuring 2 civilians.

An IED left in a Kia minibus exploded as the Kia pulled in Rustamiyah area at 10 am killing 1 civilian, injuring 4.

2 unidentified bodies were found in Baghdad by Iraqi Poloice. 1 in al-Kamaliyah and 1 in Abu Disheer.

Sulaimaniyah

3 people were injured in Sulaimaniyah city during a fight that was related to a vengeance killing, in Hachi Awa neighbourhood at 8 pm Monday. One of the gunmen is a captain in the armed forces and has been handed over to the military authorities for disciplining.

1 woman was injured in the continued Iranian bombardment of border villages. Halima Ibraheem was injured by flying shrapnel Monday evening and was taken to hospital for treatment. 5 border villages were targeted Tuesday from 11 am until noon.

Diyala

A five year old girl was killed and 4 other civilians were injured when a suicide bomber wearing a suicide belt detonated targeting Sheikh Mutlab al-Nidawi, head of Nidawi tribe and head of the Sahwa of Mutamar Ahl al-Iraq in the town of Mendili Tuesday morning..

2 mortar rounds fell on Baladruz open air market, Baladruz town killing 2 civilians, injuring 9.

Salahuddin

4 Sahwa council members including Qassim Dlaiyil al-Dulaimi head of the Sahwa council in Yeshkan village, 5 km to the east of Dhuluiyah were killed by gunmen in an ambush Tuesday. '

Al-Zaman [The Times of Baghdad] is celebrating 11 years of publishing. A warm congratulations from IC to this newspaper that has been so important to this column. (Since it is Sunni Iraqi nationalist, I find it a useful corrective for the Shiite and pan-Arab newspapers I also use).

Nick Turse at tomdispatch.com looks at the film Iron Man as part of the military-entertainment complex.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Kennedy Diagnosed with Brain Tumor

Best wishes to Ted Kennedy and his family in the aftermath of his diagnosis with brain cancer.

Analysts are pointing out that the Democrats need Kennedy more than ever, as a party wise man who could help heal it after a divisive primary.

Kennedy has been among the more effective legislators of his generation and has helped make the lives of most Americans better. He has been a friend of higher education and stood against attempts by the Israel lobby to defund or censor Middle East studies at US universities. You can't think of anyone who could step into his shoes in the latter regard, and certainly not, as this AP clip suggests, Hillary Clinton.


For "cont'd" postings, click here.

11 Police Killed in North; Police Chief Killed Near Nasiriya; IIP Demands Written Apology over Qur'an

Sunni Arab guerrillas attacked a bus in northern Iraq on Monday, killing 11 persons, the policemen aboard and their driver. The attack may have been in response to the Iraqi government campaign against the Sunni radicals in Mosul, Iraq's second largest city (pop. 1.7 million). Mosul is largely Sunni Arab and the governor of Ninevah Province, in which it is located, has alleged that Sunni radicals have been in control of it since January. It has been charged that al-Maliki's campaign has been relatively ineffective, since the radical Sunni leaders melted away when it was inaugurated. The Iraqi military has seen almost no street battles, and has just arrested about 1000 persons; it has been alleged that these detainees are for the most part not connected to the religious extremists, and that they have been subjected to human rights abuses.

Shiite militiamen used a bomb to assassinate the police chief of a town near Nasiriya in the south. The town was the site of fierce fighting earlier between the Mahdi Army and government security forces, which left 22 dead.

The Iraqi military went into Shaab district in east Baghdad on Monday, confiscating bombs and arresting members of the Mahdi Army. The raid did not provoke a breakdown in the ceasefire between the army and the Mahdi Army.

The Moroccan government broke up a terror cell in Fez that was allegedly planning an attack in Belgium. If this story is as advertised, it underlines that radical Muslim extremism is best fought by establishing warm relations with Muslim allies such as Morocco, the security forces of which are far more able to break up such cells than is the US Pentagon. That is, diplomacy is more important to counter-terrorism than sheer military might.

Sunni Arab political parties are not accepting the apology of the US military for the actions of an army sergeant who used the Qur'an for target practice. [Since the Pentagon keeps the television turned to the Islamophobic Fox Cable News for the soldiers on bases in Iraq, it is amazing more such incidents don't occur.] The Iraqi Islamic Party of Iraqi Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi is demanding a written apology and insisting that the sergeant be given the maximum possible sentence.

' "What truly concerns us is the repetition of these crimes that have happened in the past when mosques were destroyed and pages of the Holy Quran were torn and used for disgraceful acts by U.S. soldiers," al-Hashimi said. "I have asked that first this apology be officially documented; second a guarantee from the U.S. military to inflict the maximum possible punishment on this soldier so it would be a deterrent for the rest of the soldiers in the future." '

The Association of Muslim Scholars, which is Sunni fundamentalist, also condemned the incident and expressed outrage that the al-Maliki government has been silent in the face of it. The AMS is alleged to have links to the 1920 Revolution Brigades, a Sunni guerrilla group that is split on whether to continue to fight US soldiers or whether to join pro-US Awakening Councils. The USG Open Source Center translates their web posting:

' May 19, 2008 Monday . . .

"In a new step that reflects disdain for the feelings of Muslims in general and the Muslims in Iraq in particular, the occupation forces removed a soldier from Iraq they said opened fire at a copy of the holy Koran. This apologetic step is an attempt on their part to reduce embarrassment caused by this incident."

The statement notes that this step will not succeed in absorbing the anger of the Iraqi people or covering up the details of what really happened, adding that "this action was not carried out by one soldier only, but rather by a combat force, which includes many members of the occupation forces."

The statement wonders why the US forces decided to punish only one soldier, asking "if this soldier was really punished or rewarded for his action through taking him out of the hell in Iraq and sending him back to his country safely."

Concluding, the statement says that this disciplinary action will open the door wide for "further violations of and aggressions against the holy Koran and Muslim sanctities," by other US soldiers, "who are haunted by the failure of their military targets."

Source: Association of Muslim Scholars website, in Arabic 19 May 08'

McClatchy reports political violence in Iraq on Monday:

' Baghdad

Three civilians were wounded in a bomb explosion in Doura neighborhood south Baghdad around 7:30 p.m.

Around 10:00 the security forces in Zafaraniyah district southeast Baghdad found a Katusha rocket system with a Katusha rocket which was set. The explosive expert defused the rocket. No casualties were reported.

Five civilians were wounded when a Katusha rocket hit Adan intersection in Kadhemiyah neighborhood in north Baghdad around 12:00 p.m.

The Sahwa members in Abo Ghraib area in west Baghdad arrested four suicide bombers including a Syrian man. The four suicide bombers were arrested while they were in their car in al Hamdaniyah neighborhood, part of Abo Ghraib, police said.

Police found three unidentified bodies throughout Baghdad (1 body on Rasheed camp road, 1 body in Mansour and 1 body Shurta the 4th).

Around 9:00 p.m. an IED exploded targeting the vehicle of Major Ahmed, the chief police of al Quds police station in Shaab neighborhood north Baghdad. Major Ahmed got injured with three of his guards.

Two civilians were injured in a bomb explosion in Ghadeer neighborhood in east Baghdad around 9:00 p.m.

Around 8:00 p.m. gunmen opened fire targeting a vehicle carrying three policemen in Qadisyah neighborhood west Baghdad. The policemen were injured and taken to the hospital.

Gunmen attacked an officer in the ministry of interior affairs in Zafaraniyah neighborhood in southeast Baghdad. The officer was injured in the attack.

Salahuddin

Three civilians were wounded in a car bomb near al Fattah mosque in downtown Tikrit city north of Baghdad.

Thi Qar

A source in Nasiriyah police said that the commander of the marshes battalion Major Farhan Qasim Gtafi was killed in an IED explosion while he was nearby the headquarter of the battalion in Souq al Shuyoukh south of Baghdad on Monday morning.

Anbar

A man was killed with his wife while she was wearing an explosive vest. The incident took place in al Mukhtar area north Falluja city west of Baghdad. Police said that they got intelligence information that the man has an explosive vest. The man gave the vest to his wife when the house was raided by the security forces. After police left the house, the explosive vest detonated killing the woman and casing serious wounds to the man who dies later, police said. '

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Flashback: Bush's 2000 Speech

Flashback: Bush's 2000 Republican Convention speech in retrospect:

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Sadrists: Iraqi Military Breaking Ceasefire

The USG Open Source Center translates a transcript of al-Sharqiya Television interview with Sadr Movement official Salah al-Obeidi in which he charges that the Iraqi and US militairies have violated the recent ceasefire agreement.

May 19, 2008 Monday

AL-SADR TREND OFFICIAL SAYS IRAQI ARMY, OTHER FORCES VIOLATED AGREEMENT

Text of report by Dubai-based Iraqi private Al-Sharqiyah TV on 18 May

[Telephone interview with Salah al-Ubaydi, spokesman of the Al-Sadr Trend, in Baghdad by anchorperson Khama'il al-Amili in Dubai - live]

[Al-Amili] An Iraqi security source has reported violations by armed elements, saying that these elements attacked joint Iraqi forces in Al-Sadr City and Al-Ma'amil area east of Baghdad last night, resulting in the killing of four and the injury of 38 others. The source, which did not want its identity revealed, said that armed men detonated a bomb while a patrol was passing in Al-Ma'amil area, and that an exchange of fire followed the explosion. Armed elements opened fire at Iraqi soldiers in the southern neighbourhood of Al-Sadr City, killing four and injuring 38, including a number of children. The source said that the attacks began Saturday evening and continued until midnight.

With me on the telephone is Mr Salah al-Ubaydi, spokesman of the Al-Sadr Trend. Mr al-Ubaydi, given the current violations of the agreement, I ask you if this agreement between you and the Iraqi Coalition is still valid.

[Al-Ubaydi] In the name of God, the merciful, the compassionate. The 16-point agreement continues to be valid. Both sides agree that violations here or there do not mean that the agreement is cancelled, because implementing these 16 points requires extensive monitoring and efforts because of lack trust especially between the two sides, the people in the Al-Sadr City in general and the security forces. There is fear of major and arbitrary campaigns and attacks such as the attacks that took place in Karbala, Al-Diwaniyah, and Basra. These apprehensions created lack of trust.

Therefore, we need to follow up the implementation of these points in the field for a long period of time in order to implement the agreement properly.

[Al-Amili] You said that the agreement's implementation requires extensive monitoring and there have been violations. Do you attribute these violations to weakness related to assurances between the two sides?

[Al-Ubaydi] No, in fact the basic problem was that in previous phases and campaigns, the government did not draw up a mechanism to bring the violators to account or to punish the Army and police personnel who abuse the powers given to them and violate people's safety, security, and interests. The government must draw up mechanisms for punishing wrongdoers, such as dismissal or other forms of punishment. The golden rule is that lack of punishment engenders wrongdoing. Therefore, during the first phase, implementing such a mechanism to correct the performance of the security services personnel would not be easy.

The agreement stipulates that the government must use a special penal code to punish the security services in case they encroach on citizens rights. We are demanding normal rights of citizenship in Al-Sadr City, and this is what many Iraqis want in other governorates as well.

[Al-Amili] Have you reported these points and these ideas to the Coalition, and hence to the government, so they can tackle the violations in order to avoid any collapse of this agreement?

[Al-Ubaydi] Certainly, we have reaffirmed that. This is the basic point, and there has been a transformation in the thinking of the government. The government has started to admit this. Certain sides from those who speak in the name of the government or those who speak on its behalf, have recently admitted, especially after the recent meeting and the dialogue that resulted in the agreement, that there are violations, that these violations are expanding beyond expectations. They admit that the wrongdoers must be punished. Therefore, they started to defend themselves, saying that the security campaigns are not politicized. The proof that their campaigns are not politicized -

[Al-Amili, interrupting] Excuse me, Mr Al-Ubaydi, but they held you responsible for these violations.

[Al-Ubaydi] These are claims. This is one of the points that we would want to reaffirm. Some of the spokesmen of the security services make statements that are not only incorrect but are obviously (?fabricated) as well. Let us take, for instance, the latest violations in Al-Sadr City. The main violation was by the personnel of the 11th Division, who have been directing insults at the citizens over loudspeakers mounted on their vehicles. This is a way of provoking the citizen. Now there is supposed to be an agreement. The soldiers are supposed to be familiar with this agreement. What happened was that during one of their patrols in one of the crowded markets in the Al-Ula area of Al-Sadr City one afternoon, these soldiers began to direct insults at the citizens. There were verbal exchanges with a number of citizens, who included women, and they responded to them and rejected their violations. Therefore, they opened fire to silence the voices that rejected their encroachments. That was what happened.

As for the official spokesman who says that they opened fire and they tried to respond to the fire, I ask: Who opened fire? Was a one-year-old child, a three-year-old child or a woman capable of doing that? This is impossible. If they opened fire, then what losses did the patrol incur? They incurred no losses at all. How is it possible to raise such claims? If the patrol was passing through an area, which, according to their military calculations, is insecure, then would it be possible for them to use arms the moment they hear the sound of a shot and direct their weapons at ordinary citizen in a crowded market?

All these are facts, refuting the statement by the law enforcement spokesman. From this place, I ask the brother spokesmen to be objective and look at events realistically and try to mete out justice to the citizen because the citizen is being oppressed by many services, especially the government security services, as well as non-security services that deal with thefts and financial and administrative corruption. We want justice to the citizens and measures against encroachment on them, whether by the government or others.

[Al-Amili] Mr Salah al-Ubaydi, spokesman of the Al-Sadr Trend, thank you.

Source: Al-Sharqiyah TV, Dubai, in Arabic 1936 gmt 18 May 08

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

McCain on YouTube

Robert Greenwald presents McCain clips, entertainingly.

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

US Soldier Killed in Iraq; Qur'an Desecrated; Maliki Said to Replace Division Commander

The LA Times reports:

' A U.S. soldier was killed Sunday and another injured when their vehicle was struck by a roadside bomb in Salahuddin province, the military said. At least 4,078 U.S. personnel have been killed since the Iraq war began in 2003, according to the independent website icasualties.org. A car bomb targeting an Iraqi army patrol in east Baghdad killed two soldiers and a civilian, police said. Ten people, including four soldiers, were injured.'

The whole US strategy of depending on tribal groups to fight Salafi Jihadis ("al-Qaeda") was endangered when Iraqi officials learned that a US soldier was using the Holy Qur'an for target practice. Sunni Arab tribesmen threatened to stop fighting the radicals. The US in the end handled the matter by holding a ceremony in which American officers apologized for the incident. The offender is being removed from Iraq and will be punished. The incident crystallizes the contradiction in Bush administration policy, between promoting Islamophobia among Americans while attempting to cultivate Muslim allies abroad.

The US is holding about 500 juveniles, mostly in Iraq, and has placed them in adult prisons. US civil liberties groups are protesting.

Iraqi President Jalal Talabani says Iran is not playing a negative role in Iraq.

Al-Zaman reports in Arabic that Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has dismissed the general in charge of the Second Division in Mosul, and has appointed in his place Gen. Abdallah Abdul Sattar. He is said to also be replacing the commanders of brigades within the division.

Personally, I don't take this report as a sign that things are going well in the current campaign in Mosul. You don't change horses midstream when things are going well. The article says that al-Maliki is still suspicious of 2nd Division officers because of the Zanjili explosion in January, in which a building used as an arms depot exploded under mysterious circumstances.

Al-Zaman also says that al-Maliki has over the past few months put 5,000 former Baath soldiers, including 400 former officers, from Mosul back into the Iraqi military. This step is ironic, since al-Maliki was on the De-baathification committee that had excluded Baath soldiers and officers. But, in any case, he doesn't seem to trust these ex-Baathist officers very much.

Al-Maliki spokesmen say that over 1,000 suspected insurgents have been arrested in Mosul and that the campaign is now extending to the villages surrounding the city, Iraq's second largest. But Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that Usama Nujayfi, an MP from Ninevah province where Mosul is located, is saying that "al-Qaeda" elements fled the city before al-Maliki had it attacked. He said that many of the 1,000 Mosulis now in custody are innocent. He also complained that some had been tortured for information and that there were human rights abuses involved in the current Mosul campaign.

Sawt al-Iraq reports in Arabic that Gen. Jabbar Yawar of the Kurdish Peshmerga paramilitary denied that Peshmerga units had been deployed in Mosul. Many Sunni Arab observers in Iraq see the current operation against "al-Qaeda" as a power play in Mosul for control of the city and the province of Ninevah by the Shiite Badr Corps and the Kurdish Peshmerga. Yawar said that there might be Kurds in the Iraqi forces sent to the region, but that these do not report to the Peshmerga, only to the Iraqi Ministry of Defense.

McClatchy reports political violence for Sunday in Iraq:

' Baghdad

1 mortar round fell on al-Iskan neighbourhood, west Baghdad at 8 am Sunday. It landed on a house, destroyed the house and injured four of its inhabitants.

The US military detonated an IED under control in Amil neighbourhood, near al-Ashra al-Mubashara Mosque, southwest Baghdad at 7.45 this morning. As a result of the explosion 20 stores were burned and their contents destroyed.

4 Katyusha rockets fell on the Green Zone this morning. No casualties were reported.

A parked car bomb targeted an Iraqi army patrol at the far end of al-Rabei Street, Zayuna, east Baghdad at 1 pm killing 2 servicemen, injuring 5.

An IED left inside a Kia minibus exploded in Ataifiyah, a little to the north of central Baghdad at 1 pm injuring 2 civilians.

A roadside bomb exploded near al-Kindi Hospital, central Baghdad targeting a US military convoy. The explosion injured 3 civilians.

4 unidentified bodies wer

e found by Iraqi Police today. 1 in al-obaidi; 1 in Mashtal; 1 in Doura and 1 in Adil.

Sulaimaniyah

Iranian bombardment continues on border villages on Qindeel mountain. Today six villages were targeted and although no human casualties were reported livestock have been lost.

Basra

A hand grenade was thrown at a music, films and video games' store in downtown Basra, in the old city. The facade of the store and a large part of the contents were destroyed but no one was hurt.

A sound bomb exploded targeting a building housing both the Union of Iraqi Labour Unions on the first floor and the Iraqi Communist Party/Basra on the second in al-Saadi Street, Basra city centre. The explosion broke many of the window panes in the building.

Armed clashes broke out between National Police and gunmen on Kornish Street, downtown Basra at 9 pm Sunday. 2 National policemen were injured as were 2 gunmen.

1 policeman killed and 2 others injured in armed clashes that broke out between Natonal Police and gunmen in Kuwait Street, downtown Basra at 10 pm Sunday.'

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Sunday Blogivision; McCain calls for Negotiations with Hamas

Some telling video clips for a lazy Sunday:

Via Josh Marshall's TPM Veracifier: John McCain says the US will have to negotiate with Hamas at some point, since they are the government. (They are still the government in Gaza.)



Obama replies to Bush's 'appeasement' crack in Israel:



Condi Rice says she will meet the Iranian foreign minister "any time, any place" if Iran will suspend enrichment activities. She says the question is not why the Bush administration won't talk to Iran, since it will. The question is why Iran won't talk to the Bush administration:



Joe Biden points out that Bush's government talked with North Korea and Iran, both of which it considers terrorist states:



Chris Matthews nails talk radio hatehead Kevin James for having no idea who Neville Chamberlain was while deploying the "appeasement" trope against Obama. When Chris Matthews asks you why you are shouting, you are really shouting.



Lebanese people hope for a solution to their crisis (via Aljazeera English):



In the Kuwaiti election, women candidates are pushing for change (Aljazeera English):


For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Fallujah Bombing Kills 4 Police; Al-Maliki offers Amnesty; Honor Killings of Iraqi Women Rise

Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki offered an amnesty in Mosul to those guerrillas who lay down their arms and accept money from him.

Also, a bombing in Fallujah killed 4 policeman and wounded 9 others.

Mobile phone images of hanky panky are getting Iraqi women murdered in 'honor killings.'

One reason that the Iraqi Shiite elite would dislike it if relations with Iran spiralled down: They are hoping that religious pilgrimage from Iran will make them rich.

UPI's 'Iraq Press Roundup'.

McClatchy reports political violence in Iraq on Friday:

' Baghdad

A roadside bomb targeted an Iraqi army patrol in Zafaraniyah, southeast Baghdad at 9 am Friday injuring 2 civilians.

A roadside bomb exploded near al-Nahdha bus station in central Baghdad at 11 this morning killing 1 civilian, injuring 3.

3 mortar rounds slammed into the Ghazaliyah police station, west Baghdad, which is being used as a US military base at 11.15 am. No casualties were reported.

3 mortar rounds slammed into the former Central Markets building in Shaab, North Baghdad, which is being used as a US military base at 11.15 am. No casualties were reported.

Medical sources inside Sadr city reported 11 injuries and 2 deaths including women and children brought in from al-Shamaiyah and Rashad neighbourhoods, two eastern suburbs of Baghdad, at 4 pm Friday.

4 unidentified bodies were found in Baghdad today by Iraqi Police. 1 in Fdhailiyah; 1 woman in Karrada; 1 in Zafaraniyah and 1 in Doura.

Anbar

A car bomb driven by a suicide bomber exploded targeting al-Harith police station, on the eastern route at the entrance into Fallujah city at 2.18 pm Friday. The explosion killed 1 baby, six months old, and injured 7 civilians including one woman and her 2 month old baby girl as well as 5 policemen. The civilian injuries and casualty were a result of glass splinters from the shattered window panes of nearby houses.

1 policeman was shot at by gunmen in al-Ameriyah/Fallujah, 30 km to the south of Fallujah city at 4 pm. The bullet lodged in his stomach and his situation is critical.

Sulaimaniyah

This afternoon, renewed Iranian bombardment continued for two hours upon 6 border villages in Bashdar district, to the northeast of Sulaimaniyah city. Although no casualties resulted from these attacks the residents of these villages are leaving their homes and taking their livestock with them up the mountain.

1 unidentified body was found in Sirwan Lake, near DarbendiKhan dam Friday. The 30 year old man was shot dead and his body was thrown into the lake.'

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

McCain Unit Rolled out; Funeral Bombing Toll Rises to 25; Baghdad Governor's Convoy Blown Up;

VOA reports that on May 15, 'Clashes in the Iraqi capital, Baghdad's Sadr City district have left at least seven people dead, despite a deal aimed at ending the bloodshed. Iraqi officials said Thursday the fighting between Iraqi security forces and Shi'ite militants loyal to radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr broke out overnight and in the early morning. Hospital officials say 19 people were wounded, including women and children.'

Remember how Tom Friedman and Bush administration spokesmen kept saying that "the next six months" would be crucial for Iraq? They said it in 2003, 2004, 2005, etc., etc. Atrios finally called them on it, terming it the "Friedman unit".

Now we have the new, improved, "McCain unit"-- which is apparently that the next four years will be crucial in Iraq. Indeed, McCain predicted "victory" by 2013, four years after he hopes to take office as the new president. Of course if victory does not come by 2013, then the next McCain unit would kick in, with the years leading up to 2017 being "crucial" for Iraq.

William Lind explains why McCain's fantasy of victory is highly unlikely to be fulfilled. Lind calls Iraq a 'fourth generation war' in which there is no real state capacity on which the US can build, and in which the enemy is shadowy and slips away before conventional forces (as in Basra, where rightwing commentators have mistaken the Mahdi Army's ability to melt away and lie low as a victory for the [non-existent] state). The US really only controls the ground on which its soldiers tread, and that reality may well not change during the next 4 years. If Lind is right, McCain is hanging US policy on a set of ideas out of the 1940s that have no application in Iraq today.

The "McCain unit" is already a public relations bust. It sounds like a timetable to Democrats. It is too far off for most people to take seriously. The beauty of the Friedman unit was that it seemed relatively near, but people could be depended to forget about its last use before it was invoked again. The "McCain unit" will tax the public's patience too much, not to mention their pocket books. His unit probably has a $1 trillion tax bill attached to it all at once. And his unit is too specific, calling for "victory." The Friedman unit was deliberately vague about what exactly would happen in the next six months that was "crucial" for Iraq.

"Three employees of the Iranian embassy and their Iraqi driver were shot and wounded as they traveled Thursday to the Shiite Kadhemiyah Shrine in northern Baghdad."

Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that the Mosul power elite is increasingly disturbed by the central government's military campaign in that city. They say that they would be willing to keep on the sidelines if the al-Maliki government just went after "al-Qaeda" (the Salafi Jihadis) in the city. But they say that the al-Maliki forces have arrested dozens of ex-members of the Baath Party, as well as former military officers. They say that if this campaign against the Mosul elite continues, they will be forced to act. The al-Maliki government had given them undertakings that it would only target "al-Qaeda", but in fact it has arrested over 900 persons, many of them ex-Baathists.

The US is cutting off relations with Iraqi politician and notorious embezzler and liar Ahmad Chalabi for the fourth time. This time the issue is said to be his deteriorating relations with Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki and his closeness to Brig. Gen. Qasem Soleimani, head of the Jerusalem (Quds) Brigades of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards. Actually my suspicion is that Chalabi is supporting the Mahdi Army of Muqtada al-Sadr and that is the real reason for the tension with him. Sadr wants the US out on a short timetable and opposes the passage of an oil law that the Bush administration desperately wants.

McClatchy reports political violence for Thursday:

' Baghdad

A roadside bomb exploded targeting the motorcade of the Governor of Baghdad in Nasr Square, Sadoun Street, central Baghdad at 8 am Thursday. 1 security personnel was killed and 4 others as well as 2 civilians were injured.

A roadside bomb targeted a joint US military and Iraqi Army patrol in al-Khadhra neighbourhood, west Baghdad at noon Thursday. 1 Iraqi army serviceman was killed and 4 were injured, said Iraqi Police.

A roadside bomb targeted a US military convoy in al-Qanat, near al-Amin neighbourhood at 1 pm. One Hummer vehicle was destroyed, according to Iraqi Police. No comment was available from the US military at time of publication. A roadside bomb targeted a US military convoy in Fdhailiyah, northeast Baghdad at around 6 pm Thursday. No casualties were reported.

3 unidentified bodies were found in Baghdad by Iraqi Police today. 1 in Fdhailiyah; 1 in Iskan and 1 in Bayaa.

Salahuddin

3 prominent doctors were kidnapped by gunmen on the way between Tikrit and Baiji, close to al-Hamra village, 20 km to the north of Tikrit. They are Dr. Sabbar Mahrooz Abdullah, administrator of Tikrit Teaching Hospital, his deputy and specialist Dr. Ahmed Salah.

Sulaimaniyah

Iranian bombardment hit border villages in Qalaat Daza district. Local governmental sources say that the bombardment started early Thursday and continued intermittently into the afternoon. No casualties were reported.'

Reuters reports political violence on Thursday and Wednesday, including the rising death toll from the bombing of a funeral, which has reached 25:

' BAGHDAD - The final death toll from a suicide attack on a funeral west of Baghdad on Wednesday was 25, police said. They said 48 people were wounded.

BAGHDAD - A roadside bomb targeted the convoy of Baghdad's Governor Hussein al-Tahan, killing one of his guards and wounding six people near al-Nasser Square in central Baghdad, police said. Al-Tahan was not in the convoy.

BAGHDAD - The bodies of five people were found in Baghdad on Wednesday, police said.

BAGHDAD - The U.S. military said it killed four militants in clashes on Wednesday afternoon in the Kadhimiya district of northwestern Baghdad.

MOSUL - The Iraqi army said it arrested the manager of the Nineveh governor's office in a raid in southern Mosul, 390 km (240 miles) north of Baghdad.

MOSUL - The Iraqi army said it arrested the head of the facilities protection force in Mosul on Wednesday. '

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Is Obama the Apostate, or is Bush? A Reply to Luttwak

I've been traveling again and so only just saw Edward Luttwak's ridiculous column about Barack Obama being considered an "apostate" in the Muslim world.

It is just so discouraging that such an ignorant and illogical comment was made by a prominent American pundit, and that the New York Times leant its pages to this complete drivel.

Of course, this column is a stealth way of bringing back up the myth of Obama being a Muslim, and it is profoundly dishonest.

The argument is that Obama's father was a Muslim and therefore Obama would be considered a Muslim apostate by fundamentalists, even though Obama's mother was a Christian; even though his father abandoned them and Obama did not really know him; even though Obama never practiced Islam; and even though his father was himself a secularist who was known to like a stiff drink. Luttwak even alleges that the law of apostasy is in the Qur'an (Wael Hallaq has argued convincingly that it is not).

So here is what the academic literature has to say about Islamic law on this issue (Rudolph Peters and Gert J. J. De Vries
Die Welt des Islams, New Series, Vol. 17, Issue 1/4 (1976 - 1977), pp. 1-25 ):

"Not only the act of apostasy is subject to certain conditions in order to be legally valid, but also with regard to the perpetrator (murtadd) specific qualifications have been laid down. He can perform a legally effective act of riddah [apostasy] only out of free will (ikhtiyar) at an adult age (bulugh), being compos mentis (`aqil [of sound mind]), and, as emphasized by the Malikite school, after his unambiguous and explicit adoption of Islam." [- p. 3][P. 2, n. 3: "It is equally stated that this Islam needs to be evident in both qawl [speech] and `amal [deed]; a person who embraced the faith by merely pronouncing the shahadah [profession of faith] would not be considered qulified to perform a legally valid act of apostasy-- Cf. Mawwaq in the margin of Hattab, Mawahib al-Jalil, VI, pp. 279-80]"

Barack Obama never accepted or practiced Islam as an adult (which would be age 15 in Islamic law) and therefore according to classical Islamic jurisprudence cannot be an apostate. Peters and DeVries are Arabists and are among the foremost scholars on Islamic law, unlike Luttwak, who does not have the slightest idea what he is talking about.

Luttwak has no doubt been misled by some Salafi, modernist-fundamentalist fatwa, which departs from the great Islamic legal traditions, and he has mistakenly taken it to be representative of Islamic law. Or, I don't know, maybe some minor jurist in the minority Hanbali tradition dissents. But to characterize these minority traditions or idiosyncratic views as representative of Islam as a whole would be like declaring Pat Robertson's interpretation of Christianity more legitimate than that of Saint Thomas Aquinas.

The authoritative Encyclopedia of Islam, after noting some of the extremist modern positions of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad of Ayman al-Zawahiri and others goes on to say,

' The view that the law of apostasy applies only to those [adult Muslims] who have deliberately and unambiguously broken with Islam is, for instance, still held by the majority of Hanafi jurists. Some jurists have proposed the abolition of all penalties for apostasy from Islam (Shaltut, M., Islam. `Aqida wa-shari`a (Cairo 1966), 287f.; Saeed, A., and H. Saeed, Freedom of religion. Apostasy and Islam, Aldershot 2004).' (S.v. "Apostasy.")

Luttwak even goes so far as to speculate, on the basis of no evidence whatsoever, that some Muslims might want to kill Obama for "apostasy" and suggests his life would be in danger on state visits to Muslim countries. But as we have seen, classical Islamic law would not lead to this conclusion at all.

Another error is to see persons of Muslim heritage as necessarily religious. Frankly, most Muslims nowadays don't pay any attention to those kinds of minutiae. Indonesia's Muslims elected relatively secular parties when they were allowed to vote. Hundreds of millions of Muslims in Muslim-majority states lives under secular governance and laws-- Turkey, Indonesia, Tunisia, Algeria, Jordan, Syria, etc.

Moreover, Luttwak's column is ahistorical. There have been lots of "apostasies" in modern Middle Eastern history. The Shihab dynasty in the 19th century Levant had been Sunni Muslims but converted to Christianity. They were recognized as the rulers of what is now Lebanon by the Ottoman Empire and by other Ottoman principalities. Nothing bad happened to them because of their conversion even though it did meet the classical definition of apostasy. People don't always act the way the obscure law books suggest.

Or for a contemporary example, let us take Turkish Chief of Staff Yasar Buyukanit, a pillar of the Kemalist, anti-Islam establishment in Ankara. He visited Egypt quite safely even though he certainly would be considered an apostate by Muslim fundamentalists. He called activist Islam a "center of evil" that threatens Turkey's secular and democratic traditions. Fundamentalist Muslim Turks consider Buyukanit not only an apostate from Islam but also a secret convert to Judaism.

Yet Buyukanit is arguably among the more powerful persons in the Middle East and travels freely in the region.

Or there is Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev, who obviously apostatized from Islam to Communism and then from Communism to some other form of secularism. And yet Nazarbayev freely visits the Middle East.

Former Cairo University Professor Hamid Nasr Abu Zaid was accused of apostasy (not heresy, apostasy) in the Egyptian court system, on the grounds that his academic writings on the Qur'an denied its status as divine revelation. He was actually found guilty by a Cairo court, though the ruling was later suspended and an embarrassed Egyptian government said it would work to prevent it happening again. Was Abu Zaid sentenced to death by the official court? No. The punishment? He was ordered divorced from his Muslim wife, since a non-Muslim male may not be legitimately married to a believing Muslim woman. The couple fled to Holland. This incident was a horrible miscarriage of justice and an affront to human liberty, but it directly refutes Luttwak's silly argument that a finding of apostasy would necessarily lead state institutions to impose a death penalty. Many Middle Eastern states do not even have hisba or sharia benches that could make such rulings. Iran is among the few places where it could happen, and there are other reasons for one to be fearful for an American president's safety in Iran. Likewise, those radicals who brandished death threats at Abu Zaid would kill an American president even if they didn't think him an apostate, as Ali Eteraz pointed out.

A lot of observers think Obama is a 'natural' candidate for Muslims abroad to support. But why? They see him as just another American, and they haven't had a good experience with American policies. In Pakistan, 50% of a sample said that they would like to vote in the upcoming American election. Of that group, 30% said they would vote for Hillary Clinton, 14% said they would vote for Obama, and 8% said they would vote for John McCain. So Luttwak's assumptions are incorrect in every way. Pakistanis don't care about Obama's background, they care that he threatened to bomb their country. American reporters are always asking if Hillary Clinton can get respect in the patriarchal Muslim world; but she is is the one the Pakistani public would vote for! Pakistani Muslims elected a female head of state, after all, something the patriarchal Americans haven't yet managed.

An American president might be in danger in the Middle East. But it would be because of the hatred for the United States provoked by the brutal military tactics of the Bush administration and by its blithe unconcern for the welfare of Palestinians and other local people.

It would be because Bush is the apostate, since he was born under the US constitution but he left it for a faith in torture, killing innocents, neo-colonialism, and mass murder (as at Fallujah).

That's the apostasy that Middle Easterners most mind.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Cole & the BBC Doha Debates

As I was setting off for some conferences in the UK last April, I got an invitation from Tim Sebastian to come participate in the Doha Debates on April 29. Sebastian for years ran a hard hitting interview program on the BBC. More recently, he has hosted the Doha Debates in Qatar. The debates are sponsored jointly by BBC World, which carries them the following weekend, and by the Qatar Foundation.

The video of the event in which I participated is here.

The Doha Debates have a local audience and a big student following. They also sponsor a Qatari student debating team.



Among the aims of the enterprise is to foster a tradition of Oxford-style debating in the Gulf and the Arab world. Given that Qatar is emerging as a major educational hub in the region, with its innovative Education City Complex the Doha Debates have taken on an important pedagogical role.





The question put to us was whether Sunni-Shiite fighting had damaged the reputation of Islam as a religion of peace. I have to say that I did not particularly like the question, which seemed to me to lack analytical rigor. It did not specify when and where, nor the audience for Islam's reputation, and the last part begged a question. I think the way it was posed, as a matter of the reputation of Islam, tended to make a Muslim audience defensive and concerned to defend the honor of their faith. That is, if the point was to foster reasoned, dispassionate debate, then this question was ill suited to the purpose in the context of an Arab Muslim audience.

My fellow debaters were Gen. Ali Shukri of Jordan, a former adviser to the late King Hussein (who argued for the motion, as did I); Hisham Hellyer, a UK Muslim intellectual; and Imam Hassan Qazwini, who runs an impressive Shiite mosque in Deaborn, Michigan and who is originally from Karbala in Iraq. I knew Hillyer and Imam Qazwini and we had usually been on the same side in debates about Islam, so it was a little odd to be ranged against one another.

I arrived in Doha from London on the evening of the 28th of April.



By the time I got settled in the hotel, it was late. I asked the concierge about taking a walk, and he recommended the Corniche, which was near the hotel. So I walked along the seaside (Qatar is a peninsula sticking up into the Persian Gulf). There were others out, including families. There was a little kiosk serving coffee and ice cream, and people seemed to be drinking coffee at midnight.



The population is polyglot, so you could see Qataris, Egyptians, Filipinos, Pakistanis, Indians, Nepalis, Sri Lankans, Chinese, etc. Qatar's population is officially about one million, but it may be half again that in reality. There are differing estimations of the number of native citizens, usually put at 150,000. The rest are guest workers, most on 2-year renewable visas. Only 20 percent of the guest workers are Arabs. Qatar may have six or seven million people in a decade or two, raising questions about its ultimate identity, since a large part of the population seems likely to be non-Muslims from the Indian Ocean region.

Qatar is the only other Wahhabi state besides Saudi Arabia, but its tone is very different. One Qatari friend told me it was the difference between Wahhabism of the sea and Wahhabism of the desert. Qatari merchants plied dhows in the old days to India and were always more cosmopolitan. Although the Sunni mosques, which are licensed by the Pious Endowments ministry, are all of the conservative Hanbali school, the government is now allowing a Catholic church to be built. (Not something you'd see in Saudi Arabia). Although my hotel was thankfully quiet, apparently some have night clubs for the expatriates, and serve alcohol. Again, not a Wahhabi set of policies. And, Sheikh Hamad Al Thani, the current emir, has an interest in promoting open intellectual exchange; hence Aljazeera and the Doha Debates. In these ways, Qatar is starting to resemble the United Arab Emirates to the south more than it does Riyadh.

On Tuesday morning, Mr. Sebastian met with Gen. Shukri and myself to discuss the mechanics of the debate and strategy. They stressed that the opening statement is key to persuading people. Gen. Shukri and I had lunch later on to talk more about what kinds of arguments and anecdotes might be persuasive.

Despite the draw for me of the hotel beach, I dutifully stayed in my room that afternoon working on my opening statement and my main arguments.

I thought this statement by former Senate majority leader Trent Lott pretty persuasive that the Sunni-Shiite strife has damaged Islam's image. Alas, as things transpired it became clear to me that most of the studio audience had no idea who Trent Lott was and so could not gauge the significance of the quote.

The debate itself, you can see at the link above. It was collegial and maybe suffered from us all liking each other too much.

I got both bouquets and brickbats from the studio audience, but it seemed clear to me that for some of them, the way the question was phrased put them on the defensive.

It was a great experience, and I greatly enjoyed the back and forth with the other debaters and with the audience. Mr. Sebastian took us out for a nice dinner afterwards (Italian), and the hosting throughout the trip was among the best I've ever experienced.

The debates were broadcast on BBC World that weekend. Unfortunately I don't think you can get it in the United States. My DISH network just gives me this awful "BBC America" which replicates in a British accent the worst features of American television. Apparently we are not considered grown up enough for real news.

On Wednesday I went to Aljazeera to do some interviewing,

which ended up as a Salon article. The Doha Debates staff very kindly set up those interviews.

On Thursday and Friday I was shown around Education City and then hooked up with old friends, who showed me around the rest of the city, which has grown enormously since I was last there in 1988.



Not everything has changed. The Emir has tried to preserve the old souq or traditional market:



And a good time was had by all!
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Puzzle of Bombings in Jaipur

The bombings that shook Jaipur and killed 80 innocents are not immediately legible as ordinary politics. Most previous such bombings (Bombay, Hyderabad) have been in areas that have important Muslim minorities, or have been connected to separatist movements such as in Assam. Some appear to have been the work of Muslim radicals and intended as revenge on the Bharatiya Janata Party for its ties to RSS goon squads that have engaged in pogroms against Muslims. But Jaipur in Rajasthan is heavily Hindu and is not politically symbolic. Its main claim to fame is as a tourist attraction.



I don't agree with the Indian analysts who suggest that the site of the attack is arbitrary, or that it has something to do with the new government in Pakistan, which is more favorable to India than the previous one. A general attempt to foment Hindu-Muslim tension may be part of it, but then why did the perpetrators not announce themselves?

Possible considerations are that unlike most of India's provinces now, Rajasthan is run by the BJP. So this attack could be a strike against that party. A bombing in Jaipur clearly is intended to hurt India's tourist economy. Since tourism revenues in Jaipur at the moment benefit the BJP, these horrific bombings could be intended to harm the provincial government.

Terrorists have their own awful logic, however, so other considerations may have played a role.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

11 Killed, 20 Wounded in Sadr City;

No sooner had the truce between the Mahdi Army and the US & Iraqi military been signed than it appeared to break down. Clashes broke out Monday night into Tuesday morning between the Mahdi Army militiamen and US troops, leaving 11 Iraqis dead and 20 wounded. The militia also targeted some government ministries with mortar fire.

Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that there is a disagreement between the United Iraqi Alliance (Shiite coalition) and the Sadr Movement over the exact content of the ceasefire proclamation. The UIA says that Sadr made an undertaking to dissolve the Mahdi Army, while his supporters say he pledged no such thing. Sadrist spokesman Salah al-Ubaidi said that individual militiamen were free to surrender their arms to the central government, but that the movement would not impose a duty to do so on its members.

Al-Zaman reports in Arabic that the population of Mosul feels betrayed because Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki had given them an undertaking that he was only after foreign jihadis and would not arrest local Mosulis. In fact he has had 150 officers arrested.

The USG Open Source Center translates a report from Sharqiya t.v. that there is little potable water in Mosul.

From Media Matters: "A New York Times article detailed the connection between numerous media military analysts and the Pentagon and defense industries, reporting that "the Bush administration has used its control over access and information in an effort to transform" media military analysts "into a kind of media Trojan horse -- an instrument intended to shape terrorism coverage from inside the major TV and radio networks." A Media Matters review found that since January 1, 2002, the analysts named in the Times article -- many identified as having ties to the defense industry -- collectively appeared or were quoted as experts more than 4,500 times on ABC, ABC News Now, CBS, CBS Radio Network, NBC, CNN, CNN Headline News, Fox News, MSNBC, CNBC, and NPR. . ."

I had been afraid that the Iraq conflict would drive Saudi Arabia and Iran into conflict with one another. But now you have to wonder if Lebanon might be more deadly in this regard. Saudi Arabia supports Saad al-Hariri and the Sunnis, while Iran supports Hizbullah.

McClatchy reports political violence in Iraq for Tuesday:

' Baghdad

Five civilians were wounded in a roadside bomb that targeted a patrol for the Iraqi army in al Wathiq intersection in Karrada neighborhood in downtown Baghdad around 8:00 a.m.

Medical sources in Sadr hospital in Sadr city said that a seven years old died after he was run over by a vehicle of the Iraqi army and 15 other men were wounded in a air strike targeted Jamila area in east Baghdad. US military says their was one air strike and some gun battles without any further details.

Medical source in Imam Ali hospital said that five men were killed and four others were wounded in an American air strike around 5:00 a.m. No confirmation reached us from the US military until time of publication

Around 5:00 p.m. three mortar shells hit the building of the ministry of interior affairs in Bab al Sharji neighborhood in downtown Baghdad. No casualties reported. At the same time, another three mortar shells hit the building of the ministry of justice in Salihiya in downtown Baghdad casuing afire that was controlled by firefighting units.

Police found four unidentified bodies throughout Baghdad (1 body in Jisr Diyala, 1 body in Tobchi, 1 body in Amil and 1 body in Sleikh)

Nineveh

Five Iraqi soldiers were killed in a roadside bomb that targeted their vehicle in Tal al Roman area in southwest Mosul city around 9:00 a.m.

Kirkuk

Ten civilians were injured in a car bomb near Mahabad primary school in one of the Kurdish neighborhoods in downtown Kirkuk city on Tuesday afternoon. The explosion caused damaged some shops and cars '

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Dangers facing the World

As if Iraq was not enough to worry about, some important political developments in Lebanon, and even in the Yemen have raised the temperature of the Middle East . . .

A roadside bomb targeted Abu Qutaiba, a local leader of an Awakening group a U.S. sponsored militia, in Al Lehaib area north east of Fallujah killing him with two bodyguards and killing two children were passing by the bomb.

A ceasefire was formally signed on Monday between the Al-Maliki government and the Sadr movement,, which allows Iraqi forces to search Sadr City in Baghdad for medium and heavy weapons. Arabic press reports suggest that the government will need a court-ordered warrant for such searches.

The political alliance between the Pakistan People's Party and the Muslim League-N in Pakistan has fallen apart. Nawaz Sharif is withdrawing his cabinet ministers because PPP regent Asaf Ali Zardari refuses to press ahead quickly with reinstating the court judges dismissed last fall by Pervez Musharraf. Sharif knows that the Pakistani Supreme Court would, if restored, depose Musharraf. So does Zardari but he is more afraid of a military coup than is Sharif.

Pakistan will not return to stability any time soon, since Sharif and his party want to see Musharraf deposed, and the military may or may not allow that to happen.

Then in Lebanon, street fighting subsided on Monday in Beirut and in the Shouf mountains. But it flared up in the northern port city of Tripoli between Sunnis and Alawites (a folk Shiite sect to which the Syrian top leadership belongs).

Aljazeera on Lebanon's army:


"Dozens of people have been killed or wounded in renewed clashes between the Yemen army and Shiite rebels in the north-west of the country, tribal sources said. "Fighting killed or wounded dozens of people, including many civilians," on Sunday and Monday in several regions across the Shiite Zaidi rebel stronghold of Saada, one source said.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Cole in Salon: Obama and Clinton on Aljazeera

My column, "Clinton and Obama on Aljazeera," is just out in Salon.com.

It is based in part on an interview I did with the editor-in-chief of Aljazeera during my recent trip to Qatar.

Excerpt:

' Many Americans incorrectly think of Al-Jazeera's Arabic-language network as al-Qaida Central because it occasionally broadcasts excerpts from videotapes of the terror organization's leaders. Nowadays, however, viewers are far more likely to see images of the American presidential candidates on the channel's screens. As the United States, always an interested party, has become a dominant on-the-ground player in the Middle East, residents of the region increasingly feel that their own fate depends on the outcome of this election. I was in Qatar earlier this month and stopped by the office of Ahmed Sheikh, editor in chief of Al-Jazeera's Arabic service, to ask him about his network's coverage of the campaign.

Al-Jazeera's Arabic service studios in the rapidly growing metropolis of Doha have been expanded but are still relatively modest. The facilities at the new English-language Al-Jazeera International across the street are far more state-of-the-art. The correspondent who welcomed me said that when Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak visited, he was taken aback by how small the studio was, remarking, "So this is the matchbox that has caused all that trouble!"

Safely delivered to Sheikh's office, I was plied with strong Arab tea. Soon our conversation turned to the U.S. presidential campaign. Why, I asked, give such distant events air time? "Because the United States is occupying Iraq and it is an ally of Israel and a power broker in the region," Sheikh replied. "The United States is the only superpower on the planet. Events in Iraq and Palestine affect this area." '

Read the whole thing.

Qatar, by the way, is a fascinating country, and is taking on some of the attributes of Dubai, though it isn't as swinging a place as the latter. It is opening its first Catholic church soon!
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Mosul Offensive Catches Residents Off Guard; Turks Bomb N. Iraq; New Bloc in Parliament?

The Mosul operation came so unexpectedly for residents of the major northern city that they did not have time to stock up on food. Alexandra Zavis interviews Mosulis who say that they have been living in fear. What is odd is that we weren't having these stories of living in fear in Mosul 2 months ago.

Turkey bombed northern Iraq again on Sunday, retaliating against the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK) for its attack on the Turkish military in Anatolia, which left two Turkish soldiers dead. The guerrillas are then alleged to have retreated into Iraq.

McClatchy reports on the precarious position of Sadr City residents whose homes are near to the Green Zone that houses the US embassy and other US offices.

How solid the ceasefire is has yet to be seen. Hadi al-Amiri, a member of parliament who is also head of the paramilitary Badr Corps, said Sunday that the Mahdi Army must disarm. (Since the Badr Army has not disarmed, this statement is the height of hypocrisy). And, PM Nuri al-Maliki maintains that the truce in Sadr City was worked out between the Iraqi parliament and the Sadrists, and that he was not part of the process.

Al-Zaman reports in Arabic that efforts to form an alternative, nationalist bloc in parliament are continuing. It hopes to include the Iraqi National List of Iyad Allawi, the Islamic Virtue Party (Fadhila) and the National Dialogue Council of Salih Mutlak. The Sadrists are said to be studying the possibility of joining, but they have not so far.

For invaluable updates on the situation in Afghanistan, don't miss Barnett Rubin's recent entries at our Global Affairs blog.

Bil McKibben on the defining moment in climate change. . .

McClatchy reports political violence in Iraq for Sunday:

' Baghdad

- Around 7 am, a roadside bomb exploded near the oil marketing department in Zayuna neighborhood in east Baghdad. Two civilians were injured in the blast.

- Around 9:30 am a roadside bomb targeted the deputy of the finance minister’s convoy Mr. Fadhel Mahmoud. Six people were injured in the blast.

- Police found 1 dead body in Baghdad in Saidiyah neighborhood in south Baghdad.

Kirkuk

- Saturday night, gunmen opened fire on an Iraqi soldier at Mujaibra of Rashad in west Kirkuk. The soldier was killed immediately.

- Saturday night, gunmen kidnapped a peasant at Tal Aleid of Rashad in west Kirkuk.

- In the morning, police found two dead bodies on the way between Kirkuk and Sulaimaniyah. The police found out that those two bodies belonged to two workers who were kidnapped in Khan Khorma in Kirkuk last week. '

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Maliki-Sadr Agreement on Sadr City; Al-Maliki Heads to Mosul

The al-Maliki government and the Sadrists pulled back from the brink in Sadr City on Saturday. PM Nuri al-Maliki had demanded that the Mahdi Army militia that serves as the Sadrist paramilitary give up its arms and dissolve itself. The compromise simply states that the Iraqi security forces would be allowed in to Sadr City to search for suspected medium and heavy weapons. The implication is that the Mahdi Army may continue to exist and may keep its light weapons (e.g. AK-47s), though it has to pledge not to walk with them in public.

The siege of Sadr City is to be lifted and the major roads in and out of it are to be unblocked, according to the agreement.

Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that the agreement stipulates that the government should have a court order to come into Sadr City. Arrests of rogue commanders had to to be based on warrants and not just 'indiscriminate.' There is nothing in the agreement about the Mahdi Army disarming altogether, as Nuri Al-Maliki initially demanded.

Reading news about Iraq is like watching Bill Murray's 'Groundhog Day' in which you have to live through the same day over and over again. So the US and Iraqi governments have announced a new campaign against Sunni radicals in Ninevah province, especially Mosul. Take a look at this article, published late last January: "Thousands of Iraqi army soldiers reached the northern city of Mosul on Sunday in preparation for what the government said would be a major offensive there against Al-Qaeda in Iraq, along with other Sunni militants."

You have a sinking feeling that al-Maliki is recycling old announcements in a futile attempt to distract the public from his climb-down in Sadr City. Al-Maliki left for Mosul Saturday along with a few cabinet members and close advisers. Curfews have been announced in some Mosul neighborhoods.

Ninevah governor Duraid Kashmula admitted to Al-Hayat that Mosul "has come to dominated by the leaders of al-Qaeda as a result of the delay in the military operation in the city."

What??! Mosul is Iraq's second largest city at 1.7 million, and it is under the control of "al-Qaeda"? How long has this been the case? All this time? While the US press was reveling in the "calm" in the country?

Joel Brinkley points out that in the first four months of 2008, the Iraq trend lines are going the wrong way again. Worse, the Iraqi occupation is generating a wave of terrorism in the Middle East as trained insurgents return home from Iraq:

' In Morocco last year, "a series of suicide bombs shattered the relative lull in terrorist violence" over the previous five years, the report said. "Extremist veterans returning from Iraq" were training inexperienced insurgent fighters, who then carried out bloody attacks in Casablanca and other cities. King Mohamed VI observed that security in his corner of the Middle East is now "linked to the security of the region."

In neighboring Algeria, insurgents "used propaganda based on the call to fight in Iraq as a hook to recruit young people, many of whom never made it to Iraq but were redirected" to local insurgent cells instead. They carried out "high-profile terrorist attacks throughout the country." . .

Gen. Mansour al-Turki, Saudi Arabia's Interior Ministry spokesman, once told me that Saudi militants "wanted to spread their war against the United States and found that doing this was easier in their own country." He drew this conclusion, he said, from interviews with insurgents he had arrested. "The invasion of Iraq enabled them to convince others in the country to share their goals. For that reason, the invasion was very important to them." The terror report described similar patterns in Jordan, Syria, Kuwait, Yemen and elsewhere. '

As Brinkley points out, the clear evidence of the falsehood of the Pentagon talking points about a "calm Iraq" (based on what was going on in Novemenber and December!) doesn't prevent them from being conveyed unexamined right to the front page.

The Turkish military claimed to have killed 17 Kurdish guerrillas of the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK) in air strikes on eastern Turkey near Iraq on Saturday.

Iraq's war widows struggle to keep young families alive.

An eyewitness account of recent events in South Lebanon.

Lebanon has things so backwards. Its political parties are fighting military battles and its army is negotiating a political settlement.



New NYT blog in Arabic, this one on Saudi youth.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Sadrists Denounce Sistani and al-Maliki

AFP reports that on Friday an aide to junior cleric Sayyid Muqtada al-Sadr lashed out at Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani over his silence at the attacks on Sadr City (a Shiite slum) by the US and the government of PM Nuri al-Maliki:

' "We are surprised by the silence in Najaf where the highest Shiite religious authority is based," Sheikh Sattar Battat said, referring to Sistani.

"For 50 days Sadr City is being bombed ... Children, women and old people are being killed by all kinds of US weapons, and Najaf remains silent," he told the faithful at the weekly Friday prayers in Sadr City, Sadr's stronghold. Battat said the Sadr movement has not seen any "reaction or fatwa (religious decree) from Najaf" criticising the government assault on Shiite fighters in Sadr City. '

Also, Sheikh Abd al-Hadi al-Muhammadawi said in his sermon at the Kufa mosque that the shedding of blood by the Occupation forces through air strikes on the people must cease. He said it was bizarre that these air strikes should take place with the acquiescence of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki. "This is something that never was done by any dictator in the world."
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

OSC: Lebanon -- Both Sides Take Tough Line, Leave Room To Maneuver

The USG Open Source Center analyzes the Lebanese press on the crisis between the Seniora government and Hizbullah, suggesting that despite their harsh words, they have left wiggle room for a resolution.

OSC Report: Lebanon -- Both Sides Take Tough Line, Leave Room To Maneuver
Lebanon -- OSC Report
Friday, May 9, 2008 . . .

Lebanon -- Government, Opposition Take Tough Line on Crisis While Preserving Room To Maneuver; Army Seeks Neutral Role

Both opposition and government figures are maintaining tough public positions in their dispute over Hizballah's private landline telephone network. At the same time, despite continuing violent confrontations in Beirut between opposition and pro-government elements, both sides appear to be leaving themselves room for further political maneuvering. The Lebanese Army, meanwhile, is seeking to stay out of the dispute and remain neutral while maintaining its status as the guardian of national unity.

The crisis erupted after a 6 May decision by the Council of Ministers, led by Prime Minister Fuad Siniora, calling Hizballah's private telephone network "illegal" and "an aggression on the State's authority," thereby denying Hizballah's right to maintain the network as part of its legitimate "resistance" tool against Israel. The government vowed to launch legal action against the network. On 8 May, unrelated labor protests in Beirut turned into violent demonstrations against the government. Nasrallah Vows Defiance

In a news conference on 8 May, Hizballah Secretary General Hasan Nasrallah rejected the government's demands and threatened a violent response if the government acted against Hizballah's telephone network.

Nasrallah declared: "We have the right to defend ourselves," and "we will cut off the hand" of anyone threatening to take away Hizballah's "resistance weapons regardless of the person it belongs to...we will not be lenient with anyone no matter who he is" (Al-Manar TV, 8 May).

Free Patriotic Movement leader and Hizballah ally Michel Awn echoed Nasrallah's comments by stating that "it is very serious to endanger the security of the resistance during operations" and by demanding that "all parties reverse the government's decisions" (OTV, 8 May). In subsequent statements, Hizballah allies Former Minister Sulayman Franjiyah (The Daily Star, 9 May) and leader of the Lebanese Unification Party Wi'am Wahhab reiterated Nasrallah's sentiments (Now Lebanon, 9 May).

Notwithstanding his threats, Nasrallah left the door open for a negotiated resolution.

Nasrallah stated: "There are two hands: one is outstretched for dialogue based on canceling the unfair decisions" and "the path to a solution is clear and open" (Al-Manar TV, 8 May).

He asserted his continued respect for existing institutions, in particular the Lebanese Army: "We are raising the slogan of partnership between the opposition and pro-government forces...the Army constitutes a genuine national guarantee" (Al-Manar TV, 8 May). Pro-Government Response

Pro-government leaders were equally adamant in asserting the primacy of state authority.

A 9 May statement made by Lebanese Forces leader Samir Ja'ja on behalf of the pro-government March 14 Forces declared that "what happened in Beirut, its periphery, and the International Airport is an armed coup carried out by Hizballah" and called on the Siniora-led government "to hold firmly to this independent position" (LBC, 9 May).

Communications Minister Marwan Hamadah, in an interview with the Pan-Arab television channel Al-Arabiyah, stated that "we will never go back on our decision" and that "we intend to defend what remains of the sovereignty of the Lebanese state" (8 May).

Nonetheless, pro-government also alluded to the possibility of a political resolution.

Prominent 14 March Forces leader and head of the Future Movement Sa'd al-Hariri, in a news conference following that of Nasrallah's on 8 May, upheld the government's position on Hizballah's network while affirming: "We are not saying...that we want to stop protecting the resistance;" rather, "we are taking decisions to protect the state" (Future TV).

Hamadah, in his Al-Arabiyah interview, insisted that he "is not saying that we will dismantle the network by force tomorrow but that this is the right of the Lebanese state...the judiciary will pursue the case...we are not seeking a civil war." Lebanese Army Tries To Remain Neutral

In the face of continued street clashes in Beirut, the Lebanese Army has sought to remain above the dispute and preserve its status as a guardian of national unity.

In a statement on 8 May, the Army Command called on all parties to find solutions to save Lebanon from the deadlock, adding that "the Lebanese Army puts itself at the disposal of all groups to help find these solutions." The Army's statement warned parties against "abandoning dialogue and insisting on positions" (Al-Manar TV).

In a 9 May interview with Al-Arabiyah TV, Minister of Youth and Sport Ahmad Fatfat confirmed that the Lebanese Army has deployed troops to protect cabinet offices from street violence.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Beirut Ramping Up

Irina Prentice writes from Beirut:

Beirut Ramping Up

Yesterday afternoon the political fight came to a head, turning to armed conflict throughout key neighborhoods in Beirut. Loud explosions, automatic machine gun fire, rocket propelled grenade, and pistol shots resounded throughout the night.

The fight moved from a vicinity of half a kilometer from . . . Sodeco around 5pm, outwards throughout the city. In the middle of the night, the sound was drowned out by a thunder storm which unexpectedly set in as quickly as the fight which broke out.

Although, the sky was clear in the day, and the temperature cool, the unusual storm caught many of the inhabitants off guard. The loud thunder drowned out the explosions, the downpour took over and things seem to quiet down until 5 this morning.

"Things were quiet in the neighborhood until about 5 and then it went off", explains an AUB student living in the neighborhood of Hamra.

A foreign journalist living in Hamra explained that clashes have been ongoing since this morning, and the streets have reportedly come under control of the members of the opposition forces Hezbollah and Amal militia despite ongoing exchange of gunfire being resounding throughout the neighborhood.

Television pictures this morning reveal and predominantly deserted Beirut. Shops are closed, no cars on the street. Damage so far: bullet holes in cars, shattered shop fronts, freshly pockmarked buildings, and some smoke out of Hariri's Moustaqbal Newspaper headquarters.

Reports of dead are varying between 7 and 15, but a tally will probably be difficult to track unless the fighting factions announce the numbers.

The city yesterday was at 60% blocked, making moving between neighborhoods very difficult. The percentage today is rising although there are no firm numbers. Moving between East and West Beirut has become even more difficult as announcement of the sea road being cut off by opposition Amal forces.

At 3pm yesterday . . . [a] political advisor . . . received a call in the car announcing the opposition's plan to besiege the government seat in the Serrail. This morning, this unconfirmed rumor seems to be becoming a reality, as reports are saying the Serrail is surrounding by opposition forces. Unconfirmed reports are saying that the security forces of the Serrail have handed over their weapons, who knows.

On a wider scale, there are reports of fighting in the northern city of Tripoli as well as fighting in the Bekaa valley.

Although the fight which has broken out is predominantly political, it is difficult to separate the sectarian aspect of the conflict whereby so far the greatest clashes are occurring between Sunni and Shia groups. Despite the political wording in both Nasrallah's and Hariri's, the undertone was such that if you are not with us you are against us, and so bring it on... The night clashes echoed the stances.

Also, something to track is the wider regional Arab response. Depending on today's local political positions and regional positions may help the picture of what is to come.

WHAT LED TO THE PRESENT CRISIS:

In the beginning of the week, the Lebanese government removed the head of security from the airport, a government employee who was a supporter of the opposition was sacked, and Hezbollah controlled surveillance cameras were removed from the airport. The impact of the decision has been explosive, yesterday Nasrallah explained in his speech that the decision should be revoked and that anyone tampering with their surveillance system was essentially acting for the benefit of Israel.

The Hariri well, I don't have it under hand, however it would seem that this morning's results mean that what televised offer he made, it was rejected.

SIDE LINE:

ONE NON-OFFICIAL REPORT Describing a TACTIC on the ground

A pro-opposition source called to explained that the tactic on the ground is to take control of key neighborhoods and news outlets of the various loyalist/ or pro-government factions. From here on, it is a matter of time before government seat will fall.

German-speaking readers will also be interested in her piece in Der Spiegel.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Lebanon takes 2 Steps toward Civil War; Beirut in Chaos

On late Friday, the Lebanese army moved into some neighborhoods that had been taken during the day by the Hizbullah militia.

Hizbullah routed Sunni militiamen loyal to Saad Hariri and set fire to the offices of al-Mustaqbal newspaper, his press outlet. (The Lebanese Army declined to intervene, the same mistake it made in 1975).

Likewise, the Futur or Mustaqbal television station is off the air after employees fled for "security reasons." But the fighting hasn't just been between Sunni and Shiite. There has been other ethnic violence, too. Members of the Syrian National Socialist Party (probably mostly Eastern Orthodox Christians) attacked the Mustaqbal archives building. (SNSP is pro-Syrian and is allied with Hizbullah). In Tripoli pro-Hariri and anti-Hariri Sunnis clashed. (Some Sunnis up there are loyal to the rival Karami family while others belong to the Baath Party of Lebanon-- both clashed with the Hariri forces).

Liz Sly of the Chicago Tribune is a veteran correspondent in Beirut and her observations are very valuable. She points to the collapse of the red line earlier drawn by Hassan Nasrallah whereby his militia would never attack other Lebanese.

Lebanon is on the brink of civil war.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Sadr City Residents Warned to Leave;

AFP reports, "25 killed as Rockets Shatter Basra Calm." Shiite guerrillas fired a barrage of rockets at the British base out at the airport in Basra, killing two civilians. There was retaliatory fighting in Basra that left more dead.

Tina Susman of the LAT has some fun with the Bush administration's fixation on Iran as a source of weapons and trouble in Iraq. She notes a major embarrassment last week when a cache of supposedly Iranian weapons seized in the Shiite holy city of Karbala turned out to be no such thing. The US military had just taken the word for it of local Karbala police. She says that this week when the Pentagon gave its overview of captured weapons, all of a sudden there was no mention of Iran at all.

The Iraqi military has warned civilians to leave the vast slum of Sadr City, apparently in preparation for a massive government assault on the Mahdi Army militia based there. Since slum dwellers notoriously lack the means to leave their slums, this call seems more likely to be for the sake of appearances than a realistic expectation. When thousands are massacred in the course of a military attack on a densely packed civilian area, the authorities will be able to say that they gave fair warning. Although the US demonizes the Mahdi Army, Many Sadr City residents view it as in part a charitable organization, and they also are often grateful for the security it provides. It is not as if the federal government is providing security.

Saddam Hussein was the Iraqi leader who invented the technique for the modern Iraqi state of ethnically cleansing rebellious populations as a way of making his rule stick. He did it to the Marsh Arabs in the south and also to Kurds in the north. The US has already either conducted or allowed ethnic cleansing in Falluja and West Baghdad. It now seems set to empty out the east of the capital.

Apparently the fractious, RPG-wielding slum dwellers are getting in the way of the planned Green Zone golf course, so they have to be removed.

You know some British colonial administrators were still planning new cricket fields in India in 1946.

Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that the Iraqi parliament took up the conflict between PM Nuri al-Maliki and the Sadr Movement and President Jalal Talabani's initiative to resolve it. At the same time, the two sides seemed to get farther apart, with al-Maliki continuing to insist on the disarming of the Mahdi Army militia. Talabani's plan called for a first step of the militiamen pledging not to carry arms in public in Baghdad and troubled areas in the south. The Talabani plan may soon be voted on by parliament, but it is opposed by the Sadr Bloc of MPs.

Al-Hayat also reports on a planned meeting of al-Maliki with Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi of the Iraqi Islamic Party, a component of the (Sunni fundamentalist) Iraqi Accord Front. Al-Hashimi is said to be set to rejoin the government. The proposed list of cabinet members from the IAF has not been accepted by al-Maliki. Dissent has broken out, however, in the Dialogue Council of Khalaf al-`Ulyan, one of the three components of the Iraqi Accord Front.

McClatchy reports political violence for Thursday.

' Baghdad

1 Katyusha rocket slammed into the Green Zone at 9 am Thursday. No casualties were reported.

2 Katyusha rockets slammed into the street next to al-Nasr cinema, Sadoon Street, central Baghdad killing 2 civilians, injuring 2 others and causing material damage to several civilian cars.

A roadside bomb exploded in Humat al-Watan intersection near Shaab stadium, east Baghdad. It targeted an Iraqi Army patrol injuring 5 servicemen.

An adhesive IED in a Kia minibus exploded killing 1 civilian, severely injuring 5 others. The incident took place in Zayuna neighbourhood, near the traffic fly over at around 3 pm Thursday.

A roadside bomb exploded behind the National Theatre in Karrada, central Baghdad injuring 3 civilians.

A parked car bomb exploded targeting a police patrol in Mansour neighbourhood, west Baghdad, near Samad restaurant in Rowad intersection at 5 pm Thursday. The explosion killed 3 policemen and 4 civilians and injured 2 policemen and 17 civilians amongst whom were 2 women and 1 child. The location is a central commercial centre and the explosion resulted in burning 4 civilian cars completely as well as the police vehicle in addition to extensive material damages to 10 stores and completely destroying the restaurant.

A roadside bomb exploded in Jihad neighbourhood, near Mohammed Rasool Allah Mosque at 7 pm injuring 7 civilians.

4 unidentified bodies were found in Baghdad today by Iraqi Police. 1 in Nahdha; 1 in Dola’I and 2 in Abu Disheer.

Salahuddin

Suicide bomber wearing an explosive belt detonated targeting mulla Nathim al-Juboor, head of Dhuluiayah Sahwa, a US supported militia, in Khazraj area, 5 km to the north of the town of Dhuluiayah. The mulla was in a motorcade with the Chief of Police and the District Commissioner of Dhuluiyah on a tour of reconstruction projects. This is the second assassination attempt he survives with only superficial injuries.

Basra

Violent clashes broke out between the security forces and gunmen in al-Askari neighbourhood, Zubair district 35 km t the west of Basra city after many Katyusha rockets were fired targeting a Notional Police camp in Zubair. The fighting continues and no casualties report was available at time of publication.'

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Sick Guest Op-Ed: More on Hillary Clinton and Obliterating Iran

Gary Sick, a political scientist at Columbia University and former National Security Council staffer under Carter and Reagan, writes:

Hillary Clinton's warning that the United States could "obliterate" Iran if that country should "foolishly consider" launching an attack on Israel is, of course, pandering to a broad American constituency that wants to hear tough rhetoric about Iran. It is also intended to appeal to a constituency that needs constant reassurance that America's relationship with Israel is secure. And, by addressing a strategic hypothetical that would by any measure be many years in the future ("in the next ten years" in her words), it seems intended to convince doubters that a woman is tough enough - perhaps more than tough enough - to be commander in chief.

Although her use of the word "obliterate" was both excessive and ill-advised, it might be seen as a challenge to Obama to match her toughness, or even as simply pandering shamelessly to a constituency that thrives on political red meat. That is not very flattering to her, but it might be regarded as politics as usual. What makes this statement particularly troublesome is that it cannot be dismissed as mere off-the-cuff responses to a TV interviewer. Rather, it appears to be part of a broader, considered policy that would likely be at the heart of the Middle East strategy of President Hillary Clinton.

The Clinton campaign, while explaining her remarks to skeptics, made it clear that this was no slip of the tongue. Glenn Kessler of the Washington Post reports that the "obliterate" remarks are part of a more extensive plan, first advanced in the debate prior to the Pennsylvania primary, for a new defensive alliance with the Arab states and Israel, in which the United States would extend not only a "security umbrella" over Israel but also "provide a deterrent backup" that would extend U.S. nuclear guarantees to Arab states who renounce nuclear weapons. The apparent author of this strategy is Martin Indyk.

Martin Indyk came into Bill Clinton's administration as director for Middle East affairs on the National Security Council and later represented the United States as ambassador to Israel (twice) as well as a stint as Assistant Secretary for Near East Affairs at the Department of State. He was present at every stage of the Clinton administration's Middle East policy, but he is most frequently remembered, at least by Persian Gulf specialists, as the author of the so-called "dual containment" policy.

"Dual containment" basically postulates that the way to deal with recalcitrant states in the Persian Gulf (i.e. states that are unsympathetic to U.S. interests and objectives) is to isolate them and "contain" them, relying on sanctions and superior military power. It was also quite explicit in linking "containment of Iraq and Iran in the east" with "promotion of Arab-Israeli peace in the west." This was a new twist in U.S. policy which had previously maintained that the Persian Gulf/oil could be separated from the Arab-Israeli dispute. The policy was therefore viewed by many as attempting to wall off the troublesome Persian Gulf region so that the United States could focus on the Arab-Israel issue, or, as it later evolved, on Israel alone. It was also a unilateral policy: collaborators would be nice, but in their absence the United States could and would act alone.

Although the name "dual containment" is no longer used, especially after the invasion of Iraq removed one of the policy's targets, it is nevertheless true that the dominant premise of the policy - that you deal with your enemies and rivals unilaterally by isolation and threats rather than engagement - is one Clintonian policy that has been adopted unabashedly by the Bush administration. It has defined U.S. policy in the region for the past decade and a half.

Dual containment was first announced by Indyk in May 1993, in the early months of the Bill Clinton administration. The previous administration of George Bush pere had held out the promise that "Good will begets good will," to entice Iran to intervene on behalf of the American hostages in Lebanon; Iran did so, but by the time the hostages were successfully released, Bush was deep into a presidential campaign and could not fulfill his commitment. Then, of course, he lost the election and the Iranians were told that they would have to forget about any U.S. promises.

Still, Iran had taken a serious decision to try to open channels to the United States, and when Bill Clinton was elected, they put out new feelers (in which I had a small role). These were ignored in favor of dual containment. Iran tried again with unilateral economic offers in 1995, but the Clinton administration responded by enacting far-reaching economic sanctions against Iran.

Dual containment and its accompanying sanctions were adopted with the stated objective of changing Iran's behavior on a number of issues: nuclear, Arab-Israel peace process, and terrorism, among others. After a full quarter of a century, with the United States doing everything in its power to coerce and threaten Iran economically and militarily, Iran's policies have changed to some degree, but it would take a real ideologue to claim that they have evolved on anything other than an Iranian schedule according to Iranian political objectives. In short, U.S. policies have failed utterly in their key objectives. Yet our answer - and the answer of the Clinton campaign from what we can tell - is more of the same. Clinton-Indyk give lip service to engagement, but then so does Bush-Cheney.

The "new defensive alliance" with Arab states of the Middle East that Sen. Clinton has been proposing in the past few weeks is so similar to the anti-Iran alliance that the Bush administration has been trying to sell to the Sunni Arab states (with Israel as a silent partner), that I must admit I cannot see the difference. In fact, the "Bush Doctrine" toward Iran and the Arab states was nothing but a continuation of the "Clinton-Indyk Doctrine" that preceded it, and it now appears that if Hillary should win the presidency, we will come full circle back to Clinton-Indyk redux.

I have known Martin Indyk since we were at Columbia together, and I respect him as a professional. But I thought dual containment was a terrible idea from the first time I heard it, and Martin knows it. By emphasizing threats and sanctions above even the most minimal engagement, I think this concept was the origin of many of our worst mistakes and missed opportunities over the past 15 years.

Characteristically, this latest version never stops to ask how the regional states may react to our unilateral unfolding of an "umbrella," much less our anticipation that they will respond with gratitude and formal recognition of Israel. That is what Indyk specifies as the price. This sounds like the kind of unrealistic expectations that we have built into our Middle East policies repeatedly over the past dozen years.

As my friends know well, I have been a stout defender of Hillary Clinton's campaign from the very beginning, while maintaining my admiration for Barack Obama. (In the most recent case, I was impressed by the fact that Obama refused to rise to the bait, while she accepted the hypothetical and ran with it.) I respected the depth of her politically skilled network, her grit and determination, and her ability to take a punch. My major argument, of course, was Clinton's experience. But experience is a two-edged sword.

The chance for a fresh start - for "change" in the current political lexicon - was to me the great hope of this presidential campaign. But Clinton's recent remarks, and the underlying policy from which they apparently sprang, are evidence that, at least on this issue, we might only look forward to more of the same under a Clinton presidency. In that sense, I think we would be losing one of the great chances of this generation to begin to fashion a more sensible policy in a region that I care about greatly.

Gary Sick
Columbia University
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Happy 60th to Israel

Israel is celebrating its 60th anniversary, and let me take this opportunity to wish my Israeli readers a happy anniversary. The Middle East is always viewed through the lens of politics and strife, but having lived and visited a lot over there I'd like to suggest that it is forgotten how few people are actually actively involved in politics. And while there is strife in some times and places, there is also a lot of cooperation and forgiveness and mutual help.

The Israelis have come from mind-boggling adversity to build a country. But more than that, they have helped to build our modern world. Israeli science and technology has played a powerful behind- the- scenes role in the development of pivotal inventions such as computer chips. All human beings benefit from such advances, and we should all be grateful for the contributions the Israelis have made to improving the quality of human life.

For instance, it was reported just a couple of weeks ago that an Israeli team at Tel Aviv University

"claim they have found a way to construct efficient photovoltaic cells costing at least a hundred times less than conventional silicon based devices, and with similar or better energy conversion efficiency. The reactive element in the researchers' patent pending device is genetically engineered proteins using photosynthesis for production of electrical energy."

If this claim proves true, it is a big step toward saving us all from massive climate change and from the economic disaster of depending on ever more scarce and expensive hydrocarbons. Certainly, it is likely that the Israelis will play a big role in such alternative energy breakthroughs, since their own survival depends on them.

And here are some good news stories from Israeli medicine:

Israeli medical invention helps Palestinian boy with Cerebral Palsy (VIDEO)



Israeli Team Develops Robots to Save Lives:

' Leo Joskowicz, a scientist and professor at Hebrew University of Jerusalem, has developed a special robot able to assist surgeons with the positioning of needles and other medical tools during procedures. . . Especially in the realm of neurosurgery, doctors have come a long way in their ability to heal and repair certain areas of the brain. However some openings that must be accessed are too small for the naked eye to make an accurate entry point. If a surgical tool is misplaced, the brain may start hemorrhaging or permanent brain damage can occur.

Now that the robot is designed with its image-guided system, surgeons are able to remain non-invasive while carrying out successful surgeries. Patients' pain is now much more minimal and chances for full recovery are likelier than ever. The robot was developed over a two-year period through funding from the Israel Ministry of Trade and Industry. Thanks to Joskowicz and his team, people all over the world have a second chance at life.'

"Drop Foot gets a Lift, Thanks to Israeli invention:

'An Israeli-developed and manufactured wireless, computer-controlled device that enables safe walking for people with a foot paralyzed due to stroke, brain injury, cerebral palsy, spinal cord injury or multiple sclerosis has received approval from the US Food and Drug Administration.

The heart of the system, developed by NESS of Ra'anana, is a sensor in the shoe which identifies the walking stage of the paralyzed foot. It then transmits a wireless signal to a microprocessor attached underneath the knee. The NESS L300 system releases a suitable and perfectly-timed electronic pulse to the nerves and muscles that activate the paralyzed foot so as to facilitate the user's next step. The electronic stimulus replaces the nerve signal that would otherwise have arrived from the brain. '

The below list of inventions is written in technicalese and so not very useful for public information purposes, but but it has the virtue of offering a lot of information in one place.

My warm greetings to my Israeli friends on this auspicious anniversary, and my hopes that before too long a just and equitable peace can be achieved among all the peoples of the region. Israelis, like their neighbors, deserve to live productive lives in conditions of security. Periods of strife, after all, do eventually tend to pass. Europe was in turmoil for much of the first half of the twentieth century, but for some decades now has lived in peace. The same thing can happen in the Middle East.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Violence in Beirut

Violence in Lebanon
Courtesy al-Hayat

Update: CNN is reporting that the Lebanese military is reluctant to intervene in street fighting between pro-Hizbullah forces and supporters of the Seniora government. Aljazeera is also reporting that the Lebanese military has drawn back from flashpoints. It showed one clip of troops facing crowds of young men throwing stones, who were dispersed by tear gas. The overnight street fighting, which the Aljazeera correspondent said does not involve barricades but is rather fluid, was the worst seen in Beirut since the Civil War ended in 1989.

Hizbullah leader Nasrallah has just announced that he feels the Seniora government has declared war on his movement by denying them access to a network of electronic monitoring and surveillance based at the airport. (Apparently Hizbullah uses it for its struggle against Israel, but the government became concerned that they were also using it to track pro-government individuals).

A member of Saad Hariri's government on Aljazeera just said that Hizbullah had the opportunity to help elect a president (Gen. Michel Suleiman) who could have participated in the decision-making and would have been more sympathetic to Hizbullah, but they instead played the role of spoiler. The Lebanese parliament has been unable to elect a president, who by the unwritten national pact has to be a Maronite Catholic, for the past few months.

The Bush administration has been arming the Seniora government and encouraging it to take on the Hizbullah militia, which it sees as a major site of Iranian influence in the region.

From several hours ago:

First, the General Confederation of Labour Unions (CGTL) in Lebanon called a strike to protest the failure of the government to agree to a substantial rise in the minimum monthly wage. Then the strike turned violent, as the Hizbullah joined in. People closed off roads and set out burning tires. The airport was badly affected, stranding 200 passengers. Aljazeera says that the airport is closed on Thursday Arab satellite channels were showing streets crowded with Lebanese army and police, with staccatto machine gun bursts in the background. About 10 people were lightly wounded.

It isn't really clear what the relationship is between the labor unions and their strike for better wages, and the military confrontations with the strikers. [On Thursday pro-government forces said that Hizbullah had taken advantage of the strike to press its own agenda.]

I do know that on the other side, the Bush administration has worked hard to polarize Lebanese society and security, rather than working for a national unity government.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Zawahiri endorses McCain Plan to Bomb Iran; McCain seeks Endorsement of Catholic-Haters; 8 Percent of Pakistanis Back McCain

Senator John McCain, who seeks endorsements from haters of Roman Catholics, is alleging that Hamas has "endorsed" Barack Obama. He darkly suggests that this means something.

It is a despicable, dirty campaign trick. Who do you think the Ku Klux Klan will be endorsing? And if the Grand Dragons plump for McCain, does that tell us anything about McCain except that he is pasty faced? You can't logically read off anything at all from an unsolicited endorsement.

Actually it occurred to me to ask who is endorsing McCain in the Muslim world.

Well, it turns out that al-
Qaeda No. 2 Ayman al-Zawahiri has declared that he is actually on McCain's side in wanting to destroy Iran. Al-Zawahiri is hurt that McCain keeps confusing hyper-Sunni al-Qaeda with radical Shiism: "Ayman al-Zawahiri said al-Qaeda wants to see the destruction of Iran - a Shiite nation battling the terrorists . . . "The dispute between America and Iran is a genuine struggle, and the possibility of the US striking Iran is real," al-Zawahiri said. . ." Al-Zawahiri hopes that the US struggle with Iran will destroy the latter and weaken the former, putting al-Qaeda in a position to administer the coup de grace.

In essence, al-Zawahiri is endorsing McCain's plan to "bomb, bomb, bomb/ bomb, bomb Iran."

Then, it turns out that 8 percent of Pakistanis support McCain. 30 percent support Hillary Clinton, and she leads in this Muslim country over Obama (13%). But surely it is Pakistani liberals who are favoring Hillary, the sort people who supported Benazir Bhutto.

So which Pakistanis are supporting McCain? Presumably the conservative Muslims who can't accept the leadership of a woman. And wouldn't some of those be, like, part of the so-called 'transcendent challenge'?

But lets consider the people from whom McCain has actively sought an endorsement. Many of them seem to engage in a lot of hate speech against Catholics, Muslims and others.

John McCain's spiritual guides:



John Hagee, whose endorsement John McCain actively sought, compares the Roman Catholic Church to Hitler and depicts it as drinking the blood of the Jews through history:



John McCain praised Rod Parsely as a spiritual guide; he is caught on camera below:



Parseley accuses the federal government of enabling a genocide against African-Americans.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Sunni Kuwaiti Cleric Differentiates between Iraqi Shia Nationalists and those Supporting Iran

The USC Open Source Center translates a statement by a Sunni Salafi cleric in Kuwait that allows that some Arab Shiites in Iraq are "honorable" but not those allied with Iran.


Kuwaiti Shaykh Differentiates Between Iraqi Shia Supporting, Opposing Iran
Jihadist Websites -- OSC Summary
Wednesday, May 7, 2008 . . .

Terrorism: Kuwaiti Shaykh Differentiates Between Iraqi Shia Supporting, Opposing Iranian 'Plan'

On 24 April, a forum participant "Al-Ikhwani al-Salafi" posted to a jihadist website a question addressed to Kuwaiti pro-jihad [Sunni] Shaykh Hamid al-Ali about the differences among the Shia in Iraq. Shaykh Hamid al-Ali responds by stating that it is very important to differentiate between those supporting and opposing the Iranian 'plan' in Iraq. This is because differences with the former can be resolved through dialogue, whereas the Iranian plan needs dealing with in another manner.

A translation of the questions and answer follows:


"In the name of God the Merciful, the Compassionate.

"Shaykh Hamid al-Ali responds to a question in regards to the honorable Arab Shia.

"I spoke of two or three topics concerning the honorable Arab Shia who stand against the Safavid expansion. I asked the [Sunni] Association of Muslim Scholars regarding the revealing of names of the honorable Shia, who are a few in number. This is because, according to the principle that says 'ask the knowledgeable,' I asked Shaykh Hamid al-Ali, may God protect him, about the Arab Shia. His response was brief and clear. I will leave the comments to you.

"The question: Honorable shaykh, God knows how I love you in God. I want your opinion with regards to the honorable Arab Shia.

"First, what is your opinion concerning some of the Shiite leadership in Iraq such as Al-Husni al-Baghdadi, Shaykh Al-Mu'ayyid, and Shaykh Al-Khalissi. This is especially since Al-Sistani and Al-Hakim are angry with the three of them and they have been expelled from Iraq. Meanwhile, their followers are being sent to prison because of their stances regarding the American occupation and the Safavid Iranian occupation.

"Shaykh Al-Mu'ayyid forbids the vilification and slandering of the companions of the Prophet. Hence, is it legitimate to support them or pray for their guidance, especially since the Sunni Association of Muslim Scholars stated that those people shared a similar stance as theirs? Is cooperation with them in fighting the Iranian and American occupation legitimate?

"Second, what is the shaykh's opinion on the Arab Shiite Southern Tribes Council that is funded by the Sunni Association of Muslim Scholars and headed by Shaykh Harith al-Dari? Iran has killed 37 Shiite tribal chiefs because they were against its perverse attitudes. Is not fighting Iran and America a proof of their honesty? Is what the Association of Muslim Scholars is doing in opening lines of communication with them legitimate?

"Please respond to me because many people inside and outside Iraq are interested in the subject.



"Response of Shaykh Hamid al-Ali:

"I mentioned in the Al-Jazirah meeting that it is imperative to differentiate between the Shiite ideology and the Safavid political plan.

"Regarding the honorable Shia in Iraq who have stood against the Safavid [i.e. Iranian] plan, our differences with them are ideological and can be resolved through dialogue, as always has been the case throughout the history of our nation.

"As for the advocates of the Safavid [Iranian] plan, and I do not know to which of the Shiite scholars you referred in Iraq, this plan is a destructive danger and there is another way of dealing with it. If they really are against the Safavid plan, the people of Iraq should benefit from all communities in the society who are against the American and Safavid occupiers. Without doubt, Shaykh Harith al-Dari is a trustworthy personality, is honorable, and has solid and good stances; hence, his opinion should be taken with regards to the Shia who are against the Safavid occupation. God is All-Knowing.

"The words of Shaykh (Hamid al-Ali) have come to a close. Those who do not believe need to ask him once more online."

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Obama strides Closer to Victory

Barack Obama pulled closer to clinching the nomination last night, widening his lead over Hillary Clinton in voted delegates and in the popular vote. He overwhelmingly took Indianapolis and narrowed her earlier lead to only 2%, about 20,000 votes out of the hundreds of thousands cast. Obama even got 35% of working class whites in Indiana, which suggests that while Clinton is stronger with that constituency, Obama has an appeal there as well. He is clearly raising far more money than she, so voters are voting for him with their pocketbooks.

CBC writes of the two primaries last night,

' Exit polls in both Indiana and North Carolina showed the economy was the most important issue to voters, followed by the Iraq war. Concerns about Obama's controversial former pastor, Jeremiah Wright, and Clinton's attempts to paint him as an out of touch elitist, did not seem to be important to many voters.'

In other words, our corporate media keep giving us irrelevancies like someone's pastor or ad hominems (a Yalie who made $108 million in recent years is calling someone an 'elitist'?).

And the voters keep voting on the issues. They were unimpressed with Clinton's fantasies about 'totally obliterating' Iran. They appear to have liked Obama's talk of a timetable for US withdrawal from Iraq, something the majority of the Iraqi parliament also wants. They were unimpressed with Clinton's pandering on a gasoline 'tax holiday'; a solid majority was unimpressed with attempts to damn Obama by association. Take out the over-65 crowd, and Obama did well with whites. He did overwhelmingly well with new voters.

A CBS/NYT poll over the weekend had showed that Obama had rebounded from the Rev. Wright controversy, was 11 points ahead of McCain, and that the general split on the gasoline tax holiday was 49 against, 45 for. The 18 cent federal gas tax pays for highway upkeep.

How tricky reading poll results is can be seen in this summary from AP. The article says 50% of voters in each state thought the Rev. Wright controversy important, and that of those who said that, 30% in Indiana voted for Obama and 40% in North Carolina. But that means 65% of voters in Indiana either didn't care or didn't let it affect their vote, with that proportion being 75% in North Carolina. It wasn't a determinative issue.

AP dismisses Iraq as "the top issue" for only 20% of voters. But actually for a fifth of voters to say that is their top issue at a time of severe economic woes for most people is quite remarkable. And if we asked if it was among their top three issues we'd find it was so for 100%.

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

US Soldier Killed in al-Anbar; Sadrist MP Resigns; Army Arrests Police

The killing of a US soldier in al-Anbar province by Iraqi guerrillas was announced on Wednesday morning.

The Scotsman reports:

' IRAQI soldiers yesterday detained dozens of policemen and closed down a hospital suspected of treating Shiite militiamen in a Baghdad stronghold of cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army. '

It doesn't seem to me like a good sign when you have to arrest your police because they are disloyal to the government.


Another contingent of 3500 US troops is being withdrawn from Iraq, drawing back down the 30,000 that had been sent in winter, 2007, as part of Bush's troop escalation or 'surge.' Although from September of last year through February, these extra troops had some impact on reducing (not eliminating) civilian casualties in Baghdad, as they have withdrawn the numbers of Iraqis killed each month as spiked.

AFP also reports:

' On the political front, an Iraqi lawmaker whose party is loyal to anti-American cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, resigned on Tuesday protesting the violence in Baghdad's Sadr City where street battles claim a daily death toll.

"I announce the suspension of my membership in protest at what is happenning in Sadr city," Hassan Al-Rubaie said. "The religious and political leaderships in Iraq are responsible for the violations that happen in Sadr City."

He acted even as President Jalal Talabani made a fresh appeal to the militia to lay down its arms and allow essential supplies to get into the Sadr City, parliamentary officials said.'

I take away from these grafs that Iraqi politics is in danger of collapsing. Not that many members of parliament come to the sessions, and if you start having any number of resignations, even getting a quorum may be difficult. There doesn't seem to be a mechanism for holding by-elections, so the seat that was resigned will probably remain empty until the next parliamentary elections.

Also, President Talabani's statement unwittingly reveals that essential supplies are not getting into Sadr City and suggests that al-Maliki and the US are holding the civilian population hostage as a way of putting pressure on the Mahdi Army.



Saddam Hussein was germophobic in the extreme. I personally wonder whether this neurosis did not underlie his various genocides. He probably thought the people he was killing were diseased and making his country dirty. It was also a motivation for building all those presidential palaces, which were intended to be islands of cleanliness in a dirty country. He admitted as much to US troops and gave fear of their being polluted as his reason for not having allowed UN inspectors into them. I.e., his germophobia helped get him overthrown and hanged. In absolute dictatorships, the neuroses of the great leader become the neuroses of the nation.

Nir Rosen on selling war on Iran.

Astore at Tomdispatch on air power.
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Khatami's Charges Provoke Row in Iran; how Important is Iranian and Hizbullah Training

Former Iranian President Mohammad Khatami has caused a firestorm of criticism in Iran. AFP writes:

' In his speech, Khatami referred to the ambition of Iran's revolutionary leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini to export the 1979 Islamic revolution around the world, but expressed fear this wish was being distorted. "What did the imam (Khomeini) mean by exporting the revolution?" he asked in the speech Friday to university students in the northern province of Gilan, according to the Kargozaran newspaper. "Did he mean that we take up arms, that we blow up places in other nations and we create groups to carry out sabotage in other countries? The imam was vehemently against this and was confronting it," he added. His speech has been seen by some observers as accusing the Iranian authorities of encouraging militants to destabilize the Middle East, in particular Iraq and Lebanon. '

Some hard liners want to try Khatami for treason.

Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that Sunni tribes have offered to mediate between the al-Maliki government and the Sadr Movement.

It also refers to Monday's Pentagon-provoked story saying that Hizbullah of Lebanon is training Shiite radicals at camps in Iran.

I am suspicious of this story not because it is necessarily untrue (how would I know?) but because it shares with typical Bush administration propaganda the 'gotcha' technique in which questions of proportionality, significance and causality do not arise.

Thus, Dick Cheney repeatedly claimed that he had evidence that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, whom he simplistically linked with al-Qaeda, got hospital treatment in Baghdad. Cheney said that would have been impossible unless Saddam was actively hosting him. And if Saddam was giving hospital treatment to al-Zarqawi, then ipso facto the Baath regime was allied with and supporting al-Qaeda.

But Cheney's entire argument is false from beginning to end. First of all, the Iraqi secret police put out an APB on al-Zarqawi when they thought he had entered their country, and were clearly afraid of him. There is no evidence that the regime afforded al-Zarqawi hospital care. Even if he had gotten treated, it was not proof of Saddam's complicity with him or with al-Qaeda. These little tiny details were built up into a narrative that was intended to carry the audience along without their being able to ask any questions about it. How good was the proof for what Cheney alleged? Was al-Zarqawi really al-Qaeda back then? How important was he? How big an impact did his presence in Iraq have?

There were also repeated allegations from Cheney and others that Saddam was training al-Qaeda operatives at Salman Pak. Wrong.

Under torture, Ibn al-Sheikh Libi told the US that Saddam was training al-Qaeda operatives in the use of poison gas. It was a lie. That is the problem with putting people in so much pain that they will tell you anything. Cheney and Rice parroted this falsehood over and over again.

After the war and occupation began, Pentagon spokesmen actually alleged that 90% of the violence in Iraq was committed by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and his group. But what, was he an Arab version of the Flash, able to run from Mosul to Baghdad in a few minutes? And when he was killed, nothing changed, so he wasn't all that important.

Since Cheney and Rice wanted to go to war with Iraq so as to open its petroleum resources to exploitation by American firms, it really was immaterial to them if the things they were saying were true or not. They have never evinced any shame or regret. They are happy. They accomplished their goal.

We should not allow this sort of thing to happen again. The Pentagon story about Iran is fishy for these reasons:

The main pro-Iran militia in Iraq is the Badr Corps of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq. Iran is happy with Badr's vast influence. Badr has conflicts with the Mahdi Army. Why should Iran undermine its own client by favoring the latter? And note that the US never condemns Badr, which until recently was actually part of the Iranian military.

The information on the supposed Hizbullah training in Iran seems to have come from two or three captured Lebanese Shiites. That is a very small number. The US has 24,000 accused insurgents in captivity. If it only has a handful of Lebanese Shiites, then they just aren't very important. The Principle of Proportionality holds.

Moreover, the allegations may have been produced by US torture of the captives and so may not be reliable.

Then even if it were true, how important is it? The Mahdi Army is tens of thousands of slum kids. Sadrism goes back to the 1990s in Iraq and is a mass movement. Iran had nothing to do with them historically. Moreover, how important is all this? Have, like, 4 Lebanese guys really trained all that many Mahdi Army militiamen? How many exactly? How much more effective would they be as a result? Wouldn't the political support of millions of Iraqi Shiites in the South really be the source of Muqtada al-Sadr's power and authority?

What is being alleged is too small to produce a really big, nation-wide effect in Iraq. The Mahdi Army fought the US military for two long hard months in spring of 2004, and for another month in August. Iran was not around.

Occam's Razor dictates that we do not need Iran as a hypothesis for explaining the Sadr Movement or its activities in Iraq. Behind the scenes opinion polling suggests that the Sadr Movement has become more and more popular with the electorate. This, despite Iran's having helped buy the election for the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq in 2005. Having gotten their clients in power, why would Iran now try to blow up Badr commanders who have become provincial governors or deputy governors.

The Sadrists are not even very strong in Basra city, which is one reason al-Maliki attacked them there. Iran was backing Badr in Basra.

If training is so important, then why does the Mahdi Army still defeat the highly trained and equipped Iraqi Army, which has had lots more training, often from high powered American and European and Jordanian trainers. Are you saying Iranian trainers are better? How would you fix that?

So, have a few hundred militiamen maybe gotten some basic guerrilla training from fellow Shiites somewhere? That isn't the right question. The question is, how significant would that be if true. Remember, they are getting real time battle experience against US Marines, which is much more valuable than mere rudimentary boot camp. But, how could you rule it out? And, could such a thing really steer the fortunes of Iraq as a country? I think not.

McClatchy reports political violence in Iraq on Monday:

' Baghdad

Two policemen were wounded when gunmen opened fire targeting a police patrol in Bab al Sheikh neighborhood in downtown Baghdad on Sunday evening.

At least six civilians were killed and 31 others wounded in the American strikes on Sadr City in northeast Baghdad on Monday morning, medical sources in the hospitals of Sadr city said.

Five people were killed including three members of one family (parents and their child) and eight others were wounded when the American forces bombed Amil neighborhood in west Baghdad. The US military said in an e-mailed statement that the American soldiers responded to an attack from one of the buildings, killing three insurgents.

Two civilians were wounded in a bomb explosion near the oil marketing office in Zayuna neighborhood in east Baghdad around 8:30 p.m.

Police found four unidentified bodies throughout Baghdad in the following neighborhood (1 body in Husseiniyah, 1 body in Palestine Street, 1 body in Bayaa and 1 body in Amil)

Diyala

Gunmen kidnapped three truck drivers while they were coming from Khanaqin town towards Qara Tabba area, 93 miles northeast of Baquba city on Monday morning.

Seven Iraqi soldiers were wounded in a roadside bomb that targeted their patrol in Qara Tabba area around 12:00 p.m.

Three policemen were wounded in a roadside bomb explosion that targeted their patrol in Baladroz town 28 miles east of Baquba around 11:15 a.m.

Three members of the Kurdish security forces known as Bashmarga were wounded in a roadside bomb explosion that targeted their patrol on the road between Qara Tabba village and Hibhib village north of Baquba, lieutenant General Hameed Hussein fro n the Neshmarga brigade said, Clashes took place after the explosion but no casualties reported.

Gunmen attacked a check point of the Iraqi army in al Maiyah area in Mandili city, 40 miles east of Baquba city around 7:30 p.m. the gunmen killed ten soldiers then beheaded them. One civilian was wounded in the incident.

Kirkuk

A policeman from Kirkuk Emergency Police was killed and seven others were wounded in a roadside bomb that targeted their patrol near the street leading to the airport on Monday morning.

Nineveh

A roadside bomb exploded in al Masarif neighborhood in downtown Mosul city on Monday afternoon. No casualties reported.

Police found an unidentified body in al Ma’arif neighborhood in downtown Mosul city on Monday afternoon.

Gunmen opened fire randomly in al Mamoun neighborhood in downtown on Monday afternoon injuring one civilian. '

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

OSC: Al-Arabiya discusses Iraq government, Al-Sadr Trend criticism of Iran role

The USG Open Source Center translates a discussion on al-Arabiya's Panorama program about Iranian intervention in Iraq.

May 5, 2008 Monday

Al-Arabiya discusses Iraq government, Al-Sadr Trend criticism of Iran role

["Panorama" programme moderated by Muntaha al-Ramahi discusses Iran's intervention in Iraq, the Iraqi Government's escalatory tone against Iran, Al-Sadr Trend's criticism of Iran - live]

Dubai Al-Arabiya Television in Arabic at 1915 gmt on 4 May carries within its live "Panorama" news programme a 25-minute discussion, moderated by anchorwoman Muntaha al-Ramahi, on the Iraqi Government's and the Al-Sadr Trend's recent criticism of Iran's interference in Iraq. The guests on the programme are Abd-al-Karim al-Inizi, member of the Iraqi Parliament representing the Unified Iraqi Coalition, via satellite from Baghdad; political analyst Ambassador Mohammed Shariati, via satellite from Tehran; and former Iraqi Minister of Transportation Salam al-Maliki, via telephone from Basra.

Al-Ramahi begins by saying that although "intermittent clashes" continue between the Iraqi security forces assisted by US forces and the supporters of Shi'i leader Muqtada al-Sadr, both sides criticize Iran and "hold it responsible for the incidents in Iraq." She adds that the current Iraqi Government's position has changed towards Iran, and that it has begun "to directly accuse Iran of fanning violence in Iraq." She notes that a huge amount of Iranian weapons has been revealed in addition to documents that indict Iran in this regard. Al-Ramahi says that observers were surprised to hear Salih al-Ubaydi, spokesman for the Al-Sadr Trend, strongly criticize Iran. She notes that the recent criticism coincides with former Iranian President Khatami's criticism of the Iranian regime, in which he stressed that exporting violence to other countries, which he did not name, is "treason against Islam and the Iranian Revolution."

Al-Ramahi poses the following questions: Why has the Iraqi Government decide to open the file of Iran's intervention in Iraq at this time in particular? Why did the Al-Sadr Trend, which is protected by Iran, criticize Iran? Did Khatami mean Iran's intervention in Iraq or in other countries?

The programme then presents a three-minute report by Najah Muhammad Ali. Ali says that when the United States accused Iran of interfering in Iraq to undermine its stability, Iran's supporters in the Iraqi Government, including the president and the prime minister, did not hesitate to defend Iran. However, he says that the situation changed following Operation Charge of the Knights in Basra and the international conference that was held recently in Kuwait. He adds that Iraqi Prime Minister Al-Maliki and his supporters have launched an unprecedented campaign against Iran without naming it. Moreover, he says that the Iraqi Government has been declaring on a daily basis the arrest of fighters supported by Iran and the discovery of Iranian weapons. Ali notes that the Al-Sadr Trend has launched a similar campaign against Iran. He adds that the Iraqi Government accuses Iran of being responsible for the security developments in Baghdad, particularly in Al-Sadr City. Moreover, he says that the US Army and Iraqi security officials accuse the Al-Mahdi Army of being behind the attacks on the Green Zone. Ali says that the Kuwait international conference failed because Al-Maliki failed to convince the Arabs to reopen their embassies and to write off Iraq's debts. Hence, he says that Al-Maliki had to criticize Iran in order to gain Arab support, and that the Iraqi Foreign Ministry's statement on the three disputed islands between Iran and the UAE falls within this context. Ali notes former Iranian President Khatami's remarks in which he said that "exporting violence to other countries is treason against Islam and the Islamic Revolution." He concludes by wondering if the Iraqis in the post-Saddam government "have become fed up with remaining under the Iranian cloak," or if Iran's intervention in Iraq has crossed all limits.

Asked to comment on the current situation and on the position towards Iran, Al-Inizi says that the new Iraqi policy in the new Iraqi regime "relies on the principle of convincing others to cooperate, because cooperation will be in the interest of all parties." He notes that although hundreds of terrorists have entered Iraq, Iraq has not accused any Arab regime of being behind them because it believes in the need to cooperate with all neighbouring countries and to convince them of the need to cooperate. He says that he believes the current escalation towards Iran is a "deviation from the norms of Iraq's policy" and a result of US diplomatic efforts to drive a wedge between the Iraqi Government and its neighbour, Iran.

Al-Ramahi notes that the Al-Sadr Trend, which is supposed to be supported by Iran, also criticizes Iran.

Addressing Shariati, Al-Ramahi asks him to comment on the change in Iraq's position towards Iran. Shariati says that the official Iranian position continues to support Nuri al-Maliki's government. He refers to the statements made by the Iranian ambassador in Iraq, in which he expressed support for the disarming of militias in Iraq but urged dialogue. With regard to the Al-Sadr Trend, Shariati says we must "discriminate between a sector of the Iraqi people and a political idea that is suspicious of the occupation. We must respect this position."

Al-Ramahi refers to Khatami's remarks, and says that political observers consider them as "clear criticism of the conservative trend led by Ahmadinezhad." She asks if Khatami's remarks indicate that "Iran is involved in files outside Iran." Shariati says that reformists consider some of Iran's foreign policy unacceptable. However, he says that Khatami talked about deviations from the course of the Iranian Revolution but did not mention Iraq, Lebanon, or any other country. He notes that when Khatami was president he did not receive Muqtada al-Sadr due to reservations about his actions and role in Iraq.

Asked if Khatami meant Iraq in particular, Shariati says that he certainly did not mean Iraq because the situation there is unclear.

Asked if Khatami meant Lebanon or Palestine, Shariati says: "We believe we should have diplomatic relations, and hold parallel relations with groups, and that these groups must not be involved in internal conflicts because the involvement of the groups supported by Iran in internal conflicts would embroil Iran and its foreign policy."

Addressing former Iraqi Minister Salam al-Maliki, Al-Ramahi asks him to comment on the change in the Al-Sadr Trend's position. Al-Maliki says that the issue of Iran's intervention in Iraq and its support for the Al-Sadr Trend does not exist in reality. He admits that there are accusations, but argues that the Al-Sadr Trend's positions in the political process are "independent."

Interrupting, Al-Ramahi says that Salam al-Malik's remarks are surprising, because even Iranians talk about Iran's intervention in Iraq. Al-Maliki says that there is clear intervention, but that he is talking about the Al-Sadr Trend's position and Iran's support for the Al-Sadr Trend. He adds that the Iraqi Government must determine whether the Iranian role is positive or negative. He says that the Iraqi Government's spokesman said that the government needs to verify the situation, but that military officials have openly accused Iran of intervention. Al-Maliki stresses that problems must not be resolved through the media. He says that the problem is that the Iraqi Government "has not yet drawn its foreign policy in a clear manner." He argues that the United States encouraged Iran to interfere in Iraq in light of its hostile position towards Iran which prompted it to defend itself and its presence. Al-Maliki stresses that Iran's role must be in support of the Iraqi people, and that any problem with any neighbouring country must be resolved through diplomatic means, not media outlets. He stresses that Al-Sadr Trend is not supported by Iran because Muqtada al-Sadr's decisions are not influenced by foreign pressure; that Iran's role in Iraq is not new; and that it was encouraged by the United States.

Asked about Iran's support for the Al-Sadr Trend and how Iran can have "positive intervention" in Iraq, Shariati begins by noting that the headquarters of the Islamic Supreme Council and the Al-Da'wah Party were in Iran before the fall of Saddam Husayn. He argues that some internal disputes in Iraq are not the result of Iran's intervention. With regard to the militias' issue, he says that Iran must interfere and use its influence over all trends.

Al-Ramahi notes that the Iraqi Government criticizes Iran's intervention even though it encompasses parties that are supported by Iran. Shariati says that Iran has relations with various parties, and that it "must make use of its influence to calm the Iraqi arena." Shariati leaves the programme at this point.

Addressing Al-Inizi, Al-Ramahi says that even Iranians say that Iran must use its influence in Iraq to achieve stability and security. Hence, she notes that Iraq is being used by Iran as a card to acquire certain gains with regard to its relations with the West. She asks if the time is suitable for Iran to calm the situation in Iraq. Al-Inizi says that the Iraqi policy is based on cooperation with neighbouring countries and on convincing them to support the Iraqi Government. He says that the current escalation towards Iran indicates the success of the US policy that aims to use Iraq as a tool in its conflict with Iran. He urges the Iraqi Government not to fall into the trap, and to work hard with Iran in order to achieve security, political, and economic cooperation.

Asked why he accuses the United States of pushing the Iraqi Government towards adopting an escalatory position against Iran, Al-Inizi says that Iran was among the first to support the Iraqi Government and that it has strategic alliances with the ruling political forces. Hence, he argues that it is in Iran's interest to see the government of its allies succeed. Therefore, he says that Iraq must not be part of the US-Iranian conflict, and that Iraq must convince the Iranians that any intervention must be positive and constructive.

Al-Ramahi argues that Iraq's "escalatory tone" will not convince Iran to play a different role. Al-Inizi agrees and says that the Iraqi Government has deviated from the norms of its foreign policy. He urges Iraq to address neighbouring countries with a language that encourages cooperation, and to maintain positive and constructive relations with Iran.

Al-Ramahi says that Iran supports the disarming of militias in Iraq, but rejects the use of force. She asks if this has resulted in the change in the Al-Sadr Trend's position. Al-Maliki

says that the Iranian Government has not accused the Al-Sadr Trend of being a militia. He notes that the issue of militias, including the Al-Mahdi Army, is complicated because some groups carry arms to defend the Iraqi people and expel the occupiers, which is legitimate, while other groups seek to undermine stability.

With regard to the Al-Mahdi Army, Al-Ramahi says that the Iraqi Government, Iran, and the US forces want to disarm it. She asks if a settlement can be reached in this regard. Al-Maliki notes the absence of dialogue. He says that the Al-Sadr Trend believes in dialogue to resolve all problems, and that the problem is that the Iraqi Government is not holding dialogue. He notes that everyone is calling for disarming all militias, but that the existence of occupation forces that attack civilians and the absence of dialogue with the government complicate the situation.

Concluding the episode, Al-Ramahi thanks her guests.

Source: Al-Arabiya TV, Dubai, in Arabic 1904 gmt 4 May 08

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Obama: Clinton on Iran Obliteration: Bush Clone

Barack Obama criticized Hillary Clinton on Sunday for her threat to "totally obliterate" Iran if it attacked Israel. He said on Meet the Press,

'MR. RUSSERT: Hillary Clinton was asked about if Iran launched a nuclear attack against Israel, and this is the answer she gave. Let's listen.

(Videotape)

SEN. HILLARY CLINTON (D-NY): (From "Good Morning America") Well, the question was, "If Iran were to launch a nuclear attack on Israel, what would our response be?" And I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran. And I want them to understand that.

We would be able to totally obliterate them.

(End videotape)

MR. RUSSERT: "Obliterate them."

SEN. OBAMA: Yeah.

MR. RUSSERT: What do you think of that language?

SEN. OBAMA: Well, it's not the language that we need right now, and I think it's language that's reflective of George Bush. We have had a foreign policy of bluster and saber-rattling and tough talk, and, in the meantime, we make a series of strategic decisions that actually strengthen Iran. So--and, you know, the irony is, of course, Senator Clinton, during the course of this campaign, has at times said, "We shouldn't speculate about Iran." You know, "We've got to be cautious when we're running for president." She scolded me on a couple of occasions about this issue, and yet, a few days before an election, she's willing to use that language. But in terms of... terms of...

MR. RUSSERT: But would you...

SEN. OBAMA: ...in terms of...

MR. RUSSERT: Would you respond against Iran?

SEN. OBAMA: It--Israel is a ally of ours. It is the most important ally we have in the region, and there's no doubt that we would act forcefully and appropriately on any attack against Iran, nuclear or otherwise. So--but it is important that we use language that sends a signal to the world community that we're shifting from the sort of cowboy diplomacy, or lack of diplomacy, that we've seen out of George Bush. And this kind of language is not helpful. When Iran is able to go to the United Nations complaining about the statements made and get some sympathy, that's a sign that we are taking the wrong approach."

I had complained at the time that this diction is monstrous. I mean, it is surreal to have Democrats discussing whether it is appropriate for the US to "totally obliterate" another country. It would be one thing if she had threatened the Iranian military. Targeting civilians, who would be included in the "total" obliteration, is a war crime.

Clinton stood by her remarks: "I don't think it's time to equivocate. [Iran has] to know they would face massive retaliation. That is the only way to rein th