BTW, What Do the Iraqis Want?

by Olga Bonfiglio
(View Original)

You’ve got to hand it to the Quakers. They never quit. They are steadfast in their devotion to peace. And they continue to seek ways of informing Americans about the Iraq War, even when that war has become passé in the media and a largely avoided topic in the presidential debates.

Recently, in commemoration of the fifth anniversary of the Iraq War, the Friends set up a “Speak for Peace Tour” and invited Raed Jarrar, to provide an Iraqi perspective. I met him during his five-cities tour of Michigan.

Raed is a native of Baghdad who had just completed studies in architecture when his neighborhood was bombed by the Americans in April 2003. “Surgical warfare” was supposed to target only the “bad guys” and not civilians, but Raed found his neighbors were being killed and fleeing from their homes.

His purpose in life instantly changed. He decided to document civilian injuries and deaths during the first four months of the invasion. He recruited and organized 200 volunteers to conduct a survey by going door to door in cities and villages to find out who was hurt or killed.

“We gave names and faces for the Iraqi casualties,” said Raed. Also included in the survey were notes about the way each person was killed, the place and the monthly income of the dependents.

Raed married an American and he later became a naturalized citizen. He works as a political analyst and consultant for the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC) and has testified before Congress about conditions in Iraq. His blog, “In the Middle,” discusses U.S. foreign policy, the political scene and the media’s portrayal of Iraq and Iraqis. His commentary is blistering but hey, how would most of us feel if we lost our whole way of life?

During his visit to Kalamazoo where 150 people showed up, he was congenial, articulate and very pointed in letting us know what was happening in Iraq and what the U.S. should do.

“There is only one U.S. foreign policy for Iraq and that is one based on military interventionism,” he said. “Whether it is humanitarian aid or killing off the ‘bad guys’, the attitude remains that the United States must fix Iraq.”

Raed said that the U.S. government’s justifications for intervention in Iraq have shifted but the motivation is the same: to control the Middle East and its oil resources.

For example, in the 1990s the U.S. bombed Iraq in order to save the habitat for certain birds living in the marshes that Saddam Hussein was drying up. Then it was to save the Kurds from genocide. Then it was to save the world from weapons of mass destruction. Now it is to prevent civil war between the Sunnis and the Shi’ites.

Military intervention in Iraq was not George W. Bush’s idea alone. His father and Bill Clinton were both itching to get into Iraq. And while Americans are stuck debating whether military intervention should be multilateral or unilateral, Raed was adamant that the U.S. never had any business being in Iraq in the first place.

“Go back to your own home and work on your own problems,” he said referring to the after-effects of Hurricane Katrina, joblessness, poverty, and now the housing crisis.

Five years of war in Iraq have resulted in the deaths of an estimated 1.18 million Iraqis (based on the July 2006 Lancet report which reported 600,000 Iraqi deaths) and this fact goes mostly unreported.

“Americans need to realize that the violence in Iraq is the result of 90 years of illegal foreign intervention,” said Raed. “First it was the British, then it was the Americans. Now it is Al Qaeda.”

There are three main factors causing the violence in Iraq, he explained.

First, military trainers are viewed as negatively as those at the School of the Americas who train Latin American officers and soldiers on strategy and tactics, including torture.

“They are the major reason why 4.5 million Iraqis have been kicked out of their homes and over a million have been killed,” said Raed. “Violence is a tool the U.S. uses to implement its agenda.”

Secondly, counter-terrorism tactics have created more terrorism.

Prior to the 2003 invasion there was no Al Qaeda and there were no extremists blowing themselves up, said Raed.

Thirdly, the U.S. embassy, which is as big as the Vatican, does not welcome Iraqi diplomats or legislative representatives. In fact, they are harassed and humiliated whenever they attempt to visit.

“The embassy is a base for long-term political intervention,” said Raed.

The solution of what to do about Iraq stymies most Americans and, unfortunately, both Democrats and the Republicans maintain that it is imprudent to withdraw troops from Iraq but they come at it from different perspectives, said Raed.

The Right believes that the terrorists will win and that we should stay to defeat them. The Left believes that the ancient hatred between the Sunnis and Shi’ites will destroy the country so the Iraqis need to be rescued from civil war and the country should be partitioned.

Raed compared today’s Iraqi civil war to the American Civil War (1861-65). The North wanted a strong, central government and the South wanted states’ rights. In Iraq it is the same political struggle: the Sunnis want a strong central government and the Shi’ites want local control. The only difference between these civil wars is that no foreign government interfered in the American struggle.

(The U.S. has taken the side of the minority Shi’ites.)

During the 2005 Iraqi election, which the Bush administration hailed as a “watershed moment in the story of freedom” and a victory in the war on terror, the American people didn’t quite catch what was going on with all those voters’ purple fingers, said Raed.

The Iraqi people were electing Sunni legislative representatives. (They do not vote for their executive branch.) Their candidates, who won a majority, were against privatization of the oil industry and wanted the U.S. to leave the country.

Meanwhile, the Iraqi leadership turned out to be Shi’ite separatists who were supportive of the Bush administration and its intervention in Iraq. And no wonder. The prime minister was selected by the Presidency Council, which was selected by the National Assembly (whose election the Sunnis boycotted) after it replaced the Iraqi Transitional Government, which replaced the Iraqi Interim Government that had been set up by the United States.

So what should Americans think about Iraq?

“What three-quarters of the Iraqis want is a complete U.S. withdrawal,” said Raed. “No mercenaries. No permanent bases. No interference. Only complete withdrawal is the first step toward stabilizing Iraq.”

Olga Bonfiglio teaches a peacemaking class at Kalamazoo College in Kalamazoo, Michigan. She is the author of Heroes of a Different Stripe: How One Town Responded to the War in Iraq and writes on the subjects of social justice and religion. Her website is www.OlgaBonfiglio.com. Contact her at olgabonfiglio@yahoo.com

The Kurds learn what happens when you cross the U.S.

Here's the cause and effect, presented in reverse order, of what happens to a people when they get in between us and our oil. If you don't line up and start whistling dixie you'll be threatened with violence and worse (remember, Bush offered to bomb the Kurds on Turkey's behalf). If the PKK's strikes against Turkey can't be justified, which I contend they cannot, then how is it Turkey's aggression -- a country that, with Clinton's support, ethnically cleansed the Kurds throughout the '90s -- can claim the moral high road? It certainly helps that the PKK is a pack of godless socialists, our traditional enemy. It sure feels good to be slaughtering those pinko commies again.

---

Rice brands PKK 'common enemy'

Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, has said Washington views Kurdish fighters who have launched attacks on Turkey from Iraq as a "common enemy".

Rice, on a visit to Turkey, said at a press conference on Friday that Washington and Ankara needed to show "commitment and persistence" against the outlawed Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK).

Ali Babacan, Turkey's foreign minister, said in the same press conference that Rice's visit to Turkey marked the start of closer co-operation between the Nato allies against the PKK.

Rice said that Washington and Ankara were working together on intelligence sharing to combat the separatist group.

Rice will later attend wider talks in Istanbul to discuss Ankara's strategy against the PKK, who have launched attacks against Turkey from bases in northern Iraq.

Iraqi officials are also attending the Istanbul conference, which was originally meant to focus on Iraq's long-term stability.

The meeting comes amid concerns that Turkey may launch cross-border raids against fighters from the PKK.

Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary-general, is also attending the talks.

'Common enemy'

Turkey has accused the regional Kurdish government in northern Iraq of harbouring PKK fighters.

The separatist group is said to use bases in the mountainous region for cross-border attacks as part of its 23-year campaign for self-rule in Turkey's mainly Kurdish southeast.

Rice told reporters earlier en route to Turkey: "We have certainly been concerned that anything that would destabilise the north of Iraq is not going to be in Turkey's interests, it is not going to be in our interests and it is not going to be in the Iraqis' interests. That's been the reason for urging restraint.

"But we understand the need to do something effective against this PKK threat ... The PKK is an enemy of the United States just like it is an enemy of the Turks."

'Low expectations'

Rice held talks with Tayyip Recep Erdogan, Turkey's prime minister, shortly after arriving in the country and will later meet Abdullah Gul, the president.

Erdogan is due to meet George Bush, the US president, in Washington next week to discuss how to tackle the PKK.

Al Jazeera's Hoda Abdel Hamid, reporting from Istanbul, said the Turkish public's expectations over Rice's visit were low.

"Nothing really concrete [was set out], and I think from the Turkish public opinion point of view it will be quite disappointing," she reported after the press conference.

"Saying that the US was going to double efforts to share intelligence is not going to be satisfactory [to the Turkish public]," she said.

"I think the key sentence in the press conference came from Babacan when he said he expected the US to take 'concrete steps'. At the moment we are not hearing about any concrete steps."

Troops amassed

Both Baghdad and Washington strongly oppose any unilateral Turkish action in northern Iraq on the grounds that it would destabilise the only relatively calm region of the war-torn country.

Turkey has reportedly massed up to 100,000 troops on the border with Iraq and has threatened a military incursion to strike at PKK bases unless Baghdad and Washington promise to crack down on the fighters.

The White House has offered Ankara "actionable intelligence" on the PKK.

"We have no time to lose. All instruments – diplomatic, political, socio-cultural and military - are on the table," Babacan said.

He also said that Turkey may restrict flights to northern Iraq.

Turkish troops have been engaged in major operations targeting the PKK since October 21 when a group of fighters, who Ankara says came from northern Iraq, ambushed a military unit, killing 12 soldiers and capturing eight.

The army says it has since killed 80 fighters on Turkish territory.

A top PKK commander on Thursday called on Ankara to present a peace plan that could end the group's rebellion, which has claimed more than 37,000 lives.

Turkey refuses to have any contact with or make any concessions to the PKK.

---

Iraqi Kurds sign four oil deals
By Mark Gregory
BBC News

The Kurdish regional government in northern Iraq has announced four new oil exploration deals with international energy companies.

The news is likely to upset the central government in Baghdad and the US.

Both have been pressing the Kurds to hold off negotiations until national oil and gas laws for opening up Iraq's energy wealth are in place.

Development of Iraq's oil reserves has been held up by disagreements between Sunni, Shia and Kurdish communities.

These laws will set the framework for investment by foreign energy firms and for dividing oil revenues between the communities.

But increasingly the semi-autonomous Kurdish area has signalled that it will go it alone without waiting for a national consensus.

'Illegal'

In the latest move, the Kurdish authorities have announced four exploration contracts and two refinery deals, worth around $800m (£400m), giving rights to look for oil under Kurdish territory.

French and Canadian companies are involved along with other foreign investors that have not yet been named.

There has been no official reaction from either Baghdad or Washington but neither will be pleased.

A few weeks ago the Kurdish government signed agreed its first ever exploration deal with a foreign oil firm, Hunt Oil from Texas.

The Iraqi national oil minister in Baghdad described this deal as illegal.

Meanwhile, the Bush administration sees a national accord on energy policy as central to healing Iraq's wounds and creating the conditions for prosperity.

The Kurdish authorities insist their energy deals comply with the expected terms for national laws.

Iraq: A Neoconservative Paradise

Democracy Now! - Noami Klein on the Privatization of War









A Film by Alfonso Cuarón and Naomi Klein, directed by Jonás Cuarón.
"When I finished The Shock Doctrine, I sent it to Alfonso Cuarón because I adore his films and felt that the future he created for Children of Men was very close to the present I was seeing in disaster zones. I was hoping he would send me a quote for the book jacket and instead he pulled together this amazing team of artists -- including Jonás Cuarón who directed and edited -- to make The Shock Doctrine short film. It was one of those blessed projects where everything felt fated." - Naomi Klein

The Shock Doctrine