Search

band annie's Weblog

I have a parallel blog in French at http://anniebannie.net

Category

iraq

What happened to Iraq’s ‘human shields’?

Bandannie knows that this too is old news; but she was there at the time and just came across this article

'Human shields' in MilanKen O’Keefe (C) and the “human shields” en route to Baghdad

Related Stories

In March 2003, a group of international activists staged one of the most high-profile protests against the invasion of Iraq. With the world’s media watching, they drove in a ramshackle convoy of buses to a power station near Baghdad.

“The streets were absolutely rammed with people,” says Joe Letts, now 62, an anti-war campaigner from Dorset. “It was like a carnival atmosphere – I had never experienced anything like that before.”

Mr Letts had driven from Big Ben in London all the way to Baghdad, picking up “human shields” – peace campaigners from about 35 different countries – along the way.

They had arrived on three buses – two of them red London Routemasters owned by Mr Letts and usually hired out at West Country music festivals.

On the three-week journey from northern Europe, the activists had braved steep mountain roads and treacherous snowstorms while cooped up inside the cramped double-deckers in sleeping bags.

Saddam Hussein’s regime welcomed the human shields with open arms when they reached Baghdad on 15 February, timing their arrival to coincide with huge anti-war demonstrations around the world.

“The Iraqis had been told on TV who we were and why we were coming,” Mr Letts says, “so there were crowds of children waving. It was an extraordinary day!”

They were put up in comfortable hotel suites in the centre of the Iraqi capital.

“They fed us really well,” says Mr Letts. “There were aspects of it that were almost like being on holiday.”

The activists were planning to fan out to key sites around Baghdad, taking state-of-the-art cameras, satellite phones and computers with them.

Start Quote

Nobody was in favour of Saddam – we were there to stop a repeat of the damage and suffering that followed the first Gulf War”

Joe Letts

If they had been bombed, the shields would have tried to get their footage around the word instantly, causing what Mr Letts calls a “political catastrophe” in Western capitals

But as soon as the campaigners had settled in, the Iraqis announced that they had different ideas about how the operation would work.

Many in the group were expecting to be deployed to sites such as hospitals and schools, but their Iraqi liaison officer, Abdul al-Ashhemi, said Saddam Hussein’s regime wanted them to defend six key infrastructure sites instead.

The sites included an oil refinery, a power station and a food depot, where, Mr Ashhemi announced, the shields would be given special Westernised accommodation – including proper toilets.

The meeting was fraught – some of the activists were shocked, feeling they had travelled thousands of miles to save lives, not to protect Iraqi industry.

Mr Letts admits there was “dissent in the ranks”, but he spoke in favour of the Iraqi plan and eventually carried the day.

As a former disaster relief worker who had been to Iraq in 1991, he says he could see the sense in keeping Baghdad’s power and electricity going after the bombing. And he accepted, too, that these – and not schools and hospitals – were the sites that had actually been targeted during the first Gulf War.

Start Quote

My buses are all we had in the world and they were there in the middle of a war zone”

Joe Letts

“When we eventually turned up at Baghdad South power station, it had four big towers and a large picture of Saddam Hussein,” Mr Letts says.

“There was a large room that they had turned into a dormitory for us, they’d found a television from somewhere and they’d built us modern showers and loos.”

The group painted “Human Shields” in huge letters on the roof of the power station and settled in.

But in the following days there were tensions within the group – and with their hosts.

The Iraqis expelled one of the more militant activists – a former US marine called Ken O’Keefe – and several others.

Mr Letts says Mr O’Keefe had “a passionate heart” but was a “divisive leader” and too confrontational with the Iraqis.

By the start of US bombing on 20 March, others had left too – either because they were unhappy about the choice of sites or simply because they wanted to go home.

After spending a week at the electricity plant, Mr Letts also left. He felt he needed to protect his buses – they were, after all, his livelihood.

“My buses are all we had in the world and they were there in the middle of a war zone,” he says.

“I had to come back,” he says, “but I got the people there and that was my crowning achievement. I didn’t leave until we had made sure everything was working.”

Estimates of how many human shields stayed in Iraq throughout the bombing vary from 25 to just above 100. None of their sites were hit and Mr Letts thinks they did made a difference.

He returned to Baghdad later in 2003 and visited the electricity plant, where the manager told him the shields had protected the site until a wave of looting broke out immediately after the US-led invasion.

At that stage, the power station was still working and Mr Letts understands that there was a “broadly similar experience” at the other five installations.

The human shields did not even come close to stopping the war in Iraq, but Mr Letts says it was a “massive achievement” to help keep enough of the infrastructure going for Baghdad to be “survivable”.

Mr Letts says members of the RAF and other sources have told him the human shields were very much a talking point in the high command.

“The Brits and Americans were very much worried about wiping out large numbers of them,” he says.

The human shields were widely criticised in the West for being pawns of the Iraqi regime. Mr Letts says they discussed all their key decisions at length with Iraqi officials and then took a democratic vote among themselves.

“Nobody was in favour of Saddam”, he says. “We were there to stop a repeat of the damage and suffering that followed the first Gulf War.”

And for the Dorset bus driver, the trip to Iraq turned out to be as much of a personal odyssey as a political one.

He had been struggling for years to share the Christian faith of his wife, Thea, and on the way to Iraq he was inspired by seeing the biblical sites visited by Saint Paul.

“It was the most incredible journey,” Mr Letts says. “I’m a different person because of it… and I think I’m a better one.”

Simon Watts interviewed Joe Letts for the BBC World Service programme Witness. Listen back via BBC iPlayer or browse the Outlook podcast archive.

source

Human shields face 12 years’ jail for visiting Iraq

Muhammad Mahdi al-Jawahiri’s Second Death

by mlynxqualey

“A poet dies twice: once when he publishes, and once when a statue is erected to him.” So said Iraqi poet Mahmoud al-Braikan, in a speech in memory of the great Badr Shakir al-Sayyab:

A Google doodle for al-Jawahiri, which must be another sort of death.A Google doodle for al-Jawahiri, which must be another sort of death.

Al-Sayyab (1926-1964) — one of Iraq’s most gifted poets — lived and died in poverty. He was imprisoned and scapegoated by various successive regimes, and according to scholar and translator Ibrahim Muhawi, the last three years of his life “were indeed miserable,” as his poverty was compounded “with an incurable, degenerative…disease of his spinal cord…that led gradually to the paralysis of his legs and the deterioration of his nervous system, culminating in his death at the young age of 38.”

Al-Sayyab’s death did shake the world of Arabic literature, Muhawi said. By 1967, a new selection of his poetry appeared with an introduction by the Syrian poet Adonis. But it wasn’t until 1971 that he was claimed by the Iraqi government.

That’s when the Ba’athist regime, under Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr, erected a statue to the poet. In 2013, the Iraqi Ministry of Culture did one better, announcing that al-Sayyab’s family home would be turned into a cultural forum “and a tourist museum that documents his poetry works and displays to the public his personal effects, pictures, scripts and audio recordings.”

Perhaps the museum will be beautiful, educational, and a home for poets and poetry. In any case, Al-Braikan, who died in 2002, would surely not approve. But just as surely, Iraqi poet Muhammad Mahdi al-Jawahiri’s (1899-1997) second death, revealed last month and chronicled in Al-Monitor and As-Safiris a bit unhappier. From Al-Monitor:

Jawahiri’s statue has become a bad joke among intellectuals, the public and the poet’s family. Jawahiri’s granddaughter saw her grandfather’s history collapse in front of her. No one in Baghdad province gave the history of that cultural and poetic figure his due.

The province put up a simple statue that said nothing about Jawahiri. It was a simple statue made of some kind of plastic material in the middle of a pool, whose water was dyed green during the unveiling celebration. But all that ugliness was not enough. They surrounded the statue with a number of coffee pots of different sizes. The statue’s head was crooked, and the coffee pots made the scene look even more ridiculous. Jawahiri’s family rushed to the governor to try to fix the monument, which offended the history of a man buried in the Ghuraba cemetery in the neighborhood of Sayyeda Zeinab, Damascus.

Baghdad assassinated Jawahiri twice, once when it forced him into exile, away from the “Tigris River of goodness,” and another time by making for him a
pathetic statue that is unworthy of his history.

The governor promised to fix the statue and to remove the coffee pots and coffee cups from around it so that the poet doesn’t get turned into a coffee seller after his death.

There’s no indication that the leftist poet would’ve been shamed or alarmed by an association with coffee-sellers. However, it’s not quite clear how the above statue won a competition that was apparently, according to the US Department of Defense news website al-Shorfa, worth 5 million dinars.

Although a popular and beloved poet — called by critic Salma Khadra Jayyusi in Trends and Movements in Modern Arabic Poetry “undoubtedly the greatest Iraqi poet of his generation” — al-Jawahiri, with his classical style, has generally been ignored by critics and translators.

According to Jayyusi, “Poetry of a unique and uncommitted nature such as that of al-Jawahiri, which does not proclaim a new doctrine of poetry, is immediately marked out as ‘conventional’ and left untreated.”

Read: Two poems by al-Jawahiri, submitted by an anonymous translator.

Another image: of the statue.

source

Why Do Some Countries Hate America?

Which of Us Dies First? The Achilles Heel of the War Reporting Business

  • Teru Kuwayama · Jun 27, 2013

Which of Us Dies First? The Achilles Heel of the War Reporting Business timchris

“I wonder which one of us dies first?”

It was 2003, and a stray, morbid thought crossed my mind one night in a hotel in Iraq. I was in a room full of twenty and thirty-something photographers and journalists, in the Al-Hamra hotel in Baghdad. A few miles away, the grown-ups from major label news organizations had filled the Sheraton-Palestine hotel—the Al-Hamra was the low-rent downtown spill-over tent.

I used to call it Melrose Place Baghdad, and in the evenings, after day trips to bomb sites and mass graves, the pack would convene at the poolside for blurry nights fueled by bad Lebanese wine. In retrospect, those days felt like the proverbial fun and games that preceded the losing of eyes.

Which of Us Dies First? The Achilles Heel of the War Reporting Business Hkm2PF3

As it turned out, the first to die from the Al-Hamra scene was Marla Ruzicka, a 28-year-old aid worker-activist. I’d first met her on another drunken bender in Kabul, a year earlier. She was killed in Baghdad by a vehicle-borne suicide bomber who plowed into the military convoy she was driving with.

Many more died in the years that followed.

On April 20th, 2011, it was Tim Hetherington and Chris Hondros. Chris was a wire photographer, one of the rare characters who actually covered wars as his day job for a news agency. Tim was a freelancer, best known as the director of the documentary film Restrepo.

Tim’s last tweet described “indiscriminate shelling” and “no sign of NATO”. It’s unclear if it was a mortar round or an RPG that killed them. Two other photographers were wounded, but survived.

Which of Us Dies First? The Achilles Heel of the War Reporting Business timtweet

My last memory of Chris is in front of the Al-Hamra in Baghdad. I last saw Tim the night before he left for Libya, in front of the L train in Brooklyn. [Tim is in the header photo, at left.]

Facebook was off the hook in the days after they were killed. Newspapers, blogs, and even human rights organizations were publishing memorials that continued to stream in. Anderson Cooper brought Restrepo soldiers onto CNN to offer tribute to the fallen filmmaker.

You’d almost think it was the first time journalists had been killed in the line of duty, but it wasn’t—it was just the first time, in a long time, that western journalists with names like “Tim” and “Chris” were killed.

Which of Us Dies First? The Achilles Heel of the War Reporting Business rnULEBg

Which of Us Dies First? The Achilles Heel of the War Reporting Business ne2yFYV

In fact, two Arab journalists were killed in Libya just a month before Tim, but their names, Mohammed al-Nabbous, and Ali Hassan al-Jaber, didn’t get a glimmer of the attention that Tim and Chris received.

The Committee to Protect Journalists lists almost a thousand incidents since in which journalists were killed in the last twenty years—almost 90% of them were local journalists.

The ratio may even be more lopsided, because statistics on journalists often don’t even include the people who work alongside them—like their drivers, translators, and “fixers”. Those people constitute a vast, grey, undocumented labor force that the international news industry is 100% dependent on. They face the highest risks, and almost invariably, they pay the highest price.

Which of Us Dies First? The Achilles Heel of the War Reporting Business TdYJ5JN

Which of Us Dies First? The Achilles Heel of the War Reporting Business CoJXqF6

In March 2011, four New York Times correspondents were detained and abused when their car was pulled over by pro-government forces in Libya. The NYTimes published blow by blow accounts of their captivity and a series of celebratory reports when they were finally released. The headlines never mentioned a fifth person in the vehicle—a 21 year old driver named Mohamed Shaglouf.

In a passing mention, he was described as “missing”, but it was lated reported that he had died.

For NYT photographer Lynsey Addario, he was the second person, in less than two years, who’d been killed driving her car. (I was in the car when the last one, a Pakistani named Raza Khan, was killed in an automobile accident while driving us back from a refugee camp outside the Swat Valley).

Raza’s family had modest hopes for compensation or support—they were hoping to get enough money to replace the used Toyota he died in so that his oldest son could carry the family business of driving for foreign journalists.

In a single sentence mention, in a blog post about Addario’s recovery, the NYTimes mentioned that it was “gathering a fund to give to the six children of the driver, Raza Khan, for whom he was the sole provider”. That fund seems to have amounted to about a thousand dollars, which probably as much was being spent on an hourly basis to provide red-carpet medical treatment to their American photographer, who’d broken a collarbone.

At the time that I hitched that ride with Lynsey and Raza, I was on assignment for Newsweek. Newsweek paid my hospital bills, and gave nothing to Raza’s family.

Which of Us Dies First? The Achilles Heel of the War Reporting Business Gbf1EIc

Which of Us Dies First? The Achilles Heel of the War Reporting Business fiskL6f

I have yet to find a major news organization with a clearly articulated policy on what happens in the worst case scenarios—when the people it hires are killed, wounded or abducted. I don’t believe that’s an accident. Until this black hole is confronted, more people will disappear in the grey area.

Another lucky passenger in the NYT‘s car in Libya was a correspondent named Stephen Farrell. In 2009, he’d also been abducted by Taliban insurgents, along with an Afghan colleague named Sultan Munadi. Farrell was rescued by a British special forces team. Munadi was killed in the rescue, as was a British commando. Unlike the British soldier, Munadi’s body was left behind.

Which of Us Dies First? The Achilles Heel of the War Reporting Business 4nDG9ZY

Which of Us Dies First? The Achilles Heel of the War Reporting Business nmkS3F7

In 2007, Ajmal Naqshbandi, my closest friend in Afghanistan, was kidnapped along with an Italian journalist named Danielle Mastrogiacamo. The Italian journalist was freed, in exchange for the release of five high value Taliban prisoners. Ajmal was decapitated after Afghan authorities bluntly refused to make any further concessions to spare his life.

In the documentary film “Fixer“, president Hamid Karzai is shown weakly explaining that the Italian government had once built a road for the Afghan government.

Which of Us Dies First? The Achilles Heel of the War Reporting Business Q0R9tXQ

Which of Us Dies First? The Achilles Heel of the War Reporting Business X6u7TzR

The deaths of Tim Hetherington and Chris Hondros were tragic and devastating to the people who knew them, but as foreign, parachute-jumping journalists, their deaths were actually quite unusual. What isn’t an isolated incident, however, is the disparity of treatment, and attention that’s given to “internationals” and “locals”.

On a moral level, this is the Achilles heel of the war reporting business. It’s a problem that gets worse and worse, as the news industry contracts, budgets shrink, and clearly defined staff jobs are replaced by greater numbers of inexperienced freelancers, with less clearly defined rules of engagement. In the grey space, ethical and professional corners get cut, and more bodies get swept under the carpet.

As many people have heard, the journalism industry is struggling for survival, but until it answers for its own collateral damage, the bigger question will be: does it deserve to survive?

I’d like to think that Tim and Chris would ask for those answers too.


About the author: Teru Kuwayama is a crisis photographer based in New York City and currently working in Afghanistan. You can connect with him through his website and through Instagram. This article originally appeared here.


Image credits: Photographs by Teru Kuwayama

source : http://petapixel.com/2013/06/27/which-of-us-dies-first-the-achilles-heel-of-the-war-reporting-business/

Public ignorance over Iraq carnage largely due to media blindness

When count­less jour­nal­ists refuse to take re­spon­si­bil­ity for ac­cu­rately re­port­ing on the re­al­ity of wars in Iraq, Syria or Libya, it’s un­sur­pris­ing that the ef­fect on civil­ians can be so easy ig­nored. Me­di­alens ex­plains:

Last month, a Com­Res poll sup­ported by Media Lens in­ter­viewed 2,021 British adults, ask­ing:

‘How many Iraqis, both com­bat­ants and civil­ians, do you think have died as a con­se­quence of the war that began in Iraq in 2003?’

An as­ton­ish­ing 44% of re­spon­dents es­ti­mated that less than 5,000 Iraqis had died since 2003. 59% be­lieved that fewer than 10,000 had died. Just 2% put the toll in ex­cess of one mil­lion, the likely cor­rect es­ti­mate.

In Oc­to­ber 2006, just three years into the war, the Lancet med­ical jour­nal re­ported ’about 655,000 Iraqis have died above the num­ber that would be ex­pected in a non-con­flict sit­u­a­tion, which is equiv­a­lent to about 2.5% of the pop­u­la­tion in the study area’.

In 2007, an As­so­ci­ated Press poll also asked the US pub­lic to es­ti­mate the Iraqi civil­ian death toll from the war. 52% of re­spon­dents be­lieved that fewer than 10,000 Iraqis had died.

Noam Chom­sky com­mented on the lat­est find­ings:

‘Pretty shock­ing. I’m sure you’ve seen Sut Jhally’s study of es­ti­mates of Viet­nam war deaths at the elite uni­ver­sity where he teaches. Me­dian 100,000, about 5% of the of­fi­cial fig­ure, prob­a­bly 2% of the ac­tual fig­ure. As­ton­ish­ing – un­less one bears in mind that for the US at least, many peo­ple don’t even have a clue where France is. Noam’ (Email to Media Lens, June 1, 2013. See: Sut Jhally, Justin Lewis, & Michael Mor­gan, The Gulf War: A Study of the Media, Pub­lic Opin­ion, & Pub­lic Knowl­edge, De­part­ment of Com­mu­ni­ca­tions, U. Mass. Amherst, 1991)

Alex Thom­son, chief cor­re­spon­dent at Chan­nel 4 News, has so far pro­vided the only cor­po­rate media dis­cus­sion of the poll. He per­ceived ‘ques­tions for us on the media that after so much time, ef­fort and money, the pub­lic per­cep­tion of blood­shed re­mains stub­bornly, wildly, wrong’.

In fact the poll was sim­ply ig­nored by both print and broad­cast media. Our search of the Lexis media data­base found no men­tion in any UK news­pa­per, de­spite the fact that Com­Res polls are deemed highly cred­i­ble and fre­quently re­ported in the press.

Al­though we gave Thom­son the chance to scoop the poll, he chose to pub­lish it on his blog viewed by a small num­ber of peo­ple on the Chan­nel 4 web­site. Find­ings which Thom­son found ‘so stag­ger­ingly, mind-blow­ingly at odds with re­al­ity’ that they left him ‘speech­less’ ap­par­ently did not merit a TV au­di­ence.

Les Roberts, lead au­thor of the 2004 Lancet study and co-au­thor of the 2006 study, also re­sponded:

‘This March, a re­view of death toll es­ti­mates by Burkle and Garfield was pub­lished in the Lancet in an issue com­mem­o­rat­ing the 10th an­niver­sary of the in­va­sion. They re­viewed 11 stud­ies of data sources rang­ing from pas­sive tal­lies of gov­ern­ment and news­pa­per re­ports to care­ful ran­dom­ized house­hold sur­veys, and con­cluded that some­thing in the ball­park of half a mil­lion Iraqi civil­ians have died. The var­i­ous sources in­clude a wide vari­a­tion of cur­rent es­ti­mates, from one-hun­dred thou­sand plus to a mil­lion.’

Roberts said of the lat­est poll:

‘It may be that most British peo­ple do not care what re­sults arise from the ac­tions of their lead­ers and the work of their tax money. Al­ter­na­tively, it also could be that the British and US Gov­ern­ments have ac­tively and ag­gres­sively worked to dis­credit sources and con­fuse death toll es­ti­mates in hopes of keep­ing the pub­lic from uni­fy­ing and gal­va­niz­ing around a com­mon nar­ra­tive.’ (Email to Media Lens, June 12, 2013. You can see Roberts’ com­ments in full here)

In­deed, the pub­lic’s ig­no­rance of the cost paid by the peo­ple of Iraq is no ac­ci­dent. De­spite pri­vately con­sid­er­ing the 2006 Lancet study ‘close to best prac­tice’ and ‘ro­bust’ the British gov­ern­ment im­me­di­ately set about de­stroy­ing the cred­i­bil­ity of the find­ings of both the 2004 and 2006 Lancet stud­ies. Pro­fes­sor Brian Rap­pert of the Uni­ver­sity of Ex­eter re­ported that gov­ern­ment ‘de­lib­er­a­tions were geared in a par­tic­u­lar di­rec­tion – to­wards find­ing grounds for re­ject­ing the [2004] Lancet study with­out any ev­i­dence of coun­ter­vail­ing ef­forts by gov­ern­ment of­fi­cials to pro­duce or en­dorse al­ter­na­tive other stud­ies or data’.

Un­sur­pris­ingly, the same po­lit­i­cal ex­ec­u­tives who had fab­ri­cated the case for war on Iraq sought to fab­ri­cate rea­sons for ig­nor­ing peer-re­viewed sci­ence ex­pos­ing the costs of their great crime. More sur­pris­ing, one might think, is the long-stand­ing media en­thu­si­asm for these fab­ri­ca­tions. The cor­po­rate media were happy to swal­low the UK gov­ern­ment’s al­leged ‘grounds for re­ject­ing’ the Lancet stud­ies to the ex­tent that a re­cent Guardian news piece claimed that the in­va­sion had led to the deaths of ‘tens of thou­sands of Iraqis’.

source

What the Iraq war destroyed for average Iraqise

River­bend was one of the most pro­lific and savvy Iraqi blog­gers dur­ing the 2003 Iraq war. And then, she dis­ap­peared, not writ­ing for years.

On the 10th an­niver­sary of the in­va­sion, she’s back with a short and dev­as­tat­ing post about her coun­try:

April 9, 2013 marks ten years since the fall of Bagh­dad. Ten years since the in­va­sion. Since the lives of mil­lions of Iraqis changed for­ever. It’s dif­fi­cult to be­lieve. It feels like only yes­ter­day I was shar­ing day to day ac­tiv­i­ties with the world. I feel obliged today to put my thoughts down on the blog once again, prob­a­bly for the last time.

In 2003, we were count­ing our lives in days and weeks. Would we make it to next month? Would we make it through the sum­mer? Some of us did and many of us didn’t. 
Back in 2003, one year seemed like a life­time ahead. The id­iots said, “Things will im­prove im­me­di­ately.” The op­ti­mists were giv­ing our oc­cu­piers a year, or two… The re­al­ists said, “Things won’t im­prove for at least five years.” And the pes­simists? The pes­simists said, “It will take ten years. It will take a decade.”
Look­ing back at the last ten years, what have our oc­cu­piers and their Iraqi gov­ern­ments given us in ten years? What have our pup­pets achieved in this last decade? What have we learned?
We learned a lot.
We learned that while life is not fair, death is even less fair- it takes the good peo­ple. Even in death you can be un­lucky. Lucky ones die a ‘nor­mal’ death… A fa­mil­iar death of can­cer, or a heart-at­tack, or stroke. Un­lucky ones have to be col­lected in bits and pieces. Their fam­i­lies try­ing to bury what can be sal­vaged and scraped off of streets that have seen so much blood, it is a won­der they are not red. 
We learned that you can be float­ing on a sea of oil, but your peo­ple can be des­ti­tute. Your city can be an open sewer; your women and chil­dren can be eat­ing out of trash dumps and beg­ging for money in for­eign lands. 
We learned that jus­tice does not pre­vail in this day and age. In­no­cent peo­ple are per­se­cuted and ex­e­cuted daily. Some of them in courts, some of them in streets, and some of them in the pri­vate tor­ture cham­bers.
We are learn­ing that cor­rup­tion is the way to go. You want a pass­port is­sued? Pay some­one. You want a doc­u­ment rat­i­fied? Pay some­one. You want some­one dead? Pay some­one. 
We learned that it’s not that dif­fi­cult to make bil­lions dis­ap­pear. 
We are learn­ing that those ameni­ties we took for granted be­fore 2003, you know- the lux­u­ries – elec­tric­ity, clean water from faucets, walk­a­ble streets, safe schools – those are for de­serv­ing pop­u­la­tions. Those are for peo­ple who don’t allow oc­cu­piers into their coun­try. 
We’re learn­ing that the biggest fans of the oc­cu­pa­tion (you know who you are, you trai­tors) even­tu­ally leave abroad. And where do they go? The USA, most likely, with the UK a close sec­ond. If I were an Amer­i­can, I’d be out­raged. After spend­ing so much money and so many lives, I’d ex­pect the minor Cha­l­abis and Ma­likis and Hashimis of Iraq to, well, stay in Iraq. In­vest in their coun­try. I’d stand in pass­port con­trol and ask them, “Weren’t you happy when we in­vaded your coun­try? Weren’t you happy we lib­er­ated you? Go back. Go back to the coun­try you’re so happy with be­cause now, you’re free!” 
We’re learn­ing that mili­tias aren’t par­tic­u­lar about who they kill. The eas­i­est thing in the world would be to say that Shia mili­tias kill Sun­nis and Sunni mili­tias kill Shia, but that’s not the way it works. That’s too sim­ple. 
We’re learn­ing that the lead­ers don’t make his­tory. Pop­u­la­tions don’t make his­tory. His­to­ri­ans don’t write his­tory. News net­works do. The Foxes, and CNNs, and BBCs, and Jazeeras of the world make his­tory. They twist and turn things to fit their own pri­vate agen­das. 
We’re learn­ing that the masks are off. No one is ashamed of the hypocrisy any­more. You can be against one coun­try (like Iran), but em­pow­er­ing them some­where else (like in Iraq). You can claim to be against re­li­gious ex­trem­ism (like in Afghanistan), but pro­mot­ing re­li­gious ex­trem­ism some­where else (like in Iraq and Egypt and Syria). 
Those who didn’t know it in 2003 are learn­ing (much too late) that an oc­cu­pa­tion is not the por­tal to free­dom and democ­racy. The oc­cu­piers do not have your best in­ter­ests at heart. 
We are learn­ing that ig­no­rance is the death of civ­i­lized so­ci­eties and that every­one thinks their par­tic­u­lar form of fa­nati­cism is ac­cept­able. 
We are learn­ing how easy it is to ma­nip­u­late pop­u­la­tions with their own prej­u­dices and that pol­i­tics and re­li­gion never mix, even if a su­per-power says they should mix. 
But it wasn’t all a bad ed­u­ca­tion… 
We learned that you some­times re­ceive kind­ness  when you least ex­pect it. We learned that peo­ple often step out­side of the stereo­types we build for them and sur­prise us. We learned and con­tinue to learn that there is strength in num­bers and that Iraqis are not easy to op­press. It is a mat­ter of time… 
And then there are things we’d like to learn…
Ahmed Cha­l­abi, Iyad Allawi, Ibrahim Jaa­fari, Tarek Al Hashemi and the rest of the vul­tures, where are they now? Have they crawled back under their rocks in coun­tries like the USA, the UK, etc.? Where will Ma­liki be in a year or two? Will he re­turn to Iran or take the mil­lions he made off of killing Iraqis and then seek asy­lum in some Eu­ro­pean coun­try? Far away from the angry Iraqi masses… 
What about George Bush, Condi, Wol­fowitz, and Pow­ell? Will they ever be held ac­count­able for the dev­as­ta­tion and the death they wrought in Iraq? Sad­dam was held ac­count­able for 300,000 Iraqis… Surely some­one should be held ac­count­able for the mil­lion or so?Fi­nally, after all is said and done, we shouldn’t for­get what this was about – mak­ing Amer­ica safer… And are you safer Amer­i­cans? If you are, why is it that we hear more and more about at­tacks on your em­bassies and diplo­mats? Why is it that you are con­stantly warned to not go to this coun­try or that one? Is it bet­ter now, ten years down the line? Do you feel safer, with hun­dreds of thou­sands of Iraqis out of the way (granted half of them were women and chil­dren, but chil­dren grow up, right?)?

And what hap­pened to River­bend and my fam­ily? I even­tu­ally moved from Syria. I moved be­fore the heavy fight­ing, be­fore it got ugly. That’s how for­tu­nate I was. I moved to an­other coun­try nearby, stayed al­most a year, and then made an­other move to a third Arab coun­try with the hope that, this time, it’ll stick until… Until when? Even the pes­simists aren’t sure any­more. When will things im­prove? When will be able to live nor­mally? How long will it take?  
For those of you who are dis­ap­pointed re­al­ity has reared its ugly head again, go to Fox News, I’m sure they have a re­portage that will soothe your con­science. 
 
For those of you who have been ask­ing about me and won­der­ing how I have been doing, I thank you. “Lo khuliyet, quli­bet…” Which means “If the world were empty of good peo­ple, it would end.” I only need to check my emails to know it won’t be end­ing any time soon. 

Contractors Reap $138 Billion from Iraq War, Cheney’s Halliburton #1 with $39.5 Billion

In News on April 8, 2013 at 10:19 PM

Iraq - Top 10 Corporate Winners

03/18/2013

Eight days after the invasion of Iraq on March 19 2003, Paul Wolfowitz, then deputy defence secretary and a leading proponent of the war, told a Congressional committee: “We are dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon.”

A decade later, that assessment could hardly have turned out to be more wrong.

The US has overwhelmingly borne the brunt of both the military and reconstruction costs, spending at least $138bn on private security, logistics and reconstruction contractors, who have supplied everything from diplomatic security to power plants and toilet paper.

An analysis by the Financial Times reveals the extent to which both American and foreign companies have profited from the conflict – with the top 10 contractors securing business worth at least $72bn between them.

None has benefited more than KBR, once known as Kellogg Brown and Root. The controversial former subsidiary of Halliburton, which was once run by Dick Cheney, vice-president to George W. Bush, was awarded at least $39.5bn in federal contracts related to the Iraq war over the past decade.

Two Kuwaiti companies – Agility Logistics and the state-owned Kuwait Petroleum Corporation – are the second and third-biggest winners, securing contracts worth $7.2bn and $6.3bn respectively.

The US hired more private companies in Iraq than in any previous war, and at times there were more contractors than military personnel on the ground.

“These numbers are staggering,” said Claire McCaskill, the Democratic senator who has led the charge to tighten contracting controls.

“In the last decade, we’ve seen billions in taxpayer money spent on services and projects that did little – sometimes nothing – to further our military mission,” she said.

But companies on the top 10 list defended their record. KBR “performed with honour and sacrifice in a hostile, complex, ambiguous and unpredictable environment”, said Marianne Gooch, a company spokeswoman.

She noted that KBR had prepared and served more than 1bn meals and produced more than 25bn gallons of drinkable water and 265 tons of ice.

Patrick Dorton, a spokesman for the International Oil Trading Co, a Florida-based company that secured contracts worth $2.1bn to transport fuel from Jordan to US forces in Iraq, said: “We are proud to have effectively supplied jet and convoy fuel in a war zone to the US military.”

The business environment for these contractors may be changing, with the war in Iraq over and the conflict in Afghanistan winding down, but these private companies remain.

There are still 14,000 contractors, including 5,500 security guards, in Iraq even though the last troops left in December 2011.

“Contractors are here to stay as real players,” says Stuart Bowen, the special inspector general of Iraq reconstruction. “The opportunities in this field are shaped by the unpredictable rhythm of when a fragile state will fail.”

The FT’s list of the top earners over the past decade is based on all federal government contracts awarded for performance in Iraq and neighbouring Kuwait since the invasion was planned.

Compiling such a list is tricky because some contractors operate under a variety of names to avoid scrutiny. That makes these figures conservative.

The list includes companies working in supplying support services, security, reconstruction and the oil industry.

“This is not my grandfather’s military industrial complex,” said Dan Goure, vice-president of the Lexington Institute, a national security think-tank partly funded by defence contractors. “There’s not a single munitions producer in this list.”

Instead, the US had created a fifth branch of the military, he said. “It’s called the private sector.”

The extensive use of contractors in both Iraq and in Afghanistan has been steeped in controversy.

A 2011 report from the commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan estimated that defence contractors had wasted or lost to fraud as much as $60bn – or $12m a day – since 2001.

Private contractors have been involved in some of the most shocking events of the Iraq conflict – from the Nisour Square shootings in 2007 in which Blackwater security guards killed 17 Iraqis, to the Abu Ghraib prison scandal.

While the era of easy money may have ended for these contractors, that does not mean the boom times are over.

In 2011, the state department estimated that it would pay $3bn over the next five years on its private security contracts to protect its massive embassy complex in Baghdad alone.

Meanwhile, contractors are winning new business as oil companies ramp up their operations, especially around areas such as Basra in the south.

“It’s not like these companies have shut up shop and are going home,” says Stephanie Sanok of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “We are still sinking a lot of money into this and we are still trying to get our oil dividend.”

That means that companies that branch out into other areas could have an even better decade ahead.

Given the controversies that have surrounded the use of contractors in Iraq, many analysts say that there is little evidence that the defence department has learnt about how to best use them.

“While DOD is much better at using contractors than they were 10 years ago, they are still not sufficiently prepared to use contractors in future large-scale military operations,” says Moshe Schwartz, an analyst at the Congressional Research Service.

After a six-year wrangle, the Senate in December passed the National Defense Authorization Act, a sweeping overhaul of wartime contracting aimed at improving oversight and cracking down on waste and fraud.

It was pioneered by Ms McCaskill, who says she has “spent years shining a light on the massive waste, fraud and abuse in military contracting”.

Mr Bowen and the Commission on Wartime Contracting have also made specific recommendations for improvements.

But a Government Accountability Office report last year found that the Pentagon had taken or planned actions based on only half the CWC recommendations, while the state department and USAID had acted on only one-third of the recommendations relating to them.

“The reality is that the US is not well structured to carry out stabilisation and reconstruction operations on an integrated, inter-agency basis,” said Mr Bowen, the special inspector-general.

“That is the most serious and continuing problem. We must ensure we do not repeat the errors and weaknesses seen in Iraq.”

 Via FinancialTimes

source

US-trained death squads in Iraq are our legacy

A re­mark­able doc­u­men­tary, by the Guardian and BBC Ara­bic, on the role of US-funded death squads in Iraq via tor­ture skills honed in Latin Amer­ica dur­ing the “dirty wars“. Pow­er­ful, ex­plicit and bru­tal (though there are crit­ics), such films are es­sen­tial to chal­lenge the spu­ri­ous ar­gu­ment that the war was any­thing to do with free­dom (as Aus­tralia’s for­mer For­eign Min­is­ter Alexan­der Downer shame­fully claims today) and all about in­stalling a US-friendly pup­pet in Bagh­dad, what­ever the cost. One of the key jour­nal­ists on the story, the Guardian’s Mag­gie O’Kane, talks to Democ­racy Now! about the in­ves­ti­ga­tion and the com­plete lack of ac­count­abil­ity by the US gov­ern­ment.

Wik­ileaks doc­u­ments were vital in lead­ing this story:

[youtube http://youtu.be/LBGey6rfdIY?]

source

Two Matar Poems

Home

ibn-el-arab

source: sallory.wordpress.com

يقظة
Awakening

صباح هذا اليوم
This morning
أيقظني منبه الساعة
The alarm clock woke me up
و قال لي : يا ابن العرب
And told me: oh son of Arabs
قد حان وقت النوم !
It is time to sleep!

انحناء السنبلة
The Stalk Bows

أنا من تراب وماء
I am made from dust and water
خذوا حذركم أيها السابلة
Take your precautions, passersby
خطاكم على جثتي نازلة
Your footsteps fall on my body
وصمتي سخاء
And my silence is generosity
لأن التراب صميم البقاء
Because dust is the seed of eternity
وأن الخطى زائلة
And footsteps are ephemeral

ولكن إذا ما حبستم بصدري الهواء
But if you cage the air in my chest
سلوا الأرض عن مبدأ الزلزلة
Ask the earth about the beginning of the earthquake
سلوا عن جنوني ضمير الشتاء
Ask the conscience of winter about my madness
أنا الغيمة المثقلة
I am the burdened cloud,
إذا أجهشت بالبكاء
Which when it weeps
فإن الصواعق في دمعها مرسلة
Sends lightning with its tears

أجل إنني أنحني فاشهدوا ذلتي الباسلة
Yes, I bow, so bear witness to my valiant humiliation
فلا تنحني الشمس إلا لتبلغ قلب السماء
For the sun does not bow except to reach the heart of the sky
ولا تنحني السنبلة
Nor does the wheat stalk bow
إذا لم تكن مثقلة
If it is not burdened
ولكنها ساعة الإنحناء
But in the hour of its bowing
تواري بذور البقاء
It hides the seeds of its survival
فتخفي برحم الثرى ثورة مقبلة
Concealing in the earth’s womb a coming revolution.

أجل إنني أنحني تحت سيف العناء
Yes, I bow under the sword of oppression
ولكن صمتي هو الجلجلة
But my silence is deafening
وذل انحنائي هو الكبرياء
And my humiliation is pride
لأني أبالغ في الإنحناء
Because I exaggerate in bowing
لكي أزرع القنـبـلة
To plant the bomb

– Ahmad Matar

Read and listen in Arabic.

source

see also this very rich page 

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑