Wednesday,
December 26, 2012. Chaos and violence continue, protests spring up,
floods in Baghdad and elsewhere, State of Law flashes the paranoia,
Nouri attacks the Constitution, Chuck Hagel is not the one to be
Secretary of Defense, US House Rep Charles Rangel speaks out against a
war on Syria, and more.
Kamal Namaa and Raheem Salman (Reuters) report,
"Tens of thousands of Sunni Muslims blocked Iraq's main trade route to
neighboring Syria and Jordan in a fourth day of demonstrations on
Wednesday against Shi'ite Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki." Is this about
Nouri's refusal to implement the Erbil Agreement? Is it about his
refusal to maintain a power-sharing government? His inability to follow
the Constitution and nominate people to the posts of Minister of
Defense, Minister of National Security and Minister of Interior? Is it
about the corrupt arms deal with Russia?
No,
all of those problems already existed. As Ayad Allawi (leader of
Iraqiya) has pointed out, Nouri loves to create new crises in order to
distract from his inability to govern and to meet the basic needs of the
Iraqi people. This crisis was created last week. Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) reported:
Iraq's
Finance Minister Rafei al-Essawi said Thursday that "a militia force"
raided his house, headquarters and ministry in Baghdad and kidnapped 150
people, and he holds the nation's prime minister, Nuri al-Maliki,
responsible for their safety.
Members
of the al-Essawi's staff and guards were among those kidnapped from the
ministry Thursday, the finance minister said. He also said that his
computers and documents were searched at his house and headquarters. He
said the head of security was arrested Wednesday at a Baghdad checkpoint
for unknown reasons and that now the compound has no security.
After morning prayers, Kitabat reports,
protesters gathered in Falluja to protest the arrests and Nouri
al-Maliki. They chanted down with Nouri's brutality and, in a move that
won't change their minds, found themselves descended upon by Nouri's
forces who violently ended the protest. Before that, Al Mada reports, they were chanting that terrorism and Nouri are two sides of the same coin. Kitabat also reports
that demonstrations also took place in Tikrit, Samarra, Ramdia and
just outside Falluja with persons from various tribes choosing to block
the road connecting Anbar Province (Falluja is the capitol of Anbar)
with Baghdad. Across Iraq, there were calls for Nouri to release the
bodyguards of Minister of Finance Rafie al-Issawi. Alsumaria notes demonstrators in Samarra accused Nouri of attempting to start a sectarian war.
Sunday saw protests in Falluja, Ramadi and al-Qaim:
AP notes
of today's protest in Falluja, "In al-Issawi's hometown of Fallujah,
some demonstrators covering their faces with red-checkered traditional
tribal headdress carried pistols under their clothes. Others held flags
from the era of deposed dictator Saddam Hussein and those now being
raised by Syrian anti-government rebels." AP has a slide show here. On the Ramadi protest, Ammon News adds, :"Around 2,000 protestors blocked a main highway leading to Syria and Jordan in Ramadi in western Iraq on Sunday." AFP notes that Ramadi protestors were composed of many different sections, "including local officials, religious and tribal leaders." Aswat al-Iraq notes that both protests resulted in armed guards in heavy numbers being sent to 'observe' the protests.
And now today. Alumaria reports that in Ramadi today, tens of thousands demonstrated. It's being called "Dignity Day" and "Wednesday Dignity." And, AFP explains,
the protests managed to close down "the main road to Syria and
Jordan." They also note that Minister of Finance al-Essawi was present
at the protest in Ramadi "and pledged to take a representative of the
protesters 'to negotiate with Baghdad'." Adam Schreck and Qassim Abdul-Zahra (AP) add, "He appeared before Wednesday's rally and was held aloft by the crowds." AFP notes that some demonstrators made clear that negotiations were not enough and chanted, "We only want a revolution."
Read more here: http://www.adn.com/2012/12/26/2734642/iraq-new-protests-break-out-in.html#storylink=cpy
Alsumaria notes
that security forces were out in full force but states it was to
protect those demonstrating. There is a good picture of the crowd here but an even better one here.
This is seen as another attack by Nouri on Iraqiya (which came in first
in the 2010 parliamentary elections while Nouri's State of Law came in
second) and as an attack on Sunnis -- Rafaie al-Issawi is both Sunni and
a member of Iraqiya. Qassim Abdul-Zahra (AP) provides
this perspective, "Many Sunnis see the arrest of the finance minister's
guards as the latest in a series of moves by Shiite Prime Minister
Nouri al-Maliki against their sect and other perceived political
opponents. Vice President Tariq al-Hashemi, one of the country's
highest-ranking Sunni politicians, is now living in exile in Turkey
after being handed multiple death sentences for allegedly running death
squads - a charge he dismisses as politically motivated." Al Jazeera notes
that Tareq sees similiarites and that they spoke with the Vice
President on Monday and he declared, "On the ground, al-Maliki in fact,
on a daily basis [is governing in a] sectarian way. We don't have any
option but to advocate and defend ourselves."
Alsumaria notes the demands included calling for the release of al-Issawi's staff and correct the course Nouri is currently on.
There are so many corrections that need to be made with regards to how Nouri is doing things. The Washington Post's Liz Sly Tweeted today:
Nouri can't protect Iraqis from attacks and now he can't even protect them from the elements. All Iraq News notes that Baghdad is receiving the most rainfall it's seen in thirty years. Alsumaria adds
that the last days alone have seen the amount of rainfall Baghdad
usually receives in a full year (note the picture of the three men
walking down the street with water up to their knees). Kitabat notes
that the rain is destroying the infrastructure (check out the photo of
the man who's apparently trying to get home with bags of groceries).
This
is not just due to rainfall. This is also the result of Iraq's
crumbling infrastructure -- infrastructure Nouri al-Maliki has had six
years to address and he's done nothing. When you allow the sewage and
drainage systems to crumble, you get standing water. AP speaks
with various residents with complaints including that the flooding has
left them with no electricity and Abu Ibrahim states, "The heavy rain
and lack of services the muncipality of Baghdad should provide to
citizens led to this catastrophe. No good sewage, no drainage caused
this bad situation." AFP points out,
"The heavy rain spurred the government to declare Wednesday a national
holiday, the fourth time this year it has been forced to do so because
of bad weather. The other three were due to heat during Iraq's boiling
summer."
Alsumaria notes
yesterday's rains have caused 3 deaths and two people to be injured in
Baghdad -- two deaths from a house collapsing due to the rain and one
from electrical death (with two more injured in that as well) and that
main streets in the capital are sinking. All Iraq News notes Baghdad has been placed on high alert because of the torrential rains.
You could mistake Baghdad for Venice in this All Iraq News photo essay which notes that students are forced to walk through the high standing water to get to schools. They also note
of Tuesday's rainfall: Baghdad had the most yesterday (67 mm) followed
by Hilla, Azizia and Karbala (rainfall was also recorded in Samawa,
Rifai and Basra -- of those three, Basra was the highest and Baghdad's
rainfall was three times Basra's). It's not just Baghdad. Alsumaria notes that after ten house collapses in Wasit Province village, the Iraqi Red Crescent began evacuating the entire village. Dar Addustour notes Nouri issued a statement yesterday that he's going to oversee a committee that will try to address the situation.
Now he's doing that? Dropping back to the November 21st snapshot:
In Iraq, the rains have been falling with significant consequences. Tuesday, All Iraq News reported
that the rest of the week would be rainy and foggy. And Iraq had
already seen heavy rain fall. Sadr City was one of the areas
effected. Joseph Muhammadwi and Mahmoud Raouf (Al Mada) reported
on the flooding of Sadr City and included a photo of the water up to
the frame of a mini-van. Despite the flooding and continuing heavy
rains, traffic police stand outside directing vehicles. One resident
jokes that Nouri can replace the food-ration cards with free small
boats. The water's flooded the streets and also gone into homes and
schools and a makeshift bridge of bricks has been constructed to allow
access to one school. Dar Addustour noted
that many of the cities, such as Kut, have been hit with the heavy
rains. Baghdad residents protested the lack of public services --
proper sanitation (i.e. drainage) would alleviate a great deal of the
standing water. Nouri's had six years to address Baghdad's sewer
system and done nothing. AFP reports
today the heavy rains in Kut led to houses collapsing resulting in the
death of six children and leaving one adult male injured.
But now, a month later, Nouri is going to deal with the problem?
That crisis is only one of the many problems Nouri is currently facing. October 9th,
Nouri was strutting across the world stage as he inked a $4.2 billion
weapons deal with Russia. The deal is now iffy if not off (an Iraqi
delegation went to Russia at the start of the month to see if the deal
could be salvaged) and it went down in charges of corruption. Among
those said to be implicated in the corruption is Nouri's own son. All Iraq News reports
that State of Law is attempting to remove Nouri's name from the list of
those Parliament is investigating for the corruption in that deal. In
addition, Al Mada reports that Nouri is refusing to answer questions from the Parliament relating to that arms deal.
Al Rafidayn adds
that Nouri's State of Law is also attempting to cancelt he membership
of MP Ahmed al-Alwani because he took part in a protest against Nouri's
targeting of the Minister of Finance (al-Alwani took part in Sunday's
protest in Falluja.) (al-Alwani is with Iraqiya.) Dar Addustour reports
that Nouri's also declared that he is limiting the political speech of
MPs and they will no longer be protected for their remarks. He is
demanding the prosecution of members of parliament, Mohammad Sabah (Al Mada) explains.
For
those who can remember Nouri's first term, there were repeated attempts
by the litigous Nouri to sue members of Parliament. They can't be
sued. The Constitution protects them. Nouri was hoping to sue one in
particular after the session expired in 2010; however, that MP was part
of the new Parliament. Nouri has sued the Guardian newspaper
and many others. Those he can't bully with guns, he tries to bully with
law suits. He really is an international disgarace.
And his State of Law is a joke around the world. Dropping back to Monday, "In a further example of the crazy, Fars News Agency reports
MP Izzat al-Shabandar is declaring that Turkey and Qatar as well as
Saudi Arabi all have secret plots against Nouri. Although he is an MP,
he's generally identified as Nouri's 'aide' -- such as in this CBS News report from July." Today Fars News Agency reports
State of Law's Shakir al-Daraji is proclaiming "secret information" in
his possession tells of Turkey's part to plot against Baghdad. You
sound insane, you all sound insane. I feel like we should put that in
all caps.
Are there plots against people?
Yes. But if you have nothing to back up your claims, you come off as
crazy. Now maybe that's what State of Law is going for, maybe they're
trying to churn up the crazy vote ahead of the provincial elections
scheduled for April. But among the reasons Nouri is a joke on the
international stage is because he's political slate (State of Law) is
forever announcing plots against them. You sound crazy. You sound
paranoid. Your crazy does not instill confidence in you or Nouri. And
when you go on to attack Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, no
one takes you seriously because you've already acted crazy on the
public stage. By contrast, Press TV reports
State of Law's Yasin Majid called yesterday for the expulsion of
Turkey's ambassador to Iraq based on his objections to remarks made by
Erdogan. Whether you agree with his call or not, the fact that he's
not screaming about some conspiracy make the average person stick around
long enough to learn why Majid is calling for expulsion.
I
was truly touched by the tears your president [President Barack Obama]
shed during his speech because of the killing the twenty beautiful
children and the six remarkable adults as he called them. He reminded
me of the tears I shed watching my country ruined by the shock and awe
bombing during the last war on Iraq almost ten years ago.
You
gathered to mourn the death of those kids but when the war was
launched, my sister who lived in the states that time and I cried alone
as our family members were still in Iraq and we didn't know what
happened to them. The American missiles didn't differentiate between
children and adults during the war, all Iraqis were exposed to death all
days long.
No one offered us condolences
for the loss of our country, our dreams and our hopes for good days to
come. We were alone with our grief; the whole world watched the
continuous bombing in silence. Some people protested but their voices
weren't heard. The leaders of the Middle East watched their brothers and
sisters killed, your military bases were on their lands yet they did
nothing to stop you from the war.
Your
President called the kids who were killed at the school by names. Our
children who were killed by the American bombs had no names. I remember a
picture of bodies of small kids covered with blood and piled on the
back of a truck, those kids were killed during the bombing of a small
city in Iraq. No apologies where given to their parents or to the Iraqis
for taking the lives of these kids... there were no teddy bears and no
candles..
Do you know Abeer? Abeer is the
Iraqi kid who was fifteen when she was raped in front of her family
members by the American soldiers. The soldiers burnt the house to hide
their atrocities. How many of the American people know the story of
Abeer? .
This and so much more tragedy was caused by the Iraq War.
And yet Barack is apparently testing the waters to see how a Chuck Hagel for Secretary of Defense nomination would go over?
Marcia has noted Hagel's curious election results -- in an election where he owned the voting machines. She, Cedric and Wally
have called out Libeterain Glenn Greenwald for pimping for Hagel to be
nominated for Secretary of Defense. (Remember Glenn was an Iraq War
Cheerleader and supporter of George W. Bush. He's the Guardian's
token American conservative columnist.) It's a shame Barack -- the
supposed anti-war president or anti-Iraq War candidate for president --
can't find any people who stood against the Iraq War to nominate for
Cabinet positions -- so much for his claim to change the mindset.
Hagel's nomination was a topic on last Friday's broadcast of The Diane Rehm Show
(NPR). The Atlantic's Yochi Dreazen questioned how the nomination helps
the Democratic Party and doesn't it just send the message that
Democrats are weak on defense (as in, "That's why Barack has to pick a
Republican!"). Susan Glasser (Foreign Policy) had other points and,
though she moved over this one, it's not one I would move over.
Susan
Glasser: The controversy that former Senator Hagel, a Republican by
the way, has excited really revolved around the question of whether he
is deemed sufficiently pro-Israel in his policies. And there's a
particular quote that he gave to an author, one of Foreign Policy's
columnist as it happened, in which he referred to the quote unquote
"Jewish lobby" as opposed to the quote unquote "Israel lobby." That's
being taken in some quarters as a sign that he is not a real supporter.
He's been critical of Israeli settlement policy for example.
The
"Jewish lobby"? That's not a minor mistake. When Glenn Greenwald goes
off on one of his many rants that so many see as anti-Semitic, I give
him the benefit of the doubt because he does make a point to call out
the government of Israel and not liken a government to all the Jewish
people in the world. The "Jewish lobby"? Doesn't draw such a
difference. It also doesn't recognize that, if he's referring to
Americans, there is no monoloithic Jewish lobby. There are left Jews,
centrist Jews, conservative Jews, Jews who believe pot should be legal,
etc.
That a person who made it into the US
Senate would make such an idiotic remark is bothersome. That he might
become Secretary of Defense is even more bothersome. As Marcia pointed
out, the 1998 anti-gay remarks were fine with him for all these years.
He only felt the need to apologize last week. That tells you a great
deal about the type of person you're dealing with.
There are a number of people who could be nominated. As Elaine's noted,
Susan Rice could go out for that post. Elaine wouldn't object, I
wouldn't object. She doesn't have the temperment for Secretary of State
but she could handle Secretary of Defense. Susan Rice also has the
energy and youth needed for that job. Chuck Hagel's past retirement
age. He's too old for the job.
Grasp that the
suicide rate in the military has not seen marked improvement. Grasp
that the assault and rape rate is still not going down. These are
issues that need to be addressed. Robert Gates didn't. Leon Panetta (I
know and like Leon) has spoken of these issues publicly and gotten
things in motion. Susan Rice or someone with her energy and youth could
take it further.
Chuck Hagel has nothing in
his background that demonstrates he can take on these issue. He can't
even speak publicly without attacking LGBTs or Jews in the last 20
years. He's not equipped for the office.
Glenn
Greenwald thinks he is but then Glenn thought the Iraq War was a good
idea too. And Glenn counts 'activism' as his living half the year in
the US and half in his partner's country. He claims that's to protest
DOMA. Maybe so. It's a half-assed protest and that is Glenn's style.
(Half-assed because if you're really against DOMA, so much that you
don't want to live in the US, then you don't live in the US.) But more
than likely, it's another easy stand for Glenn -- his partner has family
in the other country and doesn't want to leave them and lets Glenn play
drama queen and insist he's doing something. At any rate, why the US
needs to listen to a part-time resident on who would be Secretary of
Defense has yet to be explained. But surely there are much better
choices than Chuck Hagel.
Turning to radio, Nellie Bailey and Glen Ford are the hosts of the weekly Black Agenda Radio ( here for this week's broadcast) which airs on Progressive Radio Network each
Monday from 11:00 am to noon EST. This week they broadcast two
segments from earlier in the year and also provide coverage of the
December 19th press conference about war on Syria. We'll excerpt on
that press conference.
Glen
Ford: Six members of Congress sent a letter to President Obama urging
him not to send troops or otherwise engage in hostilities with Syria
without the express authorization of the Congress. The effort to head
off yet another undeclared war is spearheaded by North Carolina
Republican Walter Jones. Only two of the Congressmen that signed the
letter were Democrats and only one of them, Charles Rangel of New York,
is Black. Rangel spoke at a press conference called by Congressman
Jones in Washington.
US
House Rep Charles Rangel: Well I think you for relieving some of the
guilt that we, as members of Congress, should have. Knowing that day
after day week after week, you, our moral voice, will be heard makes it
difficult for a lot of us because we're here to uphold the
Constitution. And there are no courses in schools and universities that
allow any president to send our young men and women off into harm's way
without coming to the Congress. Now that's the way it is and that's
the way it has been. And yet we have so many tens of thousands of
families that have lost their loved ones since WWII and it's actually
reached the point that presidents just don't give a darn about the
Congress. That may not be too bad but how do we go to the funerals of
our constituents what do you say when you look in the casket and see a
young man and a young woman and the family clings to you because you're
so -- you're a symbol of the United States government? And they want
so badly to hear that their son or their daughter was a patriot, was a
hero. And you know that once that flag goes up, of course you are a
hero. But how do you answer the question as to why they were there?
Why were they there? And that's the painful stain that we have on our
history. Now it's very simple. I am just as patriotic as the next
guy. And when someone says that our nation is in trouble, that our
national security is threatened, the way I look at it, it's time to call
up our troops and have a draft. That's the way I look at it. And if
you cannot find in your heart to ask every American to step forward and
make some sacrfice, then we should not be involved in it. It means
clearly it's not in our national security. I challenge anybody to come
to this country and enjoy all of its benefits and then we get into
trouble and you say, "Hey, I'm with the United States of America but
don't ask for an increase in taxes and don't put my son or grandson in
jeopardy and for God's sake don't put me in jeopardy." That is wrong and
that is unAmerican. So what is my collegue saying? Don't go off an
fight wars? He doesn't even say, "Don't go off and fight wars for
oil." He just says that if it's important enough to go to war, come to
the Congress. And you know what that means? It means come to the
American people. Is that asking too much to say -- before anyone gets
hurt, wounded or dies -- that we ask our people back home do you think
that it's worth it? So let me thank you and your dad and everyone for
coming out. It's remarkable the small number of people. I couldn't
even find this room. I honestly, when I saw "Canon," I thought it was
in 345, the big room. And if sending men and women off to combat is
this important and I end up in saying, "Where are the ministers, where
are the rabbies, where are the emons?" Because I hear their voices
with same sex marriages, Oh, that's a terrible thing. World's going to
come to an end." I hear their voices with men who like men and women
who like women and 'that's going to break up marriage in the United
States, whatever's left of it.' And I know they bless guns wherever the
guns go. And I know the chaplains, they carry guns too, just in case
some of the enemy gets in God's way, shoot them! But on this issue,
human beings that are born, I would like to believe that they would
think it's outrageous, immoral, unconstitutional.
Glen
Ford: That was New York Black Congressman Charles Rangel. Also on
hand was Patrick Lang, a retired Lt Col and former head of Defense
Intelligence Agency Operations in the Middle East and North Africa. He
says the US is behaving towards Syria in much the same way as it did to
Iraq just before the 2003 invasion.
Patrick
Lang: I spoke at a town meeting gathering in Lexington, Virginia in
the late, late part of 2002 -- that's where my alma mata is located --
and I told people in the audience, "If you're not paying attention,
perhaps you don't know that the train has already left the station, that
we are already on our way to war in Iraq." And a number of people
still remember my saying that, they thought it was a strange thing to
say at the time but it turned out to be correct. Well, in my opinion,
this is late 2002 again. It is come again to us. Because you can look
across the spectrum of -- of think tank, generation opinion and various
meetings in Washington which I am sometimes invited to, or the general
tenor of stuff in the mainstream media and it all kind of says the kind
of thing that was being said in late 2002. There's a great deal of
exaggeration going on and a couple of things need to be pointed out
about this. One is that in contradiction to what is being said in all
this propaganda, the outcome in Syria is not at all certain. If you
read foreign newspapers, you might have seen in the British newspaper
the Independent a few days ago, an article by a man named [Patrick] Cockburn
who wrote from Damascus about what actual conditions are like on the
ground in Syria based on having been there two weeks. He said that he
got in a car and drove 100 to the city of Homs without any inteference
whatsoever, didn't see any of the war going on, talked to people in and
around the city -- which has in the past been a hotbed of Sunni activism
-- and came to the conclusion that the picture being painted in the
west of how close the [Bashir] Assad government is to falling is
grossly exaggerated. That is an extremely significant fact. The other
things is the government of the United States has clearly embarked on a
course that, if followed, will lead to military intervention in Syria.
How can I tell that? Because our stated policy is that regime change is
the desired policy of the United States. That's been established for
some time now. Recently, we recognized the various groups of the Syrian
opposition as being the official government of Syria. Based on that
kind of a proceeding -- even though there's no UN action on this that I
can think of at the moment, it will be possible for that 'government' to
ask for our intervention and we could claim that it is a legitimate
action. The next thing about this that is interesting is that among the
coalition of groups that are fighting the Assad government is one called
the al-Nusra and this is an off-shoot of al Qaeda worldwide, the very
essence of our enemy, spread across the world, projected into Syria.
They are one of the leading fighters against the Assad government. The
United States has condemned this group as a foreign enemy. But in spite
of that, the leaders of the rest of the guerillas fighting the Assad
government have come forth across the world to demand that we rescind
that condemnation of al-Nusra because they are in fact their friends.
So the other thing that is clear here is that if the Assad government
falls, we have no idea really at all what kind of government would
succeed it. When you consider all of this put together you have to ask
yourself why these two gentlement from the House of Representatives are
not completely correct? Especially in a situation where the outcome is
uncertain? And what the successor regime might be or how aminacable to
our interests it might be, why on earth would the government not go
to the Congress for the approval of the appointment of US forces? And
as things are going now, it seems inevitable to me that if we continue
on this path the US government will feel that rather than be defeated in
its policy at this point it will have to use military force which will
probably take the form of air intervention, no fly zone, direct resupply
of the rebel groups, I don't think that after what has happened in Iraq
and Afghanistan they are likely to occupy Syria with a COIN campaign.
That has proven to be a not very fruitful enterprise.
.
| 
Liz Sly 
