Tuesday, January 28, 2014

The Square



Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Angry Birds" went up earlier today.  The illegal spying just got even more absurd and even harder to defend.

This morning, C.I. noted, "You can currently stream the Academy Award nominated documentary The Square on Netflix.  The article below, by David Swanson, is from his War Is A Crime website."


I just streamed The Square tonight.  I felt so filthy from the lies Barack spewed over the airwaves.

The Square is really riveting so make a point to stream it if you haven't already.

For more reasons to stream the film:

Misplaced Lessons of Tahrir

By David Swanson



I still want Dirty Wars to win the Oscar, but The Square is a documentary worth serious discussion as we hit the three-year point since the famous occupation of Tahrir Square in Cairo that overthrew Mubarak -- in particular because a lot of people seem to get a lot of the lessons wrong.

I suppose some people will leave Dirty Wars imagining that we need clean wars, whatever those would be.  But too many people seem to be drawing from The Square lessons they brought with them to it, including these: Thou shalt have a leader; thou shalt work within a major political party; thou shalt have an identifiable group of individuals ready to take power.  I don't think following these commandments would have easily changed the past three years in Egypt; I don't think they're where Egyptians should be heading; and I'm even more confident they're blind alleys in the United States -- where they serve as supposed remedies for the supposed failings of Occupy.

Many lessons that might be drawn from The Square seem right to me.  Did the people leave the square too early? Hell yes.  Was the movement divided when the Muslim Brotherhood sought to claim victory exclusively for itself and not for all of the people of Egypt? Of course it was.  Let that be a lesson to us indeed.  We agree, virtually all of us in the U.S., on a lot of needed reforms.  We're all getting collectively screwed.  But we divide ourselves over stupid petty stuff, irrelevant stuff, secondary stuff -- cultural issues, ideologies, superficial identities, and -- yes -- big-name leaders (think how many opponents of militarism and Big Brother you could agree with if they weren't "Ron Paulers").  Preferring one tyrant to another because of their religion or race is not a flaw the Egyptians have a monopoly on (think of all the Christian support for Bush and African-American support for Obama).

Was trusting the military a horrible idea? No. It wasn't a horrible idea.  It was the most catastrophically stupendously stupid notion ever to enter a human skull.  Militaries don't support people.  People support militaries through their useful and exploited labor.  Costa Rica had to disband its military to stop having coups.  When a military exists, appealing to the humanity of its individual members is wise indeed.  But expecting the military as a whole to be democratic to the point of handing over power before it's compelled to do so is decidedly foolish.  None of which is to say the Egyptians have had much choice or that their project is yet completed.  Between them and us the question of which group is learning faster is no contest at all.

Do the people of Egypt need a Constitution rather than a pharaoh? Yes, absolutely. Does the Occupy movement need demands? Yes, of course it does.  Must we all create an ongoing culture of nonviolent action? Yes, sir-ee.  While The Square doesn't explicitly make the point, would better nonviolent discipline help? Undoubtedly.  Is the key lesson to never give up? Indeed.  All of these lessons should soak in deep.
But other points are less clear, in both The Square and common discussions of Egyptian revolution.  Tahrir Square didn't begin in 2011, and neither did the Muslim Brotherhood.  The foundations for the popular movement and for the religious party were laid over a period of years.  Foundations are being laid for nonviolent revolution in other places now.

Did the Egyptians fail? And did they fail because they are great protesters but bad democrats who should be condescended to by enlightened Americans?  No.  First, it isn't over.  Second, the United States has a failed system of government itself, as 80-90 percent of the people here have been telling pollsters for years.  Third, although I caught only one very quick little hint at it in The Square, the major financial and military backer of the brutal, corrupt regimes in Egypt -- before Tahrir and since -- is the United States government.  To the extent that Egyptians have failed they've failed with our help.  And whether we're unaware of the billions of dollars of our grandchildren's unearned wages that we give to Egyptian thugs to assault the Egyptian people every year, or aware and unable to do anything about it -- either way, our democracy hardly shines out as a model for the world.

A leader would have divided the Tahrir movement or the Occupy movement.  That we don't think of ourselves as having leaders is a function of the corporate media giving no microphones to people who favor major improvements to the world.  Ironically, just like coverage of New York Police Department brutality, this helps us to build a stronger movement.  That is to say, it helps us in so far as it allows a movement not focused on a leader.  Yes, we'd be much stronger with major media coverage, but the possible development of leaders recognized and named as such would be a downside.  And a successful movement behind a leader would only be able to put that leader into power if it succeeded far beyond where Egypt arrived in 2011 -- and it would only be able to get that leader back out of power again if it succeeded even further.
Is the lesson of Tahrir that Occupiers should back candidates in the Democratic Party?  Is an organized party that can challenge the Muslim Brotherhood or the Democrats the answer?  Not within a corrupt system it isn't.  When our goal is not a better regime but something approaching democracy, then what's needed is the nonviolent imposition of democracy on whatever individuals are in power, and the development of a culture of eternal vigilance to maintain it.  You can't elect your way out of a system of corrupt elections.  You can't impose a group of populist leaders on a government by coup d'etat and then write a democratic constitution afterwards.

No, that is not what happened in the United States, and not just because the old government got on ships and sailed away, but because the Constitution was fundamentally anti-democratic.  The United States has gained democracy through nonviolent movements of public pressure, imposed reforms, amendments, court rulings, and the changing of the culture.  Reforms are needed more badly than ever now, and whether they're imposed at the federal level or through the states or through secession, they must come through popular nonviolent pressure, as bullets and ballots are virtually helpless here.

The lesson I take away from The Square is that we must prevent the operation of business as usual until the institution itself, not its face, is fixed.  We can put up giant posters of a black man followed by a white woman followed by some other demographic symbol, but the posters will still be on the walls of prisons, barracks, and homeless shelters, unless we fix the structure of things.  That means:


  • Rights for people, and for the natural environment, not for corporations.
  • Spending money on elections is not a human right of free speech.
  • Elections entirely publicly financed.
  • The right to vote, to have time off work to vote, and to vote on a paper ballot publicly counted at the polling place.
  • Free air time, ballot access, and debate participation to all candidates who have collected sufficient signatures of potential constituents.
  • A citizens branch and public initiative power by signature collection.
  • The application of criminal laws to authorities who commit crimes or abuse their office.
  • Mandatory impeachment and recall votes for officials facing prosecution.
  • The right to a decent income, housing, healthcare, education, peace, a healthy environment, and freedom from debt.
  • The rights of the natural environment to continue and thrive.
  • The institution of minimum and maximum wages and a ban on extreme wealth.
  • Demilitarization.
  • Dismantling of the prison industry.


Give me all of that or give me death.  Take your bullshit rhetoric about "liberty" and name a square after it.


--



David Swanson's wants you to declare peace at http://WorldBeyondWar.org  His new book is War No More: The Case for Abolition. He blogs at http://davidswanson.org and http://warisacrime.org and works for http://rootsaction.org. He hosts Talk Nation Radio. Follow him on Twitter: @davidcnswanson and FaceBook
Activist alerts: subscribe unsubscribe
Articles (which can be republished with link and credit) subscribe unsubscribe
Press releases: subscribe unsubscribe
Washington DC press advisories: subscribe unsubscribe
Charlottesville VA press releases: subscribe unsubscribe
Charlottesville VA activist alerts: subscribe unsubscribeForgive the NSA. They know not what they do. 

I think The Square has a very strong chance of winning.  IKTWHTO on that.

It really is an amazing film so if you are a Netflix subscriber, make a point to stream it now.


Closing with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"


Tursday, January 28, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, the assault on Anbar continues, Barack Obama wants to arm Nouri al-Maliki in spite of this, Barack offers a brief mention of Iraq in tonight's State of the Union address and can't even get the facts right on that, and more.

Tonight, US President Barack Obama again wasted everyone's time with a dopey speech that meandered and challenged the listener to remain awake.  The State of the Union Address was carried live on ABC, CBS, NBC and PBS -- no doubt creating a windfall for The CW's Supernatural -- a show Ava and I once described as "like really bad gay porn where the leads forget to take their clothes off."

What Barack forgot in his marathon speech was foreign policy.  As Jason Ditz (Antiwar.com) observes, "A rambling, 80+ minute State of the Union Address tonight gave President Obama an opportunity to lay out his foreign policy positions, but 60 minutes into the talk he hadn’t touched the matter at all."

Here's his full remarks on Iraq:


When I took office, nearly 180,000 Americans were serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. Today, all our troops are out of Iraq.


Two sentences.

Two sentences and Baby Barack -- so coddled and fawned over -- couldn't even tell the truth.


And I think what we have to do is continue to work with the Iraqi Army and others to insure they understand the basic techniques of counterinsurgency. And so I think we continue to do that. We have a very small element on the ground that works in the embassy that has some expertise that can continue to help in these areas. And I think it’s important that we do that.

"And I think . . ."  That's US General Ray Odierno speaking January 7th at the National Press Club.  "A very small element on the ground that works in the embassy . . ."

All are out?

No, they're not.  And there's two children in the last 14 days who've noted on Twitter that their fathers are going to Iraq.  To serve in Iraq.  Not sure whether those children are refer to openly serving in Iraq or to Special-Ops, we haven't included them in the snapshots. What we have noted (repeatedly) from a September 2012 report by Tim Arango (New York Times) is this:


 
Iraq and the United States are negotiating an agreement that could result in the return of small units of American soldiers to Iraq on training missions. At the request of the Iraqi government, according to  [US] General [Robert L.] Caslen, a unit of Army Special Operations soldiers was recently deployed to Iraq to advise on counterterrorism and help with intelligence.        


Yet Barack declared what?


US President Barack Obama:  When I took office, nearly 180,000 Americans were serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. Today, all our troops are out of Iraq.


Is he that stupid or just lying?

He's the commander in chief of the military.

Let's hope he's lying and not so stupid that he doesn't know troops are in Iraq.

Another speech, another lie.  Richard Nixon lives on in the body of Barack Obama.  In fact, the Democratic Party might want to consider staging an exorcism.


Defense World explains, "Iraq has requested a sale of AH-64E APACHE LONGBOW Attack Helicopters and associated equipment, parts, training and logistical support for an estimated cost of $6.2 billion.  The proposed sale is divided into two separate contracts, valued at $4.8 billion and $1.37 billion, respectively." Jeremy Binnie (Janes) adds, "Iraq has requested another 500 AGM-114 Hellfire laser-guided air-to-surface missiles at an estimated cost of USD82 million, the US Defense and Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) announced on 23 January 2014."  Cheryl K. Chumley (Washington Times) notes:

Congress has 15 days to object to the sale — which wouldn’t be the first U.S.-Iraqi arms deal, AFP said. Earlier this month, the United States announced a plan to ship thousands of M-16 and M-4 assault rifles and accompanying ammunition to help Iraq’s government withstand a militant uprising in the west of the country. U.S. officials have also suggested American forces could help train Iraq’s military, perhaps in a third country.
Some on Capitol Hill oppose the sale of weapons to Baghdad, worrying that the country might let Iran cross into its airspace to help the Syrian regime — and funnel weapons and supplies to President Bashar Assad’s forces.

Where's the objection in the US?  Where's the bravery?  Does, for example, the Institute for Policy Study exist today as anything other than an obituary forum for famous dead people?  I don't see how you can be "a community of public scholars and organizers linking peace, justice and the environment in the U.S. and globally" and stay silent on this potential weapons sale.

Their silence makes Nate Rawlins (Time magazine) and his parroting (as opposed to reporting) look at least timely.

Jason Ditz (Antiwar.com) notes, "There’s still objection [to the sale] though, and it comes from Iraq’s political opposition. Iraqiya’s top Sunni politician, Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq, has hired a DC lobbyist to specific fight against selling arms to his government."  Ditz' link goes to Rosie Gray of BuzzFeed who notes:


With his country descending deeper into sectarian violence, Iraqi deputy prime minister Saleh al-Mutlaq, the second highest-ranking Sunni politician in Iraq, hired independent consultant Sam Patten for “political consulting services related to the client’s electoral program in the Republic of Iraq,” according to documents filed with the Department of Justice under the Foreign Agent Registration Act on January 18. According to the contract, Patten intends to work for Mutlaq until May (after the parliamentary elections at the end of April) at a rate of $20,000 per month. Patten previously worked for former Georgian prime minister Bidzina Ivanishvili. The contract shows that Patten will be working not just for Mutlaq himself but for the al-Arabiya Movement, a political coalition led by Mutlaq that will be running candidates in the elections in April. The contract allows for a “win bonus” of $100,000 if “expectations are exceeded” at the end of the contract. 



Arming Nouri with more weapons?  When we know what he's done in the past and we don't even have to go to long ago past, just last year is proof enough.

The Iraqi Constitution notes that protesting is a right and freedom that all Iraqis can exercise if they so choose.  That's found in Article 38.

But Nouri doesn't follow the law.  So when the current wave of protests started over a year ago on December 21, 2012, his response was his usual response: call protesters "terrorists" and refuse to listen to the outcry of the Iraqi people.  And, of course, use the security forces to attack the people.


 January 7th, Nouri's forces assaulted four protesters in Mosul,  January 24th,  Nouri's forces sent two protesters (and one reporter) to the hospital,  and March 8th, Nouri's force fired on protesters in Mosul killing three.  All of which were just rehearsals for  the April 23rd massacre of a peaceful sit-in in Hawija which resulted from  Nouri's federal forces storming in.  Alsumaria noted Kirkuk's Department of Health (Hawija is in Kirkuk)  announced 50 activists have died and 110 were injured in the assault.   AFP reported the death toll rose to 53 dead.  UNICEF noted that the dead included 8 children (twelve more were injured).

Eight children are dead because of Nouri al-Maliki and Barack Obama.  And no one wants to talk about that.  Not in the US, anyway.  Not supposed peace organization, not alleged think tanks.

Not everyone was slient though.  Thamer Hussein Mousa wasn't silent.  He was there.  He was one of the many peaceful protesters wounded.  His son was among those killed. The BRussells Tribunal carried his eye witness account of what went down:



I am Thamer Hussein Mousa from the village of Mansuriya in the district of Hawija. I am disabled. My left arm was amputated from the shoulder and my left leg amputated from the hip, my right leg is paralyzed due to a sciatic nerve injury, and I have lost sight in my left eye.
I have five daughters and one son. My son’s name is Mohammed Thamer. I am no different to any other Iraqi citizen. I love what is good for my people and would like to see an end to the injustice in my country.

When we heard about the peaceful protests in Al-Hawija, taking place at ‘dignity and honor square’, I began attending with my son to reclaim our usurped rights. We attended the protests every day, but last Friday the area of protest was besieged before my son and I could leave; just like all the other protestors there.

Food and drink were forbidden to be brought into the area….

On the day of the massacre (Tuesday 23 April 2013) we were caught by surprise when Al-Maliki forces started to raid the area. They began by spraying boiling water on the protestors, followed by heavy helicopter shelling. My little son stood beside me. We were both injured due to the shelling.

My son, who stood next to my wheelchair, refused to leave me alone. He told me that he was afraid and that we needed to get out of the area. We tried to leave. My son pushed my wheelchair and all around us, people were falling to the ground.

Shortly after that, two men dressed in military uniforms approached us. One of them spoke to us in Persian; therefore we didn't understand what he said. His partner then translated. It was nothing but insults and curses. He then asked me “Handicapped, what do you want?” I did not reply. Finally I said to him, “Kill me, but please spare my son”. My son interrupted me and said, “No, kill me but spare my father”. Again I told him “Please, spare my son. His mother is waiting for him and I am just a tired, disabled man. Kill me, but please leave my son”. The man replied “No, I will kill your son first and then you. This will serve you as a lesson.” He then took my son and killed him right in front of my eyes. He fired bullets into his chest and then fired more rounds. I can’t recall anything after that. I lost consciousness and only woke up in the hospital, where I underwent surgery as my intestines were hanging out of my body as a result of the shot.

After all of what has happened to me and my little son – my only son, the son who I was waiting for to grow up so he could help me – after all that, I was surprised to hear Ali Ghaidan (Lieutenant General, Commander of all Iraqi Army Ground Forces) saying on television, “We killed terrorists” and displaying a list of names, among them my name: Thamer Hussein Mousa.

I ask you by the name of God, I appeal to everyone who has a shred of humanity. Is it reasonable to label me a terrorist while I am in this situation, with this arm, and with this paralyzed leg and a blind eye?

I ask you by the name of God, is it reasonable to label me a terrorist? I appeal to all civil society and human rights organizations, the League of Arab States and the Conference of Islamic States to consider my situation; all alone with my five baby daughters, with no one to support us but God. I was waiting for my son to grow up and he was killed in this horrifying way.
I hold Obama responsible for this act because he is the one who gave them these weapons. The weapons and aircrafts they used and fired upon us were American weapons. I also hold the United States of America responsible for this criminal act, above all, Obama.



"I hold Obama responsible for this act because he is the one who gave them these weapons."

And yet Barack is preparing to further arm Nouri al-Maliki.

Stephen Zunes (National Catholic Reporter) offers this history:


At the end of December, Iraqi forces violently attacked a protest camp on the outskirts of Ramadi, killing 17 people. Human Rights Watch noted how the government's raid "seemed intended more to provoke violence than prevent it." Indeed, al-Qaida, despite lack of popular support even within the Sunni heartland, was able to take advantage of public anger at the crackdown to launch its unprecedented assaults on major urban centers in the Anbar province. The Obama administration responded by expediting additional military aid to the Baghdad regime.
This was the fifth major incident during 2013 in which security forces fired upon and killed peaceful protesters. A recent Amnesty International report noted how during the past year thousands of Iraqis were detained without credible charges, hundreds were sentenced to death or long prison terms after unfair trials, and "torture and other ill-treatment of detainees remained rife and were committed with impunity." Even parliamentarians are not immune from imprisonment on dubious charges, and extrajudicial killings have made Iraq the second most deadly country in the world for journalists.

And we don't even have to go back to the past to see how Nouri uses these weapons on the American people.  We can just look at what's taking place right now in Nouri's assault on Anbar.   World Bulletin notes, "Some 650 people have been killed or injured and 140,000 displaced by indiscriminate army shelling in Iraq's western city of Fallujah, Iraqi Parliament Speaker Osama Nujaifi said Monday."



And what does the US government do?

Largely hold Nouri's hand and engage in a little under the sweater groping.  The US Embassy in Baghdad notes the the State Dept's Brett McGurk wrapped up 'diplomacy' January 12th:


Deputy Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs Brett McGurk completed a visit on Saturday to Baghdad where he met with national and local leaders from across the political spectrum to discuss the security situation in western Iraq. McGurk's itinerary included meetings with  Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, Speaker Osama Nujaifi, Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Deputy Prime Minister Saleh Mutlaq, Deputy Prime Minister Husayn Shahristani, head of the Supreme Iraqi Islamic Council, Ammar al-Hakim, and members of the Council of Representatives from the Iraqiyya and State of Law blocs. He also conferred with prominent leaders from Anbar province, including Governor Ahmed Khalaf, Sheikh Ahmed Abu Risha, and former Minister of Finance Rafa al-Issawi.


And now?  Deputy Secretary of State William Burns is taking meeting.  Nouri's official government website announces his meeting with Burns today and declares the focus of the meeting was on combating terrorism. According to Nouri, he has the full backing of the US with Burns declaring that the assault Anbar has nothing to do with sectarianism.  NINA has an English language report on the statement (the statement's in Arabic). Burns also met with Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi.  NINA reports:

A statement by the Office of the Speaker of the House , " Najafi said that during the meeting the importance of a political solution to the crisis in Anbar, and to stop the bombing and the return of displaced people to their homes .
He stressed that " the tragic situation in Fallujah and exposed him innocent unarmed daily as a result of indiscriminate shelling represents a flagrant violation of human rights," according to the statement .
The two sides also discussed the " parliamentary elections , and agreed on the need to hold them on schedule." 



As Kitabat observes, Burns heard contradictory narratives in the two meetings. (They also note Burns met with Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari today but don't include any details of that meeting.)  Last week, Osama al-Nujaifi visited DC and met with many US officials.  Ali Abdelamir (Al-Monitor) reports:

“US officials’ opinions and positions were much more intractable than I had expected before getting to Washington,” said Nujaifi to Al-Hayat. Several MPs from the delegation accompanying the Iraqi parliament speaker stated that they were surprised by US officials. The latter expressed, for the first time, angry opinions about Maliki's performance and specifically about the current crisis in Iraq and its flare-ups in Anbar. They told Al-Hayat that they heard Secretary of State John Kerry, Vice President Joe Biden and President Barack Obama clearly criticize Maliki, in front of Nujaifi and the accompanying delegation (which did not include Shiites), regarding the management of the current crisis. The MPs also indicated that the US officials were concerned that Maliki’s campaign in Anbar was a maneuver to postpone elections and impose new conditions that contradict democracy.
US officials seemed concerned about the activities of armed groups in Anbar, the confrontation with the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) and the ensuing assistance to Iraq, including equipment, weapons and information. Yet, they also voiced their fear that the military campaign in Anbar would turn into a settling of political scores and a human tragedy, accompanied by tens of thousands of displaced persons and refugees, especially after the Iraqi army’s shelling of Fallujah and Ramadi that led to the death of civilians.
Nujaifi clearly expressed his fears and concerns in a speech addressed to an exceptional political American and Iraqi audience in the Brookings Institution's Saban Center for Middle East Policy in Washington. “At this point, Iraq is at a crossroad and the United States must help it in its transition into a successful democratic state,” he said.

al-Nujaifi's speech at the Brookings Institution is last Thursday's snapshot.  UPI offers:

Given that Maliki needs AH-64s in the air now so he can mount all-out assaults on the jihadist-held areas of Fallujah and Ramadi, the capital of Anbar province, and that he needs major victories over al-Qaida before parliamentary elections scheduled for April 30, it's possible the leased Apaches may be sent into combat as soon as they're delivered, possibly flown by mercenaries.
Dr. Bessma Momani is an associate  professor at the University of Waterloo, a member of the Centre for International Governance Innovation and the Brookings Institution.  Saturday, she addressed the arming of Nouri in a column for the Toronoto Star:

Local tribes in Anbar province did not welcome Al Qaeda forces into their towns in the past weeks and months, but the Baghdad government run by Maliki will take advantage of long-standing local despair and reaffirm its power and control over this restless province.
The Maliki government is up for re-election this spring and its support base in Baghdad has lived through an already horrific year of terrorist attacks. To shore up his base in the centre of the country, Maliki will want to flex his muscles both politically and militarily.
Unfortunately, Maliki has been given an international green light to bomb and annihilate Al Qaeda forces in Anbar. The Iraqi leader wants to raise his credentials as a strongman who can control the vast countryside; we can expect him to take a scorched-earth approach to the pounding of Anbar province. The result will be a high rate of civilian death, destroyed infrastructure and resentful families and locals throughout the province.
Fixing this situation by hammering Anbar province into submission will have enormous blowback. The Iraqi operations will further alienate communities and towns in Anbar from the centre. This will be a catastrophic mistake. The international community is misguided to think a military solution will fill a political vacuum.
Momani is Canadian.  Where's the American opposition to arming Nouri?  To giving him more weapons to use against the people of Iraq?
Al Arabiya Net quotes a Falluja resident who was fleeing with his family, "Now we're going to areas outside Falluja to save our children, families and women from the indiscriminate shelling." Saturday,  Alsumaria quoted medical sources who explain that the residential neighborhoods in Falluja are being targeted and that many citizens are being killed and injured.

Mohammad Sabah (Al Mada) reports that the MPs stressed today in the Iraqi Parliament that there is no "military solution" to Anbar, there is only a "political solution."  They noted that the use of the military had only increased tensions and inflamed the crisis   NINA reports security sources tell them seven civilians were wounded in the military bombing of Falluja today.
Let's stay with violence.  All Iraq News notes a Babel bombing left two Iraqi soldiers injured.  National Iraqi News Agency reports 2 civilians were shot dead in Baquba, "the body of a man belonging to the police Intelligence" was discovered in the streets of Kirkuk (gunshot wounds), an Albu Alwan police station was blown up, a Shora roadside bombing left one police officer injured,  an armed clash in al-Qa'im between security members and rebels left 2 rebels dead, a Ratba roadside bombing left 1 Iraqi soldier dead and three more injured, a Baaj roadside bombing left 1 Iraqi soldier dead and two more injured, a Mosul armed attack left two Iraqi soldiers injured, security forces killed 3 suspects in Shura and Qayyarah,  and an Arab Jbour Village bombing claimed the lives of 5 Iraqi soldiers and 1 Sahwa.  Iraq Body Count counts 987 violent deaths so far this month through Monday.


Turning to the topic of the Ashraf community,  Iraq's Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued the following today:


 The Cabinet approved today January 28, 2014 on Iraq's contribution with the amount of half a million dollars to a trust fund proposed by the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on October 23, 2014 to cover costs related to transporting the residents of Camp Liberty (formerly known as Ashraf) to a third country.
Iraq fulfilled its international and humanitarian obligations to transport Ashraf residents to Camp Liberty, waiting for the implementation of international commitments to resettle the Camp Liberty residents outside Iraq.
The government's decision reaffirms its position on the need to resettle the residents of Camp Liberty in third countries outside Iraq according to the commitments and understandings between Iraq and the United Nations.


Many will doubt Nouri's word on providing money for this issue since he's repeatedly failed to provide security for the Ashraf community.  The Ashraf community?  As of September, Camp Ashraf in Iraq is empty.  All remaining members of the community have been moved to Camp Hurriya (also known as Camp Liberty).  Camp Ashraf housed a group of Iranian dissidents who were  welcomed to Iraq by Saddam Hussein in 1986 and he gave them Camp Ashraf and six other parcels that they could utilize. In 2003, the US invaded Iraq.The US government had the US military lead negotiations with the residents of Camp Ashraf. The US government wanted the residents to disarm and the US promised protections to the point that US actions turned the residents of Camp Ashraf into protected person under the Geneva Conventions. This is key and demands the US defend the Ashraf community in Iraq from attacks.  The Bully Boy Bush administration grasped that -- they were ignorant of every other law on the books but they grasped that one.  As 2008 drew to a close, the Bush administration was given assurances from the Iraqi government that they would protect the residents. Yet Nouri al-Maliki ordered the camp repeatedly attacked after Barack Obama was sworn in as US President. July 28, 2009 Nouri launched an attack (while then-US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was on the ground in Iraq). In a report released this summer entitled "Iraqi government must respect and protect rights of Camp Ashraf residents," Amnesty International described this assault, "Barely a month later, on 28-29 July 2009, Iraqi security forces stormed into the camp; at least nine residents were killed and many more were injured. Thirty-six residents who were detained were allegedly tortured and beaten. They were eventually released on 7 October 2009; by then they were in poor health after going on hunger strike." April 8, 2011, Nouri again ordered an assault on Camp Ashraf (then-US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was again on the ground in Iraq when the assault took place). Amnesty International described the assault this way, "Earlier this year, on 8 April, Iraqi troops took up positions within the camp using excessive, including lethal, force against residents who tried to resist them. Troops used live ammunition and by the end of the operation some 36 residents, including eight women, were dead and more than 300 others had been wounded. Following international and other protests, the Iraqi government announced that it had appointed a committee to investigate the attack and the killings; however, as on other occasions when the government has announced investigations into allegations of serious human rights violations by its forces, the authorities have yet to disclose the outcome, prompting questions whether any investigation was, in fact, carried out."  Those weren't the last attacks.  They were the last attacks while the residents were labeled as terrorists by the US State Dept.  (September 28, 2012, the designation was changed.)   In spite of this labeling, Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) observed that "since 2004, the United States has considered the residents of Camp Ashraf 'noncombatants' and 'protected persons' under the Geneva Conventions."  So the US has an obligation to protect the residents.  3,300 are no longer at Camp Ashraf.  They have moved to Camp Hurriyah for the most part.  A tiny number has received asylum in other countries. Approximately 100 were still at Camp Ashraf when it was attacked Sunday.   That was the second attack this year alone.   February 9th of this year, the Ashraf residents were again attacked, this time the ones who had been relocated to Camp Hurriyah.  Trend News Agency counted 10 dead and over one hundred injured.  Prensa Latina reported, " A rain of self-propelled Katyusha missiles hit a provisional camp of Iraqi opposition Mujahedin-e Khalk, an organization Tehran calls terrorists, causing seven fatalities plus 50 wounded, according to an Iraqi official release."  They were attacked again September 1st.   Adam Schreck (AP) reported that the United Nations was able to confirm the deaths of 52 Ashraf residents.  In addition, 7 Ashraf residents were taken in the assault.  Last November, in response to questions from US House Rep Sheila Jackson Lee, the  State Dept's Deputy Assistant Secretary for Iraq and Iran Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, Brett McGurk, stated, "The seven are not in Iraq."  McGurk's sworn testimony wasn't taken seriously.  Once a liar and a cheater . . .
The US Embassy in Baghdad issued the following on McGurk's January 11th visit to Camp Liberty:
Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Brett McGurk visited Camp Hurriya in Baghdad on January 10, accompanied by Gyorgy Busztin, Deputy Special Representative of the Secretary General for the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) and officials from the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR). DAS McGurk met with senior representatives from the Mujahedine-e-Khalq (MEK) as well as survivors of the attack on Camp Ashraf and reiterated the importance the U.S. Government places on the safety and security of Camp Hurriya.  He noted that in meetings with senior Iraqi officials the U.S. will continue to press the Government of Iraq (GOI) to buttress security inside the camp, and welcomed the commitment to install additional t-walls following the next Camp Management meeting among camp residents, UNAMI and the GOI. DAS McGurk stressed the urgency of relocating the residents of Camp Hurriya to third countries as soon as possible and noted the full-time efforts of Jonathan Winer, Senior Advisor for MeK Resettlement, towards that objective. Given the special challenges involved in addressing these issues, DAS McGurk expressed deep appreciation to UNAMI and UNHCR for their work and ensured ongoing U.S. Government support of their efforts.


























 

Monday, January 27, 2014

Quentin Tarantino: Poster Boy for stupid

Anglo White Quentin Tarantino is a director and writer.  His films include Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction (screenplay co-written by Roger Avery), Jackie Brown, Death Proof, Kill Bill Vol. 1, Kill Bill Vol. 2, Inglorious Basterds and Django Unchained.

He's known for violence and repeated use of the n-word.

He was cool in the 90s.  And he carried that cool on through the Kill Bills.  By Inglorious he was making films for your grandparents and Django Unchained only continued that trend.

I don't think even Frank Capra aged so quickly.

But his elderly ascension comes with his hate of new media.  He's suing Gawker.

Because of something they wrote?

Nope.

Because of a link.

Steven Musil reports:

 Furious that a first draft of "The Hateful Eight" was circulating on the Internet, Tarantino announced last week that the western would not be the next movie he filmed. Tarantino told Deadline.com at the time that the script leaked out without his permission after he sent it to six people for their review.
"I give it out to six people, and if I can't trust them to that degree, then I have no desire to make it," Tarantino told Deadline.com. "I'll publish it. I'm done. I'll move on to the next thing."
Soon after Tarantino made that statement, Gawker's Defamer blog posted a an item headlined "Here Is the Leaked Quentin Tarantino Hateful Eight Script" that linked to the 146-page script published on another site. 

Reuters notes:

In court documents, writer-director Tarantino claimed Gawker Media promoted and disseminated unauthorized, downloadable copies of the leaked screenplay.

The filmmaker is seeking more than $1 million in damages for each of two copyright infringement claims.

Ashley Lee (Hollywood Reporter) offers:

Gawker Media responded with a six-point post entitled, "Quentin Tarantino Sues Gawker Over Link to Script He Wants Online," which notes that the company thinks Tarantino is to blame for the leak, as he spoke on the availability of his work to Deadline Hollywood and made his complaints of the leak very public and, therefore, newsworthy. "It was Tarantino himself who turned his script into a news story, one that garnered him a great deal of attention," reads one section.
The item also details how the media is not the source of the script's leak, reading: "Someone unknown to Gawker put it on a website called AnonFiles, and someone unknown to Gawker put it on a different website called Scribd. Last Thursday, Gawker received a tip from a reader informing us that the script was on the AnonFiles site, after which Gawker published a story reporting that the script had surfaced online."

Quentin Tarantino is wasting everyone's time and looking like an idiot.

Now that he's directing grandparent films, this is just going to further harm his image.

Closing with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"


Monday, January 27, 2014. Chaos and violence continue, Nouri's assault on Anbbar continue, the US government moves to send the thug more weapons, Nouri trash talks Saudi Arabia, talk continues that some provinces may not be allowed to vote in April elections, and much more.



US Senator Bob Menendez has ended his block on selling Iraq Apache helicopters.  Missy Ryan (Reuters) euters reports the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which Menendez chairs, has agreed to lease and sale Nouri's government approximately 4.8  billion dollars in weapons.  John Hudson (Foreign Policy) offers a higher price tag,  "The move clears the way for Baghdad to lease six Apache attack helicopters and buy 24 more, and includes training, logistical support and equipment. The total price tag is estimated at more than $6.2 billion."  Kitabat observes that many Iraqi MPs have also objected to the proposed deal.  Kitabat also notes that Iraq's Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi, when he met with US President Barack Obama in DC last week, expressed the need for conditions on the weapons to ensure they were not used against the Iraqi people.

The biggest cost will be in blood should illegitimate leader Nouri al-Maliki manage to hold onto the post of prime minister.  While it's true that he is hugely unpopular and, as the 2013 provincial elections demonstrate, so is his State of Law coalition, it's also true that Nouri's never gotten the post of prime minister due to popular support.

In 2006, the US government nixed the Iraqi Parliament's decision to name Ibrahim al-Jaafari to a second term and insisted instead on their puppet Nouri.  In the 2010 parliamentary elections, Ayad Allawi's Iraqiya beat Nouri's State of Law meaning that Ayad Allawi should have been named prime minister-designate.  But those March election results were not honored by Nouri who refused to step down and his refusal brought the country to an eight month stand still (the political stalemate).  He was only able to accomplish that via the support of the US White House.  Ned Parker (POLITICO) explained earlier this month:


It was the April 2010 national election and its tortured aftermath that sewed the seeds of today’s crisis in Iraq. Beforehand, U.S. state and military officials had prepared for any scenario, including the possibility that Maliki might refuse to leave office for another Shiite Islamist candidate. No one imagined that the secular Iraqiya list, backed by Sunni Arabs, would win the largest number of seats in parliament. Suddenly the Sunnis’ candidate, secular Shiite Ayad Allawi, was poised to be prime minister. But Maliki refused and dug in. 
And it is here where America found its standing wounded. Anxious about midterm elections in November and worried about the status of U.S. forces slated to be drawn down to 50,000 by August, the White House decided to pick winners. According to multiple officials in Baghdad at time, Vice President Joseph Biden and then-Ambassador Chris Hill decided in July 2010 to support Maliki for prime minister, but Maliki had to bring the Sunnis and Allawi onboard. Hill and his staff then made America’s support for Maliki clear in meetings with Iraqi political figures. 
The stalemate would drag on for months, and in the end both the United States and its arch-foe Iran proved would take credit for forming the government. But Washington would be damaged in the process. It would be forever linked with endorsing Maliki. One U.S. Embassy official I spoke with just months before the government was formed privately expressed regret at how the Americans had played kingmaker.



The US-brokered Erbil Agreement was a legal contract.  To get the heads of the various political blocs to sign the contract, it had to offer them something.  In exchange for giving Nouri the second term he didn't earn, the contract called for him to do certain things (name Ayad Allawi to head an independent national security council, implement Article 140 of the Constitution -- census and referendum on Kirkuk, etc.).  The White House swore the contract had the full backing and support of the US government.  But Nouri used it to get his second term and then refused to honor any of the promises he had made in the contract.  Michael Brenner (Huffington Post) observes, "In the end, al-Maliki's reneging on those pledges to the sunnis generated growing disaffection."

With that history, the notion that votes matter is a quaint one in Iraq and the highly unpopular Nouri al-Maliki may be able to steal a third term.  In 2013, he called off provincial elections in Anbar and Nineveh.  Only US government pressure forced him to allow the two provinces to vote (months later in June).


ic of elections, Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi was in DC this week meeting with various officials, doing interviews and speaking.  Thursday's snapshot contained his speech at the Brookings Institution and he noted elections in his speech including in this section:

So the political components in Iraq were not able to build the Iraqi political system or to implement the Constitution and to reach a genuine partnership and a genuine reconciliation.  They were not able to implement the laws as it should be and get rid of corruption and abuses and they did not respect all the Iraqi components as to represent them  in a fair manner in the armed forces.  According to the Constitution, they did not provide the provinces with enough funds. Also we did not adopt the law on hydrocarbons oil and gas which is very important to set a balanced relation between the provinces and the center for the production and exportation of oil.  
So some parties are implementing the Constitution based on their own perspective and this is hindering the building of the state, the national cohesion and is leading to more division.  And more and more people are being disappointed and do not trust the political process at this point as we have seen by the very low turnout in the last general elections [2013 provincial elections] and the ones before [2010 parliamentary elections]. We believe that Iraq is, at this point, at a crossroad.  The key to situation is clear and we can find a solution.  What we need though is a strong determination and the political will for everyone to agree on the Constitution and to forget the past, to move beyond the fears and to stop punishing the Iraqi people and move to reconciliation and prevent Iraq from sliding into even greater troubles.  


Friday, Missy Ryan (Reuters) reported:

Usama al-Nujaifi, a Sunni, said in an interview during a visit to Washington that he feared attempts to discourage voting or "provoke the situation" in Sunni areas, or to sideline certain would-be candidates, were designed "to weaken Sunni representation in parliament."
He also warned that poor security could pose problems for the parliamentary polls, scheduled for April 30.
"If the security conditions worsen, the elections could be postponed (or) if they are held, they will take place under inappropriate conditions," he said.

There have been charges that Nouri launched the attack on Anbar in order to improve his low polling.  There have been charges that he launched the attack to stop the parliamentary elections planned for April 30th.

Duriad Salman and Ammar al-Ani (Alsumaria) report al-Nujaifi gave two interviews Saturday, the first to Sky News and the second to Alsumaria.  Osama al-Nujaifi noted Nouri cannot continue to act unilaterally, that there are checks and balances in the system and he was concerned that Nouri thinks he's "singular" when it comes to decision making and that this could lead Nouri to attempt to postpone the upcoming election citing "poor security."  Nouri did just that last year.  And he wasn't supposed to.  He ruled that Anbar and Nineveh could not vote.  Under pressure from the US, specifically Secretary of State John Kerry, Nouri relented and, months later, allowed the two provinces to vote.

He never should have been allowed to postpone them.  He doesn't have that power.  The Independent High Electoral Commission is the only one that does and, as their name notes, they are supposed to be "independent."

If Nouri tries to keep provinces from voting, it will be worse than last time and it will be worse then cancelling the election all out.  It will be corrupt.

In another report, Duriad Salman and Ammar al-Ani report that the 'independent' commission is now saying that one or more provinces could be prevented from voting in the parliamentary elections.

Again, this would make any elections illegitimate.

This is a way to manipulate the vote and it should not be allowed to happen.

During the US Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln didn't stop the federal elections.  People voted across the country.  That was during the deadly Civil War, 1864.  He was the sitting president (having been election in the 1860 elections).  The country was ripped in two and violently fighting.  Lincoln didn't say, "Stop! We must stop these elections!"

And a cheap thug like Nouri shouldn't be allowed to stop any area from voting either.

Last week in DC, Speaker Osama al-Nujaifi also met with US General Ray Odierno (photo below from the Iraqi Parliament's website).




In 2010, Odierno wondered, ahead of the March 2010 elections, what happens if Nouri loses and refuses to step down.  The State Dept and the White House dismissed the possibility.  Odierno, of course, had made a solid prediction.


In 2010, the French government attempted to get support going for a caretaker government in Iraq -- a temporary government that would ease the transition.  The US government worked overtime to torpedo the idead.  Mohamed Gomaa Hazal (Kitabat) notes two Constitutional methods in which a caretaker government can be created.  Article 6 would require a no confidence vote and the formation of a new Cabinet to begin 30 days later.  Article 64 required the Parliament to dissolve and, no more than 60 days later, for a new government to be built.  Hazal is floating that in an apparent effort to prevent another political stalemate -- the ideas appear to be presented in an effort to implement them ahead of the parliamentary elections scheduled to take place April 30th.

One key problem with the proposal would be that Iraq has no president.

December 2012,  Iraqi President Jalal Talabani suffered a stroke.   The incident took place late on December 17, 2012 following his meeting with Nouri al-Maliki (see the December 18, 2012 snapshot) and resulted in Jalal being admitted to Baghdad's Medical Center Hospital.    Thursday, December 20, 2012, he was moved to Germany.  A year and one month later, he remains in Germany.

Jalal remains the head of the Kurdish political party the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (which nose dived in the KRG's September provincial elections).  PUK Media notes:

In the framework of his visitation to Amed in Turkey and his meetings with Kurdish politicians and officials, Malla Bakhtyar met with Selahattin Demirtash and Gultan Kishanak, BDB co-chairs, yesterday, January 26, 2014.
In the length of the meeting, Demirtash first highlighted PUK`s role in promoting the notion of having one stance with other political parties of Kurdistan regarding peace and democracy for the Kurdish nation, eventually saying: “I hope that all other political parties would have the same stance as PUK to achieve peace and autonomy to our people.”

Regarding the peace process in Turkey between Kurds and the Turkish government, Demirtash noted that the process has reached this day due to the efforts of President Jalal Talabani. Then Malla Bakhtyar, Chief of PUK executive body, added that in the past Turkey has been ruled by the military, but now, due to the pure politics of AKP party, a suitable ground for negotiations and discussions is available.


Really?  Dropping back to May 14, 2013:


May 8th,  the PKK began their withdrawal process from Turkey.  The Kurdish rebels and the Turkish government had been at war for decades but the two sides worked out a peace agreement.  Trend News Agency describes it this way,  "Imprisoned PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan previously called on members of the organization to lay down arms and leave the country. Turkish authorities promised to create the conditions for PKK militants who laid down their weapons to freely leave the country."
The effort is a major one and a major one for the region.  It's amazing when you grasp how little commentary there's been on this in the west.  Maybe that's because the west wasn't involved?  Isn't that against the image of why so many dollars and pounds and francs, et al are used?  That area supposedly needs the west so much.  Some days, the talk all but insists that the Middle East can't go to the bathroom without a western escort.



If Jalal Talabani was influential in the peace process, it was by having a stroke which prevented him from being invovled.  May 8, 2013, Jalal had been in a German hospital -- receiving no visitors other than his immediate family -- for five months.  PUK imploded in the September provincial elections and they're desperate to have something to boast of.  But pretending that Talabani was the leader (on the Kurdish side) is stretching it beyond belief.

Still on Talabani, All Iraq News notes:

The wife of the Iraqi President, Hero Ibraheem Ahmed, assured joining the majority opinions over holding the fourth conference of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan.The office of PUK reported in a statement received by AIN ''The Secretary and the members of the central council of PUK hosted the member of the political bureau, Hero Ibrahim Ahmed, at the building of the central council in Sulaimaniya city.''


Kitabat reports that a group of Iraqi lawyers, the Iraqi Jurists, have written a letter to the UN's High Commissioner for Human Rights, to Human Rights Watch and to Amnesty International declaring that the assault on Anbar is a genocide targeting the Sunni people.   The letter is composed by Dr. Tareq Ali Saleh and notes Sunnis are the victims of genocide campaign carried out by the government, that the bombing and shellings are done randomly leaving civilians targeted resulting in the deaily deaths of women, children, the elderly and unarmed civilians in their home neighborhoods, schools, orphanages and hospitals.  Under the cloak of 'terrorism,' the letter explains, a brutal extermination on the orders of the government of Tehran is being carried out.  The letter calls for an international investigation committee to be formed.


And Nouri's assault on Anbar Province is a War Crime.  Today, Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi declared, "What is happening in Anbar is close to the level of declaring a have state of emergency."  UPI notes, "A monthlong battle in Iraq's Anbar province between anti-government forces and the army has killed 125 people and wounded 541 others, officials said Monday."  Reuters adds, "More than 65,000 people have fled the fighting in Falluja and Ramadi during the past week alone, the United Nations said on Friday."  NINA notes that "hundreds" continue to flee Falluja as military helicopters continue to bomb Falluja and Ramadi which today left 8 civilians dead and thirty-nine more injured.  Dar Addustour reports that multiple cities in Anbar have been placed under curfew.  Kitabat notes that religious and tribal leaders are in fear of an imminent attack.


In other violence, NINA reports a mortar attack on Qesayba Village left a father and son injured, Maj. Gen. Mohammed al-Dulaimi ("commander of the 12th division") announced they had killed 2 suspects outside of Kirkuk, an armed attack in western Mosul left 2 Iraqi soldiers dead, an armed attack in eastern Baghdad left a captain in the Ministry of the Interior dead, an armed attack in western Baghdad left 1 army major dead and two Iraqi soldiers injured, 1 civilian was shot dead in Baghdad (Hurriah area), security forces announce they killed 1 suspect in Mosul, and "Unidentified gunmen stormed Alglam police station southeast of Tikrit, killing four policemen and a member of Sahwa force and cut off their heads."  Alsumaria adds that a tent shop owner was killed in Mosul and an armed clash in eastern Mosul left 2 police members dead.  PUK Media notes, "Head of the Elections Commission Office in Kirkuk Farhad Talabani escaped an assassination attempt by a bomb explosion which targeted his convoy south of Kirkuk, a police source told PUKmedia."  Through Sunday, Iraq Body Count notes 955 violent deaths in Iraq so far this month.  Sunday, Margaret Griffis (Antiwar.com) counted 45 dead and 82 injured.   Kirkuk Now reports Sunday saw 3 car bombings in Kirkuk and they have a photo essay of the aftermath here.



Meanwhile mad dog Nouri picks a fight with everyone.  Press TV quotes Nouri declaring, "The current terrorism originates from Saudi Arabia."  This despite the fact, as Press TV, that:  "The clashes in Anbar broke out on December 30, 2013, when the army removed an anti-government protest camp in Ramadi."  And that would be the Iraqi military, commanded by Nouri al-Maliki, not Saudi Arabia.

From the south, Saudi Arabia borders a huge section of Iraq.  It would have been beneficial for Nouri to have ceased the war of words and made peace with the country's government at any time during the nearly 8 years of his awful reign as prime minister.  Instead, he's attacked them publicly almost as much as he's attacked the government of Turkey (which borders Iraq from the north).  PUK Media explains:
After provoking the issue of Peshmarga with Kurds, the Iraqi PM Nouri al-Maliki wants to proceed to the next level.
This time, the Iraqi PM accuses Kingdom Saudi Arabia of supporting terrorism, saying: “Saudi denies its support for terrorism because the country is ruled with a sectarian knot.”
Furthermore, Maliki highlights that he reason why the terrorist groups in Syria feel they are close to victory is because they are supported by a number of countries such as Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia, with the latter being the original source of terrorism.”


World Bulletin notes:

Accusing the Prime Minister of enforcing Shiite Muslim domination over the government, a number of tribes in the predominantly Sunni Muslim region of Anbar have revolted against Maliki’s government. Maliki has blamed the revolt on armed Al-Qaeda linked rebels and has ordered his troops to pound the region.
However, it seems that anyone who opposes Maliki’s new regime is automatically labeled as a ‘terrorist’ and runs the risk of being executed. Last year, around 1,200 men and women were on death row in Iraq after admitting to committing crimes, in many cases signing confessions under torture. Last week, 26 people were executed in Baghdad for committing acts of ‘terrorism.’



We noted the Kitabat article about the Iraqi Jurists earlier.  Their letter also objects to Nouri's announcement last week that he was going to form three new provinces -- from existing and occupied land.  The letter objects to Nouri's announcement, to his refusal to consult first with the heads of the provinces.  Rudaw reports today:


Nineveh Governor Atheel Nujafi accuses Iraq’s Shiite-led government in Baghdad of planning to turn Tal Afar and the Nineveh Plain into provinces in order to facilitate a shorter route for Iranian aid to the Syrian regime.
"Reviewing the maps show that the two provinces proposed are located on the shortest route between Iran and Syria in Mosul," Nujafi said in a statement seen by Rudaw.

Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki’s government has been accused by the West of allowing Iranian lethal and non-lethal aid to pass through Iraqi land and air routes en route to Assad’s regime, which Tehran backs.
According to Nujaifi, there has been a systematic plan by the government in Baghdad to divide and cut off Nineveh in order to fuel sectarianism in the province.
Last week, Iraq's Council of Ministers decided to turn Tuz Khurmatu in Saladin province and Talafar in Nineveh into provinces and recommended a study to turn the Nineveh Plain and Fallujah into additional Iraqi provinces.The decision raised the ire of Iraqi Kurds, because Tuz Khurmatu and Tal Afar are both within the so-called “disputed territories” claimed by both the autonomous Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) in the north and the Arab government in Baghdad.


It amazes me that Nouri's proposal has not been universally condemned.  It should be condemned.

These are occupied areas.

When you consider all the time the left spends today on the issue of the Palestinians, the thought that they would now stay silent as it is proposed to hand occupied lands over is appalling.  Should Nouri's plan succeed, is today's left leaving it to the grandchildren of tomorrow to fight the battle that should be fought today?

Sunday, Nouri's Council of Ministers issued the following:

Council of Ministers approved a draft law to develop Tal Afar district to be a province in the Republic of Iraq and referred it to House of Representatives, according to provisions of articles (61 / first item and 80 / second item) from the constitution.
This was stated to Governmental Media and Communication Office by a source at Council of Ministers Affairs Dep. at General Secretariat of the Council of Ministers, which assured also that resolution came at request of Tall Afar Council ,according to  request and support of people of the district.
It is worth mentioning ,that draft law to develop Halabja province,  has presented to Council of Ministers at its 54th regular session in 31/12/2013 .At this session a new resolution, No. (568) for 2013, has issued, which assigned Office of Minister of State for Provinces Affairs to study reality of districts that, submitted a request to develop into new provinces, and present it to CoMsec to discuss by  council at its sessions.

The draft law of Tal- Afar has been prepared, including the following four items:

developing the province, which its centre is Tall- Afar district, and including the following districts with its full administrative borders:
(Center of Tal Afar – Zammar commune – Rabia   commune - Alaiadi commune). 
The resolution stipulated that Zammar, Rabia and Alaiadip communes will be districts, belonging to province of Tal Afar and the villages (Aionat - Abu Maria - Tel Moss - Palace Sbrigg - Brglah)  will be communes , belonging to the districts.
This resolution has been taken because Tal-Afer is one of the largest districts, according to the population and it suffered a lot of deprivation under the former regime and it targeted by terrorist groups from outside border, that killed thousands of its sons when they approached the Center of AL- Mosul to complete their administrative papers 


Nouri's talk of partitioning has had the effect of leading other provinces to announce that they would like to use their Constitutionally granted powers to move towards semi-autonomy -- similar to what the Kurdistan Regional Government exercises now.  But those three northern provinces want fully autonomy and are moving towards it.   Rudaw reports:

Within five years the autonomous Kurdistan Region in northern Iraq will have declared independence, according to a senior energy advisor at the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG)."Kurdistan is going to be rid of its status as a region within Iraq,” said Ali Balu,former head of Iraqi parliament's oil and gas committee. “A plan is underway for Kurdistan to be an independent state in the near future," he said.
Balu believes that plans and preparations are being made on the international stage aimed at declaring independence, which he says will be driven by Kurdistan’s geostrategic position and rich energy reserves.
He said that Kurdistan President Massoud Barzani’s participation at the World Economic Forum in Davos paves the way for international recognition of Kurdistan as an independent state.

Dropping back to the January 16th snapshot:

On the topic of visits, Missy Ryan (Reuters) reports Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi is scheduled to visit DC next week.   Amjad Salah (Alsumaria) reports KRG President Massoud Barazani is off to Europe where he will participate in the World Economic Forum (Davos, Switzerland, January 22-25th).  He's leading a delegation from Erbil -- a KRG delegation.  Bad news for Nouri, he's not apparently going to be heading a delegation out of Baghdad.  Well, it's a World Economic Forum and Nouri's a joke on the international stage, better he stay home in his kennel and let Barzani represent Iraq.

That was a prestige moment.  Nouri wasn't able to attend.  He was too busy terrorizing Anbar Province.  No doubt they were relieved in Davos to see Barzani, rumors swirl that Nouri blows his nose on the drapes.

Turning to the issue of the US war on Syria, Yossef Bodansky (World Tribune) offers:

There is a multi-faceted war going on in the territories of Syria, as well as Iraq and Lebanon. Since the dawn of history, wars ended with winners and losers. In this war in Syria, the Assad Administration has already won and the opposition was defeated. Hence, what U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry is telling Bashar Assad in Montreux is essentially something like: “Since our protégés have failed to defeat you and overthrow your government, you should now surrender at the negotiating table.”
Meanwhile, on the ground, the Bashar Assad administration won the war because it enjoys the support of 70 to 75 percent of the Syrian population. About half of all Syrians — virtually all of them Sunni Arabs — now prefer the Assad Administration to prevail because they are exhausted of war and suffering, they dread the jihadists, and they hate and mistrust the exiled opposition (the one Jabra leads and Obama supports). No verbal magic in Montreux will change this reality.

Fighting, however, continue to spread. The now fully integrated wars in Syria, Iraq, and Lebanon would have ended long ago with significantly less casualties and suffering had it not been for the “leading from behind” by the U.S. Barack Obama administration. The Obama White House profoundly misunderstood the unfolding conflict and mishandled the local and regional reaction. Alas, the high price has been, and still is being, paid by the innocent civilians.




Finally, David Bacon's last book, Illegal People -- How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants (Beacon Press), won the CLR James Award. He has a new book, The Right to Stay Home: How US Policy Drives Mexican Migration.  We'll close with this from Bacon's "THE WORKERS' SCORECARD ON NAFTA"  (Truth Out):

In 1986, a provision of the Immigration Reform and Control Act created a commission to investigate the causes of Mexican migration to the U.S.  When it made its report to Congress in 1992 it found, unsurprisingly, that the biggest was poverty.  It recommended the negotiation of a free trade agreement, modeled on the one that had been implemented a few years before between the U.S. and Canada.  The commission argued that opening the border to the flow of goods and capital (but not people) would, in the long run, produce jobs and rising income in Mexico, even if, in the short run, it led to some job loss and displacement.
The negotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement began within months.  When completed, it was sold to the public by its promoters on both sides of the border as a migration-preventing device.  During the debate executives of companies belonging to USAÑNAFTA, the agreement's corporate lobbyist, walked the halls of Congress, wearing red, white and blue neckties.  They made extravagant claims that U.S. exports to Mexico would account for 100,000 jobs in its first year alone.
Some skeptics warned that the agreement would put downward pressure on wages and encourage attacks on unions, because its purpose was to create an environment encouraging investment and free markets. Their warnings were met with another promise -- that a parallel labor side agreement would establish a mechanism for protecting workers' rights.
Twenty years later, workers have a scorecard.  The promises of profits from increased investment and freer markets were kept.   But the promises of jobs and benefits for working people were not.   As the commission predicted, NAFTA did lead to increasing unemployment, displacement and poverty.  Workers in all three countries are still living with these devastating consequences, while the predicted long-range benefits never materialized.









missy ryan
reuters












kitabat