Back Towards The Locus

The consequences of the “surge” have inspired a lot of applause but very little analysis, presumably on the grounds that a) they seem to be good, and, thusly, b) any further prodding will just jinx the damn thing. The trouble is that the strategy has never been a panacea, but a plaster slapped over a ballistic trauma.

The “surge”, itself preceded by massive ethnic cleansing and ghettoisation, has been dependent upon two factors: the ceasefire of the Mehdi Army and the hefty bribes paid to Sunni militias.

The bribes ended a couple of weeks ago, yet the hoped for integration of militiamen into the government has been worryingly slow…

In interviews with leaders from a dozen local Awakening Councils, nearly all complained that full-time jobs were lacking, that pay was in arrears and that members were being arrested despite promises of amnesty.

I noted this last Summer when Maliki targeted hundreds of members of the Awakenings groups. The fear that former insurgents have “just changed their t-shirts” is clearly still potent, and seems to be turning his government against assimilation and towards, well, futile belligerence.

Back to the NYT…

Perhaps most ominously, many expressed concern this might drive some followers back to Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, a largely Iraqi group with some foreign leadership, at a time when both Iraqi and American military commanders say that the group seems to be making gains, small but worrisome, around Baghdad.

The interesting Musings On Iraq blog comments…

The causes are probably a mix of the notoriously slow Iraqi bureaucracy and political unwillingness on the part of some Shiites to accept the Sunnis fighters, many of which were former insurgents. Added to this is the much larger problem of the country’s budget crisis. There is little money to fund the expansion of any of the ministries and security forces right now, let alone hire almost 100,000 SOIs unless the price of oil increases. As a result, the ultimate plight of many of the SOI may be the unemployment line.

The closing sentence is more pessimistic than it sounds. Unemployed militiamen – disproportionately discontented(pdf) and facing horrific violence – could make Yosser Hughes look like a kitten.

On that theme, Spencer Ackerman offers this interesting, if nauseatingly answerable, question…

Let’s say the Iraqi government doesn’t hire the extra ex-insurgents, and instead arrests many of them. Does the Sunni community from which most of the ex-insurgents come from support a return to insurgency in that case? The recent ABC public opinion poll in Iraq suggests that Iraqis in general want a return to normalcy, but Arab Sunnis still lag behind Arab Shiites and Kurds in terms of political contentment. To oversimplify matters considerably: at what point would the Sunnis — who have already stepped back from the violent abyss once this year — say they’ve had the Shiite-led government break too many promises?

In his latest SOS distress call Michael Gove does something pretty extraordinary: he doesn’t just try to polish a turd, he displays the wretched thing with pride and demands that we admire it…

“The liberation of Iraq has been that rarest of things – a proper British foreign policy success.”

There are a few flimsy justifications for the invasion. One claims that if, over the next decades, Iraq does become a secular, liberal democracy the whole thing will be justified from a consequentialist viewpoint. This can be safely bracketed beside the classic “if I dig long enough I’ll pop out on the other side of the world” theory.

The arguments that Gove employs have even less nuance, but do show something interesting. However it’s been minimised or ‘rationalised’ – including, I’m ashamed to say, by myself – the Iraq War appears to be indefensible. I can’t find an argument suggests that it was an entirely meritous decision, that isn’t limp, fallacious or entirely worthy of a facepalm.

In our obfuscating, contrarian world that seems kind of odd, but the sheer shittiness of Gove’s arguments wholly support that view…

“You Wouldn’t Want That Nasty Mr Hussein Back, Would You…”

“Sunni and Shia contend for power in parliament, not in street battles. The ingenuity, idealism and intelligence of the Iraqi people can now find an outlet in a free society rather than being deployed, as they were for decades, simply to ensure survival in a fascist republic that stank of fear.”

A republic of fear, eh? That’s, er, original.

“There was no security worth the name, with lives, literally, at Saddam’s disposal – the only freedom from his police state was the release which death brought.”

The problem with this argument is that, as the figures support an opposing view, one is wholly reliant upon rhetorical bluster. Since the initiation of the war up to 1.2 million people have died violently*, while over 4.7 million have been forced to leave their homes.

Meanwhile, the values that apologists and interventionists rightly hold dear haven’t found a hold. While women’s rights had degenerated following the first Gulf War, they’ve only worsened post-invasion…

“Iraqi women are enduring unprecedented levels of assault in the public sphere, “honor killings,” torture in detention, and other forms of gender-based violence. Women are not only being targeted because they are members of the civilian population. Women—in particular those who are perceived to pose a challenge to the political project of their attackers—have increasingly been targeted because they are women.”

And while gay rights had come under increasing attack from Hussein’s regime, life was never as hideous as it’s now become…

“What is happening today in Iraq is one of the most organised and systematic sexual cleansings in the history of the world. Attacks have escalated into unprecedented levels of homophobic violence, including targeted assassinations. The United Nations Assistance Mission in Iraq (UNAMI) has recently, for the first time, confirmed that there are organised campaigns to kill gays in Iraq. These killings are taking place on the order of Iraq’s Shia leaders. The UNAMI Human Rights Office recently reported that it was ‘alerted to the existence of religious courts, supervised by clerics, where alleged homosexuals would be ‘tried,’ ’sentenced’ to death, and then executed.”

Still, Gove has one final, killer blow…

“Saddam was a sponsor of terror and was manoeuvring, with French and Russian help, to dismantle the sanctions regime that had held him in place since the invasion of Kuwait.”

Yup, it were the Frogs and Russkies. Nice going, Michael.

How About That Surge, Eh? Phwoooah!

Apologists for the war and the ideological baggage swinging about therein cling to the “Surge” like a comfort blanket…

“For the Bush Administration it meant a little positive PR, for the neocons it was a fine demonstration of the healing might of America military power, while for decentist ostriches such as, at one time, myself, it gave hope to the wildly utopian notion of establishing secular democracy wherever one sees fit.”

Gove does slightly better than most in praising the initial Awakenings Councils, albeit indirectly. Still, he can’t repress his desire to slobber over the Christ-like visage of General Patraeus…

“Petraeus showed an admirable capacity to learn from previous reverses and has established himself as the world’s leading expert in counter-insurgency warfare. The myth of the American army as a collection of rednecks in body armour – the cast of the Dukes of Hazzard in the costumes of the stormtroopers from Star Wars – should now be laid to rest by Petraeus’s success.

The deserved winner of Prospect Magazine’s award for intellectual of the year, Petraeus is a reminder of the fatal folly of underestimating America.”

This is the sort of rhetorical lift music that Petraeus’s supporters prefer to repeat. After all, ethnic cleansing and ghettoisation in Baghdad, the temporary ceasefire of the Mehdi Army and the paid gangsters who’ll take up their guns if they don’t get their cheques make things that little bit more complicated to explain.

THE ULTIMATE SHOE THROWER GAMBIT

It’s true: if you throw a show at a figure of authority you’re less likely to be killed. Have a fucking lollipop.

Get To The Point And Stop Pretending You Have Any Semblance Of Superiority Over This Worthless Koala Bear

Sorry.

Gove’s piece is an extreme example of the kind of gas that runs through commentary on Iraq. The “rationalisation” of the catastrophe can reduce it to a series of hazy speculations, out of which any interpretation can be drawn.

To avoid this, any exploration of the subject should root itself in the filthiest details of the occupation. Thus, one can establish that the UK and US can’t merely progress from Iraq, but must progress in the knowledge that such actions should never be repeated.

* I’ve got about as much skill with statistics as I have with nuclear physics or the piano. Even if it’s substantially lower than this it’ll be in the hundreds of thousands.

“A former UN chief weapons inspector says he is ready to testify about the false US allegations which led to the Iraq war before a tribunal.

Hans Blix, in a Sunday interview with Al Jazeera television said he and the Head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Mohamed ElBaradei, were subjected to implicit threats from US Vice President Dick Cheney in the run-up to the Iraq war.

The former top UN inspector said Cheney had also threatened to defame ElBaradei and him if they refused to provide the “required” information on Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction.”

Via Chris Floyd, As’ad AbuKhalil considers the fate of Muntader al-Zaidi, an Iraqi journalist who demonstrated the nation’s anger and one hell of a throwing arm in chunking his shoes at George Bush’s head…

Having been crushed by the security services, Muntader was dragged out moaning “my hand, my hand“…

Mr. Maliki’s security agents jumped on the man, wrestled him to the floor and hustled him out of the room. They kicked him and beat him until “he was crying like a woman[.]”

He’s now being held in one of Baghdad’s Green Zone prisons, where “aggressive techniques” are all too popular. His family doesn’t know where he is or what’s being done to him, his colleagues are calling for his immediate release and thousands of Iraqis – even the most conservative among whom seem to wish he’d been wearing stilettos – are demonstrating.

A petition for his release has begun here, and I urge you to sign it. While we can all cheer George Bush’s shame, that shoe was – in one of those tiresomely poetic moments – a middle-finger to those of us that ignored or still ignore the tremendous suffering of the people.

Update:

“The Iraqi journalist who threw his shoes at George Bush has been beaten in custody, his brother said today.

Muntadhar al-Zaidi suffered a broken hand, broken ribs, internal bleeding and an eye injury, his older brother, Dargham, told the BBC. He has since been handed over to the Iraqi judiciary, a step that normally heralds a criminal case.”

The apparent success of the “Surge” was important for a number of pompous ideologues. For the Bush Administration it meant a little positive PR, for the neocons it was a fine demonstration of the healing might of America military power, while for decentist ostriches such as, at one time, myself, it gave hope to the wildly utopian notion of establishing secular democracy wherever one sees fit.

Not only were these successes a little anti-climactic, however, their roots were far darker than the military, politicians or media ever admitted.

In September, a study into satellite imagery over Baghdad suggested that “it was sectarian cleansing that led to the decrease in violence, as the Sunnis were ‘cleared out‘”. The researchers had discovered that lights dimmed disproportionately in Sunni dominated areas of Baghdad before the “surge” even had even begun.

Other pieces of evidence substantiated this proposition. Lazily, I’ll reproduce an extract from a summation that I wrote in October…

“In a hearing before the House Appropriations Committee, Joe Christoff of the GOA admitted that “we look at the attack data going down, but it’s not taking into consideration that there might be fewer attacks because you have ethnically cleansed neighborhoods“.

Indeed, the Pentagon Quarterly Report has suggested that, while 73% of Iraqis consider the security situation in their neighborhoods to be calm, only 37% feel safe travelling outside of their own neighborhoods. I think I’m safe in saying that that’s not due to snobbery.”

The ethnic cleansing noted by Christoff was, it seems likely, carried out by the Shiite “death squads” that have long been an influence in the Iraq National Police…

“Reports last week in the Los Angeles Times and New York Times chronicled how Iraqi Interior Ministry commando and police units have been infiltrated by two Shiite militias, which have been conducting ethnic cleansing and rounding up Sunnis suspected of supporting the insurgency. Hundreds of bodies have been appearing along roadsides and in garbage dumps, some with acid burns or with holes drilled in them. According to the searing account by Solomon Moore of the Los Angeles Times, “the Baghdad morgue reports that dozens of bodies arrive at the same time on a weekly basis, including scores of corpses with wrists bound by police handcuffs.”

As late as this January “many National Police units [were] still linked with Shiite death squads“. It’s not difficult to see how the “hundreds of bodies” could keep stacking up; exacerbating sectarian fears and inspiring the US to ghettoise Baghdad.

The recognition of this discreetly veiled reality is particularly important. The idealised notion of the “Surge” is necessary to Imperial PR, because when the Coalition forces eventually withdraw, and the country lurches through violence and deprivation, the perception will remain that the US gave Iraqis the opportunity for freedom and stability, only to see the chance squandered. Because the Iraqis can’t “take responsibility“. Because they’re “ingrates“.

Obama’s nomination of Eric Shinsenki to head the Department Of Veteran’s Affairs is his first truly pleasing decision.

Shinsenki is a clever man, not afraid to oppose his superiors, and one of his first acts should be to organise a meeting with these guys.

In a recent interview with Der Spiegel (h/t Think Progress) PNAC’s Robert Kagan was questioned as to the validity of the pre-Iraq intelligence. The huffing and puffing practically emanating from the page, he declared that…

“I think it’s about time we moved beyond this silly conversation and these absurd conspiracy theories. There is a real debate as to whether we should have gone to war in Iraq. And now we should have an intelligent discussion about the new challenges we face in Iraq and elsewhere.”

For the moment, I’ll pass over his absurd “conspiracy theory” tag, and focus on the notion of the “silly conversation”. The assumption is that an investigation into the motives/actions of the Bush Administration prior to the Iraq War would be regressive; sinking into introspection when the current needs of the country must be confronted.

I disagree, for two reasons: a) it’s generally assumed that administrations can multi-task and b) I’ve come to the belief that an investigation would be a profoundly progressive action. It would…

1. Enhance American democracy, by ensuring that Presidents, Senators and Presidential advisers are fully aware that they will be held accountable for the decisions that they make.
2. Strengthen the integrity of international law.
3. Further discredit the notion of benign American power, and yet – in showing that the people can hold their governing bodies accountable – enhance international perspectives of the US as a nation.

What’s not to like (unless you’re a member of PNAC)?

Now, my knowledge of legal technicalities is as bare as an empty fridge dumped onto the top of a rubbish heap, and so I can’t assert in all confidence that the legal basis for the war, as originally presented, was invalid. What I can be sure of, however, is that the architects and advocates around Bush and Blair lied to support their case. They lied to the UN, to the Senate, to the House of Commons and to the people of the UK and the USA.

To ensure that this can’t be denied, I’ve collected a little body of links that document all the necessary evidence…

The Half-Truths, The Distortions, The Falsehoods And The Lies

• Mother Jones has a comprehensive “Lie By Lie” timeline.

• The Centre For Public Integrity provides a hyyyowge database of Iraq-related pronouncements, and documents the key false statements.

• Chris Ames’s Iraq Dossier site sets out the sex-up and identifies the direct lies of Blair and Campbell.

• A Tiny Revolution lays out the lies of Colin Powell.

• DowningStreetMemo.com has a very useful “big picture” timeline, which helps one to understand the origins of the invasion. Elsewhere, they contrast the public statements with the secret realities and refute defences of Bush and Blair.

These lies are separate from mere errors, in that they directly contradicted the knowledge of the period. As so many have pointed out, if a President can be impeached for lying about a fling (and I don’t want to devalue the horrific psychological effect that the affair must have had on Ms Lewinsky) surely the Bush Administration can be held responsible for the lies that initiated a war that’s taken hundreds of thousands of lives (and billions of dollars).

The US military has banned Iraqi interpreters from wearing face masks. Their reasoning? Good ol’ fashioned professionalism, apparently…

“We are a professional Army and professional units don’t conceal their identity by wearing masks.”

Over 300 interpreters have been murdered since the beginning of the war, with many of them being raped, beheaded or tortured with drills. Kirk Johnson from the List Project has said that…

“We have hundreds of Iraqis writing to us in desperation and fear, most of whom fled because their affiliation became known.”

Indeed, interpreters are, apparently, already coming under attack…

“A 24-year-old interpreter who uses the name Jack and is assigned to a U.S. military base in Rustamiyah, a neighborhood in eastern Baghdad, said he was devastated when his supervisor told him in September that he could no longer wear a mask.

During his first patrol without a mask, “some bad guys” recognized him, he said. The next time he went home on vacation, his terrified mother told him someone had shot dozens of rounds at the family’s southern Baghdad house.”

The only conclusion – don’t work for the US (or UK) military; they’re bastards and will only let you down.