Bad cops, good cops (22)

December 11, 2006

The word of the air strike came around mid-morning. I was actually the one to take the call from our stringer in Samarra. He said 32 people had been killed in an American air strike somewhere to the south according to local government official Amr something-or-other and he was heading towards the site, then the line went dead.

We tried to call him back later, because you can’t give a story based on the word of Amr something-or-other, certainly not an Americans-killed-dozens-of-people kind of story, but he’d either moved out of coverage area or the appalling Iraqi mobile networks were having another miserable day.

Then the press release came. “20 Al-Qaeda terrorists killed” in a midnight airstrike about 80 kilometers north of Baghdad. The wording in these things are key. As US ground forces approached a target site, they were suddenly fired upon, forcing them to return fire – killing two “terrorists”. “Coalition Forces continued to be threatened by enemy fire, causing forces to call in close air support.”

They really had no choice, it seems.

Continue reading Bad cops, good cops (22)

Better late than never?

I read the recommendations and descriptions of the Iraq Study Group report wit a mixture of elation and rage. Elation because this was the final nail in the coffin of the whole incredibly destructive US neo-con mission to remake the Middle East. It was the reassertion of traditional realpolitik over US policy — not necessarily the best and most constructive approach, but certainly less destructive that Bush Jr. and his psychopaths. I’m sure many would say it’s not even the lesser of two evils, but under the cold calculating approach by people like Baker and the others, Iraq would not have been so horrifically destabilized. As the cartoon in the Guardian said, it was time for the adults to get back into politics. God save us from the visionaries.

Steve

But if the price for Bush’s humiliation was the wholesale dismantling of Iraq’s social fiber, was it really worth it? And that’s where the rage comes in. It’s a good report, it’s familiar reading because all of us – media, Iraqis, international organizations – have been saying this for years. Where the hell was this panel a year and a half ago before got quite so awful?

Why do these old fogies say it and everyone, including the president, nod sagaciously and accept it, while everyone else was ignored before. The upbeat military weekly military press conferences, the blog attacks on the “liberal media�, the Bush administration’s defense of the situation … suddenly it’s all gone, as though it never was, and everyone seems to have no problem acknowledging that the situation in Iraq has become beyond awful.

Better late than never. I guess.

Unless of course it’s too late.

The Iraq Study Group Report

Reading commentary on the release of the Baker-Hamilton report on Iraq, you get the impression that some people expected a report to end the civil war and are disappointed that it didn’t.

One interesting thing in the report is that apparently the US embassy in Baghdad has only six fluent Arabic speakers. Another is that the Iraq war is costing eight billion US dollars a month, with an eventual total cost of some two trillion dollars. At the risk of sounding completely insensitive to the plight of Iraqis under Saddam Hussein (I am not) I think I would rather have Saddam untoppled and that money would have been better spent on virtually any global problem such as global warming, food security, human, drugs, and arms traffic control, economic development in the Third World, AIDS, etc. Of course that might not have been as good for the bottom line of big business.

Hosni’s wisdom

Hosni Mubarak on whether the US should stay or leave Iraq:

DUBLIN: An immediate withdrawal of US troops from Iraq would be dangerous but staying is also risky, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak said in an interview published on Wednesday.

He said while talking to a daily newspaper that Iraq needs a strong leader but he did not name anyone.

“I don’t want to mention any names now,” he said in an interview before his first visit to Ireland, which starts on Wednesday and is part of a tour including France and Germany.

The names on Hosni’s mind: Hosni Mubarak, Gamal Mubarak, Safwat Sherif. OK, actually he probably means a nice former Baathist he can get along with. Just not one of those pesky Shias.

Fish ‘n chips-eating surrender monkeys

This article from the NYT from Dec. 2 about a British initiative in Afghanistan’s Helmand province caught my eye. After fighting the Taliban in Musa Qala district, British forces “who had been under siege by the Taliban in a compound there for three months� brokered a ceasefire with Taliban forces and local government – and pulled out.

In the words of one Afghan lawmaker:

“The Musa Qala project has sent two messages: one, recognition for the enemy, and two, military defeat,” said Mustafa Qazemi, a member of Afghanistan’s Parliament and a former resistance fighter with the Northern Alliance, which fought the Taliban for seven years.

. . .

Some compare the deal to agreements that Pakistan has struck with leaders in its tribal areas along the Afghan border, which have given those territories more autonomy and, critics say, empowered the Taliban who have taken sanctuary there and allowed them to regroup.

What’s so interesting about this is that this is essentially what the British did in southern Iraq. They gave up. No one really likes to talk about it, and they are extremely difficult to embed with, but more and more people are starting to recognize that the one place coalition forces really suffered a defeat was in the south.

The Brits don’t patrol in Basra anymore, they largely just stay in their compound and get shelled every night. US bases get shelled too, but then they do something about it and the shelling stops.

Their most famous move was their abrupt withdrawal from Amara, capital of Maysan province, where they were rocketed every night by Mahdi militia. So with no warning to Iraqi authorities, they declared their mission in Amara complete, pulled out and “redeployed� to the Iranian border to conduct “World War II-style� desert patrol tactics. Somehow trying to turn a retreat into a evocation of the glories of the North Africa campaign.

The base in Amara, meanwhile was sacked by the Mahdi militia because Iraqi authorities hadn’t been given enough time to take control of it.

Since their departure, there have been pitched battles in Amara between Mahdi militia and police (who are controlled by the rival Badr Brigade Shiite militia).

Now don’t get me wrong, Iraq’s a tough place and each army has to make its decision about how to deal with it, but the British enjoy so much describing how they do everything better than the Americans.

In the beginning of their Basra occupation, they described how their years of experience occupying Northern Ireland made them expert at a light touch and winning the inhabitants’ trust.

Now, as they are talking about pulling out, the city is dangerous place awash in battles between rival militias and gangs making millions off the oil smuggling. The Brits just let them take over, and when it got too dangerous, they stopped leaving their base. And now they are leaving entirely.

In Afghanistan, when the fighting suddenly became hot. They appear to be doing the same thing.

So my question is, who are the real surrender monkeys?

Slaughter House Iraq

Trust Patrick Cockburn to see the big pictures that papers like the Post and the Times don’t seem to want to admit.

Civil war is raging across central Iraq, home to a third of the country’s 27 million people. As Shia and Sunni flee each other’s neighbourhoods, Iraq is turning into a country of refugees.

The UN High Commissioner for Refugees says that 1.6 million are displaced within the country and a further 1.8 million have fled abroad. In Baghdad, neighbouring Sunni and Shia districts have started to fire mortars at each other. On the day Saddam Hussein was sentenced to death, I phoned a friend in a Sunni area of the capital to ask what he thought of the verdict. He answered impatiently that “I was woken up this morning by the explosion of a mortar bomb on the roof of my next-door neighbour’s house. I am more worried about staying alive myself than what happens to Saddam.”

Iraqi friends used to reassure me that there would be no civil war because so many Shia and Sunni were married to each other. These mixed couples are now being compelled to divorce by their families. “I love my husband but my family has forced me to divorce him because we are Shia and he is Sunni,” said Hiba Sami, a mother, to a UN official. “My family say they [the husband’s family] are insurgents … and that living with him is an offence to God.” Members of mixed marriages had set up an association to protect each other called the Union for Peace in Iraq but they were soon compelled to dissolve it when several founding members were murdered.

Saudis want to ‘protect’ Iraqi Sunnis

The craziest and most dangerous article I have seen in a long time. If the Saudis really started massively arming and financing Sunni insurgent groups in Iraq, we’d probably have a 20-year Persian Gulf war.

Over the past year, a chorus of voices has called for Saudi Arabia to protect the Sunni community in Iraq and thwart Iranian influence there. Senior Iraqi tribal and religious figures, along with the leaders of Egypt, Jordan and other Arab and Muslim countries, have petitioned the Saudi leadership to provide Iraqi Sunnis with weapons and financial support. Moreover, domestic pressure to intervene is intense. Major Saudi tribal confederations, which have extremely close historical and communal ties with their counterparts in Iraq, are demanding action. They are supported by a new generation of Saudi royals in strategic government positions who are eager to see the kingdom play a more muscular role in the region.

Because King Abdullah has been working to minimize sectarian tensions in Iraq and reconcile Sunni and Shiite communities, because he gave President Bush his word that he wouldn’t meddle in Iraq (and because it would be impossible to ensure that Saudi-funded militias wouldn’t attack U.S. troops), these requests have all been refused. They will, however, be heeded if American troops begin a phased withdrawal from Iraq. As the economic powerhouse of the Middle East, the birthplace of Islam and the de facto leader of the world’s Sunni community (which comprises 85 percent of all Muslims), Saudi Arabia has both the means and the religious responsibility to intervene.

On the upside, this would probably bring down the al-Sauds in the long term. But probably even then, it’s not worth it. One also wonders whether its publication (alongside with that leaked Hadley memo) isn’t meant to scare Maliki for his meeting with Bush.

Mountains and plains (21)

November 24, 2006

It was just such a classic Baghdad return. The sky was hazy and overcast as we drove back from the airport. The traffic was bad, a convoy of SUVs featuring guys with assault rifles hanging out of the window came blaring past. And then back at the office a bombing that killed 25 people in a Shiite neighborhood soon mushroomed into stunning death toll of over 200.

Soon I was scribbling away, updating stories, answering calls from radio stations describing the latest “brutal” attack in Baghdad and the ongoing “civil war” or was it just a “sectarian conflict” as bombs “rip apart” the neighborhood in a city “convulsed” by violence as the “fabric of society frays” or whatever other cliché I’ve gotten so used to using to describe the nasty situation here.

And there, barely, at the edge of it all, are the memories of the mountains I had been in just that morning. I want to go back to the northern Iraq, the border with Iran. To the clean, crisp air, the rugged terrain, snow-capped mountains, and idealistic young guerillas in the baggy Kurdish trousers and vests of their revolutionary uniform.

Continue reading Mountains and plains (21)

Too much TV (20)

My friend Abu Ray, a journalist in Baghdad, sends regular personal dispatches from there. His latest is about something we both like a lot — Battlestar Galactica. This season (the third) is replete with references to tawhid, the Islamic concept of monotheism or “oneness of God” that is unfortunately more famous as a jihadi terms. Not only that, but the humans engage in suicide bombing operations against the Cylon occupier and then debate the morality of it. All in all, a lot of the stuff in this season hits close to home if you’re living in the Middle East. Here’s Paul’s take on the unsettling parallels between his job as a journalist and what he watches on his downtime.

Today two suicide bombers walked into a police commando recruitment center and blew themselves up, killing 35 recruiting hopefuls. The night before I watched a TV show where a young cadet blew himself up at the police graduation ceremony – killing, as I recall, 35 people.

That was a bit of a shock.

The moments after I leave the desk at night, after a long shift, are very special to me. I read, listen to music, decompress and drink my whiskey. Most importantly I watch the movies that I’ve been patiently downloading while in Egypt, or copying off friends.

The best things are television series, discrete one hour shows – they aren’t too long and don’t require too much brain power. Frankly after a day on the desk my attention span is pretty shot.

For the last few months the series that’s been really holding my attention is the remake of Battlestar Galactica. No surprise, I’m a big geek from way back and have learned to live with it. Actually, the series is quite good. I was also heartened to discover that it’s a big hit over at the LA Times and NY Times houses.

By season three, though this well written, well acted series which had been liberally borrowing from the politics of real life turned chilling.

The last remnants of the human race were now occupied by the evil robot foe (the “Cylons”). So they formed a resistance, an insurgency and started planting bombs and attacking their occupiers.

They hide their weapons in the places of worship, prompting unfortunate raids and massacres. The Cylons then recruit a local police force of humans. The insurgency responds by sending suicide bombers into the graduation ceremonies.

The police force then carry out midnight raids, rounding up the humans, putting flex cuffs on their wrists and hoods over their heads and driving them off in trucks into the wilderness to execute them.

I admit it, the metaphors are mixed. US soldiers put flex cuffs on people and bags over their heads, while it was Saddam’s soldiers took people out into the wilderness to shoot them down. But you get the point.

It was like a kick in the stomach, my entertainment turned against me. Science Fiction, the ultimate escapism, wasn’t letting me escape any more.

I watched the show and remembered a US lieutenant colonel explaining that the first rule of counter insurgency was to recruit a native police force.

I recalled being on a raid where they arrested so many people they had to radio for more flex cuffs to bind people’s hands.

And it was only a few weeks ago that I sat in Saddam’s court room and heard two witnesses for the prosecution describe how they were driven out into the desert in trucks in the middle of the night. And then, as they sat, stinking of their own fear, they heard machine gun fire as the people in each truck were taken out and shot in the desert.

The witnesses survived because when it was their turn, they rushed the guards, most died, but these two stumbled across a moonlit, nightmarish desert filled with shallow graves, and escaped.

The most arresting thing about the whole series, though, is the way the good guys are the insurgents. The big metal machines oppressing the people are clearly meant to be the helmet and flak-jacketed US troops with their Iraqi police allies.

And the insurgents argue among themselves about civilian casualties and the morality of suicide bombing while the Cylons debate whether the occupation is worthwhile and if they should pull out.

Do you get the feeling the show’s writers are trying to tell us something? It’s been a long time since I’ve been back to the States or watched much TV – makes me wonder if it’s all getting like this.

It does, however, put the recent election win for the Democrats a little more context. I reckon I spend a few more years out here and the States may actually return to what it was when I left almost a decade ago.

Every now and then, when I’d be out with the US soldiers, hunting insurgents, winning hearts and minds or whatever it is that we were supposed to be doing out there, some soldier would sort of offhand remark that, “well, yeah, I mean if someone occupied by hometown, I guess I’d be fighting them too… certainly better than these guys.”

In another twist, the human-looking occupiers are extremely religious – they believe in the one true God while the humans are polytheists (Zeus, Apollo, and what not). At one point one of the Cylons looks earnestly at a human and reminds them that “there is no god, but God.”

Oh god.

Of course, I hope the show doesn’t take the metaphor too close to heart. If full scale civil war breaks out between the cast members, I think it just might break my heart. As it is I have to turn up the volume some nights or wear ear phones because of the mortar barrages between rival Sunni and Shiite neighborhoods outside my window.