The following is an archived copy of a message sent to the CASI Analysis List run by Cambridge Solidarity with Iraq.
Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of Cambridge Solidarity with Iraq (CASI).
[Main archive index/search] [List information] [CASI Homepage]
[ This message has been sent to you via the CASI-analysis mailing list ] This is an automated compilation of submissions to firstname.lastname@example.org Articles for inclusion in this daily news mailing should be sent to email@example.com. Please include a full reference to the source of the article. Today's Topics: 1. Civil status courts must apply Islamic Sharia, IGC says (Daniel O'Huiginn) 2. U.N. to Play Key Role After June (ppg) 3. Free Market changes in Iraq (k hanly) 4. Jobless protest in Iraq: Five killed (k hanly) 5. Halliburton exonerated... (k hanly) 6. Halliburton the rest of the story (k hanly) 7. Iraqi National Congress under fire/Kuwait (ppg) 8. Early plans for Iraq invasion (k hanly) 9. Direct Election of Iraq Assembly pushed by cleric (Daniel O'Huiginn) --__--__-- Message: 1 Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 21:20:47 +0000 (GMT) From: Daniel O'Huiginn <do227@DELETETHIShermes.cam.ac.uk> To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Civil status courts must apply Islamic Sharia, IGC says http://www.iraqpress.org/homepage.asp?fname=ipenglish\2004-01-03\11.htm Civil status courts must apply Islamic Sharia, IGC says Baghdad, Iraq Press, January 3, 2004 . The Interim Governing Council has decided that Iraqi civil status courts should resort to the Islamic Sharia or code in their rulings. The secular regime of Saddam Hussein had passed laws that all matters related to marriage, divorce, birth, inheritance, etc. were required to be registered at government-run civil status courts. The regime had also passed civil status legislation which in many areas did not conform to the strict teaching of Islam. For example couples were under obligation to obtain medical examination in the light of the instructions from the court clerk. They also personally appeared in front of a judge and two witnesses. The IGC.s decision declares all civil status regulations issued by the ousted leader Saddam Hussein as null and void. Iraqis have the right now to follow the applications of their disparate religious denominations and sects rather than the unified civil status regulations prevalent under Saddam Hussein. The decision is apparently a blow to US efforts to set up a secular society and democracy in the country as an example for other Middle East states to follow. In the meantime it is a signal of the considerable influence Islamic factions wield in the country particularly the Muslim Shiite groups. Muslims, who make up 98 percent of the society, have the right now to follow centuries-old civil status traditions and codes which the former regime undermined because it saw as backward and uncivilized. Under the former regime civil status courts were the only authority capable of issuing official marriage, divorce or birth certificates. Many Iraqis still resorted to their clerics in such matters but papers issued by the clergy did not have the power of law. --__--__-- Message: 2 From: "ppg" <ppg@DELETETHISnyc.rr.com> To: <email@example.com> Subject: U.N. to Play Key Role After June Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 18:01:41 -0500 [ Presenting plain-text part of multi-format email ] washingtonpost.com http://tinyurl.com/yvhup Iraqi Leader Says U.N. to Play Key Role After June Reuters Saturday, January 10, 2004; 10:45 AM By Suleiman al-Khalidi BAGHDAD (Reuters) - The head of the U.S-appointed Iraqi Governing Council s= aid on Saturday the United Nations was prepared to take a key role in helpi= ng to draft a new constitution and holding elections in the country next ye= ar. Adnan Pachachi told Reuters his administration would discuss details of how= the world body, wary of returning to Iraq after its Baghdad offices were b= ombed last summer, could help in the transition to Iraqi sovereignty at a c= rucial meeting with Secretary-General Kofi Annan in New York on January 19. "The United Nations... have expressed readiness to play an important role i= n the constitutional process," Pachachi said, adding that the organization = could also help prepare the polls. Annan withdrew international staff from Iraq in October after two bomb atta= cks on the U.N. Baghdad headquarters, including one on August 19 which kill= ed 22 staff and visitors. Since then he has emphasized he would not send them back unless security im= proved -- and unless the U.N.'s political role was well-defined in contribu= ting to the country's future. Under a U.S.-backed plan, the Governing Council will be replaced by a trans= itional government at the end of June, a procedure known as "phase 1." In "= phase 2" a new constitution would be drawn up and general elections held ne= xt year. The U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Negroponte said after talks = with Annan on Friday: "I think that on phase 2 there isn't any doubt that t= he United Nations is prepared to play a robust role if it is asked to do so= by the Iraqis." ROLE BEFORE JUNE? Pachachi said he also wanted the United Nations to play a role in Iraq befo= re June. "We are going to inform them what Iraq expects of the U.N. and the= y will be able to tell us what the U.N. can do in the short interval," he s= aid. Officials within the governing council say greater U.N. involvement would l= end more credibility to a transition many ordinary Iraqis are skeptical wil= l lead to real independence. But many U.N. officials are wary of seeing the United Nations back in Baghd= ad while the U.S. occupation is in force. The United States and Britain, the two main countries in the coalition curr= ently governing Iraq, will both be at the January 19 meeting with Annan and= the Iraqi council. Pachachi echoed Washington's view it would be impossible to hold elections = before the June 30 transfer of power. "In order to have elections you have to have the electoral law you must hav= e a population census.. you must have voters registration.. all these thing= s take time," he said. Regarding the constitution, Pachachi said the council favored a federal sys= tem but it was too early to discuss details. "They should be decided by the= elected body which we hope will happen in 2005," he said. Iraq's majority Arabs fear a federal system giving greater rights to Kurds = will split the country on ethnic lines. =A9 2004 Reuters Reuters Saturday, January 10, 2004; 10:45 AM By Suleiman al-Khalidi BAGHDAD (Reuters) - The head of the U.S-appointed Iraqi Governing Council s= aid on Saturday the United Nations was prepared to take a key role in helpi= ng to draft a new constitution and holding elections in the country next ye= ar. Adnan Pachachi told Reuters his administration would discuss details of how= the world body, wary of returning to Iraq after its Baghdad offices were b= ombed last summer, could help in the transition to Iraqi sovereignty at a c= rucial meeting with Secretary-General Kofi Annan in New York on January 19. "The United Nations... have expressed readiness to play an important role i= n the constitutional process," Pachachi said, adding that the organization = could also help prepare the polls. Annan withdrew international staff from Iraq in October after two bomb atta= cks on the U.N. Baghdad headquarters, including one on August 19 which kill= ed 22 staff and visitors. Since then he has emphasized he would not send them back unless security im= proved -- and unless the U.N.'s political role was well-defined in contribu= ting to the country's future. Under a U.S.-backed plan, the Governing Council will be replaced by a trans= itional government at the end of June, a procedure known as "phase 1." In "= phase 2" a new constitution would be drawn up and general elections held ne= xt year. The U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Negroponte said after talks = with Annan on Friday: "I think that on phase 2 there isn't any doubt that t= he United Nations is prepared to play a robust role if it is asked to do so= by the Iraqis." ROLE BEFORE JUNE? Pachachi said he also wanted the United Nations to play a role in Iraq befo= re June. "We are going to inform them what Iraq expects of the U.N. and the= y will be able to tell us what the U.N. can do in the short interval," he s= aid. Officials within the governing council say greater U.N. involvement would l= end more credibility to a transition many ordinary Iraqis are skeptical wil= l lead to real independence. But many U.N. officials are wary of seeing the United Nations back in Baghd= ad while the U.S. occupation is in force. The United States and Britain, the two main countries in the coalition curr= ently governing Iraq, will both be at the January 19 meeting with Annan and= the Iraqi council. Pachachi echoed Washington's view it would be impossible to hold elections = before the June 30 transfer of power. "In order to have elections you have to have the electoral law you must hav= e a population census.. you must have voters registration.. all these thing= s take time," he said. Regarding the constitution, Pachachi said the council favored a federal sys= tem but it was too early to discuss details. "They should be decided by the= elected body which we hope will happen in 2005," he said. Iraq's majority Arabs fear a federal system giving greater rights to Kurds = will split the country on ethnic lines. =A9 2004 Reuters --__--__-- Message: 3 From: "k hanly" <khanly@DELETETHISmb.sympatico.ca> To: <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Free Market changes in Iraq Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 20:11:51 -0600 [[New York Times] January 10, 2004 Free-Market Iraq? Not So Fast By DAPHNE EVIATAR There is no doubt about American intentions for the Iraqi economy. As Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has said, "Market systems will be favored, not Stalinist command systems." And so the American-led coalition has fired off a series of new laws meant to transform the economy. Tariffs were suspended, a new banking code was adopted, a 15 percent cap was placed on all future taxes, and the once heavily guarded doors to foreign investment in Iraq were thrown open. In a stroke, L. Paul Bremer III, who heads the Coalition Provisional Authority, wiped out longstanding Iraqi laws that restricted foreigners' ability to own property and invest in Iraqi businesses. The rule, known as Order 39, allows foreign investors to own Iraqi companies fully with no requirements for reinvesting profits back into the country, something that had previously been restricted by the Iraqi constitution to citizens of Arab countries. In addition, the authority announced plans last fall to sell about 150 of the nearly 200 state-owned enterprises in Iraq, ranging from sulfur mining and pharmaceutical companies to the Iraqi national airline. But the wholesale changes are unexpectedly opening up a murky area of international law, prompting thorny new questions about what occupiers should and should not be permitted to do. While potential investors have applauded the new rules for helping rebuild the Iraqi economy, legal scholars are concerned that the United States may be violating longstanding international laws governing military occupation. History provides limited guidance. The United States signed both the Hague Regulations of 1907 and the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 and has incorporated their mandates regarding occupation into the Army field manual "The Law of Land Warfare." But foreign armies, whether the Vietnamese in Cambodia, the Turks in Northern Cyprus or the United States in Panama and Haiti, have rarely declared themselves to be occupying forces. After World War II, for example, the Allies claimed the Hague regulations did not apply because they had sovereign power in Germany and Japan, which had surrendered. And although most of the world calls Israel's control of the West Bank and Gaza since 1967 an occupation, the Israeli government has not accepted that status, although it has said it will abide by occupation law. Reconstruction and privatization in Kosovo, for example, have been bitterly debated. The United Nations authority over Kosovo, set up by the peace treaty after a war that was unsanctioned by the United Nations, hesitated to privatize what was in essence seized state property, but it decided the economic future of Kosovo was too important to wait for a final peace settlement that would fix Kosovo's legal status. The government in Belgrade and the much-reduced Serbian community in Kosovo have argued that such sales are specifically forbidden in the United Nations resolution setting up the authority itself. This dispute, though similar, sidesteps questions of occupation law because Kosovo, unlike Iraq, involves United Nations and NATO forces. In Iraq the latest pronouncements by the Security Council only add to the muddle. Resolution 1483, issued in May, explicitly instructs the occupying powers to follow the Hague Regulations and the Geneva Convention, but in a strange twist it also suggests that the coalition should play an active role in administration and reconstruction, which many scholars say violates those treaties. The conflict centers on Article 43 of the Hague Regulations, which says an occupying power must "re-establish and insure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country." In other words, the occupying power is like a temporary guardian. It is supposed to restore order and protect the population but still apply the laws in place when it arrived, unless those laws threaten security or conflict with other international laws. "Under the traditional law the local law should be kept unchanged as much as possible," said Eyal Benvenisti, professor of international law at Tel Aviv University and author of "The International Law of Occupation" (Princeton, 1993). Repairing roads, factories and telephone systems, then, is a legitimate way to get the economy running again. But transforming a tightly restricted, centrally planned economy into a free-market one may not be. In a memo written last March and leaked in May to The New Statesman, the British magazine, Lord Goldsmith, Prime Minister Tony Blair's top legal adviser, warned that "the imposition of major structural economic reforms" might violate international law, unless the Security Council specifically authorized it. Officials of the coalition authority insist the Security Council did that with Resolution 1483. They maintain that wiping out Saddam Hussein's entire economic system falls within Resolution 1483's instructions "to promote the welfare of the Iraqi people through the effective administration of the territory" and assist the "economic reconstruction and the conditions for sustainable development." So the authority is pressing ahead with most of the plans for economic reform in Iraq and promises to have new laws in Iraq governing, among other things, business ownership, foreign investment, banking, the stock exchange, trade and taxes by June, when power is to be transferred to the Iraqis. "We believe the C.P.A. can undertake significant economic measures in Iraq particularly where those measures support coalition objectives and the security of coalition forces," said Scott Castle, general counsel to the coalition. "There's a close nexus between the economic health of Iraq and the security of Iraq." Some experts in international law call that a stretch. "The Security Council cannot require you to comply with occupation law on one hand and on the other give you authority to run the country in defiance of that law," said David Scheffer, a professor of international law at Georgetown University and a former United States ambassador at large for war crimes issues. He added that "1483 is internally inconsistent." Order 39 "raises the biggest single question about coalition policy as it relates to the laws of war," said Adam Roberts, a professor of international relations at Oxford University and an editor of "Documents on the Laws of War" (Oxford, 2000). "That order embodies a major change not just in human rights or the political situation, but in the economic one. It would appear to go further in a free market direction and in allowing external economic activity in Iraq than what one would expect under the provisions of the 1907 Hague law about occupations." International business lawyers at a conference of investors in London in October similarly warned that the coalition authority's orders might not be legal. Part of the problem is that the old occupation law does not seem to fit the realities of modern warfare. As Mr. Benvenisti explains in his book and in a forthcoming article in the Israel Defense Forces law review, when the Hague regulations were initially drafted, war was understood to be a legitimate contest between professional armies, not a messy attempt to remove a tyrannical leader. "The Hague law reflects the interests of sovereigns to maintain their basis of power, their property and their institutions," Mr. Benvenisti said. Instead of wholesale transformation of a nation, then, occupation was supposed to be a short, transient state of affairs, with minimal intervention of the occupying authority in the lives of civilians. But in Iraq the United States' explicit goal is to completely remake Iraqi institutions and society. "Their objectives far exceed the constraints of the law," Mr. Scheffer said, noting that occupation laws were restrictive precisely in order to prevent overzealousness on the part of an occupying power. "We're squeezing transformation into a very tight square box called occupation law, and the two really are not a good match." In a forthcoming article in the American Journal of International Law, he sets forth a dozen possible violations by the occupying powers of international law, including failure to plan for and prevent the looting of hospitals, museums, schools, power plants, nuclear facilities, government buildings and other infrastructure; failure to maintain public order and safety during the early months of the occupation; and excessive civilian casualties. In the article Mr. Scheffer explains how individuals could use United States laws to sue individual coalition officials in American courts. "This is a rather uncharted field in U.S. jurisprudence," he said in an interview. "But I would not underestimate how far litigation might go." Ruth Wedgwood, a professor of international law at Johns Hopkins University and a member of the Defense Policy Board, which advises the Pentagon, is not so concerned. In her view the Iraqi laws do not deserve much deference because they were issued by an authoritarian government. "If it's not a democratically crafted law, it lacks the same legitimacy," she said. Coalition officials have recently backtracked on privatization, in part because of the legal concerns. "We recognize that any process for privatizing state-owned enterprises in Iraq ultimately must be developed, adopted, supported and implemented by the Iraqi people," Mr. Castle said. Still, some specialists worry that the radical economic changes that are moving forward will lack legitimacy in the eyes of Iraqi citizens. Iraqis may see such wholesale economic transformation as "threatening and potentially exploitative," said Samer Shehata, professor of Arab politics at Georgetown University. "I think the sensible answer is to leave extremely important decisions like the possibility of complete foreign ownership of firms to a later date, when a legitimate Iraqi government is elected by the Iraqi people in free and fair elections." --__--__-- Message: 4 From: "k hanly" <khanly@DELETETHISmb.sympatico.ca> To: <email@example.com> Subject: Jobless protest in Iraq: Five killed Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 20:39:58 -0600 http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s1023606.htm Five killed in Iraqi jobless protest Five Iraqis have been killed after British troops opened fire on protesters demanding jobs in the country's south. The violence began when Iraqi police believed they were the target of gunfire during a protest over high unemployment in the city of Amarah, Britain's Defence Ministry said in a statement in London. The police opened fire and British troops with armoured vehicles were deployed to support them, the Ministry said. The British troops also opened fire when grenades were hurled at them, it said. "It is our understanding that there have been six casualties, five fatalities and one injured," the Ministry said. It said it could give few details on the deaths, but no British or Iraqi police casualties were reported. A number of protests over lack of jobs have been staged in Iraq since Saddam Hussein was toppled by US-led forces last April and some have turned violent. --__--__-- Message: 5 From: "k hanly" <khanly@DELETETHISmb.sympatico.ca> To: "newsclippings" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Halliburton exonerated... Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 23:19:59 -0600 http://www.quicken.com/investments/news_center/story/?story=NewsStory/dowJones/20040106/ON200401060041000029.var&column=P0DFP WASHINGTON -- The head of the Army Corps of Engineers quietly exonerated Halliburton Co. (HAL, news) of any wrongdoing in a Kuwait fuel-delivery contract that Pentagon auditors asserted has overcharged the U.S. government by more than $100 million, Monday's Wall Street Journal reported. --__--__-- Message: 6 From: "k hanly" <khanly@DELETETHISmb.sympatico.ca> To: "newsclippings" <email@example.com> Subject: Halliburton the rest of the story Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 23:25:26 -0600 Army Corps Clears Halliburton in Iraq Fuel-Pricing Flap Tuesday, January 6, 2004 12:41 AM ET WASHINGTON -- The head of the Army Corps of Engineers quietly exonerated Halliburton Co. (HAL, news) of any wrongdoing in a Kuwait fuel-delivery contract that Pentagon auditors asserted has overcharged the U.S. government by more than $100 million, Monday's Wall Street Journal reported. In a previously undisclosed Dec. 19 ruling, the commander of the Corps, Lt. Gen. Robert Flowers, cleared Halliburton's Kellogg Brown & Root subsidiary of the need to provide "any cost and pricing data" pertaining to a no-bid contract to deliver millions of gallons of gasoline from Kuwait to Iraq. He acted after lower-level Army Corps officials concluded in a memo to him that Kellogg Brown & Root had provided enough data to show it had purchased the fuel and its delivery to Iraq at a "fair and reasonable price." The decision, which Halliburton itself requested, came after Halliburton's pricing of gasoline sold to the U.S. government exploded into public controversy last month when Defense Department auditors alleged that Kellogg Brown & Root, known as KBR, was significantly overcharging. While the auditors never accused the company of profiteering, when news of the audit broke, President Bush said that if Halliburton had overcharged for the fuel, he expected the company to repay the money. The ruling could undermine the continuing Pentagon audit of the company's fuel-delivery contract. Still, it will keep the fuel flowing in Iraq. Defense auditors had alleged in a Dec. 5 draft audit that KBR had picked a Kuwaiti supplier that was charging for gasoline almost twice the price asked by other suppliers in the region. The timing of the Flowers ruling - technically known as a "waiver" because it waives a requirement that the Halliburton unit provide data justifying its pricing - is sure to draw scrutiny on Capitol Hill. The waiver came just a week after Pentagon officials confirmed that a draft audit found that KBR fuel overcharges ran to $61 million through the end of September. Under a running Army Corps contract, that sum increased by around $20 million a month through the end of last year, officials said. Halliburton officials have said repeatedly in recent weeks that the company was delivering gasoline into Iraq from both Kuwait and Turkey at the fairest possible price. KBR has tried for months to get out of the fuel-delivery work, which is now set to be put out for competitive bid within the next three months. Wall Street Journal Staff Reporters Neil King Jr. and Susan Warren in Dallas contributed to this article. --__--__-- Message: 7 From: "ppg" <ppg@DELETETHISnyc.rr.com> To: <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Iraqi National Congress under fire/Kuwait Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 01:16:33 -0500 Kuwait Times http://tinyurl.com/37dnq Iraqi National Congress under fire for raising islands issue KUWAIT: A Kuwaiti daily called yesterday for declaring the Iraqi National Congress (INC) an enemy of Kuwait after its vice president urged the emirate lease two islands to Baghdad. However, there has been no official Kuwaiti comment on the issue. "If this position represents the INC, we in Kuwait should from this moment treat the group as enemies," Al-Watan wrote in a front-page editorial. INC vice president Mudhar Shawkat said in comments published by the Kuwaiti newspaper Al-Rai Al-Aam Thursday that the Gulf islands of Bubiyan and Warba were essential for Iraq's economic development. "Iraq's interests first of all lead us to demand that we should have such a water terminal on the Arabian Gulf," said Shawkat, whose remarks reminded Kuwaitis of a similar demand made by deposed Iraqi president Saddam Hussein two decades ago. The INC is headed by Ahmad Chalabi, a pro-US member of Iraq's interim Governing Council. "He (Shawkat) is following in the footsteps of Saddam Hussein and Abdelkarim Kassem," the Iraqi leader who threatened to occupy Kuwait in the early 1960s, Al-Watan said. Officially, Kuwait remained silent on the surprising proposal, but lawmakers lashed out at Shawkat, saying he was no better than Saddam. "The INC should focus on matters that bring the Iraqi and Kuwaiti peoples closer rather than raising suspicious issues that remind us of the ambitions of the deposed Iraqi president," MP Jassem Al-Kandari said in a statement. "By daring to make such a demand, the INC is symbolising the mentality of some Iraqis towards Kuwait," Sayed Mohammad Al-Mahri, head of Kuwaiti Shiite Clerics, said. But liberal columnist Abdullatif al-Duaij saw no problem in the request and even defended it. "The request to lease the two islands means total Iraqi recognition of Kuwait's ownership of the islands," Duaij wrote in Al-Qabas daily, saying this contrasted with Saddam's views towards Kuwait. Iraqi troops invaded Kuwait in August 1990 as Saddam claimed it as part of his country and annexed it, naming it Iraq's 19th province. A US-led multinational coalition evicted Iraqi troops from Kuwait seven months later. Saddam asked to lease the islands at the start of the 1980-1988 Iraq-Iran war. Although Kuwait backed Iraq in that conflict, it turned down the request. The Saudi newspaper Okaz on Saturday quoted Iraq's interim foreign minister Hoshyar Zebari as saying that leasing the two islands was not on the agenda of the US-installed Governing Council. Anyone who raises such issues would be aiming to undermine Iraqi-Kuwaiti relations, which have entered "a new stage" following Saddam's ouster, Zebari said. Kuwait has been studying the feasibility of establishing mega projects on Bubiyan, its largest island, which is uninhabited. The cabinet last Sunday gave the green light for authorities to prepare a feasibility study on building a huge port on the island to cater for both Kuwait and Iraq. If approved, the port's construction is expected to start within months. http://tinyurl.com/37dnq --__--__-- Message: 8 From: "k hanly" <khanly@DELETETHISmb.sympatico.ca> To: "newsclippings" <email@example.com> Subject: Early plans for Iraq invasion Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 11:35:44 -0600 http://www.sundayherald.com/39221 Former Bush aide: US plotted Iraq invasion long before 9/11 By Neil Mackay GEORGE Bush's former treasury secretary Paul O'Neill has revealed that the President took office in January 2001 fully intending to invade Iraq and desperate to find an excuse for pre-emptive war against Saddam Hussein. O'Neill's claims tally with long-running investigations by the Sunday Herald which have shown how the Bush cabinet planned a pre- meditated attack on Iraq in order to "regime change" Saddam long before the neoconservative Republicans took power. The Sunday Herald previously uncovered how a think-tank - run by vice-president Dick Cheney; defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld; Paul Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld's deputy; Bush's younger brother Jeb, the governor of Florida; and Lewis Libby, Cheney's deputy - wrote a blueprint for regime change as early as September 2000. The think-tank, the Project for the New American Century, said, in the document Rebuilding America's Defences: Strategies, Forces And Resources For A New Century, that: "The United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein". The document - referred to as a blueprint for US global domination - laid plans for a Bush government "maintaining US global pre- eminence, precluding the rise of a great-power rival, and shaping the international security order in line with American principles and interests". It also said fighting and winning multiple wars was a "core mission". O'Neill was fired in December 2002 as a result of disagreements over tax cuts. He is the first major Bush administration insider to attack the President. He likened Bush at cabinet meetings to "a blind man in a room full of deaf people", according to excerpts from a CBS interview to be shown today. "From the very beginning, there was a conviction that Saddam Hussein was a bad person and that he needed to go," O'Neill said. "For me, the notion of pre-emption, that the US has the unilateral right to do whatever we decide to do, is a really huge leap." O'Neill and other White House insiders have given the journalist Ron Suskind documents for a new book, The Price Of Loyalty, revealing that as early as the first three months of 2001 the Bush administration was examining military options for removing Saddam Hussein. "There are memos," Suskind told CBS. "One of them marked 'secret' says 'Plan for Post- Saddam Iraq'." Another Pentagon document entitled Foreign Suitors For Iraqi Oil Field Contracts talks about contractors from 40 countries and which ones have interests in Iraq. O'Neill is also quoted in the new book saying the President was determined to find a reason to go to war and he was surprised nobody on the National Security Council questioned why Iraq should be invaded. "It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it," said O' Neill. "The President saying, 'Go find me a way to do this.'" White House spokesman Scott McClellan rejected O'Neill's remarks. He said: "We appreciate his service. While we're not in the business of doing book reviews, it appears that the world according to Mr O'Neill is more about trying to justify his own opinions than looking at the reality of the results we are achieving on behalf of the American people." 11 January 2004 --__--__-- Message: 9 Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 11:28:13 +0000 (GMT) From: Daniel O'Huiginn <do227@DELETETHIShermes.cam.ac.uk> To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Direct Election of Iraq Assembly pushed by cleric This article mentions two examples of Iraqis asserting their authority against the CPA. Firstly Sistani (who seems to be emerging not just as one of the most significant figures in Iraqi politics, but also one of the most level-headed) is calling again for the direct elections. A Reuters piece on the same topic quotes him as saying: ""The ideal mechanism...is elections which a number of experts confirm can be held within coming months with an acceptable degree of credibility and transparency. If the transitional assembly is formed by a mechanism that doesn't have the necessary legitimacy, it wouldn't be possible for the government to perform a useful function." [http://www.reuters.com/locales/newsArticle.jsp;:4001bab9:cb45cafe39793276?type=worldNews&locale=en_IN&storyID=4106678] The NYT article also mentions that the IGC has issued an order which contradicts, or at least updates, CPA order 1, by tightening the de-baathification rules. I'm not sure whether the modification itself is a good or bad thing, but it's nice to see the IGC encroaching a little on CPA turf. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/12/international/middleeast/12IRAQ.html January 12, 2004 Direct Election of Iraq Assembly Pushed by Cleric By EDWARD WONG AGHDAD, Iraq, Jan. 11 The most influential Shiite cleric in Iraq said Sunday that members of an interim assembly must be chosen through direct elections, putting at risk White House plans to transfer sovereignty to Iraqis by July 1. His statement came despite continuing efforts to change the cleric's mind on the subject. The cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, issued an edict in late June that urged Iraqis to press for general elections and that forced American officials to scrap their original plans for writing a constitution. In November, he called again for direct elections, this time for an interim assembly, but said he would reconsider his decision if a United Nations delegation decided that such elections were not possible. In a statement issued Sunday, though, he essentially left no room for compromise by saying elections could be held "within the next months with an acceptable level of transparency and credibility." He added that an interim constitution being drafted by the Iraqi Governing Council and any agreement for American-led forces to remain in the country must be approved only by directly elected representatives. A senior member of the occupying authority said members of the Iraqi Governing Council, who have been negotiating with the ayatollah on the issue, would continue to do so, though efforts so far have been in vain. Ayatollah Sistani is the most respected cleric here among Shiite Muslims, who make up 60 to 70 percent of Iraq's population but have never ruled Iraq in modern times. General elections would favor the Shiites, and experts have warned that ethnic and religious tensions would increase if elections were held quickly. Guarantees of rights for Iraq's other groups, including Sunni Arabs and Kurds, might also be jeopardized. In another sign that Iraqis were asserting their power, the Governing Council issued new guidelines on Sunday for removing former members of the Baath Party from government jobs. Similar to the previous guidelines, set up by the Coalition Provisional Authority in May, the new ones call for the automatic dismissal of anyone who belonged to the top four levels of the party or held the top three jobs in a ministry. But the new rules allow only members of the fourth level or lower to appeal such dismissals, rather than anyone fired, as is the case now. It also gives those people the option of taking a pension if they choose not to appeal. The appeals from those who are entitled to file them would be reviewed by two committees. A former Baathist who chooses to retire and take a pension would forfeit the right to appeal. The earlier process allowed any Baathist fired to appeal but did not provide the pension option, said a senior coalition official. Ahmad Chalabi, the council member leading the process, estimated that 28,000 former Baathists had already been purged and that at least that many more would be dismissed. He added that the Governing Council would soon put out guidelines on purging employees in private companies. The official from the provisional authority disputed Mr. Chalabi's numbers, saying American officials had estimated that, all told, 15,000 to 30,000 people or 1.5 to 3 percent of the Baathists in Iraq would be purged. When asked about Ayatollah Sistani's latest demand for direct elections, the senior official for the occupying authority said American administrators were pushing ahead with their plans for putting together an interim assembly. Those plans, outlined in an agreement reached between the authority and the Governing Council on Nov. 15, call for caucus-style elections throughout Iraq's 18 provinces by May 31 for members of the interim assembly. That assembly would then appoint officers to the interim government. "We are working on implementing the Nov. 15 agreement," the official said. "We've got to move forward on this agreement." The official said the provisional authority was letting the Governing Council negotiate with Ayatollah Sistani, adding, "It's so important they take the lead." Ayatollah Sistani's statement was issued by his office, though, shortly after he met in Najaf, the southern Shiite holy city, with a delegation from the Governing Council led by Adnan Pachachi, its current leader. Following the ayatollah's objections to the American plans in June, the White House came up with the Nov. 15 accord with its caucus-style elections. That prompted the ayatollah to tell a prominent Shiite politician that he wanted direct elections for an interim assembly. His statement on Sunday said, "The ideal mechanism is an election, which many experts believe is possible to hold within the next months and with an acceptable level of transparency and credibility." Ayatollah Sistani's statement also called for directly elected representatives to approve an interim constitution, which is being drafted by the Governing Council. The Nov. 15 agreement states that such a constitution needs the approval only of the council and the provisional authority. Signs are emerging of a tenuous security situation in parts of southern Iraq, generally considered calmer than the north. On Saturday, an Iraqi-American man working for the occupying authority and an Iraqi man were found shot to death near a highway south of Basra, said Capt. Saddam Mortaza of the Basra police. The men had been blindfolded and their hands had been tied behind their backs, then they were shot in the head and dumped by a trash heap, Captain Mortaza said. He identified the Iraqi-American who was killed as Majid Shanan Hanoun. In the southern town of Amara, hundreds of protesters armed with rocks and homemade bombs attacked British soldiers outside the city hall. That riot was a reaction to events on Saturday, when six people were killed by gunfire from Iraqi policemen and possibly from British soldiers during a protest over the lack of jobs. A British Army spokesman told Reuters that soldiers had fired in self-defense and had "possibly killed" one or two of the six victims. End of casi-news Digest _______________________________________ Sent via the CASI-analysis mailing list To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.casi.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/casi-analysis All postings are archived on CASI's website at http://www.casi.org.uk