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 newsclippings@casi.org.uk Articles for inclusion in this daily news mailing should be sent to newsclippings@casi.org.uk. Please include a full reference to the source of the article. Today's Topics: 1. Emphasis on Iraq Remains, but From a Different Angle (cafe-uni) 2. Bush vows guerrillas will not stop Iraq handover (cafe-uni) 3. Talks under way as UN mulls Iraq mission (cafe-uni) 4. Iraq, Afghanistan are stretching U.S. troops to the limit (cafe-uni) --__--__-- Message: 1 From: "cafe-uni" <cafe-uni@DELETETHISfreeuk.com> To: "Casi News" <newsclippings@casi.org.uk> Subject: Emphasis on Iraq Remains, but From a Different Angle Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 15:55:25 -0000 http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/21/politics/21FORE.html?ex=1075266000&en=7f58 dad84522d325&ei=5062 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- January 21, 2004 DIPLOMACY Emphasis on Iraq Remains, but From a Different Angle By DAVID E. SANGER ASHINGTON, Jan. 20 - President Bush used his State of the Union Message on Tuesday night to answer directly the critics of his decision to invade Iraq, but he emphasized that country's "liberation," rather than the threat he has said its illicit weapons posed to the United States and the world. Mr. Bush's approach was a notable departure from the address he gave from the same place in 2003, when the last third of his speech listed, one by one, suspected stores of biological and chemical weapons that he asserted were still in the possession of Saddam Hussein. This year, after months of largely fruitless inspections, he devoted only two sentences to the subject and worded it carefully, saying that inspectors had identified "dozens of weapons of mass destruction-related program activities and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the United Nations." Mr. Bush made no reference to the continuing search for the weapons, in which an American-led team of inspectors working for nearly eight months has found no unconventional weapons or evidence of active programs to manufacture them. Instead, Mr. Bush took on the arguments heard from many of the Democratic candidates for president: that Mr. Bush acted prematurely, citing faulty evidence, and that with more time and care he could have built a true international coalition. Mr. Bush has addressed each of those arguments before, but on Tuesday night he put them all together, with a more assertive response than any he has offered before. "Had we failed to act," Mr. Bush said, "the dictator's weapons of mass destruction programs would continue to this day. Had we failed to act, Security Council resolutions on Iraq would have been revealed as empty threats, weakening the United Nations and encouraging defiance by dictators around the world. Iraq's torture chambers would still be filled with victims - terrified and innocent." "The killing fields of Iraq - where hundreds of thousands of men, women and children vanished into the sands - would still be known only to the killers," he added. Mr. Bush also addressed the critique that "our duties in Iraq must be internationalized," and without naming his critics, again led by the Democrats competing for the chance to face him in November, he suggested they were ill informed. He listed the nations that have committed troops to Iraq, including Japan and South Korea, which just joined the effort, and also took a shot at France and Germany for their opposition. "From the beginning, America has sought international support for operations in Afghanistan and Iraq and we have gained much support," Mr. Bush said. "There is a difference, however, between leading a coalition of many nations and submitting to the objections of a few. America will never seek a permission slip to defend the security of our country." But Mr. Bush never returned to the charges about Iraq that he leveled last Jan. 28, less than two months before he ordered the troops who had massed in Kuwait to topple the regime of Mr. Hussein. In that speech, he listed each intelligence finding that the C.I.A. had provided him with just months before: that Mr. Hussein had amassed anthrax and botulin, nerve agents and mobile biological weapons laboratories. As he named each one, he gave a variant of this conclusion: "He hasn't accounted for that material. He's given no evidence that he destroyed it." He concluded that "it is up to Iraq to show exactly where it is hiding its banned weapons." Gradually, some of Mr. Bush's aides are beginning to acknowledge that some of those stores were probably destroyed years ago, though they express bewilderment that Mr. Hussein provided no evidence of that to international inspectors before the invasion that ended his rule. In his address, Mr. Bush contrasted Mr. Hussein's decision, and his fate, to that of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, the Libyan leader, who agreed last month to dismantle his country's nascent nuclear weapons program. "Nine months of intense negotiations involving the United States and Great Britain succeeded with Libya," he said, "while 12 years of diplomacy with Iraq did not." He connected the two, saying, "for diplomacy to be effective, words must be credible, and no one can now doubt the word of America." As expected, Mr. Bush did not repeat his famous phrase "axis of evil" to describe North Korea and Iran. Mr. Bush has often expressed frustration in the past few months that with Mr. Hussein defeated, Americans no longer regard the country at war, though he clearly does. He repeated that frustration at midday on Tuesday, meeting with television anchors on a "background" basis, meaning that none of his statements were to be attributed directly to the president. He made the point at the opening of his address, when he warned Americans against going "back to the dangerous illusion that terrorists are not plotting and outlaw regimes are no threat to us." Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company | Home | Privacy Policy | Search | Corrections | Help | Back to Top --__--__-- Message: 2 From: "cafe-uni" <cafe-uni@DELETETHISfreeuk.com> To: "Casi News" <newsclippings@casi.org.uk> Subject: Bush vows guerrillas will not stop Iraq handover Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 15:56:01 -0000 http://www.reuters.com/locales/newsArticle.jsp?type=worldNews&locale=en_IN&s toryID=4172825 Bush vows guerrillas will not stop Iraq handover By Dean Yates BAGHDAD (Reuters) - U.S. President George W. Bush vowed guerrillas would not stop a planned handover of power to Iraqis, while Iraq's long-repressed majority Shi'ite Muslims demanded a bigger say in their political future. "We are dealing with these thugs (guerrillas) in Iraq just as surely as we dealt with Saddam Hussein's evil regime," Bush said in a State of the Union address to the U.S. Congress on Tuesday, pressing his case for re-election in November. Bush said the United States had been right to go to war in Iraq and that the world was a safer place since Saddam was toppled last April. "Had we failed to act, the dictator's weapons of mass destruction programmes would continue to this day," Bush said. Although no nuclear, chemical or biological arms have been found since Saddam was ousted, he said U.S. weapons expert David Kay had identified dozens of programmes. In last year's State of the Union address before U.S.-led forces invaded Iraq, Bush said Saddam possessed chemical and biological arms and was trying to build a nuclear weapon. Bush blamed attacks on U.S.-led forces on a "remnant of violent Saddam supporters....joined by foreign terrorists". "These killers...are a serious, continuing danger. Yet we are making progress against them," he said. "FREE AND PEACEFUL IRAQ" Presenting Adnan Pachachi, president of the U.S.-appointed Iraqi Governing Council, to the Congress, Bush said: "Sir, America stands with you and the Iraqi people as you build a free and peaceful nation." Bush urged Americans to stick with his leadership on Iraq, saying: "We have not come all this way -- through tragedy, and trial, and war -- only to falter and leave our work unfinished. "The work of building a new Iraq is hard, and it is right." Guerrillas fired a projectile, believed to be a rocket, at the compound housing the U.S.-led administration in Baghdad on Tuesday night and there were unconfirmed reports one person was wounded, the U.S. military said. The attack caused no major damage to buildings, the military said. The compound was previously one of Saddam's palaces. A suicide car bomb on Sunday just outside one of the main gates of the compound killed at least 25 people. Thousands of Shi'ites hit the streets of four Iraqi cities on Tuesday, calling on the United States to hand over Saddam to be tried as a war criminal and demanding a bigger say in their political future. Shi'ites were repressed during Saddam's three decades of iron rule. The rallies followed a march through Baghdad on Monday by tens of thousands of people from the Shi'ite community demanding direct elections to decide who controls Iraq when the United States hands back power in June. FIREBRAND LEADER Many of Tuesday's protesters were supporters of Moqtada al-Sadr, a firebrand religious leader who has expressed support for Iraq's most senior Shi'ite cleric Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani. Sistani and his followers have proven a thorn for the United States by opposing its plans to let regional caucuses appoint a transitional authority to take power at the end of June, instead of letting all Iraqis vote. "We demand elections or we will bury every American here," said one Shi'ite cleric, Sattar Jabbar. In Baghdad, Iraq's second city of Basra and the Shi'ite holy cities of Kerbala and Najaf, thousands demanded Saddam be declared a war criminal and handed over for trial soon. The United States declared Saddam a prisoner of war on January 9 following his capture the previous month. Washington has said his status may be changed further down the line, and that he will eventually be handed over to Iraqi authorities to be tried under a special tribunal set up to account for his murderous rule. Abdul al-Hakim, a Governing Council member and Sistani ally, urged U.S. and U.N. officials to explore ways to hold early polls rather than focusing on other plans such as caucuses. Speaking to reporters after a Governing Council meeting with Bush at the White House, Hakim said the demonstrations showed strong support for elections. "We said clearly that we should have elections in Iraq and we should keep to the timetable of the transfer of sovereignty," Hakim said through a translator. At the urging of the Governing Council and the Bush administration, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan is considering whether to send a team to Baghdad to study the transition process. He is expected to announce a decision within a week. (Reporting by Fiona O'Brien and Andrew Marshall in Baghdad, Steve Holland and Caren Bohan in Washington) [ 2004-01-21T104938Z_01_NOOTR_RTRJONP_1_India-141995-1-pic0.jpg of type image/jpeg removed by lists.casi.org.uk - attachments are not permitted on the CASI lists ] --__--__-- Message: 3 From: "cafe-uni" <cafe-uni@DELETETHISfreeuk.com> To: "Casi News" <newsclippings@casi.org.uk> Subject: Talks under way as UN mulls Iraq mission Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 15:56:37 -0000 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/msid-436478,prtpage-1.cms The Times of India Online Printed from timesofindia.indiatimes.com >World >The United States ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= - ---- Talks under way as UN mulls Iraq mission AFP[ WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 21, 2004 12:26:35 PM ] UNITED NATIONS: Discussions were under way as the United Nations mulled sending a mission to Iraq that US and Iraqi leaders hope wil= l clear the way for its June handover of power in Baghdad. UN officials said the "technical" talks that Secretary General Kofi Annan demanded were ongoing amid widespread speculation by diplomats that the UN chief would authorise the mission soon. Annan said he would consider the request put forward at a meeting on Monday with the US overseer in Iraq, Paul Bremer, and a delegation of Iraqi officials at UN headquarters. Annan is away on a two-week swing through Europe but a spokesman underlined that his absence from New York did not mean that no decision would be taken before then. "These talks are ongoing. The secretary general said (Monday) he was not going to drag the process out, and he's very much aware of the time issue," the spokesman said. The mission would assess the feasibility of national elections before the June 30 handover date after the religious leader of Iraq's Shiite Muslim majority, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, rejected the current plan. As the blueprint now stands, caucuses would be set up to select the interim government set to take power when the coalition formally ends its occupation and the current Iraqi Governing Council is dissolved. =A9 Bennett, Coleman and Co., Ltd. All rights reserved. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= - ---- --__--__-- Message: 4 From: "cafe-uni" <cafe-uni@DELETETHISfreeuk.com> To: "Casi News" <newsclippings@casi.org.uk> Subject: Iraq, Afghanistan are stretching U.S. troops to the limit Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 15:57:14 -0000 Posted on Wed, Jan. 21, 2004 MILITARY Iraq, Afghanistan are stretching U.S. troops to the limit BY DANIEL SNEIDER dsneider@mercurynews.com The U.S. military is in the midst of one of the most massive movements of troops since World War II. Almost the entire battle force in Iraq is being replaced by fresh units, involving the rotation of nearly 240,000 soldiers and Marines over the next five months. Buried within this huge rotation is one deployment that has quietly alarmed some military experts. Some 8,000 troops from the two Hawaii-based brigades of the 25th Infantry Division, the famed Tropic Lightning Division, are being sent to Iraq and Afghanistan. These troops ar= e the cavalry for the Pacific Command -- they are the men and women who are designated to rush first into battle in case of a war in Korea. This leaves the United States with a very thin line of defense in an area of the world that is of vital strategic interest. It comes at a time when the potential for conflict, possibly triggered by the collapse of negotiations to persuade North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons program= , is high. And it is a move that will not pass unnoticed by North Korea, whic= h could read it as a sign that the United States is too tied down in Iraq to handle another crisis. ''We should be very concerned about the fixation on Iraq and th= e effect on other potential hot spots,'' Sen. Jack Reed, a Rhode Island Democrat and a veteran of the 82nd Airborne and former West Point professor= , told me. ``We would be very hard pressed to counter quickly any serious military move by the North Koreans.'' This doesn't mean that the United States could not eventually fight and win a war in Korea without the 25th. A combination of American ai= r and naval power and the South Korean army, along with the one U.S. Army division still based in Korea, may be enough to blunt a North Korean attack= . And that could allow time for reinforcements to arrive from elsewhere. But this deployment reveals the stress, particularly on the Army, created by the war in Iraq. ''Clearly, unanticipated commitments in postwar Iraq had stretched the Army to the point where it had little in reserve for any othe= r contingencies that might arise (e.g. a war in Korea),'' wrote defense specialist Jeffery Record in an Army War College study on the global war on terrorism that is being widely read in Washington these days. The best response, one favored by some defense experts, is for the United States to increase its military forces, especially ground troops= . Reed, joined by Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, offered an amendment to the defense appropriations bill last fall to expand the size o= f the army by 10,000 soldiers. A group of House Democrats introduced legislation in December to increase force levels by about 8 percent over th= e next five years. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, needless to say, doesn't agree. He and others argue that revolution in military technology -- precision weapons, increases in mobility, the ability to coordinate air and ground forces more quickly and effectively, and the use of special forces -= - diminish the need for ground troops. During a recent visit to Seoul, however, a senior South Korean military officer expressed serious doubt about its ability to repel the North. Among other things, South Korea lacks key weapons systems, such as those to accurately direct fire against the North's thousands of artillery batteries. Plans to transfer such technology are in the works, but it will take years. It is time to realize the cost of war in Iraq is not only measured in the tens of billions spent there or the lives being lost every day. It is the price of having put too much of our resources in the wrong place. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= - ---- =A9 2004 The Miami Herald and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved. http://www.miami.com [ archives_title.gif of type image/gif removed by lists.casi.org.uk - attachments are not permitted on the CASI lists ] [ spacer.gif of type image/gif removed by lists.casi.org.uk - attachments are not permitted on the CASI lists ] 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