Re: from today's observer

["farbuthnot" <asceptic@DELETETHISfreenetname.co.uk>]

John Nichol's excellent analyis and insight (Observer 19th November) has
just one flaw. Having just returned from Iraq and again driven throught the
north and south (to Mosul and Basra) it is impossible to agree that British
and American pilots 'risk their lives on a daily basis to fly into
Iraq.....' (apart from the risk which accompanies any form of travel
including crossing the road.)
The idea that Iraq's - by today's standards - antiquated old anti-aircraft
guns - are a threat to allied pilots flying at the heights they do is almost
farcical. Reports (not verified independendently for obvious reasons) from
villagers north and south over the last two years is that when flocks of
sheep are bombed planes allegedly circle quite low. But in remote plains
where sheep graze there is no reason for anti-aircraft ordnance. (Tho' were
I a shepherd, I might think differently.)
The Iraqi regime has offered huge rewards to any military who shoots down
planes overflying the no-fly zone. Like all except about seven percent of
the population, the Iraqi military is on monthly wages which would make the
buying of a slab of chocolate for thier children impossible. A reward such
as this would render them not only rich, but a national hero. Politics
aside, this is a brave and inventive people. Yet no one has managed to claim
this prize.
Three days ago I was outside a building in Basra next to an army depot. Air
raid sirens suddenly howled, soldiers appeared, looking skywards and I
queried what was happening. They pointed upwards and in near stratospheric
heights two others from the Sheffield Delegation to Iraq identified the
almost pinpoints which were UK/US planes returning to their bases.
Anti-aircraft guns were visible, there was no scramble, just an acceptance.
They didn't even bother, it was no contest.

----------
>From: "Voices uk" <voices@viwuk.freeserve.co.uk>
>To: <soc-casi-discuss@lists.cam.ac.uk>
>Subject: from today's observer
>Date: Sun, Nov 19, 2000, 6:38 pm

> The following two pieces appeared in today's Observer (19th November 2000).
> You can e-mail your letters to letters@observer.co.uk.
> You've got (at least) until 12 noon on Wednesday to do this, maybe later.
>
> Gabriel.
>
> 1. Lift the sanctions against Iraq now
>
> John Nichol
> Sunday November 19, 2000
> The Observer
>
> My hands were visibly trembling when I handed my passport to the border
> guard. Standing close by was an armed Iraqi soldier. The last time I had
> seen Iraqi guns they were pointed directly at me; some of them had even been
> fired.
>
> When I told my friends I was returning to Baghdad after 10 years they all
> said I was mad. Why would I want to return to the place where I was abused,
> humiliated and nearly died? As I waited at the Iraqi border, I asked myself
> the same questions. My journey had begun a few months before with an idea to
> make a film for the BBC as the tenth anniversary of the Gulf War approached.
> It had been an exciting proposition.
>
> I knew from colleagues in the RAF patrolling the no-fly zone that Britain
> and America were still bombing Iraq on a regular basis. This undeclared war
> goes largely unreported by the media, something which I find truly
> disturbing. More importantly, I wanted to meet real Iraqis and see how the
> war and subsequent years of sanctions had affected the 'man in the street'.
>
> Sanctions meant that I could not fly into Baghdad; the only way in is via
> Jordan and a 15-hour car journey. Sanctions also control the sale of Iraqi
> oil, a fact which seems to have escaped the Iraqis themselves as the only
> other vehicles on the road were oil tankers. Completely ignoring the
> restrictions, thousands of them plied the route between the Iraqi oilfields
> and ports in Syria and Jordan.
>
> Sanctions were imposed on Iraq after the Gulf War in an effort to force the
> regime into surrendering its weapons of mass destruction (WMD). United
> Nations inspectors were also put in place with a brief to find and destroy
> any undeclared weapons. As I entered Baghdad, I drove past the UN compound -
> it was deserted. The inspectors were evicted from Iraq during Operation
> Desert Fox, the three-day bombing campaign in December 1998. At the end of
> that operation, we were told that 'Saddam had been put back in his cage'.
> That may have been so, but he was in his cage with his people and his
> weapons and we had drawn curtains tightly around the bars. Despite our
> overwhelming technological superiority, without UN weapons inspectors on the
> ground, we have no real idea what is going on in the darkest corners of
> Iraq.
>
> In many ways, Britain and America have painted themselves into a corner,
> which really is the nub of the Iraqi problem. Sanctions, weapons inspectors
> and the no-fly zones are all inexorably linked. Until the UN is allowed to
> return and verify that all WMD have been destroyed, sanctions must stay in
> place, argue Britain and America. Iraq denies that it has any WMD and
> refuses to accept inspectors. But sanctions are having little effect on the
> regime; the only people suffering are the poorest. In a truly ludicrous
> state of affairs, even pencils come under the items banned by the sanctions.
>
> And the no-fly zones are in disarray. They were set up to protect from Iraqi
> repression the marsh Arabs in southern Iraq and the Kurds in the north. But,
> in an obscene piece of hypocrisy, we allow one of our Nato allies to bomb
> the very group we claim to protect.
>
> Aircraft patrolling the northern no-fly zone are based in Turkey and our
> pilots put their lives in danger on a daily basis to fly into Iraq and
> ensure that the Iraqi military is prevented from attacking the Kurds.
> However, Turkey itself is also fighting a war with the Kurds, who want an
> independent homeland. On a regular basis, the Turkish authorities ground our
> aircraft so that their own air force can attack the very Kurds that the RAF
> was protecting a few hours before. After the Turkish jets land, our own
> pilots get airborne to resume their mission over the still smoking craters.
>
> British and American policy is a shambles. And it is only Britain and
> America that maintain the current position. Over the last few months, an
> increasing number of countries have flouted the ban on air travel and have
> made symbolic flights to Baghdad. At the recent Baghdad trade fair, European
> nations were falling over themselves to ensure they would profit if
> sanctions are lifted. None of our old allies takes part in the regular
> attacks launched into the no-fly zone. Indeed, even Iraq has decided to
> ignore the restrictions and has recently begun internal domestic flights
> around the country.
>
> After 10 years, the time has come to admit that the current state of affairs
> is not working and to review the situation. The great problem is that there
> appears to be no means of ending the dispute.
>
> What conditions must be met for the no-fly zones to be removed? No one seems
> to know any more. How long can sanctions remain in place? Again, no answer.
>
> No one can deny that parts of the Iraqi regime are repressive and evil. But
> we manage to deal with other similar regimes on a daily basis. After 10
> years, sanctions have failed to produce the required result. It is time they
> were lifted. Perhaps the removal of sanctions can be linked to a return of
> some sort of independent weapons inspection team. Whatever the options are,
> they have to be better than the current stalemate.
>
> As I travelled around Iraq, I was struck by how friendly and personable the
> people were. At an Iraqi airbase, I was given lunch by an Iraqi air force
> colonel who might have tried to shoot me out of the sky 10 years ago. It
> seemed strange to sit with my former enemy and to talk about the realities
> of war. But we both agreed on one thing - there was little that the military
> could do to solve the current situation. Only our respective leaders could
> do that. It must be an unpalatable thought for our politicians, but perhaps
> the time has come for them to talk to their former adversaries.
>
> • John Nichol and John Peters were captured when their RAF Tornado was hit
> by a missile over Iraq during the Gulf war early in 1991. Both men were
> tortured and forced to appear on Iraqi TV to denounce the war. John Nichol's
> latest book, Decisive Measures , is published by Hodder & Stoughton at
> £16.99.
>
> 2. Saddam indulges in execution orgy
>
> Special report: Iraq
>
> Paul Harris
> Sunday November 19, 2000
>
> A top-level defector from Baghdad has told British intelligence that scores
> of senior army officers have been killed by Saddam Hussein, the Iraqi
> leader, in purges over the past two years.
> In February 1999, intelligence sources believe, Saddam ordered the killing
> of 38 officers, including General Kamil Saachit Al Dulaimi, suspected of
> plotting a coup.
>
> Saddam has long been known to use execution as a routine disciplinary tool.
> But the defector has revealed a detailed picture of the state violence the
> Iraqi dictator uses to enforce his authority and of the personal interest he
> and his family take in their brutal measures.
>
> The orders for the execution of opponents to the regime are always signed by
> an immediate member of Saddam's family or a close adviser. The signatory can
> record whether or not the victim should be tortured before execution, the
> defector said. Saddam's two sons, Udai and Qusai, have signed execution
> orders, as have three of Saddam's half-brothers.
>
> The defector has also revealed a massive new prison construction programme.
> One, the Sijn Al Tarbout jail in Baghdad, is known as 'The Casket' and is
> located underground. Prisoners are kept on a liquid only diet.
>
> Another jail has been built on the site of an old factory at Rashdia on the
> outskirts of the capital. The bunkers and workshops hold hundreds of
> prisoners. Other cells were recently opened by Udai Hussein in the Olympic
> Stadium garage.
>
> The regime is becoming increasingly paranoid about opposition. Recent laws
> make it illegal to 'slander' Saddam or his family. Those found guilty can
> have limbs amputated. In September a man had his tongue cut out for breaking
> these laws, before being driven through the streets as an example to others.
>
> Britain and the United States are finding it difficult to maintain
> diplomatic support for the United Nations sanctions imposed on Iraq.
> Following the successful resolution of a Saudi airliner hijacking in
> October, Iraq's international image has been given a boost and there have
> been renewed calls for sanctions to be revoked. There is concern over the
> humanitarian situation within Iraq.
>
> Britain and the US believe Iraq is using the absence of UN inspectors to
> hide weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological weapons
> stored in schools and hospitals.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> This is a discussion list run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq
> For removal from list, email soc-casi-discuss-request@lists.cam.ac.uk
> Full details of CASI's various lists can be found on the CASI website:
> http://www.casi.org.uk
>
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a discussion list run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq
For removal from list, email soc-casi-discuss-request@lists.cam.ac.uk
Full details of CASI's various lists can be found on the CASI website:
http://www.casi.org.uk