The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]
News titles, 20-27/7/02 This brings us back up to date again, but the sheer quantity of material that's around at the present time is difficult to handle. Nothing much appears to be happening but a great deal is being said. The anti-Saddam Iraq Press (http://www.ip-iraqpress.com/ - which I haven't been using as a source so far) reports intensified repression and paranoia within Iraq, which would hardly be surprising; but the public record in the mainstream press (my main source) suggests an impressive calm in the fact of great provocation. There is an understandable frantic jockeying among the 'opposition' to see who is best placed in the event of an invasion of Iraq. And, unpleasant as the spectacle may be, it should be said that all Iraqis must be deeply concerned at the present time about how to salvage the best possible result out of the catastrophe if it occurs. Given the difficulty of developing a varied political life within Iraq itself, the Iraqis in exile are in a difficult position; and the question to what extent they should co-operate with the forces that have inflicted such terrible suffering on their country is agonising rather like the questions faced by the French in 1940. Is some form of collaboration the only possible way to preserve some form of sovereignty? With the question further complicated by the contradictory interests of the different peoples involved (and, in addition to Kurds and Shi'i, the Turkomans are beginning to come into view, especially since it appears they are particularly numerous around the much disputed city of Kirkuk). Most of these peoples living in Iraq have a long tradition of governments that are brutal, arrogant and alien to them so the Americans probably won't appear to be that much different from what they've had to deal with in the past Š WILL WE, WON'T WE? (Britain) * Tough standing shoulder to shoulder [Likely political and economic consequences to UK of participation in US war.] * Defence chief replaced for being 'off-message' over Iraq invasion * Opposition grows to new war on Iraq * Commons to have no say on Iraq [The article reminds us of the following: 'No member of the United Nations can declare war formally, or attack another nation. Under the UN Charter, only its Security Council can authorise the use of force.' Which, readers will remember, is why war was never declared on Serbia.] * Parliament and Iraq: Blair must be accountable not evasive URL ONLY: http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=316850 * IRAQ? LET'S NOT GO THERE by Joan Smith Sunday Independent, 21st July [Superficial argument against the war. The article presents all sorts of reasons why Mr Hussein should be overthrown but says there's no particular reason for wanting to do it right now. Except that the Americans want to. But if it ought to be done, the fact that the only power capable of doing it quickly has decided to do it would seem to be as good a reason as any ...] WILL WE, WON'T WE? (Europe) * EU pessimism over impasse on Iraqi weapons * Europe can overrule US on Iraq, Mideast [American columnist William Pfaff suggests what Europe would do if it was serious about its opposition to war on Iraq: 'The Europeans could refuse US use of NATO's European assets in an attack on Iraq on the grounds that such an attack does not fall under the agreements on countering terrorism that produced NATO's antiterrorism resolution of last September.' He argues that the Europeans could get away with it because actually the US needs NATO more than Europe does (it legitimises the US presence in Europe). But he concludes realistically: 'do the Europeans really want this? Or is it all talk?'] WILL WE, WON'T WE? (US) * Bush rallies US for strike on Iraq [The Observer continues its work of preparing us mentally to accept the inevitability of war. The article ends: 'Iraq began to end a decade of diplomatic isolation in March at the Arab summit' As has been pointed out before, Iraq had been working to end its diplomatic isolation, especially but not exclusively in the Arab world, long before Sept 11 (see these News Mailings throughout 2001). Its success in doing this, and the awareness that sanctions were cracking under the strain of it, is probably the main reason for the present US determination to go to war.] * Farrakhan warns U.S. on Arafat, Saddam * The clash of battling war plans [Amusing account of how things could go horribly wrong Š] * Gore Questions Iraq Invasion Timing [Curious remark that "I certainly question why we would be publicly blustering and announcing an invasion a year or two years in advance," indicates that Gore, who surely wouldn't want to appear not to be in the know, doesn't take the predictions for October or even next Spring too seriously.] * Some Top Military Brass Favor Status Quo in Iraq [The debate between a slow policy of keeping Iraq in a state of destitution and a speedy policy of massacre continues. I would have thought myself that the policy of slow torture was best from an Imperialist standpoint. With regard to the speedy massacre, this is one of the rare articles in which the following little genie is allowed to pop his head up above the rim of the bottle: 'a defense official said, "I think it is almost a certainty that we'd wind up doing a campaign against the Kurds and Shiites."'] URL ONLY: http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,764173,00.html * Bush and Blair agree terms for Iraq attack by Simon Tisdall and Richard Norton-Taylor The Guardian, 27th July [This strikes me as a non-article. Unnamed US officials say Mr Bush reckons he can count on Mr Blair (don't we all?), and the usual speculation about strategy (massive invasion or 'Bay of Goats'?). The only piece of original news, if its true, appears to be this: 'The US officials say Mr Bush has also obtained agreement in principle for support from France in conversations with President Jacques Chirac.'] IRAQI/INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS (Australia, Russia, Japan) * [Australian] Farmers keep faith on Iraq wheat trade [We learn here that Australia is the main supplier of wheat to Iraq. Presumably pre-1990 it was the US. Numerous articles in previous mailings have looked at the problematic efforts to import wheat from India and Pakistan.] * Australians puzzled over government's support to war on Iraq * Baghdad May Turn to Moscow for Grain * Japan's ambivalence on war with Iraq [The US anxious to restore Japan as a major military power. Japan apparently contemplating a new 'anti-terror' law allowing it expressly to do anything necessary to support the US in any way it wants. It must be true love.] * Russian envoy voices support for lifting sanctions on Iraq [It can't be completely without significance that the Russian deputy Foreign Minister should go to Iraq at the present time and that Putin should send a message of congratulations on the July 17 revolution.] * [Australian] Wheat board may send delegation to Iraq AND, IN NEWS, 20-27/7/02 (2) IRAQI/MIDDLE EASTERN-ARAB WORLD RELATIONS * Iraq foreign minister visits Algeria * Iraq, Iran swap remains of 1,736 soldiers * Kuwait warns US over Iraq action * Iraq: Men linked to Iran planned sabotage * An Iraqi press delegation in Damascus * Iraq for an extraordinary session for the AL [If the Arab league was worth anything this meeting would already have been held.] * Iran pays tribute to 570 dead soldiers repatriated by Iraq * Al-Jazeera TV News Returns to Iraq [Apparently they were banned for not showing sufficient respect to President Hussein.] * Iraq arrests two 'terrorists' linked to Iran * Jordan Set to Ink Free Trade Deal With Iraq * Morocco- Iraq to boost scientific co-operation * Kuwaiti new camp for UN forces: We will not oppose a unanimity to attack Iraq [Rather ambiguous signals coming from Kuwait] * Iran denies interference in Iraq's affairs * Kuwait to get its archives back, rejects striking Iraq * MKO [Iranian anti-government guerrilla - hey, that's a word we haven't heard much of lately! - group] says "terrorist" agents shelled Iraq camp * Improving of Iraqi ties with Syria worries west * Damascus makes common cause with 'axis of evil' * Iraq's Minister Due in Tehran * Al-Rai: Iraq ends boycot of Jordanian companies suspected to deal with Israel URL ONLY: http://www.dailystar.com.lb/opinion/25_07_02_b.htm * Mideast governments' duality: No to toppling Saddam, but yes to inheriting from him Daily Star (Lebanon), 25th July [A cynical article arguing that all Iraq's neighbours who publicly oppose war are already preparing to tumble in when the time comes. And let it be said that the opposition of all parties to the war has not risen to the pitch of moral indignation that the situation would merit if they meant to be taken seriously (eg they're still treating the US as if it is a respectable member of the family of nations).] NO FLY ZONES * Five Iraqis killed in an American attack [Thursday/Friday, 18th-19th July] * U.S. Planes Attack Iraqi Site [Monday/Tuesday] * One Iraqi killed, 22 wounded in a raid against southern Iraq [Tuesday] * Pentagon Confirms U.S.-British Air Raid in Southern Iraq [Tuesday] * IRAQ: IRAQI MILITARY SPOKESMAN SAYS U.S., BRITISH WARPLANES "VIOLATE IRAQ AIRSPACE" [Wednesday] URL ONLY: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2674-2002Jul25.html * 'No-Fly' Patrols Praised by Vernon Loeb Washington Post, 26th July [Gone are the days, not so very long ago, when it was thought to be an expensive waste of time.] NEW WORLD ORDER * Bush missteps make the world more perilous [Intelligent critique of Bush's foreign policy from a more old-fashioned US foreign policy standpoint, one that imagines that the only superpower in the world needs to make friends ...] URL ONLY: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60192-2002Jul24.html * U.S., Russia and Global Entente by Jim Hoagland Washington Post, 25th July [Jim Hoagland on the possibility that Europe can be completely sidelined in international affairs through a US/Russian alliance. The possibility and advantages of this are shown through Putin's abandonment of opposition to the Strategic defense Initiative.] AND IN NEWS, 20-27/7/02 (3) IRAQI OPPOSITIONS * Jury out on anti-Saddam move by Prince Hassan [Interesting and apparently well-informed article which only deepens the mystery of Hassan's appearance at the conference in London. It appears that he arrived 'arm in arm with Dr. Ahmed Chalabi', not a popular man in Jordan. And yet, we are reminded, 'Prince Hassan has a long history of opposing American aggression against Iraq since 1991'. In passing, we learn that Hassan is chairman of the Club of Rome.] * Iraq opposition aims for territorial base [Includes reference to 'a new opposition group, the Iraqi National Movement' as well as to a 'Free Iraqi Council.' Note incidentally the unselfconsciously racist way in which the disagreements among the Iraqi opposition, in what is an extremely difficult situation, are routinely referred to as 'squabbling.'] * Iraqi Opposition Delays Announcement of "Provisional Govt." * Iraq Rebels, U.S. to Discuss Saddam * Iraqi National Movement calls for Provisional Government in Iraq [Best account I've seen of the 'Iraqi National Movement' formed, also on the basis of remnants of the Iraqi army, in opposition to the 'Iraqi National Coalition' recently formed with much publicity in London in alliance with the Iraqi National Congress, not to be confused with the Iraqi National Accord. This one includes Major General Hasan al-Naqib and Brigadier General Ahmad al-Samarra'i. Lt-Gen Nizar al Khazraji, in Denmark, who is supposed to be forming a military council (Iraqi opposition to form military council to fill post-Saddam vacuum -report in News, 6-13/7/02 (3)), isn't mentioned, nor is Maj-Gen Wafiq al-Samarra'i, unless he is the same person as Brigadier General Ahmad al-Samarra'i. Confused?] REMNANTS OF DECENCY * Go on, call Bush's bluff [A very powerful summary of the present situation by Hans von Sponeck stressing Iraq's improved relations with its neighbours and their reluctance to go to war. As the title suggests, however, he concludes that 'The Iraqis would be well advised to seize this opportunity and open their doors without delay to time-limited arms inspectors, thereby confirming that they indeed have nothing to hide.' The problem is that the US, which controls Mr Annan, would not allow 'time-limited' inspections. Under the present circumstances of imminent war, and given the previous record of UNSCOM (as revealed in Per Klevsnas' recent very important message) Iraqi concerns about spies are 100% justified, yet they have been dismissed out of hand in the negotiations with Annan. If they got under way, the US would certainly insist on inspections which would blow open such things as Mr Hussein's personal security arrangements. Which the Iraqis would have to refuse. So we would be back to square one. And then again, the inspectors would obviously have access to all information on Iraqi defense arrangements which is not a very pleasant prospect for a country threatened with imminent, devastating war.] TURKS 'N' KURDS * Turkey asks US to pay for losses from Iraq strike * Turkey Warns of Lengthy Iraq War * Kurdish State without Kirkuk is fine by Turkey [Extracts from an article which, in a rather imperfect English translation, argues that the real dispute between Iraq, Turkey and the Kurds is not over an autonomous or even an independent Iraqi Kurdistan but more specifically over (oil rich) Kirkuk. For example he says: 'If Iraqi Kurds seeking separation and [sic. had?] accepted the existing crumbs without Kirkuk, most probably Saddam Hussein would have been the first one in history who recognised an independent Kurdish State.' Which, if it is true (and the author is strongly anti-Saddam) means the Kurds aren't getting anything from the 'International Community' that they couldn't have got from President Hussein. The article also suggests that war against the Kurds is the main reason for the militarisation of Turkey which is in turn the main reason for its impoverishment and dependence on the West. I have cut out a long historical reflection on the formation of the Turkish psyche.] * 'Al Qaeda' influence grows in Iraq [A fuller account than usual of the Ansar el-Islam in the Kurdish zone, with evidence for a link to the Iraqi government, via a captured Iraqi intelligence officer. Though links with militant Islamic groups is hardly something the Americans are in a position to complain about ...] * Wolfowitz's visit to Turkey sparks debate on Iraq strike, relations with the West [A short lesson in the philosophy of history from P.Wolfowitz: '"Turkey's aspiration to join the European Union is a development that should be welcomed by all people who share the values of freedom and democracy that grew out of the European civilization," adding that "these are not only Western values, but Muslim, Asian and universal values as well."' So Muslim, Asian and even Universal values 'grew out of the European civilization'. The article details the sort of money for which Turkey is willing to sell itself ($36 billion, to be precise. Oh, and access to the European civilisation, source of Muslim, Asian and universal values).] IRAQI/UN RELATIONS * U.N. Humanitarian Coordinator in Iraq * U.S. denies it received Iraqi visa request [Referring to the complaint reported last week (17-20/7/02): 'Iraq lodges protest against US for refusing to grant visas'] * Annan rejects new talks with Iraq without progress [This article provides a few more vague indications of what actually happened during the talks but no journalist seems yet to have really applied him/herself to finding out.] * Iraqi health minister, WHO regional official discuss cooperation WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION * Iraq seeks steel for nukes [Without suggesting that Iraq isn't seeking material for making nuclear weapons, its difficult to believe that this is the only purpose that is served by stainless steel tubes.] URL ONLY: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/a/2002/07/21/MN97915. DTL * Mass destruction's foil could be foam by John Hendren, San Francisco Chronicle (from Los Angeles Times), 21st July [This is an interesting idea. Clearly a foam that could seep in everywhere could, if delivered in sufficient quantities, suffocate every living thing that might be found underneath the earth. Families hiding in cellars, for example, that sort of thing ... And of course it would leave the buildings and other property more or less intact - though that might not be a good thing since it would do away with much of the business opportunities offered by a rebuilding programme.] _______________________________________________ Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq. To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.casi.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/casi-discuss To contact the list manager, email casi-discuss-admin@lists.casi.org.uk All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk