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]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[casi] News titles, 10-15/01/03

News titles, 10-15/01/03

A truncated news mailing, though it isn't short, sent a bit early because of
my travels.

It seems to me that in two important aspects the US  advocates of war have
already been proved wrong, whatever happens:

1. They argued that, since all Iraq's neighbours hate President Hussein,
they would all fall into line if only the US showed once and for all that it
was serious. Well, the US is now going to great lengths to show that it is
serious, but none of Iraq's neighbours are falling into line. Quite the
opposite. Which is all th more surprising when it seems so obvious that
falling into line with The Most Powerful Nation In The World in Its hour of
need would be in their interests. Perhaps there is, after all, something
beating in the hearts of the Arab/Muslim leadership other than self

2. They would like to persuade us that the US has the military power to
settle all the problems of the world, easily. But they have been building up
a military presence against Iraq for months and they say they still aren't
ready. And Iraq is a country that has been refused the right to arm itself
even with conventional weapons for the past twelve years (they are allowed
to possess certain conventional weapons, but the sanctions regime prevented
them from importing any material to renew them or even to service existing
material. Hence the likelihood that they may have kept a chemical weapons
capacity. Since the United Nations didn't seem to leave them very much
choice in the matter).

At present, as a result of the triumph of the Cheney-Rumsfeld-Wolfowitz
school, the US is looking both weak and incompetent. Iraqis who support an
invasion to overthrow Saddam Hussein could reasonably be feeling
apprehensive at the possibility that these people are going to take
responsibility for their government. Perhaps the war will be an
instantaneous, almost bloodless, victory followed by rejoicing in the
streets. Its difficult to imagine anything less that could wipe out the very
unfavourable impression that is being created at the present time.

Some articles to be recommended: 'Iraq has no N-weapons, claims expatriate
scientist' (under Inspections Process); 'Anti-war train drivers [in
Scotland] refuse to move arms freight' (Iraqi/UK Relations); 'Forbidden
fruit: Iraq dates hit by war and sanctions' (Inside Iraq) and, possibly most
important of all, 'Kirkuk: Iraq's northern tinderbox' (Northern
Iraq/Southern Kurdistan). As mentioned before I haven't been consistently
taking articles that cover various visits of the weapons inspectors but a
record is being kept by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty at .

NEWS, 10-15/01/03 (1)


*  Agency Challenges Evidence Against Iraq Cited by Bush [More details on
the aluminium tubes. The ones Iraq was trying to buy as well as the ones
they already had]
*  Iraq illegally imported missile engines [More elements in Blix's report]
*   Iraq has no N-weapons, claims expatriate scientist [This is a very
interesting, if true, account of the development of Iraq's nuclear programme
by Dr Imad Khadduri. It confirms my own memory that the Osirak reactor
supplied by France was a 'light-water reactor ... which was specifically
designed to be unsuitable for the production of plutonium for a bomb' (ie
presumably something along the lines of the reactors President Clinton
promised but failed to deliver to North Korea); and that it was its bombing
by Israel in 1981 that persuaded the Iraqi government to go for a nuclear
weapons programme. If this is true (it still leaves the question why oil
rich Iraq should have needed nuclear power) then the French government have
a heavy responsibility in not doing more to counter the Israeli version of
the story.]
*  Q&A with the Top Sleuth [Interview with Mohamed El Baradei: 'I hope the
U.S. mobilization is only about adding to the pressure']
*  Germans on trial over Iraq cannon [Another 'supergun' story, going back
to 1999]
*  Transcript: Hans Blix interview [Extracts from a rather long interview
rendered less interesting than it could have been by the BBC aggressive
style of interviewing, trying to get him to express exasperation at lack of
US co-operation]
*  Smuggled parts may be the missing clue [The Times hopefully examines the
BBC interview with Blix for a smoking gun]


*  Britain urges US to delay war until autumn [Milan Rai identified this to
the list as possibly 'the most important newspaper report of the whole
crisis', indicating real hope that the war can be prevented by action in
Britain. The subsequent eagerness of the Prime Minister and friends to deny
it suggests that he may well be right.]
*  Anti-war train drivers [in Scotland] refuse to move arms freight
*  British Muslims fear conflict for generations [Details of a letter to
Prime Minister Blair from Iqbal Sacranie, secretary general of the Muslim
Council of Britain]
*  Brown backs Blair over Iraq
*  Iraqi counting on UK to avert war [The Scotsman interviews Dr Mudhafar
Amin, the head of the Iraqi interest section]


*  Movie star leads thousands in anti-war rally [Martin Sheen, with Jackson
Browne and Ron Kovic, in Los Angeles]
*  Naked supporters for Saddam [In England: 'Many of the protesters are
regulars at a local pub and firmed up their plan at the pub Saturday

AND, IN NEWS, 10-15/01/03 (2)


*  At Your Service [Papal ordination of Fr Andreas Abouna, new Assistant
Chaldaean Bishop in Baghdad]
*  Iraqis buying guns to fight invasion [The article gives the impression
that everyone is being encouraged to arm thesmelves. Interesting to see who
the arms are used against when it comes to the crunch]
*  Iraq's Shiites Describe Reign of Fear [Conversations with Iraqi Shi'ites
in Damascus]
*  Popstar's love life takes Iraqis minds off war talk [Kazem al-Saher,
'known for pop videos featuring dozens of dancing women']
*  Forbidden fruit: Iraq dates hit by war and sanctions [Moving account of
the Iraqi date industry which, to its misfortune, seems to have been
concentrated round the Fao peninsula, scene of the worst fighting in the
Iran/Iraq war; and round Basra, where it has (possibly) fallen prey to
depleted uranium (which leaves me wondering about all those boxes of Iraqi
dates I was handing around so liberally a couple of Christmasses ago ...)]
*  Ground under Saddam's heel, southern clans are seething ['The south of
Iraq bears a passing resemblance to its famous shrines: golden accolades to
the government shimmer on the surface; underneath, everyone suspects, are
the cracks and the festering wounds of a population who feels that its time
is long overdue.']


*  Iraq government cuts petrol supplies to Kurds
*  Iraq government restores petrol to breakaway Kurds
*  Ansar issues chemical war threat [The article states as a fact that Ansar
has a stock of chemical arms supplied 'almost certainly with Saddam's
blessing', and says they could use them against US troops descending from
*  Kirkuk: Iraq's northern tinderbox
*  Delicate Iraqi Kurd Notes Batter Mighty U.S. Dollar [Old Iraqi dinars
printed in Switzerland prior to the UN Gulf War and withdrawn in the rest of
Iraq: "They believe, in my opinion wrongly, the Swiss dinar will become the
new currency, so they are all changing their savings from dollars into
dinars and taking even more dinars out of circulation."]
*  Iraqi fundamentalist leader deported from the Netherlands [Mullah Krekar,
head of the radical Ansar al-Islam. The implication is that they don't have
very much on him, which seems surprising.]


*  Western planes again attack Iraqi air defenses [Friday, 10th January, 'a
military command and control site at Tallil and four cable repeater
communications targets between al Kut and Basra']
*  US hits anti-ship missile launcher in Iraq [Monday 13th January, near
*  Iraq says six civilians wounded in US-British bombings [Monday 13th, from
the Iraqi side]

AND, IN NEWS, 10-15/01/03 (3)


*  Russian warships on standby to sail to Gulf [Not, it seems, in support of
the US, or even the 'UN', effort]
*  Allies Slow U.S. War Plans [The article mentions what I consider to be
the crucial factor: 'the military preparations for an attack on Iraq have
encountered a hitch because of delays by Turkey in agreeing to the two-front
North-South war plan developed by the Pentagon.' I'm by no means convinced
that the other front - Kuwait - is secure either. The
Cheney-Rumsfeld-Wolfowitz group have not proved themselves to be very gifted
as diplomats]
*  Has the tide turned against another Gulf war? [Patrick Seale in the Daily
Star, Lebanon, looking at straws in the wind (if you excuse the pun). But
why should he attach more importance to Britain than to Turkey, or Saudi
*  Loyal Iraqi troops already training to use chemical weapons: Czech
minister [After making this resounding announcement that implies knowledge
possessed by no-one else, the Czech Defence Minister Jaroslav Tvrdik goes on
to talk blandly of other things]
*  Where the world stands on an invasion of Iraq [Country by country
summary. It makes depressing reading for supporters of the war. Curiously
doesn't include Kuwait. It also informs us, rather coolly, that "according
to Voice of America 'war plans are laid out for complete annihilation of
Iraq via conventional weapons, or if needed, via nuclear weapons'". Which
doesn't sound much like a policy of 'liberation']
*  Ben Bella calls for protests in West [Ben Bella in London]
*  Ukraine Denies Selling [pontoon] Bridges to Iraq
*  Attack would end Poland's consular surrogacy: ambassador [Poland acting
as representative of US interests in Baghdad]
*  Patten warns US over aid for Iraq [That aid for reconstruction mightn't
be forthcoming from the EEC if the US go ahead without a UN resolution. Not
much of a threat if one assumes that 'aid' is a means of getting one's hands
on some of the oil money]
*  Pope calls the potential war in Iraq 'a defeat for humanity' [Well, he
said that war in general 'is always a defeat for humanity' and should only
be used as a last resort. The US ambassador to the Vatican agrees.]
*  Thousands of Moroccans march in support of Iraq
*  LUKoil Takes Its Oil Case to Iraq [Why should they bother, if they
believe the Iraqi government is about to be taken out of the picture?]
*  Schroeder to Insist on Anti-War Stance Over Iraq in UN ['The German daily
Die Welt quoted the Green Party leader (Fischer - PB) as saying that Greens
still consider themselves as pioneers of peaceful movement in Germany.'
Except when traditional German foreign policy objectives in the Balkans are
under consideration]

*  Big Iraqi Arms Probe in City
>From Cape Argus (Cape Town), 13th January
[Story of gunrunning from South Africa, subsequently denied by the South
African police]
*  Police Dismiss "Gun Running to Iraq" Reports
South African Press Association (Johannesburg), 14th January

AND, IN NEWS, 10-15/01/03 (4)


*  Syrian oil company joins Russian companies in developing the Iraqi al-
Qurneh oil fields
*  Where is the Syrian-American relationship headed? ['Unofficial' dialogue
between the US and Syria organised by the James A. Baker III Institute for
Public Policy. Presumably another case of the old guard in US politics
trying to make up for the government's incompetence in international
affairs. The article goes on to an interesting roundup of recent editorial
opinion in the region: US desire to prevent Syria from becoming a centre of
opposition to a future US administration in Iraq; likelihood of war leading
to an increase in Palestinian suicide bombing; apprehension (I think
unfounded) that France is oprerating a U-turn]
*  Kuwait hopes for "natural" change in Iraq not a war [First Deputy Premier
and Foreign Minister Sheikh Sabah al-Ahmad al-Sabah, in Iran]
*  Prince Abdullah Sees No War on Iraq [Pepe Escobar has seen Prince
Abdullah as a substantial player with a coherent idea of Arab and Muslim
unity, and independence from western influence - an alternative to as well
as an enemy of Osama bin Laden (see OSAMA AT LARGE, PART 3: The sheikh
against the Saudi, Asia Times, July 12th, This blunt
statement that there won't be a war, when everyone else thinks there will;
and the implicit anti-Americanism of this: ""We are targeted. The aim is not
any country but the Islamic faith ..." - suggests that he may be right.]
*  Gul brings peace pitch to Tehran [It seems US policy is bringing Turkey,
Iran and the other countries of the region closer together in support of
Iraq. So perhaps its doing some good after all ...]
*  Odds on Iraqi War Are Half to Half: Mubarak [Mubarak visiting Saudi
*  Iraq-Jordan oil pipeline pending
*  Beirut Seizes Equipment Destined to Iraq [Apparently from Belarus. But
under the present circumstances surely the Lebanese should be letting such
things as helmets, uniforms and communications gear through]
*  Hundreds of American soldiers arrive in Israel for joint maneuvers
[Mainly on operating Patriot and Arrow anti-missile systems, so they say.
Funny that none of these seem to have been delivered to the Kurds]
*  Turkish politics and an unwanted war [Gives self interest and
humanitarian reasons why Turkey should support the US; and reasons why it
will be very difficult for Recep Tayyip Erdogan to do it. The 'humanitarian'
reasons amount to the traditional argument of gangsters everywhere: 'Just
keep your hands in the air and nobody will get hurt'. The fact that the US
is getting so little support despite the strength of these arguments is
proof of the level of revulsion which the present US government has managed
to provoke even in Turkey.]

AND, IN NEWS, 10-15/01/03 (5)


*  White House Met Iraqi Shi'ite Rebels [Al-Daawa: 'Al-Daawa has
traditionally been one of the most effective and violent opposition groups
inside Iraq. Often described as the Iraqi version of the Lebanese group
Hizbollah, it planted bombs at government offices in the 1980s.']
*   Bush to Meet with Iraqi Opposition Leaders [What's the betting this
sudden and unprecedented chance to meet the Great Man Himself is G.Bush's
way of delivering the Bad News: that the Iraqis aren't going to be allowed
in the immediate future to form their own government]
*  Saddam prepares deadly surprise for own people [sez Mohammed Hariri, the
Lebanon representative of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in
Iraq (SCIRI), outlining a real nightmare scenario. The article then goes on
to talk more generally about SC IRI]


*  US will attack Iraq 'without UN backing' [Richard Perle ridicules Hans
Blix for revisiting known sites. But since both the US and the UK
governments had made much of satellite photos of rebuilding at the said
known sites, and had bombed them vindictively in 1998, it appears that Blix
isn't the only 'complete idiot' in the picture ...]
*  Poll: Majority oppose unilateral action against Iraq [83 per cent support
it if it has UN backing. Without UN backing, this drops to one third. This
article was the basis of a CASI press statement which resulted in an article
in the Daily Mirror]
*  War with Iraq: What¹s in It for Us? [Account of undesirable consequences
of war for the US public, from Bill Harvey 'at the Progressive Action
Center'. A rather nice misprint gives us the concept of 'rouge states']
*  The United States of America has gone mad [Fierce attack on the current
US administration from John LeCarre]
*  Martin Luther King's widow speaks out on Iraq

*  U.S. probes reports Iraq holding Gulf War pilot
by Will Dunham
Yahoo, 10th January
[On the Scott Speicher case. But the article doesn't suggest that anything
new has emerged. Just something that is being held in reserve in case things
get desperate. And things are indeed beginning to get desperate ...]
*  U.S. Decision On Iraq Has Puzzling Past
by Glenn Kessler
Washington Post, 12th January
[Long account of the process by which the decision was made to attack Iraq.
The article suggests that the essential decision was made very soon after
the attacks on the World Trade Centre and Pentagon, essentially on the
strength of the argument that a 'rogue state' with weapons of mass
destruction could give them to terrorists (an argument so broad in its scope
that it could apply to any number of states in the world. And not just
states but any number of rich and powerful individuals with a grudge against
the US. Its really an argument for trying to reduce the reasons why anyone
might feel a grudge against the US.) But I wonder if I am the only person
perverse enough to find the following little cameo picture rather comical:
'Cheney, as he watched the World Trade Center towers collapse while he was
sitting in front of a television in the White House's underground bunker,
turned to an aide and remarked, "As unfathomable as this was, it could have
been so much worse if they had weapons of mass destruction." ']

AND, IN NEWS, 10-15/01/03 (6)


*  Iraq's $40b embezzled, says ex-UN official [Denis Halliday]
*  It is too early to consider attack on Iraq: Annan


*  Medical consequences of attacking Iraq [Mainly on the effects of depleted
uranium both on the civilian population and on the invading army]
*  Forget the UN: Saddam Hussein is the best possible reason for liberating
Iraq [This argues on the basis of the International Crisis Group report that
the people of Iraq - especially the non-Sunnis - want an invasion and
reconstruction by the USA and that the Left - at least that part of it that
supported the invasion of Serbia - should want it too. As someone who
opposed the invasion of Serbia I too find it difficult to imagine how anyone
who supported it could oppose the invasion of Iraq. But Mr Hari is a little
late. The whole impetus for war has been built up on the weak weapons of
mass destruction argument and not on the rather stronger humanitarian
argument. Possibly because the humanitarian argument - liberating the Iraqi
people - imposes certain obligations the US government would rather not have
to assume]
*  Opposing War Is Good, But Not Good Enough [Faleh A. Jabar, formerly
(perhaps still, it isn't clear) of the Iraqi Communist Party, argues against
war (it would result in chaos and/or foreign domination) but in favour of
another way of ousting President Hussein. Bribes and threats to split the
ruling clique. Backed up by the threat of war - which sounds rather like a
return to square one, to where we are at the moment;. This is surely what
the US were trying with a notable lack of success throughout the 1990s. And
implicitly - since the signals from Washington are that a large part of the
regime would be left in place (everyone seems agreed that from the purely
administrative point of view they're rather good at their job) - its what
they're trying now. So although its good to get a clearcut argument from the
heart of the Iraqi political tradition, it isn't convincing. His books,
mentioned at the end, look interesting ...]
*  Plan: Tap Iraq's Oil [Proposal to use oil to pay for the costs of
occupation. Difficult to see why not, once the principle of occupation is
*  Sense in liberal portions [Michael Ignatieff in Scotland, agonising over
the war on Iraq: 'you can just make the case for intervention only if you
put together two things - massive human rights violations internally and
possession or perspective possession of WMD. Neither on their own is enough
to justify coercive military force.' So how does he justify his support for
the war on Serbia where the human rights violations were much less massive
than those in Iraq and there was no question of WMD?]
*  Logistics Delay Possible Iraq War Timetable - Paper [War postponed again.
Its a bit like trying to organise a conference of the Iraqi opposition ...]
*  U.S. to Retain Baath Party in Post-Saddam Iraq [according to the Japanese
Kyodo News Agency. 'The United States has handed over the plan to its
allies, including Japan, as the main post-war plan, Kyodo said.']
*  US may need over 350,000 troops in Iraq: Report [How much would they need
to fight a country which had free access to the means to defend itself?]

Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
To unsubscribe, visit
To contact the list manager, email
All postings are archived on CASI's website:

[Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]