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, 02-09/04/03 (4)



News, 02-09/04/03 (4)

IN THE VICTORS' BAGGAGE TRAIN

*  Denmark Seeks U.S. Help to Find Iraqi Ex-General
*  Role for Exile Leaders Urged
*  U.S. Enlists Aid of 700 Iraqi Exiles
*  U.S. Airlifts Iraqi Exile Force For Duties Near Nasiriyah
*  'Missing' Iraqi General Now in Kuwait: Paper
*  US troops should stay in Iraq for at least two years: Chalabi

THE JUNIOR PARTNER

*  Straw: UK won't back attack on Syria and Iran
*  Why Britain wants this war
*  Five killed in suicide bomb
*  British troops in Iraq have N.Ireland experience to draw on


IN THE VICTORS' BAGGAGE TRAIN

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=2496573

*  DENMARK SEEKS U.S. HELP TO FIND IRAQI EX-GENERAL
Reuters, 2nd April

COPENHAGEN: Denmark asked the United States on Wednesday for any information
on the disappearance of a former Iraqi army chief, suspected of war crimes,
from his Danish home in mid-March.

Nizar al-Khazraji, suspected of crimes against Kurds in the 1980s, vanished
on March 17 despite being under a court order to remain in the country. He
had been living in Denmark since 1999.

In a letter to U.S. Ambassador Stuart Bernstein, Justice Minister Lene
Espersen cited several Danish newspaper articles suggesting that the Central
Intelligence Agency may have been involved.

"Against this background...I kindly ask you to provide me with any
information from relevant American authorities on the circumstances under
which Khazraji disappeared and his whereabouts since March 17, 2003," she
wrote.

Espersen noted in her letter that the disappearance had been the subject of
intense debate in Danish media and in parliament. She said she was enclosing
a selection of newspaper articles offering theories on what had happened to
Khazraji.

One theory was that, in view of current developments in Iraq, he had escaped
with the aim of returning there.

"It has also been proposed, however, that he escaped with the assistance of
authorities of foreign countries or that he was even abducted by such
authorities," Espersen wrote.

"In this connection, the Central Intelligence Agency has been mentioned in
several articles," she said.

The Danish government was very concerned by the situation and would take all
possible steps to clarify the circumstances of the disappearance, Espersen
wrote.

"Needless to say, such clarifications may also be important in order to
avoid unnecessary -- and potentially harmful -- public myths and thus to
preserve the excellent relations between Denmark and close friends and
allies such as the United States."

Khazraji was head of Iraq's armed forces from 1987 to 1990. He fled to
Jordan in 1995 and four years later applied for political asylum in Denmark.

He was denied asylum as immigration authorities thought it likely he was
involved in chemical weapon attacks on Kurds in northern Iraq in the late
1980s. He was allowed to stay in Denmark under special rules applied to
those thought to be at serious risk if they returned home.

Khazraji had been under investigation by Danish authorities for his alleged
crimes since 2001. He had surrendered his passport and had to report to
police three times a week in his home town of Soro, south of Copenhagen.

On the day of his disappearance, Khazraji's lawyer said members of his
family had told him: "He went for a short walk this morning and didn't
return."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24990-2003Apr4.html

*  ROLE FOR EXILE LEADERS URGED
by Karen DeYoung
Washington Post, 4th April

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has proposed to President Bush that an
interim Iraqi authority composed of exile leaders be quickly installed in
the southern part of the country now largely under U.S. control.

In memos distributed this week to Bush's war cabinet, Rumsfeld suggested
that the declaration of an interim governing authority would deflect
international criticism that the United States plans to exert sole control
over Iraq for an indefinite period.

The proposals are likely to increase the temperature of an already heated
debate within the administration over the reconstruction and governance of
post-war Iraq. Plans drawn up in the Pentagon to impose a civil
administration made up of Americans and reporting to Gen. Tommy R. Franks,
head of the U.S. Central Command, have been challenged by State Department
officials who would prefer a more central administrative role by the United
Nations.

There are also disagreements over how much power to give exile leaders, who
have a powerful constituency among the Pentagon's civilian leadership.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair and other European leaders want the United
Nations to supervise the reconstruction of Iraq and the creation of a
representative interim government from within the country. A strong U.N.
role, they believe, would give the process more legitimacy in the Arab world
and help bring together an international community divided over the war.

Bush has yet to commit himself on the issue, and Secretary of State Colin L.
Powell said in a news conference in Brussels yesterday that the
administration is "still examining the proper role for the United Nations."

The administration's internal dispute over postwar arrangements has festered
as plans to move a U.S. administrative team into the country have been
delayed by unexpectedly strong Iraqi resistance to the military invasion. As
U.S. troops approached the outskirts of Baghdad yesterday, administration
officials said they were devising plans to declare victory once the military
balance has definitively tipped, even if Hussein and his lieutenants remain
at large and the fighting continues.

Rumsfeld's proposal was first reported last night by U.S. News & World
Report on its Web site. The magazine said Rumsfeld sent two memos to Bush
calling for the United States to "support those Iraqis who share the
president's objectives for a free Iraq" and arguing that Iraqi and Kurdish
expatriates, with some experience of democracy, are better equipped to take
over the country than Iraqis living under Hussein.

Sources confirmed that the memos probably would be discussed in the next day
or two by Bush, Vice President Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell and CIA Director
George J. Tenet. But they cautioned that the ideas expressed by Rumsfeld
were more in the form of suggestions than fixed plans. The sources said
Rumsfeld had not specified how authority would be divided between the exile
leaders and the U.S. postwar administration.

A Pentagon spokesman declined to comment on the memos, saying, "We have
nothing for you on that."

Even if there were agreement on the advisability of a U.S.-installed interim
Iraqi authority, its composition probably would be disputed. The Pentagon's
civilian leadership and other prominent hawks close to the administration
have long supported Ahmed Chalabi, the leader of the Iraqi National
Congress.

Chalabi is particularly close to former CIA director R. James Woolsey, whom
Rumsfeld has proposed for a prominent position in postwar Iraq, and Richard
Perle, a key Pentagon adviser. He is also backed by a group of influential
Republican senators, including Sam Brownback of Kansas, Rick Santorum of
Pennsylvania, Jon Kyl and John McCain of Arizona and Norm Coleman of
Minnesota, who this week wrote a letter to Bush asking him to clear
"roadblocks within the State Department" for increased funding of Chalabi's
group.

In public comments last month, Perle suggested that installing Chalabi in
power in Baghdad would alleviate any Muslim fears of U.S. imperialist aims.
It would also improve the chances for resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict, Perle said, because "Chalabi and his people have confirmed that
they want a real peace process, and that they would recognize the state of
Israel."

But Chalabi, who left Iraq in the late 1950s, is a controversial figure both
in Washington and among exile groups. He is distrusted by officials at the
State Department and CIA, who have questioned his claims of support inside
Iraq.

Despite U.S. discouragement, Chalabi began advocating a provisional Iraqi
government, formed by exile groups, months ago. Although he represents only
one of six opposition groups that have uneasily banded together under U.S.
auspices, he has made no secret of his desire to head such a government. He
moved from his London headquarters to the Kurdish administered territory in
Northern Iraq before the war started and has since issued a flood of
international communiques that imply he already has a leadership role.


http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/w-me/2003/apr/06/040603752.html

*  U.S. ENLISTS AID OF 700 IRAQI EXILES
by Pauline Jelinek
Las Vegas Sun, 6th April

WASHINGTON (AP): U.S.-led forces were airlifting soldiers of an Iraqi exile
group into southern Iraq to serve as humanitarian liaison officers and help
root out Saddam Hussein's paramilitary among the population, the group said
Sunday.

The first of more than 1,000 expected, some 700 soldiers of the Iraqi
National Congress were near the city of Nasiriyah, the group said. The city
was brought under control of the U.S.-led invasion force only a few days ago
after a two-week battle by U.S. Marines, defense officials have said.

Marines have been reaching out to the population there, and can be helped by
Iraqi exiles who know the language and population, said Riva Levinson,
consultant and spokeswoman for the INC in Washington.

She said in a telephone interview that they will help with the distribution
of humanitarian aid as well as help "root out pro-Saddam elements" such as
paramilitary fighters from the Fedayeen, Saddam's Ba'ath Party and others
who have put up stiff resistance to coalition forces and reportedly
prevented some Iraqi fighters from surrendering.

"They are only lightly armed, some have military training and others do
not," Levinson said of the new infusion of coalition soldiers. "But they
have a familiarity with Iraqi society and can be a bridge between coalition
forces and the civilian population."

Iraqi "freedom fighters" will also form the nucleus of a new national army
for that country, U.S. Marine Corps Gen. Peter Pace said Sunday.

Less than 100 others trained by the Pentagon in Hungary went into Iraq
earlier to do liaison jobs with U.S.-led forces. It was not immediately
clear how the new group was organized and why it did not go through the same
training.

"These are Iraqi citizens who want to fight for a free Iraq, who will become
basically the core of the new Iraqi army once Iraq is free," Pace, vice
chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, said on ABC's "This Week."

"We are proud to contribute our forces," Ahmad Chalabi of the INC said in a
statement Sunday from Nasiriyah.

"The war of national liberation which Iraqis have waged for 30 years is now
nearing its end. We call on the Iraqi people to join with us in removing the
final remnants of Saddam's Baathist regime."

Pace differed on the number of troops already in Iraq, saying it was smaller
than 500 as of Sunday morning but growing every day. Pentagon officials were
unable to clarify the number.

Asked if the participation of soldiers from the Iraqi National Congress
would give that group an unfair advantage in the process of setting up a new
government for Iraq, Pace said the Iraqis are volunteers "from all over,"
including expatriates arriving from the United States.

"The fact that they may be from one section of the population or another at
this point in time on the battlefield is not significant," he said.

"I'm comfortable that once we free Iraq and give it to the people in Iraq,
that they will be able to decide for themselves who should be their leaders
and who should not," Pace said.

Earlier, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz also stressed the necessity
of the Iraqi people deciding on their future.

"We can't say that anyone should take a leading role," he said. "By
definition, if you're going to have a government, or even a transitional
authority, that represents the legitimate views of the Iraqi people, its the
Iraqi people that have to decide."

[.....]


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42859-2003Apr6.html

*  U.S. AIRLIFTS IRAQI EXILE FORCE FOR DUTIES NEAR NASIRIYAH
by Bradley Graham
Washington Post, 7th April

[.....]

The INC group's unexpected arrival in southern Iraq followed a Pentagon
announcement last week that a program based in Hungary to train Iraqi
expatriates as guides, translators and security officers had been suspended.
Fewer than 100 candidates completed the course, defense officials said,
despite an initial goal of at least 1,000.

Explaining the reasons for the suspension, Defense Secretary Donald H.
Rumsfeld and Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,
told a news conference that the onset of war had overtaken the program.
Neither official mentioned the formation of an INC battalion or its imminent
arrival in southern Iraq.

"This is a different concept," Sethna said. "Those who were trained in
Hungary have been sent as individuals to military units to serve various
liaison functions. We weren't part of that program. Many of us had
volunteered to go to Hungary but didn't. We're a separate cohesive group."
He said creation of the battalion had been "discussed at length" within the
U.S. government and planning had been in the works for about two months.
About half the soldiers, he said, come from inside Iraq.

"Some have military training, and others do not," said Riva Levinson, an INC
consultant in Washington. "But they have a familiarity with Iraqi society
and can be a bridge between coalition forces and the civilian population."

[.....]


http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=24861

*  'MISSING' IRAQI GENERAL NOW IN KUWAIT: PAPER
Arab News (Saudi Arabia), 7th April

COPENHAGEN, 7 April 2003 (AFP): Former Iraqi Gen. Nizar Al-Khazraji, touted
as a possible successor to President Saddam Hussein, is now in Kuwait after
escaping from Denmark last month with the help of the CIA, the Danish daily
Politiken reported yesterday.

Citing a report by the former head of the CIA's counter-terrorism department
‹ a copy of which was obtained by the paper ‹ Politiken said the US security
services see Khazraji as their preferred successor for Saddam in a postwar
Iraq, a view that is not shared by the Pentagon.

The ex-CIA official, who completed the confidential report on March 28, said
the US intelligence services secretly extracted Khazraji and that he was
currently helping US forces in the war against Baghdad, according to
Politiken.

On March 22 the B.T. newspaper first reported that the CIA may have been
behind a move to spirit out Khazraji, believed to be the highest ranking
officer to have defected from Iraq. The ex-CIA official who wrote the
report, Vincent Cannistraro, has declined to comment on the document.

Khazraji, who has been charged with war crimes for chemical weapon attacks
on Iraqi Kurds in the 1980s, went missing from his house arrest in Denmark
on March 15.

He was previously head of the Iraqi armed forces during the invasion of
Kuwait in 1990. He subsequently fled to Jordan in 1995 and three years later
applied for political asylum in Denmark.

In February last year London-based Arabic daily Al-Hayat quoted opposition
sources in Syria as saying the US had chosen Khazraji to run Iraq after the
overthrow of Saddam.


http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_228642,00050004.htm

*  US TROOPS SHOULD STAY IN IRAQ FOR AT LEAST TWO YEARS: CHALABI
Hindustani Times, 7th April

Agence France-Presse, Washington, April 7: US forces should remain in Iraq
for at least two years after the collapse of Saddam Hussein's regime, a
Pentagon-supported Iraqi opposition leader said on Sunday.

"The American military should stay in Iraq until the first elections are
held and a democratic government is established," said Ahmad Chalabi, who
heads the London-based Iraqi National Congress (INC) umbrella opposition
group, interviewed on the CBS news program "60 Minutes."

Chalabi said the opposition expects "to have a constitution ratified within
two years."

Chalabi, interviewed from a location in Kurdish-controlled northern Iraq, is
under fire for saying ahead of the war that Iraq's military would fold
without a fight, and that the Iraqis would greet the US-led forces as
liberators.

US-led forces have instead encountered areas of fierce resistance, and been
greeted warmly by only some Iraqis.

The neatly-dressed millionaire dismisses charges that he predicted a
cakewalk as "false," and says that his group's reports on the strengths of
Saddam's loyalists were ignored.

The US Central Intelligence Agency now blames him for their own faulty
intelligence, he said.

Chalabi also said that he is not seeking political gain in post-Saddam Iraq.

"I'm not a candidate for any position in Iraq, and I don't seek an office,"
he told CBS. "I think my role ends with the liberation of the country."

The US military meanwhile begun flying Iraqi INC opposition fighters from
northern Iraq to the south to join in the war, a top US general said Sunday.

"To speak specifically about where they are or what they're about to do
would be inappropriate, but they are the beginning of the free Iraqi army,"
said General Peter Pace, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff told ABC
television.

The INC however said in a statement sent to AFP in Dubai that it has sent
700 fighters to southern Iraq to join in "removing the final remnants of
Saddam's Baathist regime" and "liberate the Iraqi people."

According to "60 Minutes," Chalabi himself was flown with his forces to the
southern Iraqi city of Nasiriyah after the interview.

The INC groups various movements -- including Islamists, communists and
nationalists -- opposed to Saddam's regime, which is being threatened with a
US-led war over its alleged weapons of mass destruction.

But some US State Department and CIA officials have complained in the past
of Chalabi and the INC, saying that the group has soaked up millions of US
dollars with little to show.


http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/72898.htm

‹  STATE: BUNGLING THE PEACE
by JOEL MOWBRAY
New York Post, 8th April
[The New York Post sees in the proposed Baghdad Conference a plot to
sideline the INC in favour of the Saudi Fellow Traveller Adnan Pachachi]

WITH war still raging, the State Department is planning to hold a "Baghdad
Conference" a mere six weeks after the conflict ends to determine an interim
leadership and to establish a framework for its new government - something
that many inside the administration fear could give the House of Saud undue
influence in a post-Saddam Iraq.

The plan is modeled after the Bonn Conference, which Zalmay Khalilzad, now
U.S. special envoy to Iraq, oversaw to prepare a transitional government
that eventually succeeded the Taliban.

Administration officials and various outside experts agree that a Baghdad
Conference, if it happens, would be simply the latest attempt by State to
undermine the umbrella organization of democratic Iraqi opposition groups,
the Iraqi National Congress (INC).

State is already placing - or attempting to place - pro-Saudi individuals in
important positions in a post-Saddam Iraq:

‹ Assistant Secretary of State for Consular Affairs Maura Harty recently
tapped Beth Payne - who one senior State official says "enjoys a cozy
relationship with the Saudis," even though her job has been to recover
abducted American children trapped in the desert prison - to take over the
consular section at the new Baghdad embassy.

‹ State last month forced the Pentagon to appoint longtime diplomat Barbara
Bodine - who temporarily refused the FBI entry into Yemen to investigate the
USS Cole - to be civilian administrator in Baghdad. Bodine has extensive
ties to Iraqis - but not the right ones.

Notes a senior administration official, "She only knows the Ba'athists,
because that's who she dealt with, and she's never bothered getting to know
the democratic opposition very well." With a long career centered mostly in
the Middle East, administration officials describe Bodine as an Arabist who
favors traditional, "stable" Arab regimes - the kind where democracy does
not flourish.

‹ State's top pick for ambassador to the post-Saddam Iraq is Deputy
Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Ryan Crocker, who
shares Bodine's worldview.

But State may not get Bodine into Baghdad; the Pentagon is pushing back to
get someone else in that position. And Crocker will undoubtedly run into
opposition from the White House, where the president's vision of a
democratic Iraq is diametrically opposed to Crocker's view of the Arab
world.

Meanwhile, the House of Saud is openly backing Adnan Pachachi, the former
foreign minister, for leadership of free Iraq. State sees Pachachi as the
most viable alternative to the INC, and even gave its tacit approval to a
conference he organized in London on Sunday as part of a campaign to
undermine the staunchly pro-democracy INC.

One administration official says that Khalilzad is "so obsessed with
Pachachi that he forced Jalal Talibani [leader of the Patriotic Union of
Kurdistan, an INC member organization] to put Pachachi on the Iraqi
opposition leadership council." But Pachachi was not interested, at least
not in being part of the same leadership committee as Ahmad Chalabi, the
head of the INC - and he said as much in a Financial Times column last
month. Yet State persists in wooing Pachachi.

But perhaps the greatest threat to the INC and democracy - and the greatest
boon for the House of Saud - is the proposed Baghdad Conference. If held
soon after the smoke clears, only the Ba'athists would be likely to come
forward.

Since anyone of significance in Iraqi society is a Ba'ath Party member, some
party members will necessarily be in the new government - but weeding out
Ba'athists will take longer than six weeks. Likely the only people willing
to come forward from within Iraq right after the fall of Saddam's regime are
people who were part of it because, as one administration official notes,
"It takes time for the fear to wear off."

State's attempts to thwart the INC have gotten so bad that a group of five
senators - Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), Rick Santorum (R-Pa.),
John McCain (R-Ariz.), and Norm Coleman (R-Minn.) - sent a letter last week
to President Bush, calling on him to "personally clear the bureaucratic road
blocks from within the State Department" and get funding and other support
to the INC. As they note in the letter, "American lives are at stake."

Joel Mowbray is a reporter for National Review.


THE JUNIOR PARTNER

http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=388812003

*  STRAW: UK WON'T BACK ATTACK ON SYRIA AND IRAN
The Scotsman, 2nd April

BRITAIN would have "nothing whatever" to do with any military action against
Syria or Iran, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw signalled today.

US President George Bush identified Iran as part of the "Axis of Evil" which
included Iraq and North Korea, while his Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld
recently warned Syria against supplying military equipment to Saddam 's
regime .

Such comments have prompted speculation that once it has toppled Saddam, the
US might spread military action to Iraq's neighbours.

But Mr Straw, who has made personal efforts to improve bilateral relations
between Britain and Iran - while Prime Minister Tony Blair has worked to
improve contacts with Syria - made it very clear that the British government
saw no need for any such actions.

Interviewed on the BBC today, Mr Straw said: " Iran is an emerging democracy
and there would be no case whatsoever for taking any kind of action.

"So far as Syria is concerned . . . we have worked hard to try to improve
relations. That said, it is important that Syria ensures that its territory
is not used as a conduit for military supplies to Iraq."

Meanwhile, US Secretary of State Colin Powell met his Turkish counterpart,
Abdullah Gul, today as part of efforts to dissuade Turkey from sending any
large force into Kurdish controlled northern Iraq.

The US fears a large-scale Turkish incursion could undermine the US-led war
against Iraq by stirring conflict with the Kurds.


http://english.aljazeera.net/topics/article.asp?cu_no=1&item_no=986&version=
> 1&template_id=273&parent_id=258

*  WHY BRITAIN WANTS THIS WAR
by Lawrence Smallman
Al Jazeera.net, 4th April

"The reality is that Britain is being asked to embark on a war without
agreement in any of the international bodies of which we are a leading
partner - not NATO, not the European Union and, now, not the Security
Council.. The US can afford to go it alone, but Britain is not a superpower.
Our interests are best protected not by unilateral action but by
multilateral agreement and a world order governed by rules."

The Prime Minister and his foreign policy advisors are evidently convinced
that supporting and following US foreign policy for Iraq is more important

The question is why. What does the UK benefit that can be worth disregarding
such important international bodies?

Oil

Since the 50s, it has been British interest to ensure free access to oil
products produced in states bordering the Gulf. It has also been a policy
for some time to ensure the continued availability of that oil on favourable
terms and to maintain suitable arrangements for the investment of the
surplus revenues of Kuwait.

A declassified US document observes "the UK asserts that its financial
stability would be seriously threatened if the petroleum from Kuwait and the
Persian Gulf area were not available to the UK on reasonable terms, if the
UK were deprived of the large investments made by that area in the UK and if
sterling were deprived of the support provided by Persian Gulf oil."
Translation: this is not only a war for oil; it is a war to control the
profits that flow from oil.

In January, Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, confirmed in front of
150-plus assembled diplomats that a strategic priority was to "bolster the
security of British and global energy supplies". Ministers and officials,
off the record, have for some time pointed to the instability of current oil
sources - the Middle East, Caspian region and Algeria - and the need for
secure alternatives.

Policymakers have been concerned for some time that, with the decline in
North Sea oil production, that the UK will be totally dependent on imports
within 40 years. Worse, it is estimated that over 90% of Europe's oil and
gas will need to be imported in 30 years time. The 1998 review entitled
"Future Strategic Context for Defence" even specified that oil supplies were
a key area jeopardizing 'the fundamental interests or security of Western
nations' and stressed the 'potential for aggressive competition for
resources' between nations. Such concerns would necessarily be factored into
UK foreign policy.

The first benefit for a war on Iraq as far as Britain is concerned,
therefore, is a commanding slice of Iraq's oil reserves. Lord Browne, chief
executive of British Petroleum even welcomed a 'level playing field for the
selection of oil companies' to go into Iraq following a US take over of the
country last October.

Manipulating UK / EU / US balance of power in British interest

Since New Labour came to power, the British government has often expressed
its desire to be 'at the heart of Europe'. At times of international
tension, however, the UK has always shown little regard for fellow EU member
states. This has not been to the detriment of British interests in Europe.
France and Germany have had an increasingly close relationship in the last
five years; ministers from the two countries can even listen in at cabinet
meetings. These countries account for 140 million people and are the most
powerful countries in Europe. Supporting US policy has allowed the UK to
halt the French and Germans from pushing through the Common European Foreign
Policy. Britain cannot hope to develop its political clout in the EU unless
it is able to align itself in opposition to this Franco-German alliance.

The immediate outcome of the attacks on Iraq in 1998 and on Afghanistan in
2002 were to place the UK center stage within the EU's foreign policy
development, and the UK has used this to push for an early expansion of the
European Union as well as the European rapid reaction force - potentially a
future 'Euro army' and a streamlining of the EU's foreign policy. Recent
history has shown that supporting aggressive US military policy on Iraq,
Bosnia and Afghanistan in the face of occasionally strong European criticism
has given the UK additional political weight within the EU. This policy has
been supported both by Conservative and Labour governments since the Reagan
Years.

The second benefit of supporting US policy so staunchly is that it allows
the UK to frustrate the move for a federal superstate in Europe and push for
deregulation, and reduce support for the costly agricultural cartel. Only
the expansion of Europe and making France and Germany into a minority power
within the EU could have achieved this. Britain is well placed, even if it
does not win in its EU struggles, to never be completely isolated.

The popular perception of Blair as Bush's poodle is amusing but does not
portray the extent to which Britain is benefiting from US strength. However,
there may well be an element that makes Blair susceptible to US policy at a
personal level. Every year, the British American Project holds a four-day
conference, which brings together 24 people from each side of the Atlantic
to discuss a specific issue of importance to both countries. Many foreign
politicians and key public opinion figures are invited to participate on the
project with the intention of influencing them in the direction desired by
US international strategy. Many of the main figures in 'New Labour',
including Tony Blair, have participated in this project and then returned
back to the UK inspired by US policy - in pretty much the same way that Shaw
and Wells were impressed by Stalin's Russia in the 30s.

Among figures that have attended the Project, Peter Mandelson, Mo Mowlam,
George Robertson, Chris Smith and Stephen Dorrell are the most prominent
political figures. However, there are a whole host of public opinion
formulating guests as well. Jeremy Paxman, Jonathan Powell and Lady Symons
are perhaps amongst the most well known. Charles Moore, Editor of the Daily
Telegraph, said on his return, "young Britons need to know America and
Americans. The British American project provides them with an attractive way
of doing so." Jonathan Powell, Chief of Staff to the Prime Minister, said,
"the lasting relationships that are built up are the only way to underpin an
enduring Special Relationship. Takes the working out of networking."

Of the 600 hundred or so members with which elite Britons mix are Robert
Hoffman, president of the Coca-Cola Bottling Group, Tom Proulx, co-founder
of Intuit Inc., and Robert Mosbacher, president of Mosbacher Energy Company.
The project has some interesting donors too, among them ARCO (oil and gas),
Honeywell (military avionics), and Raytheon (arms manufacturer).

Only last week Trade and Industry Secretary Patricia Hewitt contacted the US
Agency for International Development (USAID) to curry favour for British
groups. "The Secretary of State made a phone call to Mr. Andrew Natsios of
USAID discussing the expertise which can be offered by British companies in
humanitarian and reconstruction work after the war", a British government
agency Trade Partners UK spokesman informed.

The USAID has tendered eight civilian contracts for the postwar
reconstruction of Iraq, secrecy as to who is involved has attracted severe
criticism. No foreign companies were invited to tender contracts - but if
any country stands a chance, it is Britain.

This provides just a suspicion for a third reason for British war on Iraq.
Just maybe UK foreign policymakers have become subsidiaries of their
equivalents in Washington.


http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=396752003

*  FIVE KILLED IN SUICIDE BOMB
by  Stuart Reid
The Scotsman, 4th April

[.....]

Tony Blair had to stop George Bush attacking Iraq immediately after
September 11 and persuade him to tackle the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden's
al-Qaida terror network in Afghanistan first. The revelation has been made
by the ex-British Ambassador to Washington Sir Chistopher Meyer, a former No
10 press secretary to John Major, in a TV documentary.

He said following the suicide hijacking attacks on the twin towers in New
York and the Pentagon in Washington, US President Mr Bush came under
pressure from hawks in his administration to topple Saddam Hussein in
retaliation.

But Sir Christopher said that when Prime Minister Mr Blair met the President
a few days later he told him he had to tackle al-Qaida and the Taliban
before even thinking of Iraq.

Sir Christopher said: "Tony Blair's view was: 'Whatever you're going to do
about Iraq, you should concentrate on the job at hand and the job at hand
was to get al-Qaida, give the Taliban an ultimatum'."

Sir Christopher said that after listening to the appeal the President took
Mr Blair aside and promised to keep Iraq "for another day".

He also revealed in a documentary America's PBS network that Mr Blair had to
persuade Mr Bush to exhaust options at the UN and offered himself as an
envoy to sell the war on Iraq policy to European leaders. The ex-ambassador
added: "Blair said: ' You have the military strength to go into Iraq and do
it, but our advice to you is even a great super power like the US needs to
do this with partners."


http://www.haveeru.com.mv/english/news_show.phtml?id=1268&search=&find=

*  BRITISH TROOPS IN IRAQ HAVE N.IRELAND EXPERIENCE TO DRAW ON

BELFAST, April 5 (AFP) - With many years' experience battling the IRA in
Northern Ireland the British army seems better prepared than its US
counterpart for winning hearts and minds in Iraq, analysts say.

"Belfast may be considered relevant, in as far as the British have
experience of military dealings with hostile inhabitants," said Adrian
Guelke, a professor of international relations at Queen's University in
Belfast.

Alistair Miller, a native of Northern Ireland who saw action with the 7th
Armoured Brigade (the Desert Rats) in the last Gulf war in 1991, agreed.

"Without a doubt this experience (in Northern Ireland) will help them," said
Miller, 36, formerly a corporal with the Queen's Royal Irish Hussars and now
a Londonderry warehouse manager.

"They've maintained the peace in Kosovo and Bosnia and are very experienced
in dealing with the civil population," he said.

In three decades of confronting the Irish Republican Army (IRA) in urban and
rural parts of the province, the British army learned that having a
numerical and technological advantage was not enough.

"The story of the British army's alienation of civilians during the first
years of 'the Troubles' is incredible," said Guelke, using the official
British euphemism for the conflict in Northern Ireland.

"When the troops arrived in Northern Ireland in 1969 they were hailed by the
Catholics as liberators, they got cups of tea for people on the Falls Road"
in Catholic west Belfast, he said.

The Provisional IRA, founded in January 1970, waited 13 months before
killing its first soldier.

But, Guelke said, the situation deteriorated rapidly when the army got
involved in assisting Protestant parades through Catholic areas.

"There were very heavy-handed random searches for weapons during the curfew
of June 1970 where they messed up the local population," he said, recalling
that "in the early years of the troubles, in 1969 to 1976, both the
casualties among the soldiers and among civilians was very high."

Of the conflict's 3,500 victims, British soldiers killed 130 paramilitaries
and 160 civilians.

"Whether they will be able to apply that knowledge to the different
conditions of Iraq is a large question," he said.

"What helped the British government to maintain its military presence in a
kind of way that led to fewer deaths is that they got technologically
advanced," he said.

"A lot of helicopters in the sky, surveillance, spying on people, very
heavily fortitified army posts ... that kind of equipment will not be in
place in Iraq for quite a while," he said.

"To build up the infrastructure where they are as well protected as they are
here (in Northern Ireland) will take some time, but they do know what to
do," he said.

In Northern Ireland, the IRA never had ranks of suicide bombers, but it did
require supporters to go so far as to drive cars loaded with explosives
through military checkpoints.

US troops "don't know how to control these types of situation, while our men
have more training and experience to stop them getting into a situation
where you have civilian casualties," Miller said.

"If you drive through a checkpoint in this country you will be fired at
too," he said, alluding to the deaths of eight Iraqi civilians, killed on
Monday in their van at a checkpoint at Najaf, south of Baghdad.

"In that environment, a van can carry a lot of explosives, so they will take
the van out," he said. "Iraq is a completely different kettle of fish. It's
war out there."




_______________________________________________
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


[Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]