IRAQ

Independent: Robert Fisk: For the people on the streets, this is not liberation but a new colonial oppression

America's war of 'liberation' may be over. But Iraq's war of liberation from the Americans is just about to begin
17 April 2003


It's going wrong, faster than anyone could have imagined. The army of "liberation" has already turned into the army of occupation. The Shias are threatening to fight the Americans, to create their own war of "liberation".

At night on every one of the Shia Muslim barricades in Sadr City, there are 14 men with automatic rifles. Even the US Marines in Baghdad are talking of the insults being flung at them. "Go away! Get out of my face!" an American soldier screamed at an Iraqi trying to push towards the wire surrounding an infantry unit in the capital yesterday. I watched the man's face suffuse with rage. "God is Great! God is Great!" the Iraqi retorted.

"Fuck you!"

The Americans have now issued a "Message to the Citizens of Baghdad", a document as colonial in spirit as it is insensitive in tone. "Please avoid leaving your homes during the night hours after evening prayers and before the call to morning prayers," it tells the people of the city. "During this time, terrorist forces associated with the former regime of Saddam Hussein, as well as various criminal elements, are known to move through the area ... please do not leave your homes during this time. During all hours, please approach Coalition military positions with extreme caution ..."

So now – with neither electricity nor running water – the millions of Iraqis here are ordered to stay in their homes from dusk to dawn. Lockdown. It's a form of imprisonment. In their own country. Written by the command of the 1st US Marine Division, it's a curfew in all but name.

"If I was an Iraqi and I read that," an Arab woman shouted at me, "I would become a suicide bomber." And all across Baghdad you hear the same thing, from Shia Muslim clerics to Sunni businessmen, that the Americans have come only for oil, and that soon – very soon – a guerrilla resistance must start. No doubt the Americans will claim that these attacks are "remnants" of Saddam's regime or "criminal elements". But that will not be the case. "Remember this"

IRAQ: THE PEOPLE WHO WILL RULE

Sunday Herald: Carving Up The New Iraq (cont.)

THE POWER-BROKERS




Robert Reilly



Former director of Voice of America, the pro-US radio service, Reilly has been entrusted with overhauling Iraqi radio, television and newspapers.

The Bush administration has already given Reilly the green light to operate Radio Free Iraq. This will involve using transmitters that have been sent to the Middle East for the military’s psychological operations.

Reilly is closely involved with an American administration plan to establish a media network in the Middle East. A $62m (£40m) satellite TV station is scheduled to begin at the end of the year.

He is a very close friend and business partner of Ahmed Chalabi.

Michael Mobbs



Pentagon lawyer and overall civilian co-ordinator who will be in charge of 11 of the ministries.

Mobbs wants US citizens imprisoned indefinitely without charge for terrorist offences. A notorious hawk and close friend of Richard Perle, Mobbs also worked for Douglas Feith’s law firm.

Currently a Pentagon consultant, he created the legal framework for the indefinite detention of al-Qaeda suspects at Camp X-Ray in Guantanamo Bay, which was built by Bechtel (see The businesses) for $16m (£10m). Also a former member of the US arms control agency under former president Ronald Reagan.

William Eagleton



Like George Shultz, a contemporary of George Bush Snr. and revered by the right as one the grand old men of republican foreign policy.

The pair went to Yale together and both served in the Far East during the second world war. A career diplomat, Eagleton was based in Iraq between 1980-1984 as Chief of US Interests Section in Baghdad.

His tenure there came at a time when Iraqi use of chemical weapons against Iran was being studiously ignored by Washington.

He is tipped to be the “Mayor of Kirkuk”, the oil-rich city in northern Iraq, or Kurdistan.

Andrew Natsios



The head of USAid, United States Agency for International Development, Natsios is the man who hands out the post-war reconstruction contracts. Only US companies can bid for these lucrative deals.

One of the most controversial episodes of his career saw him, as CEO of the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority, oversee the Big Dig construction project, a three-mile underground highway in Boston, undertaken by Bechtel. The budget spiralled out of control costing up to $10bn (£6.3bn) more than it should have, with the largest budget rises under Natsios’s tenure.

A former Massachusetts House of Representatives congressman, he is the author of a book called US Foreign Policy And The Four Horsemen Of The Apocalypse and a retired lieutenant colonel from the first Gulf war. He was also the chairman of the Massachusetts Republican Party for most of the 1980s.

Natsios will be assisted by Michael Marx, the head of USAid Disaster Assistance Response Team (Dart) and a former US army officer. Marx previously headed the Dart team after the conflict in Afghanistan.

Lewis Lucke, another USAid senior staffer, will oversee the Iraqi reconstruction process. He headed the USAid mission team in Haiti alongside Timothy Carney (see grey suits), one of the former US ambassadors who is now involved in administering Free Iraq. Attempts at establishing democracy in Haiti have so far failed, with elections collapsing amid allegations of electoral manipulation and fraud.

George Shultz and Clint Williamson


A Republican heavyweight and former secretary of state under Nixon, Shultz was Bush Jnr’s presidential campaign adviser. He is also one of the administration’s key thinkers on running post-war Iraq, and on the board of directors at Bechtel, which is in the running for contracts after regime change. Like Perle, he has lucrative financial relationships, which bring his impartiality into question. Shultz is the chairman of the International Council of JP Morgan Chase, the banking syndicate in which Lewis Libby (see neo-cons) has heavy investments. Morgan Chase lent Saddam’s regime $500m (£320m) in 1983. Shultz is a member of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq and a patron of the American Enterprise Institute. Perle advised clients of Goldman Sachs, the investment house, on post-war investment opportunities in Iraq. Perle is also a director of the software company Autonomy Corp, which has clients including the Pentagon. Autonomy says it expects its profits to increase dramatically after the war in Iraq ends.

Clint Williamson, who is expected to head the Iraqi ministry of justice, appears to be one of the good guys. A former prosecutor at the Hague’s International War Crimes Tribunal, he helped compile evidence against Slobodan Milosevic. Williamson now works at Condoleezza Rice’s National Security Agency. Williamson appears ideally placed to deal with the unfolding chaos gripping the nation of Iraq, and is skilled and seasoned in preparing indictments against war criminals.

John Bolton



A prime architect of Bush’s Iraq policy, Bolton served Bush Snr and Reagan in the state department, justice department and USAid and is now under-secretary for arms control and international security in Bush Jnr’s state department. His appointment was intended to counter the dove-ish Colin Powell.

Bolton now leads Rumsfeld’s charge to destabilise Powell’s multilateralism. Bolton is part of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, the Project for the New American Century and is a vice-president at the American Enterprise Institute. He was also one of Bush’s chad-counters during the Florida count. Bolton has long advocated Taiwan getting a UN seat – he’s been on the payroll of the Taiwanese government.

The US unilateralist is a regular contributor to William Kristol’s right-wing Weekly Standard and has vilified UN Secretary General Kofi Annan. Bolton was an opponent of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and a cheerleader for the Star Wars Defence System. He has hinted at targeting Cuba in the war on terror. His financial interests include oil and arms firms and JP Morgan Chase, like Shultz. It is said that Bolton believes in the inevitability of Armageddon.

Like Woolsey, Bolton is said to believe we are in the midst of world war four which he estimates could take 40 years to finish. Despite evidence to the contrary they believe Iraq was involved in September 11. With Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Khalilzad, Bennet, Woolsey, Perle and Kristol, Bolton co-signed a letter in 1998 urging President Bill Clinton to take military action in Iraq .

CHECK IT

USA: DU-MUNITION

Rense/Idaho Observer: Death By Slow Burn - How America Nukes Its Own Troops
What 'Support Our Troops' Really Means
By Amy Worthington
The Idaho Observer
4-16-3

On March 30, an AP photo featured an American pro-war activist holding a sign: "Nuke the evil scum, it worked in 1945!" That's exactly what George Bush has done. America's mega-billion dollar war in Iraq has been indeed a NUCLEAR WAR.

Bush-Cheney have delivered upon 17 million Iraqis tons of depleted uranium (DU) weapons, a "liberation" gift that will keep on giving. Depleted uranium is a component of toxic nuclear waste, usually stored at secure sites. Handlers need radiation protection gear.

Over a decade ago, war-makers decided to incorporate this lethal waste into much of the Pentagon's weaponry. Navy ships carrying Phalanx rapid fire guns are capable of firing thousands of DU rounds per minute.1 Tomahawk missiles launched from U.S. ships and subs are DU-tipped.2 The M1 Abrams tanks are armored with DU.3 These and British Challenger II tanks are tightly packed with DU shells, which continually irradiate troops in or near them.4 The A-10 "tank buster" aircraft fires DU shells at machines and people on the battlefield.5

DU munitions are classified by a United Nations resolution as illegal weapons of mass destruction. Their use breaches all international laws, treaties and conventions forbidding poisoned weapons calculated to cause unnecessary suffering.

Ironically, support for our troops will extend well beyond the war in Iraq. Americans will be supporting Gulf War II veterans for years as they slowly and painfully succumb to radiation poisoning. U.S and British troops deployed to the area are the walking dead. Humans and animals, friends and foes in the fallout zone are destined to a long downhill spiral of chronic illness and disability. Kidney dysfunction, lung damage, bloody stools, extreme fatigue, joint pain, unsteady gait, memory loss and rashes and, ultimately, cancer and premature death await those exposed to DU.

Award-winning journalist Will Thomas wrote: "As the last Gulf conflict so savagely demonstrated, GI immune systems reeling from multiple doses of experimental vaccines offer little defense against further exposure to chemical weapons, industrial toxins, stress, caffeine, insect repellent and radiation leftover from the last war. This is a war even the victors will lose."6

When a DU shell is fired, it ignites upon impact. Uranium, plus traces of plutonium and americium, vaporize into tiny, ceramic particles of radioactive dust. Once inhaled, uranium oxides lodge in the body and emit radiation indefinitely. A single particle of DU lodged in a lymph node can devastate the entire immune system according to British radiation expert Roger Coghill.7

The Royal Society of England published data showing that battlefield soldiers who inhale or swallow high levels of DU can suffer kidney failure within days.8 Any soldier now in Iraq who has not inhaled lethal radioactive dust is not breathing. In the first two weeks of combat, 700 Tomahawks, at a cost of $1.3 million each, blasted Iraqi real estate into radioactive mushroom clouds.9 Millions of DU tank rounds liter the terrain. Cleanup is impossible because there is no place on the planet to put so much contaminated debris.

Bush Sr.'s Gulf War I was also a nuclear war. 320 tons of depleted uranium were used against Iraq in 1991.10 A 1998 report by the U.S. Agency for Toxic Substances confirms that inhaling DU causes symptoms identical to those claimed by many sick vets with Gulf War Syndrome.11 The Gulf War Veterans Association reports that at least 300,000 Gulf War I vets have now developed incapacitating illnesses.12 To date, 209,000 vets have filed claims for disability benefits based on service-connected injuries and illnesses from combat in that war.13

SARS BIOWEAPON

SARS Confirmed As Manmade - Possible BioWeapon
IRKUTSK --The virus of atypical pneumonia has been created artificially, possibly as a bacteriological weapon, believes Sergei Kolesnikov, Academician of the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences.

More On SARS As Manmade BioWeapon

More Scientists Say SARS Is A BioWeapon

Is SARS Mutating Into A Relatively Harmless Virus?

USA

NationalPost: War crimes case planned against U.S

Washington says groups' bid proves ICC a political tool

UNITED NATIONS - A coalition of lawyers and human rights groups yesterday unveiled a bid to use the UN's new International Criminal Court as a tool to restrain American military power.

In a move Washington said vindicated U.S. claims that the court would be used for political purposes, the rights activists are working to compile war crimes cases against the United States and its chief ally in Iraq, Britain.

"There is a way that the United States can be accused ... of aiding and abetting war crimes," said Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights.

The U.S. last year renounced the ICC, predicting it would become a political tool for opponents of U.S. foreign policy to launch frivolous prosecutions against U.S. military and diplomatic personnel.

"It appears they are trying to manufacture a case against the United States," said a senior official with the Bush administration. "So this clearly would be an example of the type of politicization that we're concerned with."

As a non-member, the United States would normally be outside of ICC jurisdiction unless it was suspected of crimes in a country that is an ICC member, which Iraq is not.

But the fact that Britain is a member has given the rights activists a springboard for a case that argues U.S. air raids that killed civilians were war crimes.

"The U.S. used bombers that took off from England ... and from Diego Garcia, also U.K. territory," said Mr. Ratner, referring to a British Indian Ocean island possession.

Britain, as an ICC member, could be prosecuted on a much wider array of activities that resulted in civilian deaths, the activists said.

Both U.S. and British officials have repeatedly said their forces make maximum efforts to avoid civilian casualties and never target civilians, which would violate the 1949 Geneva Conventions.

Rights activists joining Mr. Ratner yesterday were Phil Shiner of the British-based Public Interest Lawyers, and Roger Norman of the Committee on Economic and Social Rights.

They said five eminent international lawyers will outline a case against the United States and Britain next month for submission first to an international "alternative" court called the Permanent Peoples' Tribunal in Rome, then the prosecutor's office of the ICC in The Hague.

IRAK

Le monde: Embedded Photographer - 'I Saw Marines Kill Civilians'

"With my own eyes I saw about fifteen civilians killed in two days. I've gone through enough wars to know that it's always dirty, that civilians are always the first victims. But the way it was happening here, it was insane. . . . Distraught soldiers were saying: 'I ain't prepared for this, I didn't come here to shoot civilians.'"
Laurent Van der Stockt, a photographer working for the Gamma agency and under contract for the New York Times Magazine, followed the advance of the 3/4 Marines (3rd battalion, 4th regiment) for three weeks, up to the taking of Baghdad on April 9. He was accompanied by New York Times Magazine editor, Peter Maas. Born in Belgium in 1964, Laurent Van der Stockt mainly works in conflict zones: the first Gulf War, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Africa and the Occupied Territories. This is his eyewitness account of the Marines' march to Baghdad:

"Everything began at the Kuwait/Iraq border. I forced my way into the country and arrived at Safwan. American soldiers had seized the opportunity to tear up portraits of Saddam Hussein on the main street. They were doing this right in front of the local inhabitants, whose elation quickly vanished. The soldiers obviously didn't imagine that it was up to the Iraqis to be doing this, or that it was humiliating for them. These were the same soldiers who would topple down Saddam's statue in Baghdad three weeks later...

I understood that the Marines' general strategy was to not waste any time. In the cities they crossed, the Marines had to make a show of force. Then they would resume their advance by going as fast as possible up by the east through the desert, and avoid any contact with the population. It takes an effort to picture what an army looks like as it advances through the sands. It's an anthill. It's more than a city on the march. It's a world whose extremities are never seen. It's a cutting edge, mechanical version of Julius Caesar's army.

During the first few days, with colleagues from the New York Times and Newsweek, I tried to follow the convoys in a SUV by playing hide-and-seek. We were spending a lot of time then with the 1 500 Marines of the _, commanded by Colonel Bryan P. McCoy. His troops gave us water, gas and food. In exchange for their tolerance, we respected the rules to not pass the convoy and to camp at such and such a place. We were just barely tolerated. The colonel could see that the 'few jokers were behaving well'. He knew we had experienced more wars than his own troops.

For McCoy, we were obviously interesting right from the start. We were the ones who could tell his story. Trust settled in between us. He let us drive at the head of the convoy. The Marines are generally less privileged than the army. They're trained to do the dirty work, the less honorary jobs. They have the oldest tanks, and the least up-to-date M16 rifles. They themselves translate 'USMC' (United States Marine Corps) by United States Misgodded Children, i.e. the US' forgotten children, forgotten by God.

Their motto is 'Search and Kill'. The 'Kilo' unit is nicknamed 'Killer Kilo'. The words 'Carnivore' or 'Blind Killer' are painted on their tanks. McCoy could snap with a 'Shame on You' - a smile flashing across his face - to the sniper who had just finished telling him: 'I've got eight, Sir, but only five'. Literally meaning: I've shot eight, but only five of them are dead.

I've never seen a war with so few 'returns'. The Iraqi army was like a ghost. It barely existed. Over the three weeks, I only saw the adversary fire a few short-range rockets and a few shots. I saw deserted trenches, a dead Iraqi soldier lying next to a piece of bread and some old equipment. Nothing that really made you feel that there was a real confrontation going on, nothing comparable to the massiveness of the means at the Americans' disposal.

CHECK IT

IRAQ

Rense: How And Why US Encouraged Looting In Iraq

The widespread looting in Baghdad, Basra, Mosul, Kirkuk and other Iraqi cities, following the collapse of the Ba'athist regime of President Saddam Hussein, was not merely an incidental byproduct of the US military conquest of Iraq. It was deliberately encouraged and fostered by the Bush administration and the Pentagon for definite political and economic reasons.

Thousands took part in the looting in Baghdad which began April 9, the day the Hussein government ceased to function in the capital city. Not only were government ministries targeted, and the homes of the Ba'athist elite, but public institutions vital to Iraqi society, including hospitals, schools and food distribution centers. Equipment and parts were stripped from power plants, thus delaying the restoration of electricity to the city of 5 million people.

Perhaps the most devastating loss for the Iraqi people is the ransacking of the National Museum, the greatest trove of archeological and historical artifacts in the Middle East. The 28 galleries of the huge museum were picked clean by looters who made off with more than 50,000 irreplaceable artifacts, relics of past civilizations dating back 5,000 years. The museum's entire card catalog was destroyed, making it impossible even to identify what has been lost.

The US military stood by and permitted the ransacking of the museum, an incalculable blow to Iraqi and world culture, just as they allowed and even encouraged the looting of hospitals, universities, libraries and government social service buildings. The occupation forces protected only the Ministry of Oil, with its detailed inventory of Iraqi oil reserves, as well as the Ministry of Interior, the headquarters of the ousted regime's secret police

Sweden's largest newspaper, Dagens Nyheter, published an interview April 11 with a Swedish researcher of Middle Eastern ancestry who had gone to Iraq to serve as a human shield. Khaled Bayoumi told the newspaper, "I happened to be right there just as the American troops encouraged people to begin the plundering."

He described how US soldiers shot security guards at a local government building on Haifa Avenue on the west bank of the Tigris, and then "blasted apart the doors to the building." Next, according to Bayoumi, "from the tanks came eager calls in Arabic encouraging people to come close to them."

At first, he said, residents were hesitant to come out of their homes because anyone who had tried to cross the street in the morning had been shot. "Arab interpreters in the tanks told the people to go and take what they wanted in the building," Bayoumi continued. "The word spread quickly and the building was ransacked. I was standing only 300 yards from there when the guards were murdered. Afterwards the tank crushed the entrance to the Justice Department, which was in a neighboring building, and the plundering continued there.

"I stood in a large crowd and watched this together with them. They did not partake in the plundering but dared not to interfere. Many had tears of shame in their eyes. The next morning the plundering spread to the Modern Museum, which lies a quarter mile farther north. There were also two crowds there, one that plundered and one that watched with disgust."

CHECK IT

IRAQ: AMERICAN SOLDIERS LOOTING

Rense/InformationClearinghouse.info: Are These US Marines Looting/Liberating Iraqi Gold?Or Just Fixing Saddam's Door?

The picture shows what would appear to be, US Marines stripping gold plating from a door located in one of Saddam's palaces. Another possible explanation is that these boys found the door was not working properly and are attempting to fix its hinges...

CHECK THE PICTURE! AMERICAN SOLDIERS ARE LOOTING IN IRAQ

USA

Guardian: SPECTRE ORANGE
Nearly 30 years after the Vietnam war, a chemical weapon used by US troops is still exacting a hideous toll on each new generation. Cathy Scott-Clark and Adrian Levy report

Hong Hanh is falling to pieces. She has been poisoned by the most toxic molecule known to science; it was sprayed during a prolonged military campaign. The contamination persists. No redress has been offered, no compensation. The superpower that spread the toxin has done nothing to combat the medical and environmental catastrophe that is overwhelming her country. This is not northern Iraq, where Saddam Hussein gassed 5,000 Kurds in 1988. Nor the trenches of first world war France. Hong Hanh's story, and that of many more like her, is quietly unfolding in Vietnam today. Her declining half-life is spent unseen, in her home, an unremarkable concrete box in Ho Chi Minh City, filled with photographs, family plaques and yellow enamel stars, a place where the best is made of the worst.
Hong Hanh is both surprising and terrifying. Here is a 19-year-old who lives in a 10-year-old's body. She clatters around with disjointed spidery strides which leave her soaked in sweat. When she cannot stop crying, soothing creams and iodine are rubbed into her back, which is a lunar collage of septic blisters and scabs. "My daughter is dying," her mother says. "My youngest daughter is 11 and she has the same symptoms. What should we do? Their fingers and toes stick together before they drop off. Their hands wear down to stumps. Every day they lose a little more skin. And this is not leprosy. The doctors say it is connected to American chemical weapons we were exposed to during the Vietnam war."

There are an estimated 650,000 like Hong Hanh in Vietnam, suffering from an array of baffling chronic conditions. Another 500,000 have already died. The thread that weaves through all their case histories is defoliants deployed by the US military during the war. Some of the victims are veterans who were doused in these chemicals during the war, others are farmers who lived off land that was sprayed. The second generation are the sons and daughters of war veterans, or children born to parents who lived on contaminated land. Now there is a third generation, the grandchildren of the war and its victims.

CHECK IT CHECK IT CHECK IT CHECK IT CHECK IT

IRAQ

Islamonline: U.S. Threatens Iraqi Scientists

CAIRO, April 12 (IslamOnline.net & News Agencies) – Appealing to the world community to protect them from the U.S. aggression aimed at obliterating Iraq’s minds, a number of Iraqi scientists and university professors sent an SOS e-mail complaining American occupation forces were threatening their lives.

In their e-mail, a copy of which was sent to IslamOnlin.net Friday, April 11, they said they have dictated their message to a respected Iraqi scientist in the Netherlands over phone, urging him to circulate it to all parties concerned to protect them from the arbitrary inquires and arrests by the U.S. occupation forces.

Iraqi scientists asserted that occupation troops demanded them, particularly physicists, chemists and mathematicians, to hand over all documents and researches in their possession.

The appeal message also said that looting and robberies were being taken place under the watchful eye of the occupation soldiers.

The occupation soldiers, the e-mail added, are transporting mobs to the scientific institutions, such as Mosul University and different educational institutions, to destroy scientific research centers and confiscate all papers and documents to nip in the bud any Iraqi scientific renaissance.

The frantic scientists also underlined that some of them were placed under house arrest and deprived of going to their laboratories and universities.

USA

San Francisco Gate: Arcata the defiant
Town ordinance penalizes officials who cooperate with Patriot Act, but law may not stand up in court

Arcata, that tiny North Coast bastion of the robustly liberal, has quietly made itself the first city in the nation to outlaw voluntary compliance with the USA Patriot Act.

Town leaders know their new law outlawing the bigger law is probably illegal. And they don't know anyone local who's had troubles because of the Patriot Act.

But the very existence of the sweeping federal policy -- passed by Congress swiftly after Sept. 11, 2001, to expand powers to search, conduct surveillance and throw people in jail during terrorism probes -- so rubbed them the wrong way that they felt they had to make a stand.

So about a week ago, the Arcata City Council approved an ordinance telling its management workers they cannot "officially assist or voluntarily cooperate" with any investigators trying to carry out what the city considers provisions of the Patriot Act that violate the Bill of Rights and the Constitution.

Which, city leaders said, is pretty much all of the act except the heading on the governmental letterhead

IRAN

Guardian: Iran Won't Recognize U.S.-Led Iraq Gov't


TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iranian President Mohammad Khatami said Wednesday his country will not recognize a U.S.-installed interim administration in Iraq and will support Syria if it is attacked.

It was the first time a senior official had defined Iran's already well-known stance on a postwar Iraq.

``We will not recognize any administration other than an all Iraqi government. However, we are not seeking tension or confrontation with anybody,'' Khatami told reporters after a Cabinet meeting.

IRAQ: PROPAGANDA WATCH

Washington Post: Iraqis Say Lynch Raid Faced No Resistance
NASIRIYAH, Iraq, April 14 -- Accounts of the U.S. military's dramatic rescue of Pfc. Jessica Lynch from Saddam Hospital here two weeks ago read like the stuff of a Hollywood script. For Iraqi doctors working in the hospital that night, it was exactly that -- Hollywood dazzle, with little need for real action.

"They made a big show," said Haitham Gizzy, a physician at the public hospital here who treated Lynch for her injuries. "It was just a drama," he said. "A big, dramatic show."

Gizzy and other doctors said no Iraqi soldiers or militiamen were at the hospital that night, April 1, when the U.S. Special Operations forces came in helicopters to carry out the midnight rescue. Most of the Saddam's Fedayeen fighters, and the entire Baath Party leadership, including the governor of the province, had come to the hospital earlier in the day, changed into civilian clothes and fled, the doctors said.

"They brought their civilian wear with them," said Mokhdad Abd Hassan, who was on duty that day and evening. He pointed to green army uniforms still piled on the lawn. "You can see their military suits," he said. "They all ran away, the same day."

"It was all the leadership," Gizzy said. "Even the governor and the director general of the Baath Party. . . . They left walking, barefoot, in civilian wear."

"Die 19 Jährige Kriegsgefangene Lynch die laut Ari Fleischer Heldenhaft Hollywoodmässig von Amerikanischen Spezialeinehiten gerettet wurde lag unbewacht in einem Krankenhaus und hätte dort auch einfach so abgeholt werden können. Laut Ari Fleischer wurde Sie bei der Gefangennahme angeschossen und abgestochen. Ihr Vater aber sagt Sie hätte keine Stich- und Schusswunden erlitten was sich mit der Aussage von Irakischer Seite deckt. Die Guten Amerikanischen Helden kamen nicht in einen Hinterhalt sondern hatten schlicht und einfach einen Autounfall. White House- The Propaganda you should believe"

IRAQ

Guardian: Democracy only grows from below, US-British policy has ensured that
genuine Iraqi opposition is broken

When the B52s went in, there was not even a semblance of a democratic
force in Iraq that could make a revolution against Saddam or form the nucleus
of a new democratic order there. Why? Chiefly because the US and UK
supported Saddam when he smashed all opposition in the 1980s, provoked uprisings
in 1991 and made sure Saddam could crush them, and, ever since, starved
the people and wrecked the country's infrastructure and industry in 12
years of sanctions. Freed from such devastating interventions, who knows what
democratic organisations and opposition might have evolved, even under
the Saddam dictatorship?

In the event, all that has been created on the pile of corpses in this
war (and most people die in such a war not by being shot or bombed
directly, but from loss of limb, blood, disease or plague) is a political vacuum
into which plunge a host of contractors, bounty hunters, looters and
minorities terrified of another round of persecution. In this chaos, the only
beneficiaries are the millionaires and their toadying politicians who
caused it in the first place. Our political leaders promise elections,
as though poor dismembered Iraq can be compared to East Germany or
Czechoslovakia or Indonesia or Serbia after their tyrants were deposed
in the 1980s and 1990s. In all those countries, elections followed close
on the end of the dictatorships. But in all those countries the tyrants
were toppled by movements from below. In Iraq, as in Afghanistan, the
tyrants were toppled from above, by stronger military power in other countries.
In Afghanistan, they are still waiting for elections and will wait a long
time yet, but not as long, I expect, as in Iraq.

IRAQ

Independent: Baghdad museum's greatest treasures 'stolen to order'

Three of the most important antiquities in the history of civilisation were apparently "stolen to order" from the National Museum in Baghdad in the looting that greeted the toppling of Saddam Hussein.

The three objects are a 5,000-year-old vase, an Akkadian (Babylonian-Assyrian) statue base from 2000BC and an Assyrian stone statue from about 800BC. An international alert will now be mounted for these items.

Distraught Iraqi curators said they alone were guarding the shattered fragments of their collections and had resolved to stay because American forces were still unwilling to stand guard outside the National Museum in Baghdad despite international condemnation of the looting.

While there was little left to steal, they stressed the importance of making sure the broken pots, statues and other precious relics of the ancient Iraqi civilisations of Assyria and Mesopotamia – the "cradle of urban civilisation" – lay undisturbed until experts arrived to try to piece them back together.

SYRIA

Daily Star: Leaders focus on American threat to Syria
‘Beginning of occupation of other Arab countries’ is at hand

Threats and challenges” against Syria continued to preoccupy Lebanese religious and political leaders Tuesday, with assertions that the war on Iraq was the “beginning of the occupation of other Arab countries.”
The National Action Forum headed by former Prime Minister Salim Hoss strongly criticized US “double-standard” policy. It said while the United States attacked Iraq on the pretext that it had failed to apply UN resolutions, it overlooked Israeli violations of innumerable UN resolutions against Lebanon, Palestine and Syria.
Meanwhile, US Ambassador Vincent Battle said his country was looking forward to cooperation with Syria on a wide range of issues.

SYRIA

Islamic Republic News Agency: US starts military-build along Iraq's border with Syria: German daily

Berlin, April 14, IRNA -- The United States has apparently began a
major military build-up along Iraq's western borders with Syria, the
daily Bild cited confidential remarks by an unidentified US general.
New American troop contingents and heavy military hardware,
including A-10 fighter planes, M1 'Abrams' tanks, 'Apache' combat
helicopters and massive bomb arsenals, have been secretly deployed in
the Iraqi town of Ar-Rutbah .
Washington has repeatedly threatened Damascus over the past days
for allegedly aiding the deposed Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein.
Syria has dismissed the American charges.
OT/HZ/AH
End

IRAQ

Globe and Mail: Syria's oil lifeline cut off
Washington - Turning the screws on Syria, the United States closed a
pipeline carrying Iraqi oil yesterday in a move that could cripple
Syria's
already weak economy. After days of warnings and accusations that Syria
is
a terrorist-supporting rogue state harbouring fleeing leaders of
deposed
Iraqi president Saddam Hussein's regime - accusations that have been
rejected as false and baseless by Damascus - the White House moved to
back
up its tough talk, ordering U.S. Army engineers to shut the spigot that
fuelled one of the few healthy sectors of Syria's miserable economy.

ALSO: U.S. also denies Iraqi oil to Lebanon The United States has
halted
the flow of Iraqi oil to Lebanon. Arab diplomatic sources said the
U.S.-led
invasion forces in Iraq shut down the Iraqi-Syrian oil pipeline that
extended from Kirkuk to the Syrian port city of Banyas.
US denies Iraqi Oil to Lebanon

"The war is over - let the war begin"

IRAQ

Chinapost: Anti-American protests are intensifying in Iraq

Anti-American protests intensified here and in southern Iraq on Tuesday, as U.S. forces struggled with the delicate task of rebuilding the country after toppling the regime of Saddam Hussein.
Exasperated U.S. military officials tried to hamper the media from covering new demonstrations in Baghdad while some 20,000 people in the Shiite Muslim bastion of Nasiriyah railed against a U.S.-staged meeting on Iraq's future.

The protests came as the Americans delivered a first progress report in their effort to restore Iraq to normalcy and head off a chorus of criticism over continued lawlessness and a lack of basic services.

Some 200-300 Iraqis gathered Tuesday outside the Palestine Hotel, where the U.S. Marines have set up an operations base, for a third straight day of protests against the U.S. occupation.

For the first time, visibly angered U.S. military officials sought to distance the media from the protest, moving reporters and cameras about 30 meters from the barbed-wired entrance to the hotel.

"We want you to pull back to the back of the hotel because the Iraqis are only performing because the media are here," said a Marine colonel who wore the name Zarcone but would not give his first name or title.

IRAQ: WHERE'S SADDAM?

Rense: How Guard And Fedayeen Made A Deal With Rumsfeld
Eric Mueller comments:

Evidently, this newspaper, "Sawt al-`Urouba", has no internet website. The report clearly originates from an American source. As one translates it, it "feels" as though it was once written in English.

It also has the typical boastful "Americans never make mistkakes" "Americans always outsmart everybody" tone that has become so nauseatingly predominant in coverage of the Anglo-American aggression againt Iraq, and it makes no mention of certain things that might be embarrassing for the US and which are now leaking out elsewhere in Arabic.

Nevertheless, it does bring out a number of interesting details and is the longest report on the Great Betrayal that I have seen so far. There have been other reports in the Arabic press that in broad outlines have told the same tale.

Arabist Eric Mueller is this website's expert on Middle Eastern affairs.


The Deal
By Walid Rabbah
Exclusive to Sawt al-`Urouba
April 14, 2003

LEBANON -- One day after the start of the war against Iraq American Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld appeared on American television screens to say something that the press interpreted as some sort of American propaganda. In reality, though, it was the basis for what was later to take place.

Rumsfeld said that there had been communications between the Americans and leaders in the Republican Guard in Iraq. He said that the details could not be disclosed now, but urged listeners to wait for coming days.

Three days later the American media played an audio tape on which recorded voices could be heard speaking in Arabic guiding American forces to important bombing targets. The voices were translated immediately in the headquarters of the American forces so that orders could be issued accordingly.

In fact, Rumsfeld was not just talking at random. There had been communications that took place in total secrecy between the leaders of the Republican Guard and the Commanders of Saddam's Fedayeen, unbeknownst to the Iraqi leader and his son who was in charge of a huge military organization that could have made life hell for the American forces had they joined the battle.

The communications grew in intensity after the Republican Guard entered its first battle against the American forces in the environs of Baghdad, and after much of its equipment was destroyed. The Americans could see that they were facing a force with high military preparedness, one that was well trained and could inflict tremendous losses on the American forces whenever they tried to enter Baghdad.

The offer proposed by the American command in Iraq to the Republican Guard and Saddam's Fedayeen was generous. The offers were run past Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, who okayed them immediately. The provided for:

1. In return for not opposing American forces and for laying down their weapons, the United States will give the following:

Transportation for the Republican Guards top echelon to secure locations outside of Iraq,

Transportation of the Republican Guards leaders of the second echelon to "liberated" places of which the Anglo-American forces had control inside Iraq,

Granting to the top echelon of the Republican Guards large sums of money, with lesser sums going to the second echelon,

Granting some of the leaders of the top echelon of the Republican Guard, and to those who had not committed "war crimes" official roles in "liberated" Iraq after the end of the war,

Granting American citizenship and residency in the United States to some of the first echelon commanders and their families, depending on their wishes,

Establishing a balance between the Iraqi Opposition that will have a limited role in the administration of Iraq on the one hand, and Republican Guard commanders who did not fight the American forces, on the other.

2. As a guarantee of this (which the commanders of the Republican Guard did not completely trust), the United States disclosed some of its agents whom it had planted among the "human shields" who were guiding the American military to positions to be bombed and where President Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi leadership could be found. A brief meeting was held between one of the agents serving as a "human shield" and some members of the Republican Guard during which the latter were handed official written documents addressed to the first echelon of the Republican Guard. These reassured the Republican Guard commanders that the assurances were reliable. The documents provided for:

After the occupation of Saddam International Airport, Republican Guards of the top echelon should arrive at the airport so that they could be transported away. If that proved impossible, a place should be agreed upon where an Apache helicopter or two could land somewhere near Baghdad in order to transport them away.

Some commanders of the second echelon should secure themselves within the Iraqi Republican Palace adjacent to the Airport. American forces would fire some shells at it in order to announce that they had taken it, then American forces would transfer them to the airport.

Orders should be issued to the commanders of the Second Echelon of the Republican Guard not to resist and to lay down their weapons, together with promises of their safety, and that of their families, and they would be transported to secure locations. In turn they were to issue orders to those of lower rank in their commands not to put up resistance. The Republican Guard's first echelon used a deception to get lower ranks to accept such an order by telling them that the resistance would be carried on secretly in accordance with a plan prepared by the Iraqi leadership to protract the war and catch the American forces in a trap that had been laid for them. This trick was used on the lower ranking commanders of the Republican Guard.

First and Second echelon commanders of the Republican Guard would be given sums of money in dollars as a down payment to guarantee the implementation of the agreement.

Human Shields

From the beginning, the heads of the American Central Intelligence Agency followed a plan to use the work of agents posing as "human shields." The CIA chiefs used peace activists in America carefully and systematically. They sent three groups of peace activists to the region, and in particular into Baghdad on the basis that that would be the place where the decisive battle would be fought.

The deception worked with the Iraqi leaders who placed different groups of human shields in important places such as: factories and manufactories that had great importance for the population. Storehouses of weapons belonging to the Republican Guard were located inside those factories and manufactories, and this fact was openly acknowledged. But inside, hidden under ground, there were huge stockpiles of weapons sufficient for waging a resistance struggle for years. These were ostensibly civilian installations but on the inside were military. These included centers where rockets were gathered for destruction under the UN supervised program, while some of them were stored in underground military storehouses.

The Iraqi measures, whereby they distributed the human shields to vital locations, was in fact a trap set for the Iraqis, for the human shields carried difficult-to-detect delicate communication devices for communicating with the American forces during the bombing. It later became clear that these devices played an outstanding role in pinpointing the positions of Saddam and his leaders, as well as places where weapons were being stored.

Occupation of the Airport The occupation of Saddam International Airport was a turning point inasmuch as it enabled the American forces to carry out their entire plan as it had been detailed in the documents that they had been given and as they had been promised. The commanders of the Republican Guard were reassured, in particular those of the first echelon, that what the American forces had promised them was the truth. The Republican Guard commanders then provided complete information about the various military positions around the airport and inside of it. They also gave complete information about the tunnels that extended from the Republican Palace to inside the airport, tunnels that had been built especially so that the Iraqi president could use them should he ever be in danger. American forces occupied these tunnels, unknown to any but the first echelon of the Republican Guard.

On the second day after the occupation of the airport Muhammad Sa`id as-Sahhaf assured the world that Saddam International Airport was still in the hands of the Iraqi forces. He based his assurances on a promise of an "innovative and unusual" sort of response, as he put it, when Iraqi fighters and Republican Guards would sweep from the palace through the tunnels and on towards the airport in a surprise attack on the American forces occupying the airport. He did not know even as he spoke that American forces had discovered the location of those secure tunnels and that they would confront the small numbers of Iraqis who were sent there, under the leadership of third echelon commanders of the Republican Guard, and who would find the Americans waiting for them.

Time at that difficult juncture was golden. The American forces saw that the road had opened up to Baghdad, so they carried out two essential operations simultaneously:

The first operation: to introduce tanks to the approaches of Baghdad from where they would penetrate to the area of the Palestine Hotel, on condition that they would not cross the bridge to the opposite bank. This occurred after they were sure that orders had been issued to the Republican Guard to disappear in accordance with the "secret plan" to which the first echelon commanders had already alerted their junior officers.

The second operation: to prepare a military transport plane of at least 200 seats to transport the first echelon commanders of the Republican Guard and some members of the second echelon to secure locations.

The orders given to the American soldiers who advanced to secure a bridgehead for the rest of their forces were as follows:

First: attempt to silence the media that were transmitting pictures of the places where the breakthrough was occurring (this is what took place when the offices of al-Jazeera TV, and the Abu Dhabi TV station, were shelled) and to try to herd the journalists into a place from which they could not move, except by order of the coalition forces, or, to be precise, the US Marines. Second: To cut communications and electricity off from the area and to attempt to shell the little electricity generators in the area in order to completely knock out any means for transmission once and for all.


Teheran Times: Dictator's Collusion In The Iraq 'War'

Note - This is the first story to point in the direction of possible/probable answers to a number of key questions about the US-UK zionist subjugation of Iraq. When the Iraqis failed to blow a single bridge - a classic and mandatory defensive military strategy - suspicions arose immediately. Aside from a handful of oil well-head fires in the South, there was no effort to torch Iraq's oil assets by Saddam. The repeated deployment of the regular Iraqi army and the Guard into exposed areas in the desert - and certain death by total US and UK airpower and carpet bombing - is also equally bizarre in a military sense. What happened to the deadly Russian Kornet wire-guided antitank missiles which surprised the 'Coalition' in the South? And now the 'obliteration' of Saddam and sons can only be 'confirmed' by 'dna' on the word of possibly a single person in a lab somewhere...how potentially convenient. And then there is the remarkably and surprising ease with which Baghdad was taken. There are many things to ponder in the weeks ahead, and high-level collusion is certainly at the top of list. This article begins the search for possible answers. Nothing much is as it seems. -ed


Almost 10 days ago, there was a halt in U.S.-British operations in Iraq. However, U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and the chief of the U.S. Central Command, General Tommy Franks, in their interviews with the media never elaborated on the issue, but instead tried to mislead world public opinion in order to hide a greater secret decision from them.

The Balochistan Post: Did US Allow Saddam To Flee?
Was The Surrender A Result Of Conspiracy?
People Of Iraq Are Asking Questions

BAGHDAD -- Did US intentionally allow Saddam Hussein to flee from Iraq to Syria for a final destination in Russia after a last minute bargain with Moscow to capture the capital of Iraq without fighting? Is the question that thousands of the people in the World are asking as they fail to understand that how come the defences of the Baghdad collapsed within hours.

According to rumours and unconfirmed reports President Saddam Hussein was traveling with the caravan of Russian diplomats that was attacked by the US troops despite the fact that the US had given approval for Saddam's covert removal from Baghdad in a deal for the surrender of the capital without resistance.

These unconfirmed reports suggest that the deal was reached between the Russian and US governments after talks between US national security advisor Condoleeza Rice and Russian officials just before US attack on Baghdad

IRAQ

Guardian: Pro-Saddam Gangs Challenge US Control Of Tikrit

TIKRIT -- Gangs of Arab tribesmen armed with Kalashnikovs and machine guns were still in control of much of Tikrit last night, a day after US marines apparently liberated the town.

Hours after the Pentagon announced the war in Iraq was virtually over, Arab youths established their own checkpoint on the edge of Saddam Hussein's former stronghold.

They shot dead at least one Kurd, leaving his body in the middle of a roundabout, and opened fire on several cars while shouting pro-Saddam slogans.

American marines control Tikrit's almost deserted main square and the road south to Baghdad, as well as the main bridge spanning the Tigris. But they have failed to establish a presence on the eastern side of theriver, where hundreds of youths loyal to Saddam are holed up.

Light armoured vehicles have mounted reconnaissance patrols, but the armed tribesmen vanish whenever the Americans turn up and reappear only when they leave.

USA

Heise: Operettenimperialismus

Allenthalben hört man von der unendlichen Überlegenheit der USA, von ihrer ökonomischen Übermacht, ihrer waffentechnischen Einzigartigkeit, ihren unendlichen Ressourcen. An einem beliebigen TV-Abend hört man dieses Mantra mindestens ein dutzendmal, teilweise drei- viermal kurz hintereinander. Im scharfen Kontrast zur angeblichen Allmacht der USA stand das Vorspiel zum Irak-Krieg im UN-Sicherheitsrat: Die USA und Großbritannien standen allein. Mexiko, Chile und Deutschland sagten nein, selbst politische und wirtschaftliche Zwerge wie Angola muckten auf und zum Schluss verweigerte gar die Türkei die Gefolgschaft. Und auch jetzt geht das Gezerre in der UNO munter weiter. Zwei Fragen drängen sich auf: Sind die USA wirklich so mächtig? Braucht die Welt diese Macht überhaupt?

Emmanuell Todd, französischer Demograf und Historiker, der in einer Studie schon 1976 den Untergang der Sowjetunion vorhergesehen hat, beantwortet in seinem Essay "Weltmacht USA. Ein Nachruf", beide Fragen mit einem klaren Nein. Das Buch wurde bisher schon in 11 Sprachen übersetzt und hat eine lebhafte Debatte ausgelöst. Unter anderem auf der webpage der schweizer Wochenzeitung WOZ.

Die USA befinden sich wirtschaftlich in einer Situation zunehmender Schwäche. Todd begründet dies mit dem schon vielfach diskutiertem Fakt des immensen Außenhandelsdefizits. Dieses Defizit wird in der deutschen linken Debatte gerne als Menetekel des bald bevorstehenden endgültigen Zusammenbruchs des Kapitalismus angesehen, Todd interpretiert es jedoch auf eine neue und theoretisch interessante Weise.

Die deutschen Lohnstückkosten sinken mit geringen Schwankungen, seit 1993 kontinuierlich, die Folge der stetig steigenden Produktivität und der stagnierenden Löhne. Das Resultat ist der deutsche Exportboom und der deutsche Kaufkraftschwund.. Die US-Lohnstückkosten dagegen steigen im gleichen Zeitraum, ihre Produkte sind auf dem Weltmarkt nicht konkurrenzfähig.
Als Folge bleibt das Wachstum der industriellen Güterproduktion der USA seit Mitte der 1980er Jahre hinter den anderen Branchen, insbesondere Handel, Dienstleistungen und Finanzdienstleistungen weit zurück

Im gleichen Maße wächst das Handelsbilanzdefizit. Es hat im letzten Jahr die astronomische Summe von 500 Milliarden $ pro Jahr angenommen.

Diesen Daten entspricht auch die Alltagserfahrung: Computer stammen aus Taiwan. Werkzeugmaschinen und Autos stammen aus Deutschland. Roboter stammen aus Japan.

Einzig in dem schmalen Segment der CPUs halten die USA noch ein Monopol und auch Microsoft behauptet sich noch im Markt der Betriebssysteme und Bürosoftware, obgleich bedroht von Linux und Konsorten. Ansonsten kämpfen die USA um ihre Pfründe aus vergangenen Zeiten, um Urheberrechte und Patente. Der amerikanische Kapitalismus ist auf dem Weg in den Rentierkapitalismus. Die USA haben ihre Produktion ausgelagert, damit aber haben sie auch ihren Entwicklungsvorsprung verloren.

Die USA haben ihre Überlegenheit auf dem Hightech-Sektor nicht kampflos aufgegeben, sie haben alles, was ihnen möglich war, versucht: Geheimhaltung, Exportbeschränkungen, Industriespionage. Es hat alles nichts genutzt. Grund war vermutlich, neben rein ökonomischen Faktoren, ein kultureller Faktor.

"Ökonomie" ist nach unserer Überzeugung keine ontologische Wesenheit, die man aus sich selbst heraus begreifen könnte, sondern bestenfalls eine Betrachtungsweise mit begrenzter Aussagekraft. In das tatsächliche Wirtschaften gehen politische, mentale, demografische etc. Faktoren mindestens gleichgewichtig ein.

WOZ Debatte: Die Burg zieht die Zugbrücke hoch
Der Krieg im Irak ist für die USA nur ein Vorspiel. Ihr Ziel ist der Weltbürgerkrieg einer globalisierten Elite gegen den Rest der Menschheit. Aristokratische Herrschaftsformen des Altertums sind das Modell.

CHECK IT

SITE OF THE DAY

We Love The Iraqi Information Minister

This site is a coalition effort of bloodthirsty hawks and ineffectual doves united in admiration for Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf, Iraqi Minister of Information (currently on administrative leave).

"In an age of spin, al-Sahaf offers feeling and authenticity. His message is consistent -- unshakeable, in fact, no matter the evidence -- but he commands daily attention by his on-the-spot, invective-rich variations on the theme. His lunatic counterfactual art is more appealing than the banal awfulness of the Reliable Sources. He is a Method actor in a production that will close in a couple of days. He stands superior to truth."

-- Jean-Pierre McGarrigle

IRAQ

Heise: "Das passiert"

Das Ölministerium wurde von US-Soldaten geschützt, das Museum von Bagdad ließ man leer räumen und die Bibliothek anzünden

Weil Frankreich und Deutschland längst Teil der "Achse des Bösen" sind, wirft die US-Army Bomben auf die Hauptstädte und vertreibt neben Kanzler und Präsidenten auch Polizei und Sicherheitskräfte aus den Städten. In einer Amnestie zuvor freigelassene Gefängnisinsassen stürmen daraufhin gemeinsam mit den Bewohnern der Slums von Paris, Berlin und München den Louvre, die Pinakotheken und die Nationalbibliotheken, klauen und zertrümmern alles und setzen den Rest in Brand.

Nur ein geschmackloser Alptraum aus einem schlechten Science-Fiction-Film? Nicht wirklich. Genau dies ist nämlich nun mit dem Museum und der Bibliothek geschehen, die die Dokumente und Kunstwerke der Wiege der Menschheit enthielten, dem Zweistromland zwischen Euphrat und Tigris, heute unter dem Namen Irak bekannt.

Das Museum von Bagdad war bei Archäologen und Kunstliebhabern berühmt, wenn es auch in den letzten 20 Jahren kaum mehr von westlichen Besuchern besichtigt wurde. Immerhin stammen aus diesem Gebiet die Werke der ersten bekannten Kultur der Welt, das Museum enthielt über 170.000 bis zu 10.000 Jahre alte Ausstellungsstücke. Seine Zerstörung oder das Zulassen derselben zählt damit rechtlich unter Kriegsverbrechen nach der Hager Konvention, welche die USA aber sicherheitshalber nie unterzeichnet haben. Die größte Sorge der Wissenschaftler war, dass das Museum von einer Bombe getroffen werden könnte, was auch nur bei Absicht gegen die Genfer Konvention verstoßen hätte. Das passierte zwar nicht, doch das Resultat ist nun das Gleiche:

Ölquellen, sowie Öl- und Innenministerium in Bagdad wurden nach dem Einmarsch der Amerikaner sofort besetzt und gegen Übergriffe und Zerstörung geschützt. Ebenso Saddam Husseins Palast und einige seiner bekannten Zufluchtsorte und auch sonst waren die US-Soldaten nicht gerade zimperlich.

MIDDLE EAST

Spiegel: Araber wollen ein Nahost ohne Massenvernichtungswaffen
Die arabischen Staaten gehen gegen die US-Vorwürfe in die Offensive. Sie wollen einen Resolutionsentwurf im Uno-Sicherheitsrat einbringen, der die Nahost-Region zur massenvernichtungswaffenfreien Zone erklärt.

New York - Die Staaten der Arabischen Liga wollten am Mittwoch eine entsprechende Vorlage einbringen, kündigte der syrische Uno-Botschafter Faissal Mekdad nach einer nicht-öffentlichen Sitzung in New York an. Israel sei das einzige Land in der Region, das Massenvernichtungswaffen besitze. Deshalb verstehe man die Vorwürfe der USA an die Regierung in Damaskus nicht. Die USA verdächtigen Syrien, Chemiewaffen getestet zu haben.
Der Botschafter der Arabischen Liga bei den Vereinten Nationen, Jahja Mahmassani, nannte die US-Vorwürfe an die Adresse Syriens unannehmbar und haltlos. US-Außenminister Colin Powell hatte Syrien unter anderem mit wirtschaftlichen Sanktionen gedroht und von der dortigen Regierung ein Umdenken angemahnt.

"Mit was für einer Begründung die USA wohl diesesmal ihr Veto einlegen werden?"

RESISTANCE

ZMAG: Kommunique des Geheimen Revolutionären Indigenen Komitees
Generalkommando der Zapatistischen Armee der Nationalen Befreiung
von Subcommandante Marcos
La Jornada 12.04.2003

An das Volk von Mexiko:
An die Völker der Welt:
Brüder und Schwestern:

Auf der ganzen Welt finden heute Mobilisierungen statt, um gegen den Krieg der Vereinigten Staaten und Großbritanniens gegen die irakische Bevölkerung zu protestieren.

Wir möchten daher unsere Worte mit einem Gruß an alle Menschen beginnen, die weltweit und in andere Teile Mexikos demonstrieren, um "Nein" zum Krieg der Mächtigen zu sagen.

Denn man kann einen Krieg nicht ablehnen ohne klar zu definieren, wer ihn führt, genau wie man kein Verbrechen verurteilen kann, ohne den Mörder zu erwähnen.

Dort oben, wo das Geld Gott und Meister ist, feiern sie einen Sieg, der nichts anderes ist als eine Attrappe, die mit arabischem Blut bemalt ist, das, wie wir nicht vergessen sollten, menschliches Blut ist, auch wenn die großen Medienmonopole uns gerne vom Gegenteil überzeugen würden.

Dort oben reibt sich der Herr der Furcht die Hände, und denkt er könne jetzt ohne Widerstand regieren. Er denkt, das Hauptziel dieses Krieges, die Globalisierung der Furcht und der Unterwerfung, erreicht zu haben.

Dort oben ist der Zyklop der Macht zufrieden, weil sein Blick auf Blut fällt, das Blut des anderen, des unterschiedlichen.

Wenn die Macht des Geldes denkt sie habe die Menschlichkeit besiegt, dann nur weil sie nur sich selbst und seine winzige Klone betrachtet, die in den Vereinten Nationen und den verschiedenen Regierungen der Welt herumschwärmen, einschließlich der mexikanischen Regierung.

Nun, da der Fall Bagdads gefeiert wird, zeigen die Regierungen der Welt, die sich zum Anfang widersetzt hatten, ihr wahres Gesicht, während sie untereinander aushandeln, wie die Beute verteilt werden soll.

Denn Krieg ist Geschäft, und die Nachkriegszeit ist auch ein Geschäft.

Kein Geschäftsmann möchte aus dem Handel ausgeschlossen werden, und sie hoffen zumindest auf ein Paar Brosamen von der Festtafel, die die Vereinigten Staaten für ein Volk beabsichtigen, das in den Medien als besiegt und erobert dargestellt werden.

Aber die Mächte liegen falsch. Sie liegen immer falsch.

Ihr aktueller Krieg hat nicht die Furcht und die Unterwerfung globalisiert, es sei denn die der politischen Klasse.

Nein, was dieser Krieg internationalisiert hat ist die Empörung, die Ablehnung, den Protest, das "Nein".

Wenn der derzeitigen US Regierung für irgendetwas zuerkannt werden kann, dann dass sie in wenige Wochen das erreicht hat, wofür Hitler Jahre brauchte: die Verurteilung von Millionen Menschen auf dem gesamten Planeten zu erwecken.

Und deshalb hat uns heute nicht nur das "Nein" zum Krieg zusammengerufen.

Wir demonstrieren auch, um die Regierungen der Welt wissen zu lassen, dass wir keine Angst haben, dass wir nicht besiegt sind.

Statt Furcht und Niederlage, sind heute alle Farben und Sprachen in die Empörung gekleidet, die es in alle Größen gibt, und die sich in den Herzen von Männer, Frauen, Alte, Jugendliche und Kinder regt.

Nichtsdestotrotz sollten wir wissen, dass das derzeitige Fest von Tod und Zerstörung nicht nur Verurteilung und Empörung hervorruft.

Der Fundamentalismus, den dieser Krieg mit dem Christengott als Alibi vorantreibt, wird nur einen anderen Fundamentalismus hervorrufen.

In der Logik des genetischen Codes der Macht, ist der Terror ein siamesischer Zwilling mit zwei Köpfe aber einem Pfad: den der Zerstörung.

Das Chaos von morgen wird das Ergebnis der "Neuen Weltordnung" sein, die in diesen schrecklichen und schändlichen Tagen durch diese "intelligenten" Raketen ausgetragen wird, die im Mittleren Osten fallen.

Es gibt besseres Bild der "Neuen Weltordnung", als die Plünderungen und den Chaos in den Städten, die von den US und britischen Truppen "befreit" worden sind.

"Befreit", so beschreiben die Mächtigen die Städte, deren Geographie heute von toten Zivilisten und zerstörten Gebäuden gekennzeichnete ist.

Denn man darf nicht vergessen, dass das Argument, das Gott in diesem Krieg begleitete die "Befreiung" war.

Es ist jedoch völlig klar geworden, dass die Freiheit, die uns die Mächte und ihre Dienern anbieten, die Wahl ist uns selbst zu verkaufen und uns zu ergeben, oder zu sterben.

"Ihr seid frei," sagen uns die Mächtigen und ihre Regierungen. "Ihr könnt zwischen der Garotte und der Karotte wählen".

Und die mexikanische politische Klasse beeilt sich uns als Beispiel zu dienen, verkleidet als "Vernunft" und "Vorsicht".

Die registrierten politischen Parteien (denn man darf nicht vergessen, dass es politische Organisationen gibt, die sich an den schmutzigen Spielen der Regierung nicht beteiligen) wählten die Karotte.

Es interessiert sie nicht, dass die Karotte aus Plastik besteht, wie diese Knochen, die man Hunde gibt um sie zu unterhalten und ihre Zähne zu schärfen, damit sie "Fremde" besser beißen können.

Heute, in der "Neuen Weltordnung" die mit dem Krieg im Irak ausgerufen wurde, sind die "Fremde" alle Männer, Frauen, Jugendliche, Kinder und Alte, die sich nicht ergeben werden.

Und die Menschen, die sich nicht ergeben werden - es wäre gut, wenn die in Washington gut zuhören würden - sind immer noch in der Mehrheit.

In den letzten Jahren haben sie uns erzählt, diesen Drang nach Eroberung und Zerstörung, der die Mächtigen antreibt als "Imperialismus" oder "Imperium" zu bezeichnen nur ein Anzeichen "veralteten Marxismus" sei, eine "60er Jahre Nostalgie", "pre-moderne Argumente".

Nichtsdestotrotz, egal wie man es bezeichnet, das Geld hat alle rebellischen Kämpfe die sich ihm widersetzen völlig zeitgemäß gemacht.

Denn sie können zwar die Namen ändern, und die Worte können versuchen, dass was sie umschreiben zu verstecken, oder auch nicht, aber die unwiderlegbare und brutale Wahrheit ist, dass es eine kleine Gruppe der Mächtigen gibt, die die ganze Welt erobern und sie sich untertan machen wollen.

Und dann gibt es noch anderem kleine Gruppen der Mächtigen, die das gleiche tun wollen.

Die Fahnen, die sie alle verhüllen sind nicht wichtig, denn ihr gemeinsames Banner ist immer das Geld.

Aber wenn der Krieg der Mächtigen weltweit ist, dann ist es die Rebellion genauso.

Die heutigen Mobilisierungen richten sich gegen den Krieg der Mächtigen, egal wie er bezeichnet wird.

Es spielt keine Rolle ob ihr Name nun George W. Bush, Tony Blair, José Marí Aznar, Vicente Fox ... Verzeihung, das Präsidentenpaar, Diego Fernández de Cevallos, Jesús Ortega oder Manual Bartlett lautet.

Es spielt keine Rolle, ob es nun die Fahne der Republikanischen Partei ist, der Demokratischen Partei, der Arbeitspartei, der Konservativen Partei, der PRI, PAN, PRD oder dieser mexikanischen Pygmäen, die wie es jemand ausdrückte, auch mal klein angefangen haben.

Die mexikanische politische Klasse versucht heute das Gefühl der Ablehnung, den dieser Krieg hervorgerufen hat zu kapitalisieren, aber sie achten darauf, die Person die ihn verübt hat nicht beim Namen zu nennen. Deshalb wollen sie nicht vor der US Botschaft demonstrieren, um ihr Touristenvisum nicht zu verlieren, und um die wirklichen Herrscher Mexikos nicht zu verärgern.

Die mexikanischen Politiker täuschen Bestürzung über den Krieg im Mittleren Osten vor, einfach und nur weil sie sich der fast einhelligen Ablehnung der mexikanischen Bevölkerung bewusst sind.

Und das "fast" verdanken wir den mexikanischen Geschäftsleute und Kommentatoren einiger Radio- und Fernsehstationen, die nur beklagen, dass der Krieg so lange brauchte um den Sieg zu simulieren.

Die Haltung der mexikanischen politischen Klasse zum Krieg ist durch ein schmutziges und verabscheuungswürdiges Kalkül inspiriert worden.

Als sie die wachsende Desillusionierung der mexikanischen Bevölkerung über die Korruption und die Verbrechen bemerkten, nahmen die politischen Parteien große Anstrengungen auf sich um gegen den Krieg zu protestieren, auch wenn sie schwiegen als es darum ging denjenigen zu benennen, der ihn anordnet.

Nun sagt das Präsidentenpaar sie seien desillusioniert, weil die US Regierung nicht verstanden hat, dass es bei dem Feilschen um ihre Unterstützung nur darum ging, einige Popularitätspunkte zu kassieren.

Die PRI tat das was sie am besten konnte: an der Spitze sagten sie "wer weiß", und unten applaudierten sie eine Methode, die ihre lange Geschichte des Autoritarismus rechtfertigte, die gleiche, die sie mehr als 70 Jahre lang an der Macht gehalten hat. Und die gleiche, die sie rausgeworfen hat.

Die PAN leidet unter einer schweren Identitätskrise, weil unter ihren Anführer das Gerücht umging, sie könnten des Vaterlandsverrates bezichtigt werden, wenn sie die Regierung der Vereinigten Staaten explizit verurteilen würden.

Die PRD erbrachte eine bemerkenswerte Leistung. Wenn sie so weitermachen könnten sie für den Nobelpreis für biogenetische Alchemie nominiert werden, weil es ihnen so gelingen würde zu einem Klon zu werden, der die PRI und die PAN kombiniert.

Die Pygmäen ohne festen Platz, bestanden darauf von einer Seite zur anderen zu rennen um gesehen zu werden.

Heute demonstriert die mexikanische politische Klasse angeblich gegen den Krieg, aber untereinander sagen sie sich, dass sie diesen Tag nicht verschwenden können, um die Wahlkampagnen voranzubringen.

Vielleicht denken sie wir hätten kein Gedächtnis, und sie könnten uns täuschen.

Als die mexikanische politische Klasse sich gegen die Anerkennung der indigenen Rechte und Kultur zusammenschloss, gewährleisteten sie damit nicht nur die Fortführung des Krieges gegen die indigenen Völker Mexikos.

Sie errichtete auch eine Mauer, die sie von den Bürgern dieses Landes trennt.

Hinter dieser Mauer teilen sich die Politiker Intrigen, Gehälter, Begünstigungen, Korruption und Vertuschungen.

Wie so oft während der Wahlzeit, lugen sie über die Mauer um uns zu sagen, dass wir uns aus all den Klonen einen aussuchen können, der uns repräsentieren und regieren soll.

Einige könnten fragen, wieso wir uns der Mobilisierung zu der die Senatoren aufgerufen haben nicht angeschlossen haben, mit der Ansicht wir sollten unse re Unterschiede hinter uns lassen.

Erstens, weil wir es nicht zulassen können, Komplizen der Vertuschung derer zu werden, die in Mexiko Krieg führen und Entsetzen über den Krieg in einem anderen Teil der Welt vortäuschen.

Zweitens, weil wir wissen, dass die Senatoren gefordert haben, den Studenten der Nationalen Autonomen Universität von Mexiko, den Mitgliedern der Volksfront Francisco Villa, den Campesinos von San Salvador Atenco, und allen die ihnen "schmutzig, hässlich und schlecht" erscheinen, die Teilnahme zu verbieten.

Die Senatoren sagten, sie würden sich weigern zu marschieren, wenn diese Brüder und Schwestern es tun würden. Also kam die erste Absicht einen Marsch zu spalten, der vereint hätte sein können von ihnen.

Sie sagten uns wir wären schmutzig und hässlich, aber die Masken verdeckten die Hässlichkeit und täuschten Schmutz vor. Sie sagten uns wir wären schlecht. Sie benutzten das Wort "verflucht". Wir wissen nicht ob "verflucht" besser oder schlechter ist als "schlecht".

Und so nehmen die Schmutzigen, Hässlichen und Schlechten der mexikanischen Gesellschaft an diesem Marsch teil, und wir, die Männer, Frauen, Kinder, Jugendliche und Alte der Zapatistischen Armee der Nationalen Befreiung stehen mit ihnen.

Ich sende Ihnen, durch meine Worte, die Grüße, den Respekt und die Bewunderung der "Verfluchten" der EZLN.

Brüder und Schwestern:

Wir möchten den politischen und sozialen Organisationen danken, die mit uns zu diesem Marsch aufgerufen haben.

Wir möchten unsere Dankbarkeit und gute Wünsche auch allen Teilnehmern gegenüber zum Ausdruck bringen, die keiner politischen oder sozialen Organisationen angehören.

Vielleicht sind wir wenige, und haben auf der korrupten Waage der beschissenen Worte und Bilder, die den Politiker dienen nicht viel Gewicht. Aber sie wissen sehr gut, was 100 Patrioten für dieses Land ausrichten können.

Vielleicht werden an diesem Marsch mehr als 100 Leute teilnehmen. Dann sollten sie sich eher Sorgen machen als zu lachen.

Und wir sollten glücklich sein.

Den politischen und sozialen Organisationen, die heute an diesem Marsch teilnehmen, und an andere die anderswo in Mexiko stattfinden, sagen wir, dass die EZLN nicht versucht die Rebellion in Mexiko zu beherrschen und zu homogenisieren.

Wir verstehen sehr gut, dass Rebellion viele Farben und viele Pfade hat.

All diesen Organisationen bieten wir ein Spiegel. Wenn sie uns respektieren, werden wir sie respektieren.

Uns wurde seit längerer Zeit gesagt, dass die Fragmentierung der sozialen Bewegung für den Wandel der Gesellschaft tödlich sei.

Jene die das sagen tun es, weil sie versuchen diejenigen zu sein, die an der Spitze stehen und die Bewegung dominieren. Die meiste Zeit über um sie für ein paar Münzen zu verraten, oder, indem sie ungünstige Umstände und Voraussetzungen vorschützen, die Mobilisierungen mit Betrügerein und Einigungen auf hoher Ebene zu ersetzen.

Wir wissen nicht ob die Pluralität und Diversität der politischen und sozialen Organisationen einen Wandel erreichen können, der möglich ist, den wir brauchen und verdienen.

Aber wissen, dass Dominanz, auch wenn sie als "Programm Einheit" verkleidet ist, sie nicht erreicht hat, und andererseits Skeptizismus und Desillusionierung verbreitet hat.

Die oft beschworene Einheit der Linken, kann nach den Zapatisten nicht mit einem einzigen Kriterium errichtet werden, mit einer Struktur, die lediglich die gegenseitige Piraterie von Militanten und Aktivisten beherbergt, ein offenes Wettbewerb um zu sehen wer radikaler spricht, und ein verdecktes Wettbewerb um zu sehen wer sich am besten verkaufen kann.

Versuche eine Einheit durch den Drang zur Herrschaft errichten, haben nur zu Splitterungen, Spaltungen, und sinnlose Rivalitäten geführt.

Einheit ist nur möglich, wenn Pluralität und Diversität respektiert sind.

Es ist möglich, wenn mit diesem Respekt für die Basis, ein gemeinsames Agenda für Diskussion geschaffen wird, nicht für Abkommen.

Aus dieser Diskussion könnte ein neuer Vorschlag entstehen, in dem wir alle anerkannt werden könnten, ohne aufzugeben was wir sind, und ohne unsere Haltungen und Überzeugungen aufzugeben.

Unsere Idee ist nicht eine einzige Organisation, sondern eine Bewegung aus vielen Organisationen, mit einem Grundsatz, Widerstand, und einer gemeinsamen Flagge, die der Rebellion.

Die Mächtigen und ihre Schriftgelehrten erklärten den 11. September zum Grenzstein der modernen Geschichte. Sie sagten sogar, dieser aktuelle Krieg sei ein Produkt jenes Tages.

Nun sehen wir, dass dies vielleicht der Krieg ist, der das neue Jahrhundert kennzeichnen könnte.

Das hängt von der Haltung ab, mit der wir ihm begegnen.

Brüder und Schwestern:

Einige von euch haben vielleicht bemerkt, dass wir jetzt die Jugendlichen besonders erwähnen, und sie mit den Männer, Frauen, Kinder und Alte aufzählen.

Und nun richten wir einen besonderen Gruß an die jungen Männer und Frauen von Mexiko.

Fast gleichzeitig als die ersten Bomben auf Irak fielen, begannen junge Leute, in erste Linie Studenten der Hoch- und Mittelstufe, mit den Mobilisierungen. Nicht ihre Anzahl war wichtig, sondern das "Nein", das sie erhoben.

Wir Zapatisten erkennen und begrüßen das Empfindungsvermögen der mexikanischen Jugend an, ganz gleich welcher Name ihnen Identität und Gemeinde verleiht.

Durch die Laune einer Radiowelle erreichte eine Übertragung aus Mexiko Stadt die Berge des mexikanischen Südosten. Sie stammte aus eine dieser Stationen, die die meiste Zeit über von ihren Zuhörerquoten sprechen. Der Sprecher erhielt eine Note von einem Reporter der über eine der vielen Mobilisierungen gegen den Irakkrieg berichtete, vor der US Botschaft.

Der Sprecher hatte kaum den Bericht geendet, als er sofort anfing alle Arten verächtliche Beleidigungen gegen die Demonstranten loszulassen. "Es sind Vandalen, Anarchisten, Kriminelle," kommentierte er. Und dann fing er an zu stammeln, weil sein Vokabular der Synonyme ziemlich begrenzt zu sein schien. Nachdem er fertiggestammelt hatte sagte er: "Es sind Jugendliche", als ob das die größte Beleidigung und der schlimmste Name sei, mit dem man irgendjemanden bezeichnen könnte.

"Es sind Jugendliche," sagte er mit Abscheu, mit Verachtung, und wollte, dass López Obradors Bereitschaftspolizei ihnen eine Lektion erteilte, weil sie die großen Magnaten, die ihre Büros in Paseo de la Reforma bei der Arbeit störten. Als ob er wollte, dass die Polizei sie zwingen sollte aufzuhören Jugendliche zu sein.

Hoffentlich werden sie niemals aufhören Jugendliche zu sein. Hoffentlich verstehen sie, dass Kalender eines Tages nur eine Maske für Kapitulation sind, und von Geburtstagsfeier mal abgesehen, hat das Älterwerden nichts zu bieten.

Brüder und Schwestern:

An die Jugendlichen, die Frauen, die Kinder, die Alten, an alle Farben die die Menschheit erleuchten, sagen wir, dass wir das Recht haben zu wählen.

Wählen: darum geht es bei der Freiheit. Aber wir müssen uns Optionen schaffen, denn diejenigen die sie uns heute vorsetzen, mit der Macht als Vater und die Gier geschaffen wurde.

Wir können eine bessere Welt wählen, eine gerechtere, eine bessere, aber wir müssen darum kämpfen sie mit Gerechtigkeit und Würde zu errichten, die zwei Füße, auf die der Frieden schreiten und den Krieg besiegen kann.

Demokratie!
Freiheit!
Gerechtigkeit!

Aus den Bergen des mexikanischen Südostens.

Für das Geheime Revolutionäre Indigene Komitee - Generalkommando der Zapatistischen Armee der Nationalen Befreiung

Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos

IRAQ

ZMAG: Noam Chomsky Interviewed by Noam Chomsky and MIchael Albert

1) Why did the U.S. invade Iraq, in your view?

These are naturally speculations, and policy makers may have varying motives. But we can have a high degree of confidence about the answers given by Bush-Powell and the rest; these cannot possibly be taken seriously. They have gone out of their way to make sure we understand that, by a steady dose of self-contradiction ever since last September when the war drums began to beat. One day the "single question" is whether Iraq will disarm; in today's version (April 12): "We have high confidence that they have weapons of mass destruction -- that is what this war was about and is about." That was the pretext throughout the whole UN-disarmament farce, though it was never easy to take seriously; UNMOVIC was doing a good job in virtually disarming Iraq, and could have continued, if that were the goal. But there is no need to discuss it, because after stating solemnly that this is the "single question," they went on the next day to announce that it wasn't the goal at all: even if there isn't a pocket knife anywhere in Iraq, the US will invade anyway, because it is committed to "regime change." The next day we hear that there's nothing to that either; thus at the Azores summit, where Bush-Blair issued their ultimatum to the UN, they made it clear that they would invade even if Saddam and his gang left the country. So "regime change" is not enough. The next day we hear that the goal is "democracy" in the world. Pretexts range over the lot, depending on audience and circumstances, which means that no sane person can take the charade seriously.

The one constant is that the US must end up in control of Iraq. Saddam Hussein was authorized to suppress, brutally, a 1991 uprising that might have overthrown him because "the best of all worlds" for Washington would be "an iron-fisted Iraqi junta without Saddam Hussein" (by then an embarrassment), which would rule the country with an "iron fist" as Saddam had done with US support and approval (NYT chief diplomatic correspondent Thomas Friedman). The uprising would have left the country in the hands of Iraqis who might not have subordinated themselves sufficiently to Washington. The murderous sanctions regime of the following years devastated the society, strengthened the tyrant, and compelled the population to rely for survival on his (highly efficient) system for distributing basic goods. The sanctions thus undercut the possibility of the kind of popular revolt that had overthrown an impressive series of other monsters who had been strongly supported by the current incumbents in Washington up to the very end of their bloody rule: Marcos, Duvalier, Ceausescu, Mobutu, Suharto, and a long list of others, some of them easily as tyrannical and barbaric as Saddam. Had it not been for the sanctions, Saddam probably would have gone the same way, as has been pointed out for years by the Westerners who know Iraq best, Denis Halliday and Hans van Sponeck (though one has to go to Canada, England, or elsewhere to find their writings). But overthrow of the regime from within would not be acceptable either, because it would leave Iraqis in charge. The Azores summit merely reiterated that stand.

The question of who rules Iraq remains the prime issue of contention. The US-backed opposition demands that the UN play a vital role in post-war Iraq and rejects US control of reconstruction or government (Leith Kubba, one of the most respected secular voices in the West, connected with the National Endowment of Democracy). One of the leading Shi'ite opposition figures, Sayed Muhamed Baqer al-Hakim, who heads the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), just informed the press that "we understand this war to be about imposing US hegemony over Iraq," and perceive the US as "an occupying rather than a liberating force." He stressed that the UN must supervise elections, and called on "foreign troops to withdraw from Iraq" and leave Iraqis in charge.

US policy-makers have a radically different conception. They must impose a client regime in Iraq, following the practice elsewhere in the region, and most significantly, in the regions that have been under US domination for a century, Central America and the Caribbean. That too is well-understood. Brent Scowcroft, National Security Adviser to Bush I, just repeated the obvious: "What's going to happen the first time we hold an election in Iraq and it turns out the radicals win? What do you do? We're surely not going to let them take over."

The same holds throughout the region. Recent studies reveal that from Morocco to Lebanon to the Gulf, about 95% of the population want a greater role in government for Islamic religious figures, and the same percentage believe that the sole US interest in the region is to control its oil and strengthen Israel. Antagonism to Washington has reached unprecedented heights, and the idea that Washington would institute a radical change in policy and tolerate truly democratic elections, respecting the outcome, seems rather fanciful, to say the least.

Turning to the question, one reason for the invasion, surely, is to gain control over the world's second largest oil reserves, which will place the US in an even more powerful position of global domination, maintaining "a stranglehold on the global economy," as Michael Klare describes the long-term objective, which he regards as the primary motive for war. However, this cannot explain the timing. Why now?

The drumbeat for war began in September 2002, and the government-media propaganda campaign achieved a spectacular success. Very quickly, the majority of the population came to believe that Iraq posed an imminent threat to US security, even that Iraq was involved in 9-11 (up from 3% after 9-11) and was planning new attacks. Not surprisingly, these beliefs correlated closely with support for the planned war. The beliefs are unique to the US. Even in Kuwait and Iran, which were invaded by Saddam Hussein, he was not feared, though he was despised. They know perfectly well that Iraq was the weakest state in the region, and for years they had joined others in trying to reintegrate Iraq into the regional system, over strong US objections. But a highly effective propaganda assault drove the American population far off the spectrum of world opinion, a remarkable achievement.

CHECK IT

IRAQ

ZMAG/Independent: Would President Assad Invite A Cruise Missile Into His Palace? by Robert Fisk



So now Syria is in America's gunsights. First it's Iraq, Israel's most powerful enemy, possessor of weapons of mass destruction – none of which has been found. Now it's Syria, Israel's second most powerful enemy, possessor of weapons of mass destruction, or so President George Bush Junior tells us. No word of that possessor of real weapons of mass destruction, Israel – the number of its nuclear warheads in the Negev are now accurately listed – whose Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, has long been complaining that Damascus is the "centre of world terror".

But Syria is a target all right. First came the US claim that Damascus was sending gas masks to the Iraqi army. The Syrians denied it – but what if it's true? Why shouldn't an Arab neighbour offer Iraqi soldiers protective clothing during an American invasion which has no international legitimacy? Then Syria was accused of sending, or allowing, Arab "volunteers" to cross into Iraq to fight the Americans. This is much harder for the Syrians to deny. I've met a few of them here in Baghdad, most anxious to return to their homes in Homs and Damascus, others – from Algeria and Morocco – telling me that they will be safe if they can reach the Syrian border because "there will be no trouble from there". But here, too, there's a whiff of hypocrisy.

ISRAEL

Guardian: Israel simply has no right to exist by Faisal Bodi

Peace might have a real chance without Israelis' biblical claims

Special report: Israel and the Middle East

Faisal Bodi
Guardian

Wednesday January 3, 2001


Several years ago, I suggested in my students' union newspaper that Israel shouldn't exist. I also said the sympathy evoked by the Holocaust was a very handy cover for Israeli atrocities. Overnight I became public enemy number one. I was a Muslim fundamentalist, a Jew-hater, somebody who trivialised the memory of the most abominable act in history. My denouncers followed me, photographed me, and even put telephone calls through to my family telling them to expect a call from the grim reaper.

Thankfully, my notoriety in Jewish circles has since waned to the extent that recently I gave an inter-faith lecture sponsored by the Leo Baeck College, even though my views have remained the same. Israel has no right to exist. I know it's a hugely unfashionable thing to say and one which, given the current parlous state of the peace process, some will also find irresponsible. But it's a fact that I have always considered central to any genuine peace formula.

Certainly there is no moral case for the existence of Israel. Israel stands as the realisation of a biblical statement. Its raison d'être was famously delineated by former prime minister Golda Meir. "This country exists as the accomplishment of a promise made by God Himself. It would be absurd to call its legitimacy into account."

That biblical promise is Israel's only claim to legitimacy. But whatever God meant when he promised Abraham that "unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the Euphrates," it is doubtful that he intended it to be used as an excuse to take by force and chicanery a land lawfully inhabited and owned by others.

It does no good to anyone to brush this fact, uncomfortable as it might be, under the table. But that has been the failing with Oslo. When it signed the agreement, the PLO made the cardinal error of assuming that you could bury the hatchet by rewriting history. It accepted as a starting point that Israel had a right to exist. The trouble with this was that it also meant, by extension, an acceptance that the way Israel came into being was legitimate. As the latest troubles have shown, ordinary Palestinians are not prepared to follow their leaders in this feat of intellectual amnesia.

Israel's other potential claim to legitimacy, international recognition, is just as dubious. The two pacts which sealed Palestine's future were both concluded by Britain. First we signed the Sykes-Picot agreement with France, pledging to divvy up Ottoman spoils in the Levant. A year later, in 1917, the Balfour Declaration promised a national home for the Jewish people. Under international law the declaration was null and void since Palestine did not belong to Britain - under the pact of the League of Nations it belonged to Turkey.

By the time the UN accepted a resolution on the partition of Palestine in 1947, Jews constituted 32% of the population and owned 5.6% of the land. By 1949, largely as a result of paramilitary organisations such as the Haganah, Irgun and Stern gang, Israel controlled 80% of Palestine and 770,000 non-Jews had been expelled from their country.

This then is the potted history of the iniquities surrounding its own birth that Israel must acknowledge in order for peace to have a chance. After years of war, peace comes from forgiving, not forgetting; people never forget but they have an extraordinary capacity to forgive. Just look at South Africa, which showed the world that a cathartic truth must precede reconciliation.

Far from being a force for liberation and safety after decades of suffering, the idea that Israel is some kind of religious birthright has only imprisoned Jews in a never-ending cycle of conflict. The "promise" breeds an arrogance which institutionalises the inferiority of other peoples and generates atrocities against them with alarming regularity. It allows soldiers to defy their consciences and blast unarmed schoolchildren. It gives rise to legislation seeking to prevent the acquisition of territory by non-Jews.

More crucially, the promise limits Israel's capacity to seek models of coexistence based on equality and the respect of human rights. A state based on so exclusivist a claim to legitimacy cannot but conceive of separation as a solution. But separation is not the same as lasting peace; it only pulls apart warring parties. It does not heal old wounds, let alone redress historical wrongs.

However, take away the biblical right and suddenly mutual coexistence, even a one-state solution, doesn't seem that far-fetched. What name that coexistence will take is less important than the fact that peoples have forgiven and that some measure of justice has been restored. Jews will continue to live in the Holy Land - as per the promise - as equals alongside its other rightful inhabitants.

If that kind of self-reproach is forthcoming, Israel can expect the Palestinians to be forgiving and magnanimous in return. The alternative is perpetual war.

Faisal Bodi is a Muslim journalist.

IRAQ

BBC: US rejects Iraq DU clean-up
The US says it has no plans to remove the debris left over from depleted uranium (DU) weapons it is using in Iraq.

It says no clean-up is needed, because research shows DU has no long-term effects.

It says a 1990 study suggesting health risks to local people and veterans is out of date.

A United Nations study found DU contaminating air and water seven years after it was used.

DU, left over after natural uranium has been enriched, is 1.7 times denser than lead, and very effective for punching through armoured vehicles.

When a weapon with a DU tip or core strikes a solid object, like the side of a tank, it goes straight through before erupting in a burning cloud of vapour. This settles as chemically poisonous and radioactive dust.

ISRAEL

Haaretz: Jewish mini-state to give Washington instructions for Middle East, Israel to U.S.: Now deal with Syria and Iran

Ha`aretz Monday, April 14, 2003 8:56 AM
By ALUF BENN

JERUSALEM­­Two of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's senior aides will go to
Washington for separate talks this week. National Security Advisor
Efraim
Halevy will discuss the regional implications of the Iraq war and the
fall
of the Ba'ath regime, and the prime minister's bureau chief Dov
Weisglass
will bring the White House Israel's comments on the "road map" plan for
a
peace settlement. Israel will suggest that the United States also take
care
of Iran and Syria because of their support for terror and pursuit of
weapons of mass destruction. Israel will point out the support of
Syria
and Iran for Hezbollah, which the U.S. considers an important target in
the
war against international terrorism. American officials recently said
in
closed conversations that the U.S. will act against Syria and Iran, but
not
by military means. The American administration is very angry with Syria
for
its support of Iraq during the war and its willingness to take in
defectors
from Saddam Hussein's regime. As for Iran, the administration suggests
working with the UN and Atomic Energy Commission to halt the Iranian
nuclear program.

Weisglass is scheduled to meet National Security Advisor Condoleezza
Rice
and present Israel's reservations on the road map. Senior government
sources said Weisglass's goal is "to make sure things that disturb us
won't
happen." The administration has made it clear in advance that it is not
ready to reopen the road map for discussion and will present it to both
sides as is, after the new Palestinian government headed by Abu Mazen
is
sworn in . Israeli sources assume Weisglass will try to reach "agreed
principles to implement the plan" with the Americans that will take
Israel's "red lines"into consideration. Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom
spoke with his U.S. counterpart Colin Powell on Friday to prepare for
the
talks. Shalom said Israeli comments on the road map were meant "to
facilitate its
implementation," and explain the political pressures on Sharon's
government. He said "our comments will help get the road map approved
by
the cabinet."