Shaun Mullen’s powerful post, “Iraq Status Of Forces Agreement: No Time To Break Out The Party Hats,” brought back the flood of memories, the emotions, the pent-up anger and frustration Americans have experienced over the past six years as a result of, as Mullen puts it, “the evil that [Dick Cheney’s, Donald Rumsfeld’s and Richard Perle’s] little adventure in Iraq unleashed.” (Of course that list of adventure seekers is by no means complete, and we know all too well who is at the top of that list.)

Also on top of the list of emotions Americans have experienced, and continue to experience, over this “adventure” is the unfathomable sadness at the loss of so many American and Iraqi lives. None of these losses as cruel, heartwrenching and needless as those of innocent little children, the thousands of Dr. Clarissa Pinkola Estés “Little Iraqi Madonnas.”

Helping me recall some of the many missteps, promises, slogans, tragedies, deceptions, and just plain lies that were part-and-parcel of the Iraq “adventure,” were the “running-script-like” headlines in Mullen’s post.

For example:

. . . Haditha massacre . . . Ethnic cleanings . . . Missing billions . . . Militias rule . . . Morale never better . . . The Surge . . .

One “headline” in particular caught my attention: “Missing billions.”

It caught my attention because it encapsulates the rampant corruption that has been such an intrinsic part of the Iraq adventure—both on the U.S. administration’s side and on the Iraqi side.

And, the corruption continues.

Witness this morning’s headlines in the New York Times, “Premier of Iraq Is Quietly Firing Fraud Monitors.” Apparently, the government of Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki is getting rid of Iraqi oversight officials, who were appointed to fight corruption.

According to the Times:

The dismissals, which were confirmed by senior Iraqi and American government officials on Sunday and Monday, have come as estimates of official Iraqi corruption have soared. One Iraqi former chief investigator recently testified before Congress that $13 billion in reconstruction funds from the United States had been lost to fraud, embezzlement, theft and waste by Iraqi government officials.

And in today’s USA TODAYay a report that the Pentagon spent about $600 million on more than 1,200 Iraq construction contracts that were eventually canceled, nearly half of them for mismanagement or shoddy construction. Also, in the same newspaper, another report that a company that was suspended from U.S. government contracts for allegedly bribing Army officers was awarded a new contract from Iraq two days after the suspension was imposed. The Pentagon apparently paid the suspended company more than $1 million under the new contract.

And so the beat goes on.

Corruption was rampant under Saddam Hussein, albeit mostly benefitting a single family and a few select ones; corruption was and continues to be rampant under the U.S. occupation; and corruption will probably continue to be rampant after the last U.S. soldier leaves Iraq.

Perhaps the Iraqis (and the U.S.) can live with that. It is my hope, however, that the killings, the massacres, the sectarian violence will not return to the “Iraqi beat” when that last soldier leaves Iraq.

Is a new fratricidal conflict, even ‘more ferocious’ that what has already occurred, about to break out in Iraq? According to this article from Iraq’s Sotal Iraq, now that American plans for Sunni-Shiite sectarian strife have run their course, Washington is whipping up an ethnic conflict between the Kurds and the Arabs - centering on oil-rich Kirkuk.

Read the rest of this entry »

As political observers parse The Endorsement, the unspoken element is the payback of Colin Powell, no matter how much he denies it, for the humiliation he suffered at the hands of Dick Cheney’s gang in being forced to act as UN point man in justifying the invasion of Iraq with cooked intelligence.

Yes, Powell gives Obama credibility as commander-in-chief and a leader who will be able to reach across party lines. No, contrary to Rush Limbaugh et al, the endorsement is not racially based.

But behind Powell’s calm, rational demeanor in explaining his decision on Meet the Press Sunday, he would be less than human if his own treatment by the Bush Administration were not involved in his thinking and, more to the point, feeling.

Before Iraq, Powell was the one of the most admired men in America, who might have been nominated for President in 1996 if he agreed to run. Today he is remembered for that February 2003 speech that misled Americans into believing Saddam Hussein had WMDs.

Read the rest of this entry.

Iraqi Legislator Mithal al-Alusi: Punished for visiting Israel.

So how is Iraq’s experiment in Western-style democracy coming along, a curious American might ask?

Judging from the recent dust-up over Iraqi legislator Mithal al-Alusi, who decided to visit Israel to attend an anti-terror conference - Iraqis is still have a long way to go. Mr. al-Alusi has been stripped of his parliamentary immunity and is about to be charged with treason for traveling to the Jewish state - all of which has sparked a debate in Iraq about the potential benefits of relations with Israel and the suggestion by some - that Israel would be a better ally for Iraq than Iran.

But according to this article from Iraq’s Kitabat newspaper, there is something more sinister at play: It’s all part of Washington’s ploy to acclimatize Iraqis to something that not long ago would have been unthinkable.

Of lawmaker Mithal al-Alusi, the author writes:

Al-Alusi, who is so loyal to the occupation, which is where he came from and where he will return, like all the others in the National Assembly of donkeys, serve only one religion - complete submission to Uncle Sam. They differ in their support for this or that minor item, but their one and only master is the Lord of the Green Barn [referring to the fortified Green Zone], which is also the Lord of his chosen people [Israel] and the rapist of occupied Palestine.

It’s the game of the American occupation that steers the debate over which side would be better to follow and collaborate with - Iran or Israel. … Now the question of “visits to Israel” and calls to “reestablish relations with her” is a viable topic of debate, whereas before it was the most taboo of taboos. … Friends of Iran have sparked the uproar over this friend of Israel [Al-Alusi], but it’s all just electoral clatter being permitted by the American master to create a huge debate about the advantages of friendship with Israel.

Read the rest of this entry »

Once again we have an article by that inimitable columnist from Iraq’s Kitabat newspaper, Khadir Taahar.

Taahar is responsible for previous articles we have translated, such as ‘The American CIA:’Defender of Humanity‘; ‘Security Deal With America is Iraq’s ‘Opportunity of a Lifetime‘; ‘Teheran ‘Infiltrating’ and ‘Poisoning’ Iraqi Culture!; Iraqi Shiites! Stand Up and Reject Iran!; and ”We are a Foolish People That Destroy Ourselves.’

How representative of the Iraqi population are his views? It’s very hard to say. But we do know that he is regularly published in this Sunni-leaning daily published in Baghdad.

In today’s article, Taahar writes of the absolute necessity of good Iraqi relations with the United States:

“Apart from the minds of those polluted by demagogic, despotic speeches and whose views are so set in stone that they chant absurd slogans against the United States of America - knowledgeable and realistic people unequivocally agree that America is the most important strategic ally of Iraq, which offers the Iraqi people the greatest of golden opportunities.

In the entire history of the Iraqi people, nothing compares to the opportunity now offered by America’s presence on our soil, with all of its scientific, industrial, administrative, political and military strength. What more could the Iraqi people ask than the opportunity afforded by the greatest nation on the face of the earth? The United States of America, with her outstretched hand, is offering to assist Iraq in many areas of development and construction.”

Read the rest of this entry »

Iraq’s Governorate of Wasit

What some people call ‘victory in Iraq’ often looks alot more like a slap in the face.

According to this news item from Iraq’s Azzaman newspaper, the Iraqi government has decided - at Iran’s urging - to give the rights to one of Iraq’s largest oil fields to China’s state-owned oil firm, according to the article, making it ‘harder for American companies to exploit Iraqi oil.’

The article says in part:

“A source in the Oil Ministry said that the deal is worth about $3 billion and would generate $6 billion over the next ten years. The source went on to say that the cost to retrieve each barrel [from the field] would be about $6. Well-informed Iraqi sources revealed that the decision to allow China to exploit the field comes in the context of Iranian government pressure and mediation, urging Iraq to grant oil exploitation rights to Chinese and Russian companies and to deny U.S. companies access to Iraqi oil and energy.”

Read the rest of this entry »

Despite at times being disappointed that our nation isn’t living up to its promise, most Americans - left, right and center - regard this country as the greatest in the world. But how often do we hear such sentiments from the foreign press, let alone the Middle East or even Israel?

For Kuwait’s Al Seyassah, Ahmed al-Baghdadi writes in part:

“Many believe that today, as a new global system forms, China, Brazil, India, Russia and China have an undeniable role to play. … The tremendous economic growth of these powers does come along with political influence. … But can we expect these countries to exercise the role that the United States plays at the global level, or in clearer words: Do these countries possess the audacity to forcefully intrude on international affairs, like the United States does?”

Then al-Baghdadi answers his question by saying in part:

“America’s great generosity and sacrifice, both in money and in lives, is well-known. No nation in history has offered its sons to death and drained its coffers for the sake of others the way the United States of America has. ‘Courageous intrusion’ requires a spirit that stands apart from industrial growth or agricultural development. Today’s newly-industrial states don’t presently have this spirit, nor will they have it in the future. Because such a spirit requires so much money and so many souls that if any of these nations had such courage, its coffers would quickly be emptied and its economy would collapse, never to rise again.”

Read the rest of this entry »

According to Fateh Abdusalam of Iraq’s Azzaman newspaper, that nation’s so-called democracy would be funny of it wasn’t so tragic.

Abdusalam writes sarcastically:

“For a long while as they ranted about democracy, Iraqi politicians were also laughing to themselves. And they have been backed up by the greatest laughers of them all, the Americans - and the might of the U.S. Army. In fact, since the Americans created the racist, sectarian Governing Council on the first day of their occupation, everyone has been laughing to themselves over the ‘democracy; that Iraqis have been practicing.”

After venting a bit on Iraq’s political class and foreign interference, Abdusalam adresses what Iraqi leaders need to do to make things right:

He writes in part:

“Now all of Iraq must show the courage necessary to stop this democracy game that has been exposed, and for which we Iraqis have paid so heavily with our priceless blood. The question is: what’s the solution?What’s the alternative to the false democracy with which all Iraqis ‘comfort’ themselves today? For if the new Iraq is to rise up, Iraqis must take hold of the only choice - real democracy - which doesn’t submit to racial or sectarian influence, regardless of which side it comes from.”

Read the rest of this entry »

In her “A Turning Point in the Georgia Conflict? (A News & TMV Blog Post Round-Up),” Damozel gives a great summary of the Russia-Georgia conflict and lists several other good posts at TMV reporting, commenting on, and analyzing the issue.

There have been several other articles on the roots, history, and possible ramifications of the conflict.

Let us set aside for the moment who may be to blame for the current conflict in the Caucasus: Georgia for sending troops into the pro-Russian enclave of South Ossetia, or Russia for deploying full military power into sovereign and democratic Georgia.

Let us also not dwell on how and why this political conflict that has been simmering for years finally erupted into an all-out military conflict.

Also, let us give credit to the Bush administration for starting “vigorous” humanitarian missions to help the displaced and affected people in Georgia. Finally, let’s also give Mr. Bush some credit for demanding that Russia abide by the fragile cease-fire, withdraw its forces or risk consequences with regard to “the diplomatic, political, economic and security structures of the 21st century.”

These are good efforts. However, it would take an obstinate, heads-in-the-sand attitude not to wonder how much more powerful and effective our words and actions could be, were it not for Iraq, and other international policy follies.

In a recent post, “America the Impotent,” Elrod discusses how the Bush administration has painted itself in a corner because of past and recent actions in the Middle East and elsewhere.

For example, Elrod writes how

…the Bush Administration has been kneecapped by a conflict having little to do with the War on Terror. The West - and America in particular - has been rendered impotent in this crisis. We can only hope that Russia does not occupy all of Georgia, depose Saakashvili and take over or destroy the BTC pipeline. And what message does this send to pro-Western forces elsewhere in the region?

Aside from the obvious debilitating effects our own invasion and occupation of another nation have had on our moral authority, it is interesting to ponder how extremely careful Bush administration officials and diplomats have to be in selecting, i.e. parsing, their words in statements condemning Russia for its actions in Georgia.

For example, there is the now famous statement by U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Zalmay Khalilzad, during an exchange with Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin on whether the Russians had “regime change” in mind for Georgia: “The days of overthrowing leaders by military means in Europe — those days are gone.”

Note the conveniently inserted words, “in Europe.” Apparently, Khalilzad would like “those days” to be thought of as being pre-2001.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice tried to fix any ambiguity in Khalilzad’s claim by time-stamping “those days” when she recently said:

This is not 1968 and the invasion of Czechoslovakia where Russia can threaten a neighbor, occupy a capital, overthrow a government and get away with it…things have changed.

But, in spite of the most rigorous coaching, some of our politicians still cannot get their lines straight. Condemning Russia yesterday, John McCain claimed that: “In the 21st century nations don’t invade other nations.” I guess McCain’s 21st century started sometime after March 20, 2003.

This is what Sam Stein had to say about that in the Huffington Post:

It was the type of foreign policy rhetorical blunder that has regularly plagued the McCain campaign and could have diplomatic ripples as well. Certainly the comment was meant in innocence. But for those predisposed to the notion that the U.S. is an increasingly arrogant international actor, the suggestion by a presidential candidate that, in this day and age, countries don’t invade one another — when the U.S. is occupying two foreign nations — does little to alleviate that negative perception.

Bush’s “21st century” apparently also starts after March 20, 2003, because he recently said:

“It no