Study: One in 10 US soldiers said they mistreated civilians

Update - May 5, 2007 - Editor's note: I am posting at the secondary blog

Yesterday's stories are here below.

See older articles at the overflow blog.

---

Related

U.S. examines Iraq battlefield ethics
A new Pentagon survey of troops in Iraq found that only 40 percent of Marines and 55 percent of Army soldiers would report a member of their unit for killing or wounding an innocent civilian.
---

One in three US combat troops would condone torture: survey

2 hours, 33 minutes ago

A survey of US combat troops deployed in Iraq has found that one in 10 said they mistreated civilians and more than a third condoned torture to save the life of a comrade, a report said Friday.

The study by an army mental health advisory team found continuing problems with morale and that acute mental health issues were more prevalent among troops with lengthening tours or on their second and third deployment to Iraq.

"They looked under every rock, and what they found was not always easy to look at," said Ward Casscells, the Pentagon's health affairs chief.

For the first time ever, a sampling of soldiers and marines in combat units were questioned on issues of character, and their answers suggested hardened attitudes toward civilians among front line troops:

-- About 10 percent of soldiers surveyed reported mistreating non-combatants or damaging their property when it was not necessary;

-- Less than half of the soldiers and marines would report a team member for unethical behavior;

-- More than a third of all soldiers and marines reported that torture should be allowed to save the life of a fellow soldier or marine.

Major General Gale Pollock, the army's acting surgeon general, sought to make a distinction between soldiers' thoughts about torture and their actions.

"These men and women have been seeing their friends injured and I think that having that thought is normal," she said at a Pentagon press conference.

"But what it speaks to is the leadership that the military is providing, because they're not acting on those thoughts. They're not torturing the people," she said.

The team surveyed 1,320 soldiers and 447 marines between August and October 2006 in Iraq. Although the report was completed in November, it was only released Friday in censored form after its findings began to leak to the press.

The study found that morale among soldiers was worse than among marines, which it said was explained in part by the marines' shorter six month tours.

The team recommended that the army's yearlong tours in Iraq either be shortened, or that soldiers be given 18 to 36 months between deployment to recover.

Instead, the army is moving in the opposite direction, extending tours to 15 months to keep pace with a surge in forces. The army is struggling to allow units a year at home between deployments.

From the White House to Abu Ghraib

The creator of the famous Stanford prison experiment says the Bush administration is responsible for the US army's abuse and torture in Iraq.

April 26, 2007 7:00 PM

Sasha Abramsky

Thirty-six years ago, Philip Zimbardo, a young psychologist at Stanford University, set up an experiment intended to explore how normal young men would behave if put into a prison setting.

Zimbardo's team advertised for paid volunteers, screened the applicants for mental abnormalities and personality disorders, divvyed up the chosen ones into guards and prisoners, and then kicked off the experiment.

Over the next few days, in the basement lab of the psychology building, the uniformed "guards" - getting increasingly caught up in their role - thought up ever-more creative ways to assert their dominance over the jumpsuit-wearing "prisoners". They paraded them around with bags over their heads; removed the prisoners' clothing as punishment; took away their bedding; made them scrub toilets with their bare hands; insisted they do huge numbers of press ups, sometimes with other prisoners sitting on their backs; threw them into a dark, locked closet that was supposed to serve as an isolation unit; made them scream obscenities at each other; even forced them to pretend to be engaged in sexual activity with other brutalized prisoners.

The experiment was supposed to last two weeks. By day five, however, four of the prisoners had begun showing signs of nervous collapse; and by day six, the "Stanford Prison" had to be closed. What had started out as a low-key academic project had degenerated, in a remarkably short space of time, into a real-life version of William Golding's book Lord of the Flies.

Sound familiar? Over 30 years later, many of the same techniques, amplified by the horrors of war and the terrors of guerilla insurgency - some of them simply bizarre demonstrations of sadism, others clumsily thought-through control strategies - surfaced in the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

Zimbardo has long been haunted by the events that his experiment precipitated. The realization that he and his fellow-experiment designers had created an utterly toxic environment, in which decent people playing guards speedily degenerated into brutes and decent people playing prisoners became abject, cowering, hysterical captives, has informed Zimbardo's career ever since.

Now, he has finally written a book on the Stanford Prison Experiment, tying it in with the slide toward torture that has occurred in Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib. Titled The Lucifer Effect, Zimbardo's volume argues that it's futile to put all of the blame for these violent episodes on "bad apples" in an otherwise good barrel. Quite the opposite, he writes. If senior political, military or correctional officials create a "bad barrel," signify to underlings that abuse will be tolerated, turn a blind-eye to wanton acts of humiliation, then the chances are pretty high that many "good apples" that get dumped into the situation will swiftly go rotten.

A few years back, Zimbardo was approached by the defense team for Sergeant Ivan "Chip" Frederick, one of the reservists on trial for the Abu Ghraib abuses. Frederick was in charge of Tier 1A, the infamous tier in which men were electric-shocked, had attack dogs set on them, and were made to engage in various humiliating sexual rituals. He wasn't one of the prime abusers, but he was responsible for letting the cycle of brutality go unchecked. He was also a man of limited initiative, used to taking orders, and desperate to fit in, to be one of the boys.

Zimbardo came to believe that Frederick was, essentially, a fall-guy for "The System" (his capital letters, not mine). After 9/11, he argues, the higher ups in that system, whether it be political leaders, top military brass or shadowy intelligence bosses, were all giving a nod-and-a-wink to acts designed to physically and mentally break detainees. As the editors of the book The Torture Papers documented, getting "actionable intelligence" from suspects being interrogated came to be more important than respecting the niceties of the Geneva Convention or the various prohibitions on torture signed onto by congress over the years.

In the second half of The Lucifer Effect, Zimbardo develops arguments for why Bush, Cheney, then-CIA chief Tenet and Geoffrey Miller - the major general who arrived in Abu Ghraib determined to have the prison there implement Guantanamo methods of interrogation - should stand trial for the atrocities that occurred in Abu Ghraib. If a man like Frederick is going to go to prison for years for his actions, Zimbardo argues, then the higher-ups who allowed this to happen on their watch should most assuredly be held accountable too.

Of course, Bush isn't about to stand trial anytime soon. Congress isn't going to muster the cajones to impeach the man, let alone hand him over to any international court of justice. But that doesn't make Zimbardo's line of reasoning any less valid: bad situations or systems do lead to atrocious actions, not by every participant but by enough to cause tremendous damage. Political climates created by those in power do have a trickle-down impact throughout society, rendering previously unthinkable acts normal.

In the long-run, President Bush's casual acceptance of the need for the state-as-torturer, his willingness to embrace a means-justifies-the-ends philosophy, will likely be his most shameful legacy.

George W's poll numbers are now so utterly dismal that it's hard to work out which actions are most repellant to ordinary voters. I'd like to think - though, admittedly, without the data to back up the hunch - that his and Cheney's implicit condoning of a climate in which torture has flourished ranks up there. After all, most Americans, like most people everywhere, are not innately bad. Maybe for a while they accepted the notion that Abu Ghraib was the product solely of a few twisted, amped-up lowly reservists. Not anymore. Zimbardo and others have done too good a job of showing up the connections, of insisting we look at the nudge-nudge, wink-wink nature of the Bush administration's relationship to torture.

Sasha Abramsky is a senior fellow at the New York-based think tank Demos. He writes regularly for the Nation, Mother Jones, and several other publications. His most recent book, on the issue of the disenfranchisement of felons, is titled Conned: How Millions Went to Prison, Lost the Vote, and Helped Send George W. Bush to the White House. It was published in April by The New Press, and is available in England and the U.S. His next book will be published by Beacon Press in May, and is titled American Furies.

Government Report Slams "Emergency" War Funding Request

Editor's note: I am moving to post at the secondary blog.
Older stories at the overflow blog.
---
03/28/07 FY2007 Supplemental Appropriations for Defense, Foreign Affairs, and Other Purposes -- Updated - PDF

Report On Haditha Condemns Marines

Signs of Misconduct Were Ignored, U.S. General Says

By Josh White
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, April 21, 2007; A01

The Marine Corps chain of command in Iraq ignored "obvious" signs of "serious misconduct" in the 2005 slayings of two dozen civilians in Haditha, and commanders fostered a climate that devalued the life of innocent Iraqis to the point that their deaths were considered an insignificant part of the war, according to an Army general's investigation.

Maj. Gen. Eldon A. Bargewell's 104-page report on Haditha is scathing in its criticism of the Marines' actions, from the enlisted men who were involved in the shootings on Nov. 19, 2005, to the two-star general who commanded the 2nd Marine Division in Iraq at the time. Bargewell's previously undisclosed report, obtained by The Washington Post, found that officers may have willfully ignored reports of the civilian deaths to protect themselves and their units from blame. Though Bargewell found no specific coverup, he concluded that there also was no interest at any level in investigating allegations of a massacre.

"All levels of command tended to view civilian casualties, even in significant numbers, as routine and as the natural and intended result of insurgent tactics," Bargewell wrote. He condemned that approach because it could desensitize Marines to the welfare of noncombatants. "Statements made by the chain of command during interviews for this investigation, taken as a whole, suggest that Iraqi civilian lives are not as important as U.S. lives, their deaths are just the cost of doing business, and that the Marines need to get 'the job done' no matter what it takes."

Bargewell's sharp criticism of the Marine command appears to have been a contributing factor in subsequent efforts by top leaders to ensure that U.S. troops exercise appropriate restraint around civilians. Lt. Gen. Peter W. Chiarelli, who was the top field commander in Iraq last year, and Gen. David H. Petraeus, now the top U.S. commander there, have emphasized the importance of protecting the civilian population in counterinsurgency operations and have ordered aggressive investigations of alleged wrongdoing.

Though Bargewell completed his secret report in June 2006, it has not been publicly released because of ongoing criminal investigations of three Marines on murder allegations and four Marine officers who allegedly failed to look into the case. Bargewell's report, now unclassified, focuses on the reporting of the incident and the training and command climate within the Marine Corps leadership; it does not address the actual incident in detail.

The investigation began in March 2006 after an initial inquiry concluded that the Marines did not intentionally kill civilians. Bargewell's team interviewed Marines in Asad in western Iraq and in the United States in April 2006. His final report was submitted to Chiarelli on June 15, 2006.

A Marine Corps spokesman declined to comment yesterday. Marine officials have generally not discussed the incident because it is under investigation.

In the Haditha incident, which has become one of the most notorious alleged atrocities of the Iraq war, Marines killed two dozen civilians after a huge roadside bomb ripped through a Humvee in their convoy, killing one Marine instantly and injuring two others. A Naval Criminal Investigative Service report found that the Marines then killed five unarmed civilians whom they ordered out of a car -- one Marine alleged that another got down on one knee and shot them one by one -- before storming several houses and killing women and children, some of them still in their pajamas and lying in bed.

The Marines have told investigators that they believed they were taking small-arms fire from the houses and that they were following their rules of engagement when they threw grenades and then shot everyone inside.

Bargewell found that, though the Marines were trained correctly, some "did not follow proper house and room techniques" by not positively identifying their targets. Lt. William T. Kallop, the only officer on the scene at the time, ordered the attack on the houses and told investigators that he did not believe the Marines did anything wrong. Kallop received immunity this month and will probably testify at the hearings for the other Marines.

The report notes errors and oversights at all levels of the Marine command in Iraq. Bargewell says that Marines at the squad level came up with a false story; that Kilo Company officers and the commander of the 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment, passed along insufficient information to the regimental commander; and that regimental officers and officers at the 2nd Marine Division ignored signs of a problem and believed the incident to be insignificant. He also accuses the entire chain of failing to recognize the importance of civilian deaths.

Of particular concern to Bargewell was that nearly all Marines looked the other way when confronted with early reports that many civilians had been shot in fighting on the streets of Haditha after a roadside bomb killed a member of their unit. His investigation found that Marines and officers present that day immediately reported numerous civilian deaths to superiors but that the reports were "untimely, inaccurate and incomplete" -- failures he attributed to "inattention and negligence, in certain cases willful negligence."

Then, no one asked any further questions, Bargewell wrote, despite gruesome photographs circulating among junior Marines that showed that women and children had been killed in their beds. He cited several opportunities to investigate that were not taken, such as when more than $40,000 in condolence payments went to Iraqis after the killings.

"I found that the duty to inquire further was so obvious in this case that a reasonable person with knowledge of these events would have certainly made further inquiries," Bargewell wrote. "The most remarkable aspect of the follow-on action with regard to the civilian casualties from the 19 November 2005 Haditha incident was the absence of virtually any kind of inquiry at any level of command into the circumstances surrounding the deaths."

No one recommended an investigation until a Time magazine reporter began asking questions about the attack in January 2006. Maj. Gen. Richard A. Huck, the division commander, dismissed the allegations as insurgent propaganda, according to the report. The battalion commander, Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani, also refused to investigate, saying, "My marines are not murderers," according to two of his top subordinates. Bargewell called this "an unwillingness, bordering on denial," to examine an incident that could be harmful to his unit.

Chessani's attorneys have denied that he did anything wrong and have said that he informed his commanders about the incident.

The regimental commander, Col. Stephen Davis, was also not interested in investigating, according to the report. "The RCT-2 Commander, however, expressed only mild concern over the potential negative ramifications of indiscriminate killing based on his stated view that the Iraqis and insurgents respect strength and power over righteousness," the report says.

None of Chessani's superiors has been charged with a crime, but in addition to the battalion commander, two captains and a lieutenant have been charged with failing to investigate or with impeding the investigation.

Bargewell found that Huck's division staff viewed the allegations of inappropriate killings as part of insurgent "information operations" and an attempt to make the Marines look bad. He also noted a proclivity among senior officers to look past such allegations even if there was a chance they could be accurate. Bargewell called that approach "myopic and overly simplistic" and said it produced a tendency to judge credibility based on the source of the information rather than on the facts.

Haditha Report Blasts Marines

Haditha Report Blasts Marines

"Obvious" signs of misconduct ignored in 2005 slayings of two dozen Iraqis, Army probe finds.

Josh White

• Excerpts: 'Simple Failures' and 'Disastrous Results'

Rep. Murtha: President's Iraq war plan requires draft

Related
Experts: Draft May Be Necessary
---
For Immediate Release
April 18, 2007

Murtha calls for responsibility on the part of the President

“If the President insists on continuing the current operational tempo and policy, then he should call for a military draft. That is the responsible thing to do.”

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Congressman John P. Murtha, Chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, issued the following remarks today while discussing Army personnel issues:

“I just returned from visiting three major army bases: Ft. Hood, Ft. Stewart and Ft. Bragg.

“What I found was that the President’s policy has forced the military to break its own rotation and deployment guidelines. Our forces have had to accelerate training, they have had to train on inadequate and insufficient equipment, and percentages have been deployed a third and fourth time.

“I discussed the length of deployments with a group of commanders who told me that more than nine months deployed in theater was harmful to them and their families. They were not complaining; rather they candidly acknowledged that after a certain amount of time, professional skills begin to diminish and extended tours could very well push soldiers and leaders beyond what is reasonable.

“I found a need for counseling for our military children and was told that the truancy rate is increasing while their academic performance is declining. A first sergeant commented, “We love being soldiers but we are also people with families and children. When we’re not soldiers we’re soccer coaches, Cub Scout leaders, and we’re involved in our local P.T.A.” Fifteen months from home significantly impacts the military family. Another soldier who had already served three tours said, “I just can’t bear to tell my kids that I am being deployed again and that my tour will be extended beyond a year.”

“Our Army will do what is asked of them, but it is unconscionable to ask the same men and women, who have deployed three or four times and who have already served a year in intensive combat, to now extend their time in theater for an additional three months. As one soldier put it, “after six months in Iraq, every day is another Groundhog Day.”

“Our military has done a tremendous job with what has been asked of them. They have juggled and balanced with what they have, but what they have is not enough. The president asks the impossible and the burden continues to fall on the very few. The pressure must be taken off the current force and their families who have already sacrificed so much. If the President insists on continuing the current operational tempo and policy, then he should call for a military draft. That is the responsible thing to do.”

(####)

Iraq policy 'spawned new terror'

Related
Oxford Research Group - building bridges for global security
---

The British and US policy towards Iraq has "spawned new terror in the region", a think tank report has said.

The countries had tried to "keep the lid on" problems by military force and had failed to address the root causes, the Oxford Research Group warned.

It said Iran, Syria and North Korea had become "emboldened", while the Taleban was on the rise in Afghanistan.

The UK government said the past decade of foreign policy had been effective and action in Iraq was "justified".

Global instability

It comes as a separate report from Oxfam said the Iraq invasion had "seriously undermined" Britain's reputation.

However, the charity warns Britain must not be reluctant to send in troops to deal with future humanitarian crises.

We are looking at a highly unstable global system by the middle years of the century unless urgent action is taken now Chris Abbott Oxford Research Group

In a report a year ago, the Oxford Research Group (ORG) highlighted four areas that it said were contributing to world instability.

Climate change, competition for increasingly scarce resources, marginalisation of the majority of the world's population as socio-economic divisions widen, and the increasing use of military force and the further spread of military technologies were all threats.

Its latest report said these issues were still the greatest threats, but added that the ongoing war on terror and the war in Iraq were increasing the risk of future terrorist attacks on the scale of 9/11.

"Treating Iraq as part of the war on terror... created a combat training zone for jihadists," it says.

Lead study author Chris Abbott said: "There is a clear and present danger - an increasingly marginalised majority living in an environmentally constrained world, where military force is more likely to be used to control the consequences of these dangerous divisions.

"Add to this the disastrous effects of climate change, and we are looking at a highly unstable global system by the middle years of the century unless urgent action is taken now."

Iran's nuclear plan

The report, Beyond Terror: The Truth About the Real Threats to Our World, said any military intervention in Iran would be "disastrous". However, it warned that Iran should not be allowed to develop civil nuclear power.

"This would involve the development of facilities that are potential terrorist targets, as well as encourage the spread of technology and materials that could be used in the development of nuclear weapons," the report said.

It also added that the British government's decision to replace its nuclear submarine system Trident could "substantially encourage" other states to develop nuclear weapons.

A Foreign Office spokesman said the past decade of foreign policy had been effective and that the military action in Iraq was "justified".

"We have rightly focused on 'hard' security issues such as Iraq, Afghanistan, Bosnia, Kosovo and Sierra Leone as well as 'softer' issues such as climate change and poverty eradication," he added.

Patterns of War Shift in Iraq Amid Buildup of U.S. Force

April 9, 2007

BAGHDAD, April 8 — Nearly two months into the new security push in Baghdad, there has been some success in reducing the number of death squad victims found crumpled in the streets each day.

And while the overall death rates for all of Iraq have not dropped significantly, largely because of devastating suicide bombings, a few parts of the capital have become calmer as some death squads have decided to lie low.

But there is little sign that the Baghdad push is accomplishing its main purpose: to create an island of stability in which Sunni Arabs, Shiite Arabs and Kurds can try to figure out how to run the country together. There has been no visible move toward compromise on the main dividing issues, like regional autonomy and more power sharing between Shiites and Sunnis.

For American troops, Baghdad has become a deadlier battleground as they have poured into the capital to confront Sunni and Shiite militias on their home streets. The rate of American deaths in the city over the first seven weeks of the security plan has nearly doubled from the previous period, though it has stayed roughly the same over all, decreasing in other parts of the country as troops have focused on the capital.

By ALISSA J. RUBIN and EDWARD WONG

--MORE--

Index on Afghanistan: March 2007

Monday, April 02, 2007

by Sarah Meyer

Kandahar Airfield 2002

Civilian murders define this month’s obscenities in Afghanistan but – as in Iraq - the war-mongers insist that ‘progress’ is being made. The Americans do not care about civilians dying either in Iraq or in Afghanistan. From the US perspective, perhaps every civilian killed is a future ‘terrorist.’

Canadian torture and losing prisoners in Afghanistan was under the spotlight this month. A further obscenity was the announcement of NATO racist policies in Kandahar Airbase toilets . Not surprising that Afghans, like Iraqis, don’t want occupation forces in their country?


1. Oil and Gas (Pakistan/Iran /India & Iraq)
2. Strategic Imperatives (Afghanistan, Pakistan, US, Media & Videos)
3. Contracts
4. Contractors
5. Investment and Aid
6. US/NATO (General; missile shield)
7. NATO Participating Countries (Australia, Bulgaria, Canada, Czech Republic, Estonia, Germany, Italy, New Zealand, Poland, South Africa, Sweden, UK
8. Opium
9. Human Rights (‘rendition; torture; Canadian misdemeanors; racism; Rumsfeld in German court case.)
10. Some Deaths (catalogue of civilian deaths; Pat Tillman)
11. Future Deaths
12. Meanwhile, in Iran …
13. Meanwhile, in New Orleans …

Index Research

--MORE--

SPURIOUS EQUIVALENCE: THE ABSENCE OF ISRAEL'S OCCUPATION IN THE PRESS

SPURIOUS EQUIVALENCE: THE ABSENCE OF ISRAEL'S OCCUPATION IN THE PRESS
Recently, the Glasgow University Media Group released a study suggesting that press coverage obscures, rather than facilitates; popular understanding of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. This is perhaps best evidenced by the general failure of the press to describe the conflict within the accurate context of an occupation. Rather than presenting the conflict as one between an "occupier" and an "occupied," the conflict is presented as one between two equal parties with equal rights to "disputed" land that Israel "captured" in 1967.

Must read UN Committee message to Israel

ADALAH'S NEWSLETTER
Volume 34, March 2007

UN Committee Urges Israel to Revoke the Citizenship Law, Dismantle the Wall, Bind
the Jewish National Fund to Anti-Discrimination Principles, and
Recognize the Unrecognized Villages

Adalah: “The UN Committee, which is composed of legal experts, reached these concluding observations based on the principles of anti-discrimination. Therefore the concluding observations constitute an official statement that institutionalized discrimination exists in Israel.”

On 9 March 2007, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (“the Committee”) issued its Concluding Observations, following its review last month of Israel’s implementation of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (“ICERD” or “the Convention”). In its Concluding Observations, the Committee emphasized 25 areas of concern and recommendations regarding Israel’s compliance with the Convention concerning the rights of Palestinian Arab citizens of Israel and Palestinians living in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT). Representatives of Adalah, Attorney Sawsan Zaher and Rina Rosenberg, Esq., and other Palestinian, Israeli and international human rights organizations participated in the UN sessions held on 22-23 February 2007 in Geneva.

The Concluding Observations reflected numerous issues highlighted by Adalah in its reports to the Committee noting Israel’s violations of the ICERD.

A high-level delegation of 13 state representatives, headed by Israeli Ambassador to the UN, Yitzhak Levanon, also participated in the Committee’s sessions. Nevertheless, many of the questions sent in advance to Israel remained unanswered, as the Committee noted at the outset.

The main concerns and recommendations adopted by the Committee, which is composed of eighteen independent experts including law professors, lawyers and former judges, included:

1) The right to equality and a prohibition on racial discrimination should be explicitly included in the Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty.

2) Israel should ensure that the definition of the state as a Jewish state does not result in any systemic distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin in the enjoyment of human rights.

3) Israel should ensure “equality in the right to return to one’s country and in the possession of property”.

4) Israel should ensure that the World Zionist Organization, the Jewish Agency and the Jewish National Fund, which manage land, housing and services exclusively for the Jewish population, are “bound by the principle of non-discrimination in the exercise of their functions.”

5) Israel should revoke the Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law (Temporary Order) – 2003, and “ensure that restrictions on family reunification are strictly necessary and limited in scope, and are not applied on the basis of nationality, residency or membership of a particular community.”

6) Israel’s policy of affording highly advantageous benefits, particularly for housing and education, to those who perform military service is incompatible with the Convention, bearing in mind that most Arab citizens do not perform national service.

7) Israel should assess the significance and impact of Israel Land Administration’s “social suitability” admission criterion to small communities, as it may allow in practice for the exclusion of Arab citizens from some State-controlled land. The Committee recommended that Israel take all measures to ensure that State land is allocated without discrimination, direct or indirect, based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin.

8) Israel should assess the extent to which discriminatory attitudes by employers against Arabs, scarcity of jobs near Arab communities, and lack of daycare centers in Arab villages are a cause of high unemployment rates, particularly for Arab women.

9) Israel should enquire into possible alternatives to the relocation of inhabitants of unrecognized Bedouin villages in the Negev/Naqab to planned towns, in particular through the recognition of these villages and the recognition of the rights of the Bedouin to own, develop, control and use their communal lands, territories and resources traditionally owned or otherwise inhabited or used by them.

10) Israel should address concerns that the psychometric examinations used to test aptitudes, ability and personality indirectly discriminates against Arab citizens in accessing higher education.

11) Israel should ensure that laws and programmes be equally devoted to the promotion of cultural institutions and the protection of holy sites of both Jewish and other religious communities.

12) Israel should increase its efforts to prevent racially motivated offences and hate speech, and ensure that relevant criminal law provisions are effectively implemented by prosecuting politicians, government officials and other public figures for hate speech against the Arab minority.

13) “A high number of complaints filed by Arab citizens against law enforcement officers are not properly and effectively investigated and that the Ministry of Justice’s Police Investigations Unit (Mahash) lacks independence.” The Committee regretted that Israel provided no comments in this regard as requested or information as to whether the persons responsible for the October 2000 killings have been prosecuted and sentenced.

14) Israel’s position that the ICERD does not apply in the OPT “cannot be sustained under the letter and spirit of the Convention, or under international law as also affirmed by the International Court of Justice.” Moreover “the Israeli settlements are illegal under international law.”

15) Israel should cease the construction of the Wall in the OPT, including in and around East Jerusalem, dismantle the structure, and make reparation for all damage. Israel should also “give full effect” to the 2004 Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice.

16) Severe restrictions on the freedom of movement in the OPT targeting a particular national or ethnic group, especially through the wall, checkpoints, restricted roads and permit system, have created hardship and have had a highly detrimental impact on the enjoyment of human rights by Palestinians, in particular their rights to freedom of movement, family life, work, education and health.

17) Different laws and practices apply to Palestinians and to Israelis in the OPT, in particular the unequal distribution of water resources to the detriment of Palestinians, the disproportionate targeting of Palestinians in house demolitions, and different criminal laws leading to prolonged detention and harsher punishments for Palestinians for the same offences.

18) While stressing that the Al-Aqsa Mosque is an important cultural and religious site for people living in the OPT, the Committee urged Israel to ensure that the excavations in no way endanger the Mosque and impede access to it.

19) Israel should increase its efforts to protect Palestinians against violence perpetuated by Jewish settlers, particularly in Hebron, and ensure that such incidents are investigated in a prompt, transparent and independent manner, are prosecuted and sentenced, and that avenues for redress are offered to the victims.

The Committee also recommended that Israel make its reports and the Committee’s concluding observations readily available to the public in both Hebrew and Arabic.

Israel should submit answers to questions not provided in its submission and representations within one year, together with information on any first steps taken towards implementing the Committee’s recommendations. Israel should submit its next periodic reports and address all points raised in the concluding observations in February 2010.

For more information, see Adalah’s Special Report on UN CERD available at: http://www.adalah.org/eng/cerd.php

URL

Pakistan's $4.2 Billion 'Blank Check' for U.S. Military Aid

After 9/11, funding to country soars with little oversight

By Nathaniel Heller, Sarah Fort and Marina Walker Guevara
Data analysis by Ben Welsh

WASHINGTON, March 27, 2007 — In the three years after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, U.S. military aid to Pakistan soared to $4.2 billion, compared to $9.1 million in the three years before the attacks — a 45,000 percent increase — boosting Pakistan to the top tier of countries receiving this type of funding.

More than half of the new money was provided through a post-9/11 Defense Department program — Coalition Support Funds — not closely tracked by Congress.

--MORE--

Pakistan's $4.2 Billion 'Blank Check' for U.S. Military Aid

After 9/11, funding to country soars with little oversight

By Nathaniel Heller, Sarah Fort and Marina Walker Guevara
Data analysis by Ben Welsh

WASHINGTON, March 27, 2007 — In the three years after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, U.S. military aid to Pakistan soared to $4.2 billion, compared to $9.1 million in the three years before the attacks — a 45,000 percent increase — boosting Pakistan to the top tier of countries receiving this type of funding.

More than half of the new money was provided through a post-9/11 Defense Department program — Coalition Support Funds — not closely tracked by Congress.

--MORE--

General McCaffrey’s new report: Iraq 'population is in despair'

Related
JOE LIEBERMAN
Who elected this nut job and why as chair of the Homeland Security Committee is he not investigating massive Republican corruption? BTW, what nut job made him chairman anyway?
---

"It is clear that for the first time in a long time, there is reason for cautious optimism about Iraq."

WARNING: LIEBERMAN VIDEO - March 27, 2007
---
General Barry McCaffrey has released a report on Iraq - PDF

Adjunct Professor of International Affairs

March 26, 2007

MEMORANDUM FOR: Colonel Michael Meese

Professor and Head Dept of Social Sciences

CC: Colonel Cindy Jebb
Professor and Deputy Head Dept of Social Sciences

SUBJECT: After Action Report—General Barry R McCaffrey USA (Ret)
VISIT IRAQ AND KUWAIT 9-16 March 2007

Excerpts

There is no function of government that operates effectively across the nation--- not health care, not justice, not education, not transportation, not labor and commerce, not electricity, not oil production. There is no province in the country in which the government has dominance. The government cannot spend its own money effectively. ($7.1 billion sits in New York banks.) No Iraqi government official, coalition soldier, diplomat, reporter, foreign NGO, nor contractor can walk the streets of Baghdad, nor Mosul, nor Kirkuk, nor Basra, nor Tikrit, nor Najaf, nor Ramadi---without heavily armed protection.

***

The US and Iraqi Forces have now dramatically changed their operational scheme. More then 50+ Iraqi Police/Army and US Army Joint Security Stations (JSS) are now being emplaced across the city and extended into the suburbs. The pre-operation planning and rehearsals were superb. The presence of these joint military elements is now becoming ubiquitous across the urban areas. Although many of these small outposts have been attacked—none has yet been seriously jeopardized. The Iraqi people are encouraged ---life is almost immediately springing back in many parts of the city. The murder rate has plummeted. IED attacks on US forces during their formerly vulnerable daily transits from huge US bases on the periphery of Baghdad are down--- since these forces are now permanently based in their operational area.

***

The police force is feared as a Shia militia in uniform which is responsible for thousands of extra-judicial killings. There is no effective nation-wide court system. There are in general almost no acceptable Iraqi penal institutions. The population is terrorized by rampant criminal gangs involved in kidnapping, extortion, robbery, rape, massive stealing of public property ---such as electrical lines, oil production material, government transportation, etc.

***

...ripped by a low grade civil war which has worsened to catastrophic levels with as many as 3000 citizens murdered per month.

US democracy ideals lose steam to Bush 'realism': experts

by Sylvie Lanteaume Wed Mar 28, 2:33 AM ET

Fallout from the Iraq war has prompted a new "realism" in US foreign policy, which is edging out early Bush administration ideals of promoting democracy around the world, analysts say.

US President George W. Bush pushed hard for reform in the Middle East during his first term in office, and still says that ideological change is an integral part of what he calls the "war on terror."

And Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said she was "really concerned" last week on the eve of an Egyptian constitutional referendum that opponents said was certain to curb freedoms.

Experts say the crippling war in Iraq has forced Washington to pursue "realist" policies over Bush's earlier "idealist" ways.

"The failure of US policy in Iraq has provided autocratic regimes in the Middle East a reprieve from the pressure to democratize, as long as they position themselves clearly on the side of Washington in its looming confrontation with Iran, Syria, and Shiite Islamists," said analyst Marina Ottoway of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

"The lofty ideals of democracy promotion may still find their way into the administrationÂ’s speeches, but when it comes to policy, AmericaÂ’s enemiesÂ’ enemies are its friends."

Ottoway said Saudi Arabia and Egypt have been "the biggest beneficiaries of the US loss of interest in draining the swamp of autocracy once it was confronted by large alligators such as Iran and its allies."

For Thomas Carothers, another expert at the Carnegie Endowment, dictators of the world have beat back democratic principles by presenting them as a new manifestation of US imperialism.

"The way that President George W. Bush is making democracy promotion a central theme of his foreign policy has clearly contributed to the unease such efforts -- and the idea of 'democracy promotion' itself -- are creating around the world," he wrote in the latest issue of Foreign Affairs.

"Some autocratic governments have won substantial public sympathy by arguing that opposition to Western democracy-promotion is resistance not to democracy itself, but to American interventionism.

"Moreover, the damage that the Bush administration has done to the global image of the United States as a symbol of democracy and human rights by repeatedly violating the rule of law at home and abroad has further weakened the legitimacy of the democracy-promotion cause."

Egypt and Saudi Arabia are not the only countries to benefit from US support while turning a deaf ear to calls for democratic reform.

Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, who just ousted the chief high court justice in what opponents call a power grab, recently received a surprise visit from US Vice President Dick Cheney who simply urged him to do more to fight Al-Qaeda extremists along the border with Afghanistan.

Azerbaijan, under iron-fisted rule by President Ilham Aliev who succeeded his father in 2003, last week signed an energy deal with the United States.

And in US-ally Colombia Bush has been content with President Alvaro Uribe's efforts to control his territory and fight narco-terrorism despite a scandal linking government officials and extremist paramilitaries.

A monstrous war crime

Related
Blair's Advisers Backed Lancet Study of Iraqi Deaths
---
With more than 650,000 civilians dead in Iraq, our government must take responsibility for its lies

Richard Horton
Wednesday March 28, 2007
The Guardian

Our collective failure has been to take our political leaders at their word. This week the BBC reported that the government's own scientists advised ministers that the Johns Hopkins study on Iraq civilian mortality was accurate and reliable, following a freedom of information request by the reporter Owen Bennett-Jones. This paper was published in the Lancet last October. It estimated that 650,000 Iraqi civilians had died since the American and British led invasion in March 2003.

Immediately after publication, the prime minister's official spokesman said that the Lancet's study "was not one we believe to be anywhere near accurate". The foreign secretary, Margaret Beckett, said that the Lancet figures were "extrapolated" and a "leap". President Bush said: "I don't consider it a credible report".

Scientists at the UK's Department for International Development thought differently. They concluded that the study's methods were "tried and tested". Indeed, the Johns Hopkins approach would likely lead to an "underestimation of mortality".

The Ministry of Defence's chief scientific adviser said the research was "robust", close to "best practice", and "balanced". He recommended "caution in publicly criticising the study".

When these recommendations went to the prime minister's advisers, they were horrified. One person briefing Tony Blair wrote: "Are we really sure that the report is likely to be right? That is certainly what the brief implies?" A Foreign and Commonwealth Office official was forced to conclude that the government "should not be rubbishing the Lancet".

The prime minister's adviser finally gave in. He wrote: "The survey methodology used here cannot be rubbished, it is a tried and tested way of measuring mortality in conflict zones".

How would the government respond? Would it welcome the Johns Hopkins study as an important contribution to understanding the military threat to Iraqi civilians? Would it ask for urgent independent verification? Would it invite the Iraqi government to upgrade civilian security?

Of course, our government did none of these things. Tony Blair was advised to say: "The overriding message is that there are no accurate or reliable figures of deaths in Iraq".

His official spokesman went further and rejected the Johns Hopkins report entirely. It was a shameful and cowardly dissembling by a Labour - yes, by a Labour - prime minister.

Indeed, it was even contrary to the US's own Iraq Study Group report, which concluded last year that "there is significant underreporting of the violence in Iraq".

This Labour government, which includes Gordon Brown as much as it does Tony Blair, is party to a war crime of monstrous proportions. Yet our political consensus prevents any judicial or civil society response. Britain is paralysed by its own indifference.

At a time when we are celebrating our enlightened abolition of slavery 200 years ago, we are continuing to commit one of the worst international abuses of human rights of the past half-century. It is inexplicable how we allowed this to happen. It is inexplicable why we are not demanding this government's mass resignation.

Two hundred years from now, the Iraq war will be mourned as the moment when Britain violated its delicate democratic constitution and joined the ranks of nations that use extreme pre-emptive killing as a tactic of foreign policy. Some anniversary that will be.

· Richard Horton is a doctor and the editor of the Lancet

Richard.Horton@lancet.com

Arab experts cautious over Rice's peace moves

Middle East News
ANALYSIS

By Abdul Jalil Mustafa Mar 25, 2007, 15:03 GMT

Amman - US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice may be carrying proposals for pushing forward the Arab-Israeli peace process, but governments of the region should avoid 'excessive optimism' as to the outcome of the new US round of diplomacy, Arab politicians and analysts said Sunday.

'We have to avoid excessive optimism regarding what may come out of Rice's new tour,' Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee at Jordan's lower house of parliament, Mohammad Abu Hudaib, told Deutsche Presse-Agentur dpa.

'However, we do believe that the Arabs can put pressure on the United States to do something at this juncture, because Washington is in a state of crisis in Iraq and, therefore, it needs their help to come out of this plight,' he said.

Abu Hudaib considered Israeli and US attitudes towards the newly- forged Palestinian coalition government as 'non-reassuring.'

He alluded to Israel's avowed refusal to deal with the new Palestinian cabinet and Washington's declaration that it would only deal with the non-Hamas ministers.

The US Secretary of State met on Saturday in the Egyptian city of Aswan with foreign ministers of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates, which form the pillars of the so-called moderate Arab camp.

Addressing a press conference earlier Sunday, Rice sidestepped a question about the nature of moves the United States intended to carry out to push forward the Middle East peace process.

But she said it would try to develop a 'common ground' between the Palestinians and Israelis for implementing the quartet's roadmap.

An address delivered by Jordan's King Abdullah II before the US Congress on March 8 appeared to be the catalyst for Rice's new Middle East tour, Arab diplomats said.

The monarch urged the United States to play a 'historic role' toward the conclusion of a Palestinian-Israeli peaceful settlement, warning all parties will be 'at risk' should a solution leading to the setting up of an independent Palestinian state not materialize.

'His Majesty's address was designed to alert the US legislators to the fact that the Palestinian question, which represents the core of all conflicts in the region, should be given priority over the situation in Iraq,' Abu Hudaib said.

The Aswan meeting comes ahead of the Arab summit conference scheduled for Wednesday in Riyadh, where Arab leaders are expected to re-launch the Arab Peace Initiative that was adopted for the first time by the Arab summit in Beirut in 2002.

Israeli leaders have demanded an amendment of the Arab blueprint, and Arab editorialists and commentators expected Rice to exercise pressure on Arab leaders to introduce certain changes into the Arab peace plan at the Riyadh summit.

'I don't believe Arab leaders will accept any pressure to change the Arab initiative,' Abu Hudaib said, citing the 'difficult situation' faced by the US administration due to pressure by the Congress to pull out from Iraq.

The Arab peace plan envisages extending recognition to Israel by all Arab states only after it pulls out from all Arab territories it occupied in the 1967 Six Day War, including East Jerusalem.

Israel however wants to normalize ties with Arab countries before committing itself to any territorial concessions.

Taher Adwan, editor-in-chief of the daily newspaper al-Arab al- Yawm, also indicated his belief that Arab leaders would reject any US pressures to change the Arab initiative.

'Washington used to put pressure on Arab leaders ahead of any new summit, but there are precedents where Arab summits did not respond to such dictations,' he said.

Adwan discerned a 'different US attitude this time, as far as the Palestinian-Israeli peace process is concerned.'

'However, Rice's visit to the region ahead of the Riyadh summit gives the conference added significance and should prompt Arab leaders to adopt strong positions that affect the US agenda and force it to change course in the right direction,' he said.

One of the impressions widely perceived in the Arab world is that the US secretary of state will be seeking support for the West's standoff with Iran over the nuclear issue.

'I cannot exclude this as part of the US manoeuvre, but any prudent politician must come to the conclusion that any war against Iran will be catastrophic for the entire region,' Abu Hudaib said.

© 2007 dpa - Deutsche Presse-Agentur

Strategic Insights on Iraq

Editor's note: I am posting Friday's new articles at the overflow blog(see Thursday's below).

---

Volume VI, Issue 2 (March 2007)

---

The Iraq Study Group Report: The Way Forward or Backward? A Strategic Insights Special Edition Introductory Overview Introduction to the Special Edition of Strategic Insights on the Iraq Study Group by Robert Looney Feature Articles Diplomacy and the Iraq War by John Tirman Saudi Arabia: Iraq, Iran, the Regional Power Balance, and the Sectarian Question by F. Gregory Gause, III Israel and the Iraq Study Group Report by Jonathan Spyer Iraq’s Future 101: The Failings of the Baker-Hamilton Report by Brendan O’Leary Shi`i Perceptions of The Iraq Study Group Report by Abbas Kadhim Strategic Insecurity After Saddam: Whither Regional Security in a World Turned Upside Down? by James Russell Beyond the Iraq Study Group: The Elusive Goal of Sustained Growth by Robert Looney Coming Soon: A Response from a Member of The Iraq Study Group by Leon Panetta Reflections on the Long War It’s Now 2007: So Where are We in the Long War? by John Mills Cultural Understanding within Context as a Tool for Countering Irregular Threats and as a Force for Peace by Kathleen M. Meilahn The Evolution of Arab Conceptions of the Crusades by John "Garick" Chamberlin Viewpoints Pouring More Arms into Iraq Risks Regional Conflagration by James Russell Whither Victory in the War on Terror? by Barry Zellen Conference Report Conference Report: The Militarization of Energy Security by James A. Russell and Trisha Bury Student Thesis The Resiliency of Terrorist Havens: A Social Mobilization Theory Approach by Robert W. Johnston

Most Afghan civilians turning against NATO, towards Taliban: survey

What? They don't appreciate our 'help'?
---
Related
Poor Iraq. First the lies and now, even worse: more help
---

Afghans rejecting Canadian troops for Taliban, survey finds
Globe and Mail, Canada - 19 Mar 2007
LONDON — Afghan civilians are increasingly turning against Canadian troops and their country's government and toward support of the Taliban, according to a ...

Taliban Support Rising In Afghanistan: Study Online - International News Network, Pakistan - 17 hours ago LONDON: Canadian troops are facing another challenge in Afghanistan as Taliban support among civilians has rocketed to nearly 27 per cent, ctv.ca reported. ...

Not welcome Macleans.ca, Canada - 19 Mar 2007 Maclean's 50 member Scott Taylor, who travelled with the Senlis Council in Kandahar earlier this year, says it's time for a comprehensive re-assessment of ...

Most Afghan civilians turning against NATO, towards Taliban: survey Winnipeg Free Press, Canada - 19 Mar 2007 TORONTO (CP) — A new survey conducted this month in Afghanistan suggests civilians there are turning against Canadian and other NATO troops as well as their ... Poverty "driving people into arms of Taliban" Kuwait News Agency, Kuwait - 19 Mar 2007 LONDON, March 19 (KUNA) -- More than a quarter of men in southern and eastern Afghanistan support the Taliban, according to research released here Monday. ... Losing Afghan hearts, minds Toronto Star, Canada - 20 Mar 2007 Canada and other Western countries are losing the battle for hearts and minds in Afghanistan while the Taliban is seizing the advantage, says a survey from ...

Iraq By the Numbers

March 19, 2007

Today, on the four-year anniversary of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, our military is stretched to the breaking point, Iraq is descending deeper into civil war, and the president is moving more—and more poorly prepared—troops into battle. The Center for American Progress has repeatedly advocated for a new strategy that would redeploy troops from Iraq to focus more attention on completing the mission left unaccomplished in Afghanistan and strengthen our ground troops by making sure that they are well-equipped and prepared—mentally and physically—when they are sent overseas. Clearly, we need a change in U.S. policy in Iraq:

The Cost in American Lives is Rising

3,217: Number of American troops killed in Iraq since the beginning of the war

54: Percentage of troops killed who were 24 years old or younger

Coalition Support is Waning

49: Number of countries in the Coalition of the Willing when the invasion began in 2003

21: Number of countries in the Coalition by mid-2007 after Britain, Denmark, and South Korea reduce their forces

135,000: Number of American troops in Iraq

11,095: Number of non-American troops that will remain in Iraq after the upcoming Coalition withdrawals

Staying the Wrong Course

29,100: Number of additional troops President Bush and his generals have officially requested to send to Iraq as part of an escalation strategy

Up to 50,000: Likely number of additional combat and support troops that will actually have to be deployed for the escalation, according to a Congressional Budget Office report

59: Percentage of Americans who think the Iraq war was a mistake

13: Percentage of Americans who prefer the option of sending more troops to options involving some form of withdrawal

Our Troops Are Being Pushed Beyond Their Limits

31: Number of Army combat brigades that have served two or more tours in Iraq or Afghanistan, out of 44 total

420,000: Number of troops that have deployed more than once

50: Percentage of troops more likely to suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder if they serve more than one tour

50,000: Number of troops on whom “stop-loss” has been imposed, meaning they are prevented from leaving the Army when their enlistment end date arrives

Our Veterans Are Not Receiving Adequate Support

23,417: Number of troops wounded in Iraq

9 out of 10: Number of disabled veterans who have been made to wait for benefit evaluations longer than the Pentagon’s own standard of 40 days

76: Percentage of Americans who think the Bush administration has not done enough to care for Iraq war veterans

Violence is Increasing

150,000: Estimated number of Iraqi civilians killed by violence since the beginning of the war, according to the Iraq Health Minister (a conservative estimate)

34,452: Number of Iraqi civilians killed by violence in 2006, according to the U.N.

19: Average number of daily attacks by insurgents in December 2003

77: Average number of daily attacks by insurgents in December 2004

185: Average number of daily attacks by insurgents in December 2006

5,000: Estimated strength of insurgency nationwide in Iraq, November 2003

20,000-30,000: Estimated strength of insurgency nationwide, October 2006

Basic Needs Are Still Unmet

75: Percentage of Iraqis who believe security is poor, according to a June 2006 survey

3,700,000: Estimated number of Iraqis who have fled the country or been internally displaced

20: Percentage of the Iraqi population living below the poverty line (or 5,600,000 people)

25-40: Estimated unemployment rate for Iraqi population

14.2 to 26.5: Estimated percentage of Iraqis who are malnourished

75: Percentage of Iraqi elementary schoolchildren who attended school last year, according to the Iraq Ministry of Education

30: Percentage of Iraqi elementary schoolchildren who attend school now, according to the Ministry of Education

Costs are Mounting

100.8 bil.: Annual cost of the war in Iraq, according to current monthly spending of 8.4 bil. per month

$463 bil.: Cumulative estimated cost of the Iraq war as of 2007

$5.6 bil.: Estimated cost of the escalation, according to Bush administration

Up to $27 bil.: Estimated cost of the escalation, according to the CBO

$633 bil.: Projected cumulative cost of the Iraq war come 2008, figuring in the cost of the escalation

21: Percentage of the FY 2007 National Security Budget spent on Iraq

8: Percentage of the budget spent on homeland security

0.07: Percentage of the budget being spent on international broadcasting and educational cultural exchanges to win the war of ideas with terrorist groups

Americans Are Not Safer

75: Percentage of more than 100 foreign policy experts surveyed who think the war in Iraq had a “very negative impact” on protecting the American people from global terrorist networks and in advancing U.S. national security goals

75: Percentage of foreign-policy experts who think the United States is losing the war on terror

3,194: Number of terrorist attacks worldwide in 2004, as reported by the U.S. government’s National Counterterrorism Center

11,100: Number of terrorist attacks worldwide in 2005, as reported by the U.S. government’s National Counterterrorism Center

1: Rank of Iraq among all nations as a training ground for terrorists

There are no longer any good or easy options in Iraq. However, the United States can minimize the damage to its troops, its national security, and the security of Iraq and the region by redeploying troops from Iraq to address the mounting terrorist threat in Afghanistan. This strategy, in tandem with multiple diplomatic efforts involving Iraq’s neighbors in serious negotiations, just might allow the United States to extricate itself from the Bush administration’s war of choice in Iraq with our national security interests intact.