THE COMPLETE ARTICLE
The New York Times
OP-ED COLUMNIST
No One to Lose To
By MAUREEN DOWD
Published: November 25, 2006
In Iraq, the only question is, who can we turn the country over to?
After the Thanksgiving Day Massacre of Shiites by Sunnis, President Bush should go on Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News and give an interview headlined: “If I did it, here’s how the civil war in Iraq happened.”
MORE
http://tinyurl.com/y9yp5v
Saturday, November 25, 2006
NEARBY NATIONS DREADING IRAQ'S DISINTEGRATION
Posted on Thu, Nov. 23, 2006
Civil war could ripple outward
By Ellen Knickmeyer
Washington Post
BAGHDAD, Iraq - While American commanders have suggested that civil war is possible in Iraq, many leaders, experts and ordinary people in Baghdad and around the Middle East say it is already under way, and that the real worry ahead is that the conflict will destroy the flimsy Iraqi state and draw in surrounding countries.
Whether the U.S. military departs Iraq sooner or later, the United States will be hard-pressed to leave behind a country that does not threaten U.S. interests and regional peace, according to American and Arab analysts and political observers.
``We're not talking about just a full-scale civil war. This would be a failed-state situation with fighting among various groups'' growing into regional conflict, Joost Hiltermann, Middle East project director for the International Crisis Group, said by telephone from Amman, Jordan.
``The war will be over Iraq, over its dead body,'' Hiltermann said.
``All indications point to a current state of civil war and the disintegration of the Iraqi state,'' Nawaf Obaid, an adjunct fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and an adviser to the Saudi government, said earlier this month at a conference in Washington on U.S.-Arab relations.
As Iraq's neighbors grapple with the various ideas put forward for solving the country's problems, they uniformly shudder at one proposal: dividing Iraq into separate regions for Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds, and then speeding the withdrawal of U.S. forces.
``To envision that you can divide Iraq into three parts is to envision `ethnic cleansing' on a massive scale, sectarian killing on a massive scale,'' Prince Turki al-Faisal, the Saudi ambassador to the United States, said Oct. 30 at a conference in Washington. ``Since America came into Iraq uninvited, it should not leave Iraq uninvited.''
``When the ethnic-religious break occurs in one country, it will not fail to occur elsewhere, too,'' Syrian President Bashar al-Assad told Germany's Der Spiegel newsweekly recently. ``It would be as it was at the end of the Soviet Union, only much worse. Large wars, small wars -- no one will be able to get a grip on the consequences.''
In an analysis published last month by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Obaid said sectarian conflicts could make Iraq a battleground for the region.
Obaid described widespread interference by Iranian security forces within Iraq. He urged Saudi Arabia, which is building a 560-mile wall on its border with Iraq, to warn Iran ``that if these activities are not checked,'' Saudi Arabia ``will be forced to consider a similar overt and covert program of its own.''
In Damascus, a Syrian analyst close to the Assad government warned that other countries would intervene if Iraq descended into full-scale civil war. ``Iran will get involved, Turkey will get involved, Saudi Arabia, Syria,'' said the analyst, who spoke on condition he not be identified further.
``Regional war is very much a possibility,'' said Hiltermann, the analyst for the International Crisis Group. Iraq's neighbors ``are hysterical about Iranian strategic advances in the region,'' he said.
U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad last month ranked Syria and Iran with Al-Qaida in Iraq, one of the country's principal Sunni Arab insurgent groups, in terms of destabilizing influences in Iraq. Despite that assessment, the United States has not held substantive talks with Syria regarding Iraq since 2004 or with Iran since the war began in 2003.
Diplomats and analysts increasingly are urging the Bush administration to reach out to both countries as part of a regional approach to quelling Iraq's troubles. Former Secretary of State James Baker, leader of a panel preparing a set of policy recommendations for the Bush administration, already has endorsed the idea of seeking the help of Iran and Syria.
``The thing is, because Iran and Syria both have spoiling power in Iraq, if you could neutralize them,'' it would ease some of the many pressures within Iraq, Hiltermann said. But he said the two countries may demand a mighty trade-off: for Syria, U.S. help with its biggest stated aim, winning back the Golan Heights from Israel; for Iran, U.S. compromise over its nuclear program.
Hiltermann acknowledged the difficulty. ``I'm saying it's required,'' he said. ``I'm not saying it's possible.''
In Baghdad's Shiite stronghold of Sadr City late last month, aides to one of the country's leading Shiite clerics held a rally to urge followers to bide their time until the American forces leave the country. The rally was called by followers of Muqtada al-Sadr, a strongly anti-occupation figure who is one of the leaders in the current Shiite-led government and one likely claimant to power should the Americans withdraw.
``Will America win?'' a speaker in a brown turban demanded before the more than 1,000 protesters, as a brewing storm whirled dirt and trash and pelted demonstrators with drops of cold rain. Loudspeakers shot his question back across the square.
The men thrust their fists in the air, shouting their answer out to a grim, gray sky: ``No, no! America will not win!''
Between 2 percent and 5 percent of Iraq's 27 million people have been killed, wounded or uprooted since the Americans invaded in 2003, calculates Anthony Cordesman of the Center for International and Strategic Studies.
``This is civil war,'' he said.
Since midsummer, Shiite militias, Sunni insurgent groups, ad-hoc Sunni self-defense groups and tribes have accelerated campaigns of sectarian cleansing that are forcing countless thousands of Shiites and Sunnis in Baghdad to seek safety among their own kind.
Whole towns north and south of Baghdad are locked in the same sectarian struggle, among them the central Shiite city of Balad, still under siege by gunmen from surrounding Sunni towns after a bloody spate of sectarian massacres last month.
Even outside the center of sectarian strife in the central region of the country, Shiite factions battle each other in the south, Sunni tribes and factions clash in the west. Across Iraq, the criminal gangs that emerged with the collapse of law and order rule patches of turf as mini-warlords.
Since the war began, 1.6 million Iraqis have sought refuge in neighboring countries; at least 231,530 people have been displaced inside Iraq since February, when Shiite-Sunni violence exploded with the bombing of a Shiite shrine in the northern city of Samarra, according to figures from the United Nations and the U.N.-affiliated International Organization for Migration.
http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/world/16082761.htm
Civil war could ripple outward
By Ellen Knickmeyer
Washington Post
BAGHDAD, Iraq - While American commanders have suggested that civil war is possible in Iraq, many leaders, experts and ordinary people in Baghdad and around the Middle East say it is already under way, and that the real worry ahead is that the conflict will destroy the flimsy Iraqi state and draw in surrounding countries.
Whether the U.S. military departs Iraq sooner or later, the United States will be hard-pressed to leave behind a country that does not threaten U.S. interests and regional peace, according to American and Arab analysts and political observers.
``We're not talking about just a full-scale civil war. This would be a failed-state situation with fighting among various groups'' growing into regional conflict, Joost Hiltermann, Middle East project director for the International Crisis Group, said by telephone from Amman, Jordan.
``The war will be over Iraq, over its dead body,'' Hiltermann said.
``All indications point to a current state of civil war and the disintegration of the Iraqi state,'' Nawaf Obaid, an adjunct fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and an adviser to the Saudi government, said earlier this month at a conference in Washington on U.S.-Arab relations.
As Iraq's neighbors grapple with the various ideas put forward for solving the country's problems, they uniformly shudder at one proposal: dividing Iraq into separate regions for Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds, and then speeding the withdrawal of U.S. forces.
``To envision that you can divide Iraq into three parts is to envision `ethnic cleansing' on a massive scale, sectarian killing on a massive scale,'' Prince Turki al-Faisal, the Saudi ambassador to the United States, said Oct. 30 at a conference in Washington. ``Since America came into Iraq uninvited, it should not leave Iraq uninvited.''
``When the ethnic-religious break occurs in one country, it will not fail to occur elsewhere, too,'' Syrian President Bashar al-Assad told Germany's Der Spiegel newsweekly recently. ``It would be as it was at the end of the Soviet Union, only much worse. Large wars, small wars -- no one will be able to get a grip on the consequences.''
In an analysis published last month by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Obaid said sectarian conflicts could make Iraq a battleground for the region.
Obaid described widespread interference by Iranian security forces within Iraq. He urged Saudi Arabia, which is building a 560-mile wall on its border with Iraq, to warn Iran ``that if these activities are not checked,'' Saudi Arabia ``will be forced to consider a similar overt and covert program of its own.''
In Damascus, a Syrian analyst close to the Assad government warned that other countries would intervene if Iraq descended into full-scale civil war. ``Iran will get involved, Turkey will get involved, Saudi Arabia, Syria,'' said the analyst, who spoke on condition he not be identified further.
``Regional war is very much a possibility,'' said Hiltermann, the analyst for the International Crisis Group. Iraq's neighbors ``are hysterical about Iranian strategic advances in the region,'' he said.
U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad last month ranked Syria and Iran with Al-Qaida in Iraq, one of the country's principal Sunni Arab insurgent groups, in terms of destabilizing influences in Iraq. Despite that assessment, the United States has not held substantive talks with Syria regarding Iraq since 2004 or with Iran since the war began in 2003.
Diplomats and analysts increasingly are urging the Bush administration to reach out to both countries as part of a regional approach to quelling Iraq's troubles. Former Secretary of State James Baker, leader of a panel preparing a set of policy recommendations for the Bush administration, already has endorsed the idea of seeking the help of Iran and Syria.
``The thing is, because Iran and Syria both have spoiling power in Iraq, if you could neutralize them,'' it would ease some of the many pressures within Iraq, Hiltermann said. But he said the two countries may demand a mighty trade-off: for Syria, U.S. help with its biggest stated aim, winning back the Golan Heights from Israel; for Iran, U.S. compromise over its nuclear program.
Hiltermann acknowledged the difficulty. ``I'm saying it's required,'' he said. ``I'm not saying it's possible.''
In Baghdad's Shiite stronghold of Sadr City late last month, aides to one of the country's leading Shiite clerics held a rally to urge followers to bide their time until the American forces leave the country. The rally was called by followers of Muqtada al-Sadr, a strongly anti-occupation figure who is one of the leaders in the current Shiite-led government and one likely claimant to power should the Americans withdraw.
``Will America win?'' a speaker in a brown turban demanded before the more than 1,000 protesters, as a brewing storm whirled dirt and trash and pelted demonstrators with drops of cold rain. Loudspeakers shot his question back across the square.
The men thrust their fists in the air, shouting their answer out to a grim, gray sky: ``No, no! America will not win!''
Between 2 percent and 5 percent of Iraq's 27 million people have been killed, wounded or uprooted since the Americans invaded in 2003, calculates Anthony Cordesman of the Center for International and Strategic Studies.
``This is civil war,'' he said.
Since midsummer, Shiite militias, Sunni insurgent groups, ad-hoc Sunni self-defense groups and tribes have accelerated campaigns of sectarian cleansing that are forcing countless thousands of Shiites and Sunnis in Baghdad to seek safety among their own kind.
Whole towns north and south of Baghdad are locked in the same sectarian struggle, among them the central Shiite city of Balad, still under siege by gunmen from surrounding Sunni towns after a bloody spate of sectarian massacres last month.
Even outside the center of sectarian strife in the central region of the country, Shiite factions battle each other in the south, Sunni tribes and factions clash in the west. Across Iraq, the criminal gangs that emerged with the collapse of law and order rule patches of turf as mini-warlords.
Since the war began, 1.6 million Iraqis have sought refuge in neighboring countries; at least 231,530 people have been displaced inside Iraq since February, when Shiite-Sunni violence exploded with the bombing of a Shiite shrine in the northern city of Samarra, according to figures from the United Nations and the U.N.-affiliated International Organization for Migration.
http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/world/16082761.htm
Iraq's Violence Spins Beyond Anyone's Control
Friday, Nov. 24, 2006
Analysis: It has been clear for some time that the U.S. is not in control of events in Iraq. But the latest sectarian bloodshed suggests that even help from Iran and Syria may not be enough to stop the slide into chaos
By TONY KARON
If this week's announcement that President Bush is to meet Iraq's Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki in the capital of neighboring Jordan raised eyebrows, by Friday it was abundantly clear why the meeting couldn't be held in Baghdad — the Iraqi capital is under siege. After a day of open sectarian warfare on the streets had claimed more than 200 lives, the city's airport is closed and its residents are forced to remain indoors under a curfew.
The latest carnage comes as the focus on Iraq's immediate future shifts outside its borders — to U.S. discussions over redefining its strategy, moves by Iran and Syria to stake their own claim to a role in stabilizing Iraq, and perhaps, to competition between the two camps.
President Bush is due to meet Prime Minister Maliki against a backdrop in which U.S. officials are increasingly frustrated over the failure of the Iraqi government to act against the Shi'ite militias, which are answerable to parties in the ruling coalition. Washington views the dismantling of those militias as the key to achieving national reconciliation with the Sunnis and isolating the insurgency.
But following the latest attacks, the pressure on Maliki from his own base to resist U.S. demands will likely be greater than whatever leverage President Bush can bring to bear: The Iraqi leader has long made clear that he can only move against the Shi'ite militias after the Sunni insurgent threat has been removed, and the bloodshed in Sadr City Thursday will only reinforce that point. Indeed, Sadr's party threatened to quit the government if Maliki's meeting with Bush goes ahead next week — and Sadr's support has been critical to keeping him in power.
The latest escalation in bloodshed began with a two-hour siege Thursday by Sunni gunmen on the Ministry of Health; then suspected Sunni insurgents detonated a series of bombs in crowded places in Sadr City and other Shi'ite neighborhoods that killed more than 160 people. Shi'ite militiamen retaliated by firing mortars at mosques and other targets in neighboring Sunni suburbs. And tensions were further inflamed by an incident in which U.S. troops, searching in Sadr City for a kidnapped American soldier, fired on a van that refused to slow down in response to a signal, killing four civilians. The incident, which highlighted the ongoing U.S. campaign against elements of Sadr's army who they see as responsible for much of the sectarian violence, makes life even more difficult for Maliki.
It's a safe bet that those responsible for Thursday's bombings calculated their political effect — the most extreme wing of the Sunni insurgency, which routinely engages in the mass killing of Shi'ite civilians, has no interest in the success of a national reconciliation project in which they would be the big losers. And while Iraqi leaders issued by-now routine calls for reconciliation and calm, many observers feared that Thursday's bombings could have a similar effect to the bombing of the Shi'ite shrine at Samarra in the spring, which dramatically escalated the sectarian confrontation. It will certainly take more than a curfew to stop the cycle of retribution.
Iranian leaders, meanwhile, will host Iraq's President Jalal Talabani — with Syrian leaders possibly in attendance — on Saturday, in an initiative designed to showcase Iran's intention of playing a positive role in Iraq; the meeting will also not so subtly make the point that Tehran doesn't need Washington's permission to get involved. But even though Iran traditionally wields greater influence over the Shi'ite parties that dominate Iraq's government, it may have little to offer in the immediate crisis of sectarian escalation. Likewise Syria, whose contribution would be largely to tighten border security to prevent the trickle of foreign jihadists into the territory of its neighbor, may not be able to effect events on the ground as much it might like to think.
Iraq, after all, is already awash with weapons and fighters. And even the extent to which the Shi'ite political leadership is able to restrain the militias on the streets is an open question. Despite the best efforts of various, contending regional powers to shape events in Iraq, the escalating violence puts the momentum in the hands of Iraq's own contending factions. And their prospects for agreeing to a formula that can reverse the slide into full-scale civil war are not bright.
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1562867,00.html
Analysis: It has been clear for some time that the U.S. is not in control of events in Iraq. But the latest sectarian bloodshed suggests that even help from Iran and Syria may not be enough to stop the slide into chaos
By TONY KARON
If this week's announcement that President Bush is to meet Iraq's Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki in the capital of neighboring Jordan raised eyebrows, by Friday it was abundantly clear why the meeting couldn't be held in Baghdad — the Iraqi capital is under siege. After a day of open sectarian warfare on the streets had claimed more than 200 lives, the city's airport is closed and its residents are forced to remain indoors under a curfew.
The latest carnage comes as the focus on Iraq's immediate future shifts outside its borders — to U.S. discussions over redefining its strategy, moves by Iran and Syria to stake their own claim to a role in stabilizing Iraq, and perhaps, to competition between the two camps.
President Bush is due to meet Prime Minister Maliki against a backdrop in which U.S. officials are increasingly frustrated over the failure of the Iraqi government to act against the Shi'ite militias, which are answerable to parties in the ruling coalition. Washington views the dismantling of those militias as the key to achieving national reconciliation with the Sunnis and isolating the insurgency.
But following the latest attacks, the pressure on Maliki from his own base to resist U.S. demands will likely be greater than whatever leverage President Bush can bring to bear: The Iraqi leader has long made clear that he can only move against the Shi'ite militias after the Sunni insurgent threat has been removed, and the bloodshed in Sadr City Thursday will only reinforce that point. Indeed, Sadr's party threatened to quit the government if Maliki's meeting with Bush goes ahead next week — and Sadr's support has been critical to keeping him in power.
The latest escalation in bloodshed began with a two-hour siege Thursday by Sunni gunmen on the Ministry of Health; then suspected Sunni insurgents detonated a series of bombs in crowded places in Sadr City and other Shi'ite neighborhoods that killed more than 160 people. Shi'ite militiamen retaliated by firing mortars at mosques and other targets in neighboring Sunni suburbs. And tensions were further inflamed by an incident in which U.S. troops, searching in Sadr City for a kidnapped American soldier, fired on a van that refused to slow down in response to a signal, killing four civilians. The incident, which highlighted the ongoing U.S. campaign against elements of Sadr's army who they see as responsible for much of the sectarian violence, makes life even more difficult for Maliki.
It's a safe bet that those responsible for Thursday's bombings calculated their political effect — the most extreme wing of the Sunni insurgency, which routinely engages in the mass killing of Shi'ite civilians, has no interest in the success of a national reconciliation project in which they would be the big losers. And while Iraqi leaders issued by-now routine calls for reconciliation and calm, many observers feared that Thursday's bombings could have a similar effect to the bombing of the Shi'ite shrine at Samarra in the spring, which dramatically escalated the sectarian confrontation. It will certainly take more than a curfew to stop the cycle of retribution.
Iranian leaders, meanwhile, will host Iraq's President Jalal Talabani — with Syrian leaders possibly in attendance — on Saturday, in an initiative designed to showcase Iran's intention of playing a positive role in Iraq; the meeting will also not so subtly make the point that Tehran doesn't need Washington's permission to get involved. But even though Iran traditionally wields greater influence over the Shi'ite parties that dominate Iraq's government, it may have little to offer in the immediate crisis of sectarian escalation. Likewise Syria, whose contribution would be largely to tighten border security to prevent the trickle of foreign jihadists into the territory of its neighbor, may not be able to effect events on the ground as much it might like to think.
Iraq, after all, is already awash with weapons and fighters. And even the extent to which the Shi'ite political leadership is able to restrain the militias on the streets is an open question. Despite the best efforts of various, contending regional powers to shape events in Iraq, the escalating violence puts the momentum in the hands of Iraq's own contending factions. And their prospects for agreeing to a formula that can reverse the slide into full-scale civil war are not bright.
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1562867,00.html
More U.S. Troops Dying in Anbar Province
Saturday November 25, 2006 12:46 PM
By LOLITA C. BALDOR
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - In the three months since thousands of U.S. forces poured into Baghdad to quash escalating violence, far more American troops have died in the volatile western Anbar province than in the capital city.
More than two-thirds of the 245 U.S. casualties between Aug. 7, the start of the Baghdad offensive, and Nov. 7 occurred outside Baghdad - which military leaders have called the ``center of gravity'' of Iraq, and the key to success in the war. Four in 10 deaths over those three months have been in Anbar province, a Sunni insurgency stronghold where U.S. Marines have largely taken the lead.
Marines, who comprise only about 15 percent of the 141,000 U.S. forces currently in Iraq, accounted for nearly 28 percent of the fatalities over the three-month period.
The Baghdad assault, dubbed Operation Together Forward, started slowly in June. It escalated in early August when about 7,200 additional U.S. troops, including an agile Stryker brigade, were brought into enforce a broad array of checkpoints, curfews and house-to-house searches.
As total U.S. war casualties mounted through this summer and into the fall - from a total of about 2,500 by mid-June to more than 2,870 now - military officials blamed the rise on the Baghdad offensive, as well as the holy observance of Ramadan. The escalating violence made October the fourth deadliest month since the war began.
``Baghdad is the center of gravity for Iraq. We must get it right in Baghdad,'' Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said at the time. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld added, ``Most of the violence occurs within 30 kilometers of Baghdad.''
In terms of actual U.S. casualties, the opposite was true.
Most of the 245 deaths during the first three months of Operation Together Forward occurred beyond Baghdad's boundaries. According to an analysis by The Associated Press, there were 73 casualties in Baghdad between Aug. 7 and Nov. 7, while there were 103 in Anbar.
In comparison, during the first three months of 2006, there were 148 U.S. military deaths in Iraq - nearly 100 fewer than the August-November timeframe.
The death count in Anbar, combined with the deadly spike in sectarian attacks in Baghdad this week, paints a picture of an Iraq still teetering on the brink of civil war, battered by religious divisions, al-Qaida terrorists and a stubborn and diverse insurgency.
The unabated violence comes as the Bush administration and the U.S. military are conducting several wide-ranging reviews of Iraq war policy under the critical eyes of Democrats who are poised to take control of both houses of Congress early next year. The bipartisan Iraq Study Group, led by former Secretary of State James Baker and former Rep. Lee Hamilton, is expected to issue its report soon.
Little more than a week ago, the top U.S. commander in the Middle East, Gen. John Abizaid, acknowledged that the Sunni-dominated Anbar province was still not under control. Yet, military officials and Rumsfeld have often asserted that most of the violence in Iraq has been near Baghdad, and that the military effort must be centered there.
The problems in Anbar prompted U.S. military officials last week to move more than 2,200 additional Marines to the western province in a short-term effort to shore up U.S. combat power there.
Such troop shifts have drawn criticism from Congress in the past. In August, as the Pentagon prepared for the Baghdad operation, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., likened the positioning of forces in Iraq to a game of ``whack-a-mole,'' where generals try to curb violence in one area only to see it pop up somewhere else.
Overall, the U.S. Army - which has roughly 108,000 soldiers in Iraq - has borne the brunt of the deaths throughout the war, including 163 of the 245 deaths the AP looked at during the three-month period. There were 68 Marines killed during that time, along with seven Navy members and six in the Air Force, and one was unknown.
The most prevalent cause of death has remained the same across the country. Roadside bombs and other improvised explosive devices caused about 40 percent of the casualties, while another 13 percent were caused by small arms fire or snipers and 33 percent by unspecified combat incidents. Other causes of death included vehicle and helicopter crashes and non-combat incidents.
The high rate of Marine deaths is due in part to the fact that most are performing combat duties in the dangerous Anbar region. While the Army has a much larger presence in Iraq, some soldiers are serving in support roles or working in the headquarters units and are not doing combat duty.
Gen. James T. Conway, commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps, said this week that the decision to send more troops to Anbar is an effort to take advantage of ``some of the momentum that is taking place. ... It is reinforcing success based on what we see the tribes doing.''
---
Associated Press researcher Monika Mathur contributed to this report.
---
On the Net:
Defense Department: http://www.defenselink.mil
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6238389,00.html
By LOLITA C. BALDOR
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - In the three months since thousands of U.S. forces poured into Baghdad to quash escalating violence, far more American troops have died in the volatile western Anbar province than in the capital city.
More than two-thirds of the 245 U.S. casualties between Aug. 7, the start of the Baghdad offensive, and Nov. 7 occurred outside Baghdad - which military leaders have called the ``center of gravity'' of Iraq, and the key to success in the war. Four in 10 deaths over those three months have been in Anbar province, a Sunni insurgency stronghold where U.S. Marines have largely taken the lead.
Marines, who comprise only about 15 percent of the 141,000 U.S. forces currently in Iraq, accounted for nearly 28 percent of the fatalities over the three-month period.
The Baghdad assault, dubbed Operation Together Forward, started slowly in June. It escalated in early August when about 7,200 additional U.S. troops, including an agile Stryker brigade, were brought into enforce a broad array of checkpoints, curfews and house-to-house searches.
As total U.S. war casualties mounted through this summer and into the fall - from a total of about 2,500 by mid-June to more than 2,870 now - military officials blamed the rise on the Baghdad offensive, as well as the holy observance of Ramadan. The escalating violence made October the fourth deadliest month since the war began.
``Baghdad is the center of gravity for Iraq. We must get it right in Baghdad,'' Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said at the time. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld added, ``Most of the violence occurs within 30 kilometers of Baghdad.''
In terms of actual U.S. casualties, the opposite was true.
Most of the 245 deaths during the first three months of Operation Together Forward occurred beyond Baghdad's boundaries. According to an analysis by The Associated Press, there were 73 casualties in Baghdad between Aug. 7 and Nov. 7, while there were 103 in Anbar.
In comparison, during the first three months of 2006, there were 148 U.S. military deaths in Iraq - nearly 100 fewer than the August-November timeframe.
The death count in Anbar, combined with the deadly spike in sectarian attacks in Baghdad this week, paints a picture of an Iraq still teetering on the brink of civil war, battered by religious divisions, al-Qaida terrorists and a stubborn and diverse insurgency.
The unabated violence comes as the Bush administration and the U.S. military are conducting several wide-ranging reviews of Iraq war policy under the critical eyes of Democrats who are poised to take control of both houses of Congress early next year. The bipartisan Iraq Study Group, led by former Secretary of State James Baker and former Rep. Lee Hamilton, is expected to issue its report soon.
Little more than a week ago, the top U.S. commander in the Middle East, Gen. John Abizaid, acknowledged that the Sunni-dominated Anbar province was still not under control. Yet, military officials and Rumsfeld have often asserted that most of the violence in Iraq has been near Baghdad, and that the military effort must be centered there.
The problems in Anbar prompted U.S. military officials last week to move more than 2,200 additional Marines to the western province in a short-term effort to shore up U.S. combat power there.
Such troop shifts have drawn criticism from Congress in the past. In August, as the Pentagon prepared for the Baghdad operation, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., likened the positioning of forces in Iraq to a game of ``whack-a-mole,'' where generals try to curb violence in one area only to see it pop up somewhere else.
Overall, the U.S. Army - which has roughly 108,000 soldiers in Iraq - has borne the brunt of the deaths throughout the war, including 163 of the 245 deaths the AP looked at during the three-month period. There were 68 Marines killed during that time, along with seven Navy members and six in the Air Force, and one was unknown.
The most prevalent cause of death has remained the same across the country. Roadside bombs and other improvised explosive devices caused about 40 percent of the casualties, while another 13 percent were caused by small arms fire or snipers and 33 percent by unspecified combat incidents. Other causes of death included vehicle and helicopter crashes and non-combat incidents.
The high rate of Marine deaths is due in part to the fact that most are performing combat duties in the dangerous Anbar region. While the Army has a much larger presence in Iraq, some soldiers are serving in support roles or working in the headquarters units and are not doing combat duty.
Gen. James T. Conway, commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps, said this week that the decision to send more troops to Anbar is an effort to take advantage of ``some of the momentum that is taking place. ... It is reinforcing success based on what we see the tribes doing.''
---
Associated Press researcher Monika Mathur contributed to this report.
---
On the Net:
Defense Department: http://www.defenselink.mil
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6238389,00.html
US interference 'allowed terror gang to escape'
By Jason Bennetto, Crime Correspondent
Published: 25 November 2006
A team of suspected terrorists involved in an alleged UK plot to blow up trans-atlantic airliners escaped capture because of interference by the United States, The Independent has been told by counter-terrorism sources.
An investigation by MI5 and Scotland Yard into an alleged plan to smuggle explosive devices on up to 10 passenger jets was jeopardised in August, when the US put pressure on authorities in Pakistan to arrest a suspect allegedly linked to the airliner plot.
As a direct result of the surprise detention of the suspect, British police and MI5 were forced to rush forward plans to arrest an alleged UK gang accused of plotting to destroy the airliners. But a second group of suspected terrorists allegedly linked to the first evaded capture and is still at large, according to security sources.
The escape of the second group is said to be the reason why the UK was kept at its highest level - "critical" - for three days before it was decided that the plotters no longer posed an imminent threat.
The alleged airliner plot caused chaos and fear at airports throughout Britain when details emerged in August of an alleged plan to smuggle liquid explosives on board up to 10 flights and destroy them after take-off.
As a result of the alert, airports banned passengers from carrying liquids in their hand luggage and imposed tough new security checks.
The operation was one of the largest undertaken by the police and MI5, yet two counter-terrorism sources suggested that the intervention of the Americans was due to "inexperience and naivety" and that they were after a "short-term success".
American intelligence chiefs are understood to have persuaded the Pakistani authorities to arrest a British citizen, called Rashid Rauf, on Wednesday 9 August this year.
Mr Rauf was suspected of being closely linked to group of men and women in Britain who were allegedly involved in the airliner terror plot, and the arrest prompted emergency meetings involving ministers, police and intelligence chiefs - who were still investigating the case.
Assistant Commissioner Andy Hayman, who has overall responsibility for the Metropolitan Police's anti-terrorist investigations, was forced to abandon a family holiday in Spain and catch an easyJet flight to Britain, arriving at 3am on Thursday 10 August.
Fearful that the arrest might tip off the alleged plotters, Scotland Yard, in consultation with MI5, decided to act and sanctioned a series of raids in the early hours of Thursday. The police arrested 24 men and women and later charged 13 in connection with the alleged terror plan. Britain has requested the extradition of Mr Rauf.
Scotland Yard has declined to comment about any other groupings who may have been involved in the alleged plot.
John Reid, the Home Secretary, downgraded the threat after three days from "critical" to "severe", meaning an attack was "highly likely", but not imminent.
It is understood that one of the main reasons why the highest level of alert was maintained was that authorities were trying to establish whether the second group was capable of an attack. After they satisfied themselves that it did not have the equipment to launch an assault, the threat level was downgraded.
A team of suspected terrorists involved in an alleged UK plot to blow up trans-atlantic airliners escaped capture because of interference by the United States, The Independent has been told by counter-terrorism sources.
An investigation by MI5 and Scotland Yard into an alleged plan to smuggle explosive devices on up to 10 passenger jets was jeopardised in August, when the US put pressure on authorities in Pakistan to arrest a suspect allegedly linked to the airliner plot.
As a direct result of the surprise detention of the suspect, British police and MI5 were forced to rush forward plans to arrest an alleged UK gang accused of plotting to destroy the airliners. But a second group of suspected terrorists allegedly linked to the first evaded capture and is still at large, according to security sources.
The escape of the second group is said to be the reason why the UK was kept at its highest level - "critical" - for three days before it was decided that the plotters no longer posed an imminent threat.
The alleged airliner plot caused chaos and fear at airports throughout Britain when details emerged in August of an alleged plan to smuggle liquid explosives on board up to 10 flights and destroy them after take-off.
As a result of the alert, airports banned passengers from carrying liquids in their hand luggage and imposed tough new security checks.
The operation was one of the largest undertaken by the police and MI5, yet two counter-terrorism sources suggested that the intervention of the Americans was due to "inexperience and naivety" and that they were after a "short-term success".
American intelligence chiefs are understood to have persuaded the Pakistani authorities to arrest a British citizen, called Rashid Rauf, on Wednesday 9 August this year.
Mr Rauf was suspected of being closely linked to group of men and women in Britain who were allegedly involved in the airliner terror plot, and the arrest prompted emergency meetings involving ministers, police and intelligence chiefs - who were still investigating the case.
Assistant Commissioner Andy Hayman, who has overall responsibility for the Metropolitan Police's anti-terrorist investigations, was forced to abandon a family holiday in Spain and catch an easyJet flight to Britain, arriving at 3am on Thursday 10 August.
Fearful that the arrest might tip off the alleged plotters, Scotland Yard, in consultation with MI5, decided to act and sanctioned a series of raids in the early hours of Thursday. The police arrested 24 men and women and later charged 13 in connection with the alleged terror plan. Britain has requested the extradition of Mr Rauf.
Scotland Yard has declined to comment about any other groupings who may have been involved in the alleged plot.
John Reid, the Home Secretary, downgraded the threat after three days from "critical" to "severe", meaning an attack was "highly likely", but not imminent.
It is understood that one of the main reasons why the highest level of alert was maintained was that authorities were trying to establish whether the second group was capable of an attack. After they satisfied themselves that it did not have the equipment to launch an assault, the threat level was downgraded.
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/article2013256.ece
Published: 25 November 2006
A team of suspected terrorists involved in an alleged UK plot to blow up trans-atlantic airliners escaped capture because of interference by the United States, The Independent has been told by counter-terrorism sources.
An investigation by MI5 and Scotland Yard into an alleged plan to smuggle explosive devices on up to 10 passenger jets was jeopardised in August, when the US put pressure on authorities in Pakistan to arrest a suspect allegedly linked to the airliner plot.
As a direct result of the surprise detention of the suspect, British police and MI5 were forced to rush forward plans to arrest an alleged UK gang accused of plotting to destroy the airliners. But a second group of suspected terrorists allegedly linked to the first evaded capture and is still at large, according to security sources.
The escape of the second group is said to be the reason why the UK was kept at its highest level - "critical" - for three days before it was decided that the plotters no longer posed an imminent threat.
The alleged airliner plot caused chaos and fear at airports throughout Britain when details emerged in August of an alleged plan to smuggle liquid explosives on board up to 10 flights and destroy them after take-off.
As a result of the alert, airports banned passengers from carrying liquids in their hand luggage and imposed tough new security checks.
The operation was one of the largest undertaken by the police and MI5, yet two counter-terrorism sources suggested that the intervention of the Americans was due to "inexperience and naivety" and that they were after a "short-term success".
American intelligence chiefs are understood to have persuaded the Pakistani authorities to arrest a British citizen, called Rashid Rauf, on Wednesday 9 August this year.
Mr Rauf was suspected of being closely linked to group of men and women in Britain who were allegedly involved in the airliner terror plot, and the arrest prompted emergency meetings involving ministers, police and intelligence chiefs - who were still investigating the case.
Assistant Commissioner Andy Hayman, who has overall responsibility for the Metropolitan Police's anti-terrorist investigations, was forced to abandon a family holiday in Spain and catch an easyJet flight to Britain, arriving at 3am on Thursday 10 August.
Fearful that the arrest might tip off the alleged plotters, Scotland Yard, in consultation with MI5, decided to act and sanctioned a series of raids in the early hours of Thursday. The police arrested 24 men and women and later charged 13 in connection with the alleged terror plan. Britain has requested the extradition of Mr Rauf.
Scotland Yard has declined to comment about any other groupings who may have been involved in the alleged plot.
John Reid, the Home Secretary, downgraded the threat after three days from "critical" to "severe", meaning an attack was "highly likely", but not imminent.
It is understood that one of the main reasons why the highest level of alert was maintained was that authorities were trying to establish whether the second group was capable of an attack. After they satisfied themselves that it did not have the equipment to launch an assault, the threat level was downgraded.
A team of suspected terrorists involved in an alleged UK plot to blow up trans-atlantic airliners escaped capture because of interference by the United States, The Independent has been told by counter-terrorism sources.
An investigation by MI5 and Scotland Yard into an alleged plan to smuggle explosive devices on up to 10 passenger jets was jeopardised in August, when the US put pressure on authorities in Pakistan to arrest a suspect allegedly linked to the airliner plot.
As a direct result of the surprise detention of the suspect, British police and MI5 were forced to rush forward plans to arrest an alleged UK gang accused of plotting to destroy the airliners. But a second group of suspected terrorists allegedly linked to the first evaded capture and is still at large, according to security sources.
The escape of the second group is said to be the reason why the UK was kept at its highest level - "critical" - for three days before it was decided that the plotters no longer posed an imminent threat.
The alleged airliner plot caused chaos and fear at airports throughout Britain when details emerged in August of an alleged plan to smuggle liquid explosives on board up to 10 flights and destroy them after take-off.
As a result of the alert, airports banned passengers from carrying liquids in their hand luggage and imposed tough new security checks.
The operation was one of the largest undertaken by the police and MI5, yet two counter-terrorism sources suggested that the intervention of the Americans was due to "inexperience and naivety" and that they were after a "short-term success".
American intelligence chiefs are understood to have persuaded the Pakistani authorities to arrest a British citizen, called Rashid Rauf, on Wednesday 9 August this year.
Mr Rauf was suspected of being closely linked to group of men and women in Britain who were allegedly involved in the airliner terror plot, and the arrest prompted emergency meetings involving ministers, police and intelligence chiefs - who were still investigating the case.
Assistant Commissioner Andy Hayman, who has overall responsibility for the Metropolitan Police's anti-terrorist investigations, was forced to abandon a family holiday in Spain and catch an easyJet flight to Britain, arriving at 3am on Thursday 10 August.
Fearful that the arrest might tip off the alleged plotters, Scotland Yard, in consultation with MI5, decided to act and sanctioned a series of raids in the early hours of Thursday. The police arrested 24 men and women and later charged 13 in connection with the alleged terror plan. Britain has requested the extradition of Mr Rauf.
Scotland Yard has declined to comment about any other groupings who may have been involved in the alleged plot.
John Reid, the Home Secretary, downgraded the threat after three days from "critical" to "severe", meaning an attack was "highly likely", but not imminent.
It is understood that one of the main reasons why the highest level of alert was maintained was that authorities were trying to establish whether the second group was capable of an attack. After they satisfied themselves that it did not have the equipment to launch an assault, the threat level was downgraded.
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/article2013256.ece
Friday, November 24, 2006
They hate us because we fire on their funerals
US helicopter fires on Iraqi funeral party-ministry
24 Nov 2006 17:37:33 GMT
Source: Reuters
BAGHDAD, Nov 24 (Reuters) - A U.S. helicopter fired on a funeral party in Baghdad, one of dozens taking place after Thursday's devastating bombings in Sadr City, in response to ritual shooting, the Iraqi Interior Ministry said.
A ministry official said two people were wounded in Friday's air strike, which came after mourners fired into the air.
Earlier, some residents and a Shi'ite lawmaker reported clashes between gunmen and U.S.-led forces in Sadr City, a stronghold of the Mehdi Army militia in the Iraqi capital.
A U.S. military spokesman said he could not comment on specific operations but U.S. forces were helping Iraqi army and police enforce a curfew imposed after the Sadr City attacks on Thursday which killed more than 200 people.
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/COL462533.htm
'Modern day slavery’ in Israel
Migrants face ‘modern day slavery’ in Israel
Migrant workers in Israel face shocking working conditions, denied rights, blackmail, fraud before deportation.
TEL AVIV - Impoverished Turkish labourer Shaheen Yelmaz arrived in Israel four months ago dreaming of helping his father pay off his mounting debts.
But today the 23-year-old faces a US $14,000 debt of his own, deportation and the possible loss of his family home in Turkey after challenging his employer over non-payment of wages and shocking working conditions.
"I never wanted money for myself, I just wanted to pay off my father’s huge debts. We were told by Yilmazlar [a Turkish manpower agency that supplies construction workers to a number of companies in Israel] that we could make up to $1,400 a month and more with overtime if we worked in Israel," he told IRIN.
"Yilmazlar assured us we would be well treated and be housed in good accommodation. However, when I arrived, my dream turned into a nightmare."
Yelmaz was sharing a room with eight others - furnished with bunk beds - that was so small that there was no space for their suitcases. They were fed a monotonous diet of rice and lentils and there were only three toilets with no running water for 130 workers.
"The conditions of the toilets were so disgusting, they were not fit even for an animal," said Yelmaz.
"We were forbidden from using mobile phones on pain of confiscation and fines and were forced to work an average of 11 hours a day, without being paid overtime. And in our half-hour lunch break we were expected to go home, eat and return to the construction site.
"In addition to our passports being taken away [by the employer], we needed special permission to leave the premises after work and on our day off. If people left without permission, they were fined and threatened with deportation by the management."
The final straw came when Yelmaz found out that he and the other workers would only receive their first payment after three months. He and a friend, 41-year-old father-of-three Hikmat Tekin, decided to challenge their boss.
"We were told by the management that if we didn't like it, we would be deported without payment and barred from employment elsewhere in Israel," Tekin said.
Strict visa regulations
As he began his battle against his employer, Yelmaz became aware of the strict Israeli visa regulations governing conditions for migrant workers.
"The issuance of these visas is subject to the workers staying with the same employer stated on the visa and if this condition is broken then the migrant worker is deemed illegal and liable for deportation,” said Sigal Rosen, spokeswoman for Israeli human rights organisation Hotline for Migrant Workers.
The Hotline has received more than 20 requests for help from Turkish workers placed by Yizmazlar over the past few years.
"Many employers take advantage of the visa conditions by withholding wages from uninformed workers and then firing the employees when they owe them significant amounts of money," Rosen said.
"Often the employer will then inform police that the workers he has just fired are now illegal aliens. The police then arrest and deport them before they can challenge the employer in court,” said Rosen.
About 200,000 migrant workers live in Israel, mostly from Turkey, the Philippines and Eastern Europe. Half of them are deemed illegal, with about 5,000 getting deported annually on average, according to Rosen.
In March this year, an Israeli Supreme Court judge described the conditions of migrant workers in Israel as a "form of modern slavery" following a petition from human rights organisations.
The court further ordered the State to adopt a new employment scheme within the next six months allowing workers to resign without losing their legal status.
"Although it is difficult for migrant workers to change employers if they find the conditions too terrible, they can ask the manpower agency to find them new employment after three months,” Sabine Haddad, a spokeswoman for the Israeli Interior Ministry, said.
But in reality this does not happen. In general, manpower agencies are reluctant to help migrant workers find new employment as there is no further financial incentive for them once the workers have already been placed, said Rosen.
Furthermore, this provision is not available to workers placed by Yizmazlar who are not entitled to seek employment elsewhere.
In huge debt
Meanwhile, as Yelmaz awaits the Supreme Court's decision on 13 December, following a successful stay of deportation filed by his lawyer, he has found out that he cannot possibly pay off his father's debts.
Before leaving Turkey, he and other Turkish workers were obliged to sign blank promissory notes and a labour contract by Yilmazlar, which they said they were not allowed to read or keep a copy of.
"When the company found out I was leaving, they filled in one of the blank promissory notes that I had signed before coming to Israel," he said.
"They stated I owed the company $14,000 and that they would repossess my family's home if I did not pay up. The Turkish Embassy couldn’t help me because my signature was on the notes.”
He said that he was warned by the company manager that if he returned to Turkey quietly he would be forgiven but if he made any trouble, he would disappear.
Yilmazlar’s lawyer, Tal Benenson, told IRIN that he had affidavits signed by Yelmaz and Tekin before a Turkish-speaking notary in Israel, admitting that they were only using Yilmazlar to get into Israel and had no intention of staying with the company once in the country.
“They have told a pack of lies which they planned beforehand in Turkey with the help of Turkish workers already in Israel and the aim of these lies is to try and justify their fraudulent behaviour.
“Our client has laid out a huge sum financially for air tickets and medicals and is now suing Shaheen and Tekin for 200,000 Shekels [about US $46,450] to retrieve these expenses,” he said.
http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=18464
Migrant workers in Israel face shocking working conditions, denied rights, blackmail, fraud before deportation.
TEL AVIV - Impoverished Turkish labourer Shaheen Yelmaz arrived in Israel four months ago dreaming of helping his father pay off his mounting debts.
But today the 23-year-old faces a US $14,000 debt of his own, deportation and the possible loss of his family home in Turkey after challenging his employer over non-payment of wages and shocking working conditions.
"I never wanted money for myself, I just wanted to pay off my father’s huge debts. We were told by Yilmazlar [a Turkish manpower agency that supplies construction workers to a number of companies in Israel] that we could make up to $1,400 a month and more with overtime if we worked in Israel," he told IRIN.
"Yilmazlar assured us we would be well treated and be housed in good accommodation. However, when I arrived, my dream turned into a nightmare."
Yelmaz was sharing a room with eight others - furnished with bunk beds - that was so small that there was no space for their suitcases. They were fed a monotonous diet of rice and lentils and there were only three toilets with no running water for 130 workers.
"The conditions of the toilets were so disgusting, they were not fit even for an animal," said Yelmaz.
"We were forbidden from using mobile phones on pain of confiscation and fines and were forced to work an average of 11 hours a day, without being paid overtime. And in our half-hour lunch break we were expected to go home, eat and return to the construction site.
"In addition to our passports being taken away [by the employer], we needed special permission to leave the premises after work and on our day off. If people left without permission, they were fined and threatened with deportation by the management."
The final straw came when Yelmaz found out that he and the other workers would only receive their first payment after three months. He and a friend, 41-year-old father-of-three Hikmat Tekin, decided to challenge their boss.
"We were told by the management that if we didn't like it, we would be deported without payment and barred from employment elsewhere in Israel," Tekin said.
Strict visa regulations
As he began his battle against his employer, Yelmaz became aware of the strict Israeli visa regulations governing conditions for migrant workers.
"The issuance of these visas is subject to the workers staying with the same employer stated on the visa and if this condition is broken then the migrant worker is deemed illegal and liable for deportation,” said Sigal Rosen, spokeswoman for Israeli human rights organisation Hotline for Migrant Workers.
The Hotline has received more than 20 requests for help from Turkish workers placed by Yizmazlar over the past few years.
"Many employers take advantage of the visa conditions by withholding wages from uninformed workers and then firing the employees when they owe them significant amounts of money," Rosen said.
"Often the employer will then inform police that the workers he has just fired are now illegal aliens. The police then arrest and deport them before they can challenge the employer in court,” said Rosen.
About 200,000 migrant workers live in Israel, mostly from Turkey, the Philippines and Eastern Europe. Half of them are deemed illegal, with about 5,000 getting deported annually on average, according to Rosen.
In March this year, an Israeli Supreme Court judge described the conditions of migrant workers in Israel as a "form of modern slavery" following a petition from human rights organisations.
The court further ordered the State to adopt a new employment scheme within the next six months allowing workers to resign without losing their legal status.
"Although it is difficult for migrant workers to change employers if they find the conditions too terrible, they can ask the manpower agency to find them new employment after three months,” Sabine Haddad, a spokeswoman for the Israeli Interior Ministry, said.
But in reality this does not happen. In general, manpower agencies are reluctant to help migrant workers find new employment as there is no further financial incentive for them once the workers have already been placed, said Rosen.
Furthermore, this provision is not available to workers placed by Yizmazlar who are not entitled to seek employment elsewhere.
In huge debt
Meanwhile, as Yelmaz awaits the Supreme Court's decision on 13 December, following a successful stay of deportation filed by his lawyer, he has found out that he cannot possibly pay off his father's debts.
Before leaving Turkey, he and other Turkish workers were obliged to sign blank promissory notes and a labour contract by Yilmazlar, which they said they were not allowed to read or keep a copy of.
"When the company found out I was leaving, they filled in one of the blank promissory notes that I had signed before coming to Israel," he said.
"They stated I owed the company $14,000 and that they would repossess my family's home if I did not pay up. The Turkish Embassy couldn’t help me because my signature was on the notes.”
He said that he was warned by the company manager that if he returned to Turkey quietly he would be forgiven but if he made any trouble, he would disappear.
Yilmazlar’s lawyer, Tal Benenson, told IRIN that he had affidavits signed by Yelmaz and Tekin before a Turkish-speaking notary in Israel, admitting that they were only using Yilmazlar to get into Israel and had no intention of staying with the company once in the country.
“They have told a pack of lies which they planned beforehand in Turkey with the help of Turkish workers already in Israel and the aim of these lies is to try and justify their fraudulent behaviour.
“Our client has laid out a huge sum financially for air tickets and medicals and is now suing Shaheen and Tekin for 200,000 Shekels [about US $46,450] to retrieve these expenses,” he said.
http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=18464
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)