_______________________________
WEEKDAY PRESS PICKS FROM
THE ELECTRONIC INTIFADA
ELECTRONIC LEBANON
AND ELECTRONIC IRAQ
http://electronicIntifada.net
http://electronicIraq.net
http://electronicLebanon.net
_______________________________
New Items For 25 August 2006
NEWS:
1) Jewish state executes Palestinian, bombs his house, kidnaps brother (PCHR)
2) Occupier bombs Gaza homes injuring 10 civilians (DPA)
3) Occupier bombs apartment building in Jabalya refugee camp (AFP)
4) Toll from invader's cluster bombs mounts in Lebanon (AFP)
5) Life beyond bearable in occupied Gaza (Silverman/Al-Ahram)
6) Israel air force appoints "Iran commander" to prepare for war (Ha)
7) US State Dept opens inquiry into Israel use of cluster bombs (NYT)
8) Italy FM: We send troops to Lebanon "out of love for Israel" (Ha)
9) Belgium: UN forces must defend Israel and disarm its victims (DS)
10) Filmmaker Ken Loach Joins the Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI)
11) Apartheid advances: 62% of Israeli Jews would not rent to an Arab (Ha)
12) Jews-only government loses all support over scandals, war loss (AFP)
13) Ever-more-fascist parties gain in Israel polls
14) Canada MP forced to resign for uttering Hizbullah heresy
ANALYSIS & VIEWS:
15) 7 Facts You Might Not Know about the Iraq War (Schwartz/eIraq)
16) Blair foreign policy now a threat to national security (Clark/Guardian)
17) Palestinian "unity govt" will not solve crisis (Amayreh/Al-Ahram)
18) Psychological warfare (Serene Assir/Al-Ahram)
Ali Abunimah
**********************************************************
(1) IOF Kill a Palestinian in Cold Blood, and Bomb his House
after Abducting his Brother in Greater Abasan in Khan
Yunis
Palestinian Centre for Human Rights
24 August 2006
http://pchrgaza.org/files/PressR/English/2006/100-2006.htm
In the early morning hours of Thursday (24 August 2006),
an under cover Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF) unit killed
a Palestinian in cold blood in the town of Greater Abasan,
east of Khan Yunis. IOF troops fired at him from close
range during an operation to arrest his brother, who is
allegedly wanted by IOF and lives in a nearby house. After
withdrawing from the area, IOF bombed killed victim's
house with several rockets from the air despite the
presence of the family inside, causing significant
destruction to the house. PCHR's preliminary investigation
indicates that the victim, Yousef Mohammad Abu Daqqa (55),
did not pose any threat to IOF when he was shot from a
distance of 12 meters. He was an unarmed civilian inside
his house when he was killed.
PCHR's preliminary investigation into the incident
indicates that at approximately 02:50, an undercover IOF
unit infiltrated nearly 800 meters into El-Farahin area in
the town of Greater Abasan, east of Khan Yunis. IOF drones
and helicopters provided aerial cover for the force, which
surrounded the houses belonging to the brothers Younis and
Yousef Mohammad Salim Abu Daqqa. The force stormed the
house of Younis Abu Daqqa (40) who works as a lab
technician at the Islamic University of Gaza and is a
prominent Hamas activist. Yousef (55) opened a window on
the northern side of his besieged house. Immediately, a
soldier fired at him from a distance of 12 meters. He was
hit in the head by a bullet that killed him instantly.
During the withdrawal of the force, one of the victim's
sons fired from inside the house at the withdrawing force.
After ensuring that IOF have left the area, planes fired 5
rockets at the killed victim's 2-storey house. The rockets
hit the southern, eastern, and northern sides of the
second storey of the house. The 17-member family was in
the northwest corner of the ground floor. They escaped the
bombardment by miracle; and extensive damage was inflicted
on the house.
PCHR reiterates its strong condemnation of the IOF killing
of Palestinian civilians, which are a form of reprisal
and collective punishment against Palestinians that are a
violation of article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention.
In the Center's view, the complacency of the international
community and the High Contracting Parties of the 4th
Geneva Convention and their failure tot take effective
steps to stop Israeli war crimes has been a supporting and
encouraging element for Israel to continue perpetrating
additional war crimes against Palestinian civilians. The
Centre reminds the High Contracting Parties of:
- Their obligations under article 1 of the
convention to ensure respect of the convention under all
circumstances;
- Their obligations in article 146 of the
convention to pursue suspects of committing serious
violations of the convention, noting that these violations
are war crimes according to article 147, as specified in
the first protocol additional to the convention
**********************************************************
(2) Israeli warplanes strike on Gaza homes, 10 wounded
Deutsche Presse Agentur
25 August 2006
Gaza--DPA POLITICS Mideast Conflicts Israeli warplanes
strike on Gaza homes, 10 wounded Begins new cycle Gaza
Nine Palestinians were injured when Israeli warplanes
rocketed two Palestinian-owned homes before dawn Friday in
the northern Gaza Strip and in Gaza City, witnesses and
security sources reported.
Eyewitnesses said that three Palestinian civilians were
wounded when an Israeli warplane fired two missiles at a
house that includes a metal workshop in Gaza City. The
building was destroyed.
One of the missiles did not explode, said the residents,
adding that explosives experts were at the scene.
Ambulances and firefighters evacuated the three civilians
to a Gaza hospital.
Shortly before the house was targeted, Israeli F16
warplanes targeted another house in Jabalia refugee camp
in northern Gaza Strip, said Palestinian residents. The
four-storey building was destroyed.
Palestinian medics said that seven Palestinians were
wounded in the airstrike on the house, which belongs to a
member of al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, the Fatah movement's
armed militant wing.
Palestinian security sources reported that the Israeli
army notified the owners of the two houses by telephone to
evacuate.
**********************************************************
(3) Israeli warplanes strikes Gaza
Agence France Presse
25 August 2006
GAZA CITY (AFX) - An Israeli warplane attacked and
destroyed a metal workshop in Gaza City in the early
hours, a Palestinian security official said, but had no
information about any casualties.
The Israeli military confirmed the attack.
'The target was a hidden arms cache. There was a warning
to occupants to leave before the attack,' an Israeli
military spokeswoman said.
Last night, an Israeli aircraft fired two missiles at a
three-storey building in the Jabalya refugee camp in Gaza,
which collapsed, Palestinian sources said, adding there
were no casualties.
Residents of the apartment building, which belonged to a
member of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, an armed faction of
the Fatah movement of president Mahmud Abbas, were warned
in a telephone call minutes before the strike and had time
to evacuate, the sources said.
**********************************************************
(4) Cluster bomb toll mounts as displaced return
By Seth Meixner
Agence France-Presse
25 August 2006
http://jordantimes.com/fri/news/news5.htm
TYRE -- Israeli cluster bombs dropped during a monthlong
blitz against Hizbollah in southern Lebanon are taking an
increasing toll on civilians trying to return home more
than a week after the fighting ended, the UN and rights
groups say.
"Every day we hear about casualties -- it's a large
number," said Dalya Farran, media officer for the UN Mine
Action Coordination Centre in southern Lebanon.
"We're in an emergency situation," she said.
Several children have been among the 11 killed and 43
wounded by cluster bomb explosions since the ceasefire
began on August 14, according to Lebanese military
figures.
On Wednesday, three Lebanese bomb disposal experts were
also killed by a cluster bomb in the village of Tebnin,
some 15 kilometres from the Israeli border.
Hundreds of Israeli artillery shells containing nearly 200
explosive rounds each were fired into southern Lebanon
during the fighting, landing in villages and towns dozens
of kilometres beyond the border.
According to the most recent data, 185 cluster bomb
strikes have been found so far by assessment teams racing
against a tide of displaced people scrambling to return to
their stricken villages, Farran said.
New ones are being discovered each day as assessment teams
push deeper into Lebanon.
At each impact zone, hundreds of tiny bomblets burst from
the shells, creating a huge killing field of shrapnel.
But the UN estimates that a dangerously high percentage of
these failed to explode, leaving their targets strewn with
deadly sub-munitions.
"Not all of these, a majority maybe, failed to go off,"
Farran said, adding that those intact bomblets are hard to
find amid the rubble, and when they are spotted, "people
assume that because of their small size that they are
harmless."
The result, according to Human Rights Watch military
analyst Marc Garlasco, are "minefields in peoples' homes".
Several houses near the southern city of Naqura had
"cluster bomb strike" sprayed across them in red
spraypaint with arrows pointing to pock-marked walls or
towards the ground where unexploded bomblets lay.
"The Israelis were using Vietnam-era stock with an
extraordinarily high dud rate. We've seen some ordnance
that was dated March 1973," Garlasco said following a
weeklong tour through the south where "whole villages have
been contaminated" by bombs.
"Unexploded ordnance is a huge problem. It's getting
worse, certainly as far as cluster bombs are concerned,"
he said. "There are kids playing with them and getting
hurt, killed." In a fact sheet issued earlier in the week,
the UN urged parents to be especially vigilant for
unexploded ordnance.
Some 100,000 leaflets and 10,000 posters have been
distributed by the Lebanese army at checkpoints, and radio
and television spots have aired warning the people against
the dangers of live bombs in a massive public education
campaign.
"It's important to get the message out early," said an
official with the British-based Mine Action Group, which
has been tasked by the UN with clearing the most recent
battle zones of cluster bombs.
Nonetheless, the UN warned, "civilian casualties are
mounting".
Farran said ordnance teams were dealing with "immediate
threats" -- those unexploded bombs found in places most
commonly used by people.
"It's mostly cluster bombs in houses, in gardens or
fields, on roofs of hospitals or in main roads," she said,
but added that their efforts have strained under a lack of
manpower and material.
"It's not total clearance. We don't have the time or the
assets," she said.
"More help should be coming."
**********************************************************
(5) Beyond bearable
By Erica Silverman
Al-Ahram Weekly
24-30 August 2006
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2006/809/re82.htm
Palestinians flood to Rafah crossing in a bid to escape
the hell that is life in the Gaza Strip, writes Erica
Silverman
Scores of buses overflowing with passengers, so tightly
packed that bodies are pressed against glass windows,
approached the gates of Rafah Terminal along the
Gaza-Egypt border Saturday in a desperate bid to exit the
Gaza Strip. Luggage and people piled high on top and on
trailers dragging behind, some precariously balancing
themselves even on metal hitches in between.
Mohamed, 17, clung to the side of one bus by his arms,
trying to make his way into Egypt for medical care. One
mother grasped the side of a trailer with one arm and her
crying little girl with the other as suitcases were
rapidly hurled on top of them.
Buses pushed on -- some carrying as many as 200 people,
tires flattened from the weight -- towards lines of
preventative security forces trying to control the chaos.
Over 7,000 passengers swarmed the terminal frantically
trying to escape, but only 2,396 passengers departed and
341 returned, according to EU monitors stationed there.
Students, medical patients, and foreign visa holders were
permitted to leave. An estimated 30,000 are still waiting
to depart, and as of Tuesday the border remained sealed.
"They deal with us like animals," cried 37- year-old Riad
Syiam, an electrical engineer trying to reach Abu Dhabi
with his wife and three children. Like hundreds of
families they came to Gaza to visit relatives and were
trapped inside when Israel sealed the border after an
Israeli soldier was captured by Hamas 25 June. Rafah
(Gaza's only passenger crossing) has been closed by Israel
for seven weeks, ostensibly to prevent the soldier from
being smuggled outside the Strip as well as to cut off
large amounts of cash Hamas leaders have been bringing
across the border.
Palestinian officials and EU monitors are working to
convince Israel to resume normal operation of the
terminal, although according to Salim Abu Saifa,
Palestinian Authority (PA) director of border security in
Gaza and a chief negotiator with the Israeli side, there
is no agreement in sight. Abu Saifa predicts erratic
openings until the release of the Israeli soldier.
Shin Bet Chief Yuval Diskin told ministers at the weekly
Israeli cabinet meeting Sunday that the Philadelphi Route
along the Egyptian border is porous, allowing several
tonnes of explosives and weapons to enter Gaza. "Recently,
$1.5 million has been smuggled in through Rafah by the
Hamas Agriculture Ministry," said Diskin. The intelligence
chief charges that Egyptian supervision of the crossing is
ineffective, calling for a review of the agreements signed
with Egypt last year.
The Palestinian side securely operated the terminal for
eight months, says Abu Saifa, asserting, "the crossing is
used [by Israel] for collective punishment and other
political gains." President Mahmoud Abbas's office
controls the crossings, not the Hamas-led government, in a
vain effort to keep them open. On 10 and 11 August, Rafah
opened one-way, allowing 4,200 passengers to leave Gaza,
according to the EU observer mission.
Meanwhile Karni -- Gaza's only commercial crossing -- has
been sealed shut for four days, as of Monday, creating a
shortage of basic commodities and food supplies across
Gaza.
Fear and hostility amongst Gazans is brimming over into
violent protests throughout Gaza City, as most
Palestinians have not received a paycheque in nearly six
months. PA employees stormed into banks Saturday morning
demanding salaries and on Sunday angry mobs attacked the
Legislative Council building. These outbursts come amid a
recent string of auto thefts uncommon in the religiously
conservative Strip. Palestinians are surviving under the
intense pressure of a nearly nine-week-long Israeli
incursion into Gaza to purportedly halt the launching of
Qassam rockets into Israel and to recover the captured
Israeli soldier.
On Saturday 170,000 PA employees received 1,500 shekels,
half their monthly salary, from local banks. Funds were
transferred directly from the Arab League and select Arab
and non-Arab donor nations to the President's Office --
the fruits of Abbas's recent tour soliciting aid.
Healthcare sector employees received their salaries
directly from the EU, the first channel of the Temporary
International Aid Mechanism that has reached Palestinians,
presidential spokesperson Nabil Abu Rudeineh told Al-Ahram
Weekly.
When PA employees discovered the payment amounted to only
half their usual salaries -- and even less for those with
outstanding loans in their accounts -- enraged crowds
attempted to seize Gaza banks as frightened employees went
into hiding. "My wife is expecting and my daughter is
sick, I can't make ends meet," said Ossam Akhouli standing
outside the Arab Bank to withdraw his salary. Abbas's
presidential force and police deployed to secure the
banks, as heated protesters tried to enter.
"The problem is the bank, they owe us our salaries -- this
bank is against the Hamas government," shouted 20-year-old
Baha Al-Buttish outside Jordan Bank, a member of the
presidential security forces. After waiting for two hours
under a scorching sun Al-Buttish walked away empty-handed.
"People are under pressure, but they know for sure the
Israeli occupation along with the international embargo
are responsible for this," Hamas spokesperson Sami Abu
Zhouri told the Weekly, asserting that Hamas's popularity
has increased since 25 June.
Meanwhile, unknown Palestinian militants kidnapped two Fox
News crew -- cameraman Olaf Wiig, 36, of New Zealand, and
American reporter Steve Centanni, 60 -- 14 August in Gaza
City. Four militants emerged from a Magnum Jeep, threw the
driver of Wiig and Centanni on the ground and swiftly
snatched the two journalists from their TV van, recounted
witnesses. The journalists are being held by Mumtaz
Doghmush, commander of the Salaheddin Brigades, the armed
wing of the Popular Resistance Committees, as a bargaining
chip to put pressure on the Israelis to stop shelling
houses and halt incursions into the Strip, according to a
senior Palestinian intelligence official speaking off
record. Hamas knows the location of the journalists, the
official said.
Wiig's wife, Anita McNaught, a freelance journalist, made
emotional pleas for her husband's release in a televised
appeal Friday. It is the first time Palestinian kidnappers
have not identified themselves or their demands. Waves of
kidnappings, commencing last summer, went largely
unpunished under Fatah as the kidnappers' demands were
promptly met, arguably encouraging further incidents. "It
is a reprehensible act on the part of any faction, and it
serves the Israeli occupation," said Abu Zhouri.
Hamas, elected into office on a campaign promise to
restore law and order in Gaza, asserts the perpetrators
will be punished. The Fatah bloc of the Palestinian
Legislative Council affirmed the Palestinian people have
suffered as a result of the kidnappings, which have even
further discouraged foreign investment coupled with the
inability of exports to leave the Strip.
Until now, Israel's offensive in Gaza has been
overshadowed by its war on Lebanon, leaving Gaza's
population in a media blind spot and even more vulnerable
to Israeli terrorism. Israeli forces have destroyed three
major bridges, along with roads, crops, and infrastructure
crushed by rolling Israeli tanks. Gaza's main power
station was destroyed 28 June, leaving households,
businesses and hospitals across the Strip without
electricity and water in the sweltering heat of summer
while sanitation systems also collapsed.
Israeli forces have killed over 200 Palestinians, with
over 1,000 injured, since 25 June.
**********************************************************
(6) IAF chief to head 'Iranian command'
By Aluf Benn
Haaretz
25 August 2006
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/754702.html
In an effort to upgrade Israel's preparedness for a
possible confrontation with Iran, Israel Defense Forces
Chief of Staff Dan Halutz has appointed Israel Air Force
Commander Major General Elyezer Shkedy as the IDF's
"campaign manager" against countries that do not border on
Israel - primarily Iran.
The appointment was made before the war in Lebanon.
As part of his new responsibilities, Shkedy will act as
"GOC Iran Command": He will oversee battle plans and
manage the forces if war breaks out. According to a
security source, Shkedy will be the "orchestra conductor,"
but will coordinate with the Mossad and Military
Intelligence, and with the IDF's various operational
branches.
The security source noted that during the 1991 Gulf War,
the IDF did not have a "campaign manager" for Iraq.
Instead, the IAF, the intelligence agencies and the ground
forces each operated within their own areas of
responsibility and authority.
**********************************************************
(7) Inquiry Opened Into Israeli Use of U.S. Bombs
By DAVID S. CLOUD
The New York Times
25 August 2006
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/25/world/middleeast/
25cluster.html
WASHINGTON, Aug. 24 -- The State Department is
investigating whether Israel's use of American-made
cluster bombs in southern Lebanon violated secret
agreements with the United States that restrict when it
can employ such weapons, two officials said.
The investigation by the department's Office of Defense
Trade Controls began this week, after reports that three
types of American cluster munitions, anti-personnel
weapons that spray bomblets over a wide area, have been
found in many areas of southern Lebanon and were
responsible for civilian casualties.
Gonzalo Gallegos, a State Department spokesman, said, "We
have heard the allegations that these munitions were used,
and we are seeking more information." He declined to
comment further.
Several current and former officials said that they
doubted the investigation would lead to sanctions against
Israel but that the decision to proceed with it might be
intended to help the Bush administration ease criticism
from Arab governments and commentators over its support of
Israel's military operations. The investigation has not
been publicly announced; the State Department confirmed it
in response to questions.
In addition to investigating use of the weapons in
southern Lebanon, the State Department has held up a
shipment of M-26 artillery rockets, a cluster weapon, that
Israel sought during the conflict, the officials said.
The inquiry is likely to focus on whether Israel properly
informed the United States about its use of the weapons
and whether targets were strictly military. So far, the
State Department is relying on reports from United Nations
personnel and nongovernmental organizations in southern
Lebanon, the officials said.
David Siegel, a spokesman for the Israeli Embassy, said,
"We have not been informed about any such inquiry, and
when we are we would be happy to respond."
Officials were granted anonymity to discuss the
investigation because it involves sensitive diplomatic
issues and agreements that have been kept secret for
years.
The agreements that govern Israel's use of American
cluster munitions go back to the 1970's, when the first
sales of the weapons occurred, but the details of them
have never been publicly confirmed. The first one was
signed in 1976 and later reaffirmed in 1978 after an
Israeli incursion into Lebanon. News accounts over the
years have said that they require that the munitions be
used only against organized Arab armies and clearly
defined military targets under conditions similar to the
Arab-Israeli wars of 1967 and 1973.
A Congressional investigation after Israel's 1982 invasion
of Lebanon found that Israel had used the weapons against
civilian areas in violation of the agreements. In
response, the Reagan administration imposed a six-year ban
on further sales of cluster weapons to Israel.
Israeli officials acknowledged soon after their offensive
began last month that they were using cluster munitions
against rocket sites and other military targets. While
Hezbollah positions were frequently hidden in civilian
areas, Israeli officials said their intention was to use
cluster bombs in open terrain.
Bush administration officials warned Israel to avoid
civilian casualties, but they have lodged no public
protests against its use of cluster weapons. American
officials say it has not been not clear whether the
weapons, which are also employed by the United States
military, were being used against civilian areas and had
been supplied by the United States. Israel also makes its
own types of cluster weapons.
But a report released Wednesday by the United Nations Mine
Action Coordination Center, which has personnel in Lebanon
searching for unexploded ordnance, said it had found
unexploded bomblets, including hundreds of American types,
in 249 locations south of the Litani River.
The report said American munitions found included 559
M-42's, an anti-personnel bomblet used in 105-millimeter
artillery shells; 663 M-77's, a submunition found in M-26
rockets; and 5 BLU-63's, a bomblet found in the CBU-26
cluster bomb. Also found were 608 M-85's, an Israeli-made
submunition.
The unexploded submunitions being found in Lebanon are
probably only a fraction of the total number dropped.
Cluster munitions can contain dozens or even hundreds of
submunitions designed to explode as they scatter around a
wide area. They are very effective against rocket-launcher
units or ground troops.
The Lebanese government has reported that the conflict
killed 1,183 people and wounded 4,054, most of them
civilians. The United Nations reported this week that the
number of civilian casualties in Lebanon from cluster
munitions, land mines and unexploded bombs stood at 30
injured and eight killed.
Dozen of Israelis were killed and hundreds wounded in
attacks by Hezbollah rockets, some of which were loaded
with ball bearings to maximize their lethality.
Officials say it is unlikely that Israel will be found to
have violated a separate agreement, the Arms Export
Control Act, which requires foreign governments that
receive American weapons to use them for legitimate
self-defense. Proving that Israel's campaign against
Hezbollah did not constitute self-defense would be
difficult, especially in view of President Bush's publicly
announced support for Israel's action after Hezbollah
fighters attacked across the border, the officials said.
Even if Israel is found to have violated the classified
agreement covering cluster bombs, it is not clear what
actions the United States might take.
In 1982, delivery of cluster-bomb shells to Israel was
suspended a month after Israel invaded Lebanon after the
Reagan administration determined that Israel "may" have
used them against civilian areas.
But the decision to impose what amounted to a indefinite
moratorium was made under pressure from Congress, which
conducted a long investigation of the issue. Israel and
the United States reaffirmed restrictions on the use of
cluster munitions in 1988, and the Reagan administration
lifted the moratorium.
**********************************************************
(8) Italian FM: Harsh U.S. approach to Mideast failed
By Meron Rapoport
Haaretz
25 August 2006
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/754743.html
ROME - If the planned multinational force in Lebanon
succeeds, it might be possible to create a similar force
for the Gaza Strip, Italian Foreign Minister Massimo
D'Alema said in an interview with Haaretz.
D'Alema said that America's aggressive approach to the
Middle East, which Israel shares, has failed, and has
caused serious damage. Now, he said, Italy and Europe must
prove to Israelis that only international intervention can
bring them security.
D'Alema is considered the driving force behind Italy's
decision to contribute 3,000 soldiers to a beefed-up UN
Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), thereby making it the
largest western contributor to the force.
But the Italian foreign minister, who met with Foreign
Minister Tzipi Livni in Rome on Thursday, said that the
multinational force can only help the government of
Lebanon to disarm Hezbollah. This matter "essentially
depends" solely on the government of Prime Minister Fouad
Siniora, he said, and will certainly not be done through
force.
He also claimed that it would be "simplistic" to describe
Hezbollah solely as a terrorist organization. "Were
Hezbollah merely a small terrorist group, it would not
enjoy the support of so many Lebanese," he said. "Even
Tzipi Livni says that if Hezbollah becomes a political
organization, this will be a success, and I agree with
her."
D'Alema is president of the Democrats of the Left, and was
also a senior figure in the party's earlier incarnation as
the Communist Party. Many on the Italian right and in
Italy's Jewish community view the party as hostile to
Israel, particularly in view of the great support that
Israel received from former prime minister Silvio
Berlusconi.
The Italian foreign minister's views are clearly not
supportive of the Israeli government. Nevertheless, he
expressed concern for Israel during the interview.
"We are sending our soldiers to Lebanon and endangering
their lives out of love for Israel. We have no interests
in Lebanon; this is supposed to be a step that creates
peace. And that is in Israel's interest," D'Alema said.
D'Alema said that it is still unclear whether Italy will
head the bolstered UNIFIL, but it is already clear that it
will be a leading contributor with its 3,000 soldiers. The
decision to deploy the force enjoys overwhelming support
among the Italian public, and in the parliamentary Foreign
Affairs Committee, it won across-the-board support.
Analysts explain that the Italians are pleased with the
fact that D'Alema has managed to turn Italy into a central
player in the international arena.
"Moreover, we're taking about involvement in Lebanon,
which is nearby. This is not Afghanistan, which is so far
away that no one understands what we are doing there," an
official in the Italian Foreign Ministry explained.
Nonetheless, D'Alema is trying to make sure that Italy is
not alone in Lebanon. At an emergency European Union
meeting in Brussels today, D'Alema hopes a decision will
be made to add at least 5,000 European troops to UNIFIL.
On this point, Italy's hopes are shared by Israel.
Analysts say D'Alema understood the United States cannot
mediate in Lebanon. The French are hesitant, the British
are considered too pro-American, and the Germans do not
want to get involved in a delicate situation. He is
therefore pushing for Italy to take advantage of the
vacuum.
What, in your view, would be considered a success for the
multinational force in Lebanon?
"Success would be the active presence of international and
European diplomacy in the region, a presence that has been
missing for many years. Europe has not counted for too
much in the Middle East, and Israel has always related to
it suspiciously. The Arabs thought that Europe hands out
money, but for the important things, one must turn to the
Americans. If, with the assistance of a UN and European
presence, a positive process begins in Lebanon - the
country is stabilized and the fundamentalist threat is
removed from Israel's borders - that will show people in
Israel that the international community can be efficient,
that Europe can be efficient. Such a process would prove
to Israel that it can ensure its security better through
the politics of peace than through war. The main problem
is that in Israeli politics, peace and security are two
different, often contradictory things."
And the current crisis proved, in your view, that the U.S.
on its own cannot guarantee such security?
"This is obvious to me. The American policy, which Israel
also supported, created an impossible situation. Just a
few years ago, they foretold the demise of the UN. I
recall that on the day Baghdad fell, Richard Perle wrote
that along with Baghdad, the UN also fell. The thinking
was that it is possible to control the world via the power
of a hegemonic liberal power. This philosophy has created
serious damage, and now the U.S. is looking for a logical
way out."
D'Alema disagrees with Israel's description of Hezbollah
as a terrorist organization: "An organization that has 35
members of parliament and three ministers cannot be
described solely as a terrorist group. Hezbollah is not
considered a terrorist group by the European Union, nor in
my personal view. Hezbollah is a military organization,
but also a force that participates in elections. The
paradox is that we support Siniora, a democratic leader,
and Siniora lauds Hezbollah as the defender of the
Lebanese homeland. It is important to understand the
complexity of the situation, because if you have a
simplistic view of the enemy, you deal with him
incorrectly."
Does this mean that UNIFIL and the Italian soldiers will
not attempt to disarm Hezbollah?
"This essentially depends on the Lebanese. If the
government of Lebanon wants to, it is certainly possible,
and we must encourage the government of Lebanon. We cannot
act against the will of the Lebanese government.
Hezbollah's disarmament is not only Israel's demand, it is
also Lebanon's, because a democratic country cannot be
sovereign if it does not have a monopoly over the army."
There was talk in the past about deploying a multinational
force to the Gaza Strip as well.
"The idea of sending UN troops to the Gaza Strip is
currently being aired. But I think that if things go well
in Lebanon, a similar positive process could also begin in
the Gaza Strip: the release of [kidnapped soldier Gilad]
Shalit, a Palestinian unity government that meets the
criteria set by the international community, and the
presence of a UN force to bolster the Palestinian
government."
**********************************************************
(9) Belgium wants UN force to prevent arms smuggling from
Syria
By Nada Bakri
The Daily Star
25 August 2006
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&
categ_id=2&article_id=75006
BEIRUT: A Belgian official said Thursday that a beefed-up
UN force for South Lebanon should monitor the
Lebanese-Syrian border to prevent weapons smuggling from
Syria to armed groups in Lebanon.
Syria threatened on Wednesday to close its border with
Lebanon if a vastly expanded United Nations Interim Force
in Lebanon (UNIFIL) were to be deployed along the border.
"I believe it is very important to stop sending arms from
Syria to Lebanon and to effectively control these
borders," said Belgian Foreign Minister Karel De Gucht
following a meeting with his Lebanese counterpart, Fawzi
Salloukh.
De Gucht, who also met with Lebanese Premier Fouad Siniora
Thursday said Resolution 1701 - which ended Israel's
34-day offensive against Lebanon - states the new, more
robust United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon should help
the Lebanese Army control its borders with Syria.
"This has to be implemented," he said.
Salloukh said Lebanese Army troops had already deployed
along the Lebanese-Syrian border but that the government
had yet to decide whether these troops will be supported
by UNIFIL.
"This will be discussed in Cabinet when we see that it
requires discussion," Salloukh added. "If Cabinet thinks
there is a need to seek the help of the UNIFIL it will do
so. This is Cabinet's decision."
But De Gucht declined to answer a question about his
country's position on Israel's continued air and sea
blockade on Lebanon, effective since July 12.
"The UNIFIL should be deployed as soon as possible and all
conditions for its deployment have to be met soon," he
said.
Salloukh and his Belgian counterpart also discussed
Europe's participation in the UN force ahead of an
extraordinary
meeting of the EU foreign affairs committee on Friday with
UN chief Kofi Annan.EU officials were expected to decide
who is to play what role in the enlarged UN force.
Salloukh later met with Cypriot Foreign Minister George
Lillikas for talks on Nicosia's role in the UN force.
Lillikas had announced earlier from Cyprus that the UN
will set up an administration center in Nicosia for the
transfer of peacekeeping troops to Lebanon.
Last week Cyprus offered to act as a transit point for
movement of troops to bolster the UNIFIL force in South
Lebanon.
"The UN has decided to set up the center of administration
in Cyprus for the peacekeeping force," said Lillikas. "In
collaboration with the United Nations and UNFICYP, we will
create the essential infrastructure."
The approximately 1,000-strong UN force In Cyprus, which
monitors the 180-kilometer buffer zone in Cyprus, has had
a presence on the island since 1964 and has a substantial
support infrastructure in place.
Both European officials met with Siniora. De Gucht also
met with Speaker Nabih Berri, while his Cypriot
counterpart met with Future Movement leader MP Saad
Hariri.
Separately, Prime Minister Fouad Siniora met with
Jordanian Tourism Minister Mounir Nassar.
Siniora said during the meeting that his Cabinet was
making every effort to end the Israeli blockade and
enhance its control over Lebanon's borders.
**********************************************************
(10) Filmmaker Ken Loach Joins the Cultural Boycott of Israel
PACBI
24 August 2006
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article5615.shtml
Ken Loach, the acclaimed British director and winner of
this year's Palme d'Or at Cannes Film Festival, an artist
who is known for his politically and socially engaged
films, has declared in a personal statement his support of
"the call by Palestinian film-makers, artists and others
to boycott state sponsored Israeli cultural institutions
and urge[s] others to join their campaign". He anounced
that he would not take part in the "Haifa Film Festival or
any other such occasions," a clear statement of his intent
to boycott Israeli film festivals, and an acknowledgment
of the fact that "Palestinians are driven to call for this
boycott after forty years of the occupation of their land,
destruction of their homes and the kidnapping and murder
of their civilians".
Statement by Ken Loach
I support the call by Palestinian film-makers, artists and
others to boycott state sponsored Israeli cultural
institutions and urge others to join their campaign.
Palestinians are driven to call for this boycott after
forty years of the occupation of their land, destruction
of their homes and the kidnapping and murder of their
civilians.
They have no immediate hope that this oppression will end.
As British citizens we have to acknowledge our own
responsibility. We must condemn the British and US
governments for supporting and arming Israel. We must also
oppose the terrorist activities of the British and US
governments in pursuing their illegal wars and
occupations.
However, it is impossible to ignore the appeals of
Palestinian comrades. Consequently, I would decline any
invitation to the Haifa Film Festival or other such
occasions.
Best Wishes,
Ken Loach
**********************************************************
(11) Poll: 18% of Israeli Arabs backed Hezbollah in war
By Gideon Alon
Haaretz
25 August 2006
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/754512.html
A majority of the Jewish Israeli public believes Israeli
Arabs supported Hezbollah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah
during the war in Lebanon, according to a Dahaf poll
conducted by Mina Tzemach. Some 18% of Israeli Arabs
polled said they supported Hezbollah during the month-long
war in the north.
Some 15% of Jewish Israelis polled said all Israeli Arabs
supported Nasrallah, while 40% claimed that most Israeli
Arabs supported him. Some 21% of the respondents said that
half of Israeli Arabs supported Nasrallah, and 21% believe
that only a small minority of Israeli Arabs supported the
Hezbollah leader.
When asked who they supported in the second Lebanon war,
27% of the Israeli Arabs polled said they backed Israel,
18% said they supported Hezbollah and 36% said they did
not support either side.
When asked to what extent Arab MKs represent the views of
the Arab public, 44% of Israeli Arabs polled said the MKs
do not represent them at all, 28% said they represent them
to some degree, and 20% said they were well-represented by
the Arab MKs.
In regards to Jewish-Arab relations, the poll found that
some 62% of the Jewish Israeli public would be unwilling
to rent an apartment to Arabs, and 35% said they would be
willing to do so. Some 56% of those polled said it would
bother them if one of their neighbors rented their
apartment to an Arab, and 42% said they would be
unbothered by such a scenario.
**********************************************************
(12) Israel government teeters under resignation calls
By Marius Schattner
Agence France Presse
25 August 2006
JERUSALEM, Aug 25 2006-- Israel's embattled leadership,
discredited by the Lebanon war and sex scandals, teetered
Friday under calls for the prime minister, defence
minister and army chief to resign over mounting
discontent.
Wednesday July 12 was a black day for Israel's elected
leadership.
The attorney general decided to open a police
investigation into allegations that President Moshe Katsav
sexually harrased a woman employee. Hezbollah captured two
soldiers, killed eight others and Israel went to war in
Lebanon.
Justice Minister Haim Ramon attended a Tel Aviv bash and
allegedly kissed a woman soldier against her will,
sparking fresh sex allegations and ultimately forcing his
resignation this week.
A month later, the war failed to achieve its aims of
stopping Hezbollah rocket attacks, which killed 41
Israelis, or freeing the two soldiers.
Just 113 days since Prime Minister Ehud Olmert took office
promising to redraw Israel's borders with the Palestinians
amid the optimism of the Gaza Strip pullout, his
government's approval ratings have sunk to an all-time
low.
"The crisis is so serious that the government seems doomed
in the long-term," political science professor Shlomo
Avineri told AFP.
"It is not just a bad show for the military campaign, but
a lack of confidence in the entire political class
acculumating in the scandals," the former director of the
foreign ministry said.
"It's time to say goodbye," screamed a headline in the
tabloid-style Maariv newspaper, in general pro-government,
urging Olmert, Katsav and chief of staff Dan Halutz to go.
"Halutz should take the initiative and resign before he is
forced out," Olmert should "widen his government
immediately otherwise his Kadima party will collapse" and
Katsav "would do better to leave" without delay, it
counselled.
Indeed, most Israelis want Olmert, Defence Minister Amir
Peretz and Halutz to resign over a litany of failings and
mismanagement of Israel's 34-day offensive, its biggest
war in quarter of a century.
According to an opinion poll published in the largest
circulation Yediot Aharonot daily, 63 percent believe
Olmert should step down, while 74 percent want Peretz and
54 percent want Halutz ousted over the war.
The 61-year-old Olmert's ratings have never been lower.
Three-quarters of the population -- 74 percent -- are
dissatisfied with his leadership and only 11 percent feel
he is the most suitable prime minister today.
Exposing a strong swing to the right, in which opposition
parties could win a snap election less than four months
after being defeated, Likud leader and former premier
Benjamin Netanyahu was favourite to be premier at 22
percent.
Even far-right leader Avigdor Lieberman and octogenarian
Shimon Peres, who has never won a nationwide election in
his life, would make for more suitable premiers at the
moment, the poll found.
Nevertheless, few Israelis actually want an election, with
another option that the right-wing be brought into the
government in a bid to help solve the crisis and better
prepare for the future.
"Such a cabinet, in addition to achieving practical goals,
would probably contribute to morale by restoring public
confidence in the government, or at least, public
willingness to extend it further credit," the Haaretz
daily said.
Army reservists were to protest Friday outside Olmert's
Jerusalem office, but the protest movement has yet to
gather the same momentum as seen after the Yom Kippur War
in 1973, when prime minister Golda Meir eventually
resigned.
Twenty-three years ago tens of thousands protested against
the government -- a far cry from the dozens of reservists
and relatives of the slain who have taken their discontent
to the rose garden outside Olmert's office.
Pledges from Olmert to pump billions into reconstruction
of war-damaged areas of the north, should they come to
fruition, may further defuse malaise.
"The establishment will take in air and survive. The
movement will be destroyed if it lacks determination ...
Who will win? Protest and revolt are always a fateful
lottery," wrote Haaretz.
**********************************************************
(13) In post-war Israel, right-wing opposition parties post
strong gains: poll
Associated Press
25 August 2006
JERUSALEM-- Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's popularity
plunged after Israel's war with Hezbollah and he would
lose to the right-wing opposition if elections were held
now, according to a poll published Friday.
The next vote is not scheduled until 2010. However,
Olmert's government could be forced out earlier amid
growing public anger over his performance during the war
that ended last week.
Opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu is now the most
popular Israeli politician, according to the poll by the
Dahaf Institute, published in the Yediot Ahronot. The
survey among 499 respondents had an error margin of 4.5
percentage points.
**********************************************************
(14) Liberal MP resigns post over Hezbollah comment
CanWest News Service
24 August 2006
http://www.canada.com/saskatoonstarphoenix/news/national/
story.html?id=e0b6a2c7-0ab5-4bec-821f-906f298eed69
VANCOUVER -- The Liberal associate foreign affairs critic
quit Wednesday over the controversy sparked by his
suggestions that Hezbollah be removed from Canada's list
of designated terrorist organizations.
Borys Wrzesnewskyj, MP for Etobicoke- Centre, said
Wednesday in Vancouver that he "insisted" Liberal Leader
Bill Graham accept his resignation when they met during
the national caucus meeting of the federal Liberals.
"I set a high standard for myself in the role of associate
critic. In no way do I want any statements I have made to
interfere with that role," he told reporters, reading from
a prepared statement.
The MP caused a furor by suggesting Hezbollah, a leading
radical Islamist movement in Lebanon central to the
current confl ict with Israel, be involved in Mideast
peace negotiations and also removed from the list of what
Canada considers terrorist groups. The Liberals put
Hezbollah on the list in 2002 when they were in
government.
Even fellow Liberals angrily called for his ouster from
his critics post over the comments made while he was in
Lebanon on a fact-fi nding mission organized by the
National Council of Canada-Arab Relations.
He later denied calling for the shift in classifi cation
for Hezbollah and Wednesday said several times that
"Hezbollah is a terrorist organization." The MP said he
regretted the a controversy caused by his remarks.
Graham said he considers the matter closed.
****************
ANALYSIS & VIEWS
****************
(15) 7 Facts You Might Not Know about the Iraq War
By Michael Schwartz
TomDispatch
23 August 2006
http://electroniciraq.net/news/2459.shtml
With a tenuous cease-fire between Israel and Lebanon
holding, the ever-hotter war in Iraq is once again
creeping back onto newspaper front pages and towards the
top of the evening news. Before being fully immersed in
daily reports of bomb blasts, sectarian violence, and
casualties, however, it might be worth considering some of
the just-under-the-radar-screen realities of the situation
in that country. Here, then, is a little guide to
understanding what is likely to be a flood of new Iraqi
developments -- a few enduring, but seldom commented upon,
patterns central to the dynamics of the Iraq war, as well
as to the fate of the American occupation and Iraqi
society.
1. The Iraqi Government Is Little More Than a Group of
"Talking Heads"
A minimally viable central government is built on at least
three foundations: the coercive capacity to maintain
order, an administrative apparatus that can deliver
government services and directives to society, and the
resources to manage these functions. The Iraqi government
has none of these attributes -- and no prospect of
developing them. It has no coercive capacity. The national
army we hear so much about is actually trained and
commanded by the Americans, while the police forces are
largely controlled by local governments and have few, if
any, viable links to the central government in Baghdad.
(Only the Special Forces, whose death-squad activities in
the capital have lately been in the news, have any formal
relationship with the elected government; and they have
more enduring ties to the U.S. military that created them
and the Shia militias who staffed them.)
Administratively, the Iraqi government has no existence
outside Baghdad's heavily fortified Green Zone -- and
little presence within it. Whatever local apparatus exists
elsewhere in the country is led by local leaders, usually
with little or no loyalty to the central government and
not dependent on it for resources it doesn't, in any case,
possess. In Baghdad itself, this is clearly illustrated in
the vast Shiite slum of Sadr city, controlled by Muqtada
al-Sadr's Mahdi Army and his elaborate network of
political clerics. (Even U.S. occupation forces enter that
enormous swath of the capital only in large brigades,
braced for significant firefights.) In the major city of
the Shia south, Basra, local clerics lead a government
that alternately ignores and defies the central government
on all policy issues from oil to women's rights; in Sunni
cities like Tal Afar and Ramadi, where major battles with
the Americans alternate with insurgent control, the
government simply has no presence whatsoever. In Kurdistan
in the north, the Kurdish leadership maintains full
control of all local governments.
As for resources, with 85% of the country's revenues
deriving from oil, all you really need to know is that
oil-rich Iraq is also suffering from an "acute fuel
shortage" (including soaring prices, all-night lines at
gas stations, and a deal to get help from neighboring
Syria which itself has minimal refining capacity). The
almost helpless Iraqi government has had little choice but
to accept the dictates of American advisors and of the
International Monetary Fund about exactly how what energy
resources exist will be used. Paying off Saddam-era debt,
reparations to Kuwait from the Gulf War of 1990, and the
needs of the U.S.-controlled national army have had first
claim. With what remains so meager that it cannot sustain
a viable administrative apparatus in Baghdad, let alone
the rest of the country, there is barely enough to spare
for the government leadership to line their own pockets.
2. There Is No Iraqi Army
The "Iraqi Army" is a misnomer. The government's military
consists of Iraqi units integrated into the U.S.-commanded
occupation army. These units rely on the Americans for
intelligence, logistics, and -- lacking almost all heavy
weaponry themselves -- artillery, tanks, and any kind of
airpower. (The Iraqi "Air Force" typically consists of
fewer then 10 planes with no combat capability.) The
government has no real control over either personnel or
strategy.
We can see this clearly in a recent operation in Sadr
City, conducted (as news reports tell us) by "Iraqi troops
and US advisors" and backed up by U.S. artillery and air
power. It was one of an ongoing series of attempts to
undermine the Sadrists and their Mahdi army, who have
governed the area since the fall of Saddam. The day after
the assault, Iraqi premier Nouri Kamel al-Maliki
complained about the tactics used, which he labeled
"unjustified," and about the fact that neither he, nor his
government, was included in the decision-making leading up
to the assault. As he put it to an Agence France-Presse,
"I reiterate my rejection to [sic] such an operation and
it should not be executed without my consent. This
particular operation did not have my approval."
This happened because the U.S. has functionally expanded
its own forces in Iraq by integrating local Iraqi units
into its command structure, while essentially depriving
the central government of any army it could use purely for
its own purposes. Iraqi units have their own officers, but
they always operate with American advisers. As American
Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad put it, "We'll ultimately help
them become independent." (Don't hold your breath.)
3. The Recent Decline in American Casualties Is Not a
Result of Less Fighting (and Anyway, It's Probably Ending)
At the beginning of August, the press carried reports of a
significant decline in U.S. casualties, punctuated with
announcements from American officials that the military
situation was improving. The figures (compiled by the
Brookings Institute) do show a decline in U.S. military
deaths (76 in April, 69 in May, 63 in June, and then only
48 in July). But these were offset by dramatic increases
in Iraqi military fatalities, which almost doubled in July
as the U.S. sent larger numbers of Iraqi units into
battle, and as undermanned American units were redeployed
from al-Anbar province, the heartland of the Sunni
insurgency, to civil-war-torn Baghdad in preparation for a
big push to recapture various out-of-control neighborhoods
in the capital.
More important, when it comes to long-term U.S.
casualties, the trends are not good. In recent months,
U.S. units had been pulled off the streets of the capital.
But the Iraqi Army units that replaced them proved
incapable of controlling Baghdad in even minimal ways. So,
in addition, to fighting the Sunni insurgency, American
troops are now back on the streets of Baghdad in the midst
of a swirling civil war with U.S. casualties likely to
rise. In recent months, there has also been an escalation
of the fighting between American forces and the
insurgency, independent of the sectarian fighting that now
dominates the headlines.
As a consequence, the U.S. has actually increased its
troop levels in Iraq (by delaying the return of some
units, sending others back to Iraq early, and sending in
some troops previously held in reserve in Kuwait). The
number of battles (large and small) between occupation
troops and the Iraqi resistance has increased from about
70 a day to about 90 a day; and the number of resistance
fighters estimated by U.S. officials has held steady at
about 20,000. The number of IEDs placed -- the principle
weapon targeted at occupation troops (including Iraqi
units) -- has been rising steadily since the spring.
The effort by Sunni guerrillas to expel the American army
and its allies is more widespread and energetic than at
any time since the fall of the Hussein regime.
4. Most Iraqi Cities Have Active and Often Viable Local
Governments
Neither the Iraqi government, nor the American-led
occupation has a significant presence in most parts of
Iraq. This is well-publicized in the three Kurdish
provinces, which are ruled by a stable Kurdish government
without any outside presence; less so in Shia urban areas
where various religio-political groups -- notably the
Sadrists, the Supreme Council of Islamic Revolution in
Iraq (SCIRI), Da'wa , and Fadhila -- vie for local
control, and then organize cities and towns around their
own political and religious platforms. While there is
often violent friction among these groups -- particularly
when the contest for control of an area is undecided --
most cities and towns are largely peaceful as local
governments and local populations struggle to provide city
services without a viable national economy.
This situation also holds true in the Sunni areas, except
when the occupation is actively trying to pacify them.
When there is no fighting, local governments dominated by
the religious and tribal leaders of the resistance
establish the laws and maintain a kind of order, relying
for law enforcement on guerrilla fighters and militia
members.
All these governments -- Kurdish, Shia and Sunni -- have
shown themselves capable of maintaining (often
fundamentalist) law and (often quite harsh) order, with
little crime and little resistance from the local
population. Though often severely limited by the lack of
resources from a paralyzed national economy and a bankrupt
national government, they do collect the garbage, direct
traffic, suppress the local criminal element, and perform
many of the other duties expected of local governments.
5. Outside Baghdad, Violence Arrives with the Occupation
Army
The portrait of chaos across Iraq that our news generally
offers us is a genuine half-truth. Certainly, Baghdad has
been plunged into massive and worsening disarray as both
the war against the Americans and the civil war have come
to be concentrated there, and as the terrifying process of
ethnic cleansing has hit neighborhood after neighborhood,
and is now beginning to seep into the environs of the
capital.
However, outside Baghdad (with the exception of the
northern cities of Kirkuk and Mosul, where historic
friction among Kurd, Sunni, and Turkman has created a
different version of sectarian violence), Iraqi cities
tend to be reasonably ethnically homogeneous and to have
at least quasi-stable governments. The real violence often
only arrives when the occupation military makes its
periodic sweeps aimed at recapturing cities where it has
lost all authority and even presence.
This deadly pattern of escalating violence is regularly
triggered by those dreaded sweeps, involving brutal,
destructive, and sometimes lethal home invasions aimed at
capturing or killing suspected insurgents or their
supporters. The insurgent response involves the
emplacement of ever more sophisticated roadside bombs
(known as IEDs) and sniper attacks, aimed at distracting
or hampering the patrols. The ensuing firefights
frequently involve the use of artillery, tanks, and air
power in urban areas, demolishing homes and stores in a
neighborhood, which only adds to the bitter resistance and
increasing the support for the insurgency.
These mini-wars can last between a few hours and, in
Falluja, Ramadi, or other "centers of resistance," a few
weeks. They constitute the overwhelming preponderance of
the fighting in Iraq. For any city, the results can be
widespread death and devastation from which it can take
months or years to recover. Yet these are still episodes
punctuating a less violent, if increasingly more run-down
normalcy.
6. There Is a Growing Resistance Movement in the Shia
Areas of Iraq
Lately, the pattern of violence established in largely
Sunni areas of Iraq has begun to spread to largely Shia
cities, which had previously been insulated from the
periodic devastation of American pacification attempts.
This ended with growing Bush administration anxiety about
economic, religious, and militia connections between local
Shia governments and Iran, and with the growing power of
the anti-American Sadrist movement, which had already
fought two fierce battles with the U.S. in Najaf in 2004
and a number of times since then in Sadr City.
Symptomatic of this change is the increasing violence in
Basra, the urban oil hub at the southern tip of the
country, whose local government has long been dominated by
various fundamentalist Shia political groups with strong
ties to Iran. When the British military began a campaign
to undermine the fundamentalists' control of the police
force there, two British military operatives were
arrested, triggering a battle between British soldiers
(supported by the Shia leadership of the Iraqi central
government) and the local police (supported by local Shia
leaders). This confrontation initiated a series of armed
confrontations among the various contenders for power in
Basra.
Similar confrontations have occurred in other localities,
including Karbala, Najaf, Sadr City, and Maysan province.
So far no general offensive to recapture the any of these
areas has been attempted, but Britain has recently been
concentrating its troops outside Basra.
If the occupation decides to use military means to bring
the Shia cities back into anything like an American orbit,
full-scale battles may be looming in the near future that
could begin to replicate the fighting in Sunni areas,
including the use of IEDs, so far only sporadically
employed in the south. If you think American (and British)
troops are overextended now, dealing with internecine
warfare and a minority Sunni insurgency, just imagine what
a real Shiite insurgency would mean.
7. There Are Three Distinct Types of Terrorism in Iraq,
All Directly or Indirectly Connected to the Occupation
Terrorism involves attacking civilians to force them to
abandon their support for your enemy, or to drive them
away from a coveted territory.
The original terrorists in Iraq were the military and
civilian officials of the Bush administration -- starting
with their "shock and awe" bombing campaign that destroyed
Iraqi infrastructure in order to "undermine civilian
morale." The American form of terrorism continued with the
wholesale destruction of most of Falluja and parts of
other Sunni cities, designed to pacify the "hot beds" of
insurgency, while teaching the residents of those areas
that, if they "harbor the insurgents," they will surely
"suffer the consequences."
At the individual level, this program of terror was
continued through the invasions of, and demolishing of,
homes (or, in some cases, parts of neighborhoods) where
insurgents were believed to be hidden among a larger
civilian population, thus spreading the "lesson" about
"harboring terrorists" to everyone in the Sunni sections
of the country. Generating a violent death rate of at
least 18,000 per year, the American drumbeat of terror has
contributed more than its share to the recently escalating
civilian death toll, which reached a record 3,149 in the
official count during July. It is unfortunately accurate
to characterize the American occupation of Sunni Iraq as a
reign of terror.
The Sunni terrorists like those led by Abu Musab
al-Zarqawi have utilized the suicide car bomb to generate
the most widely publicized violence in Iraq -- hundreds of
civilian casualties each month resulting from attacks on
restaurants, markets, and mosques where large number of
Shia congregate. At the beginning of the U.S. occupation,
car bombs were nonexistent; they only became common when a
tiny proportion of the Sunni resistance movement became
convinced that the Shia were the main domestic support for
the American occupation. (As far as we can tell, the vast
majority of those fighting the Americans oppose such
terrorists and have sometimes fought with them.) As
al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri wrote, these attacks
were justified by "the treason of the Shia and their
collusion with the Americans." As if to prove him correct,
the number of such attacks tripled to current levels of
about 70 per month after the Shia-dominated Iraqi
government supported the American devastation of Falluja
in November 2004.
The Sunni terrorists work with the same terrorist logic
that the Americans have applied in Iraq: Attacks on
civilians are meant to terrify them into not supporting
the enemy. There is a belief, of course, among the
leadership of the Sunni terrorists that, ultimately, only
the violent suppression or expulsion of the Shia is
acceptable. But as Zawahiri himself stated, the "majority
of Muslims don't comprehend this and possibly could not
even imagine it." So the practical justification for such
terrorism lies in the more immediate association of the
Shia with the hated occupation.
The final link in the terrorist chain can also be traced
back to the occupation. In January of 2005, Newsweek broke
the story that the U.S. was establishing (Shiite) "death
squads" within the Iraqi Ministry of Interior, modeled
after the assassination teams that the CIA had helped
organize in El Salvador during the 1980s. These death
squads were intended to assassinate activists and
supporters of the Sunni resistance. Particularly after the
bombing of the Golden Dome, an important Shia shrine in
Samarra, in March 2006, they became a fixture in Baghdad,
where thousands of corpses -- virtually all Sunni men --
have been found with signs of torture, including
electric-drill holes, in their bodies and bullet holes in
their heads. Here, again, the logic is the same: to use
terror to stop the Sunni community from nurturing and
harboring both the terrorist car bombers and the
anti-American resistance fighters.
While there is disagreement about whether the Americans,
the Shia-controlled Iraqi Ministry of Defense, or the Shia
political parties should shoulder the most responsibility
for loosing these death squads on Baghdad, one conclusion
is indisputable: They have earned their place in the
ignominious triumvirate of Iraqi terrorism.
One might say that the war has converted one of President
Bush's biggest lies into an unimaginably horrible truth:
Iraq is now the epicenter of worldwide terrorism.
Where the 7 Facts Lead
With this terror triumvirate at the center of Iraqi
society, we now enter the horrible era of ethnic
cleansing, the logical extension of multidimensional
terror.
When the U.S. toppled the Hussein regime, there was little
sectarian sentiment outside of Kurdistan, which had
longstanding nationalist ambitions. Even today, opinion
polls show that more than two-thirds of Sunnis and Shia
stand opposed to the idea of any further weakening of the
central government and are not in favor of federation, no
less dividing Iraq into three separate nations.
Nevertheless, ethnic cleansing by both Shia and Sunni has
become the order of the day in many of the neighborhoods
of Baghdad, replete with house burnings, physical
assaults, torture, and murder, all directed against those
who resist leaving their homes. These acts are aimed at
creating religiously homogeneous neighborhoods.
This is a terrifying development that derives from the
rising tide of terrorism. Sunnis believe that they must
expel their Shia neighbors to stop them from giving the
Shiite death squads the names of resistance fighters and
their supporters. Shia believe that they must expel their
Sunni neighbors to stop them from providing information
and cover for car-bombing attacks. And, as the situation
matures, militants on both sides come to embrace removal
-- period. As these actions escalate, feeding on each
other, more and more individuals, caught in a vise of fear
and bent on revenge, embrace the infernal logic of
terrorism: that it is acceptable to punish everyone for
the actions of a tiny minority.
There is still some hope for the Iraqis to recover their
equilibrium. All the centripetal forces in Iraq derive
from the American occupation, and might still be
sufficiently reduced by an American departure followed by
a viable reconstruction program embraced by the key
elements inside of Iraq. But if the occupation continues,
there will certainly come a point -- perhaps already
passed -- when the collapse of government legitimacy, the
destruction wrought by the war, and the horror of
terrorist violence become self-sustaining. If that point
is reached, all parties will enter a new territory with
incalculable consequences.
Michael Schwartz, Professor of Sociology and Faculty
Director of the Undergraduate College of Global Studies at
Stony Brook University, has written extensively on popular
protest and insurgency, and on American business and
government dynamics. His work on Iraq has appeared on
numerous Internet sites, including Tomdispatch, Asia
Times, Mother Jones.com, and ZNet; and in print in
Contexts, Against the Current, and Z Magazine. His books
include Radical Protest and Social Structure, and Social
Policy and the Conservative Agenda (edited, with Clarence
Lo). His email address is Ms42@optonline.net.
Tomdispatch.com is researched, written and edited by Tom
Engelhardt, a fellow at the Nation Institute.
**********************************************************
(16) Blair's foreign policy is now a threat to national
security
A new prime minister who wants to defuse domestic
extremism will need to rethink the relationship with
Washington
By David Clark
The Guardian
25 August 2006
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1857775,00.html
We know it. They know it. We know that they know it. So
why do they continue to deny it? I am, of course, talking
about the very obvious connection between British foreign
policy and the rising terrorist threat, and the
government's refusal to come to terms with it. Politicians
rarely admit to their mistakes, but this mental block is
more than just routine political obduracy; it is a serious
issue of national security.
We have come to expect little better of Tony Blair, whose
personal reputation now depends on such a falsified
version of reality that he increasingly appears to inhabit
a land of make-believe. But what was truly depressing
about the response to the recent open letter from
prominent Muslims warning that British policy is providing
"ammunition to extremists" was the number of ministers -
several of whom clearly know better - who lined up to
parrot the mantra that it was "dangerous" to suggest a
link.
Those same ministers must have been galled by this week's
Guardian/ICM poll suggesting that 72% of the British
people agree that our foreign policy has made us less
secure, while only 1% accept the government's assurance
that it has made us safer. That's as close to zero as it's
possible to get in an opinion poll. There are probably
more people in Britain who believe in Santa Claus or yogic
flying.
The one thing that could always be said of New Labour was
that it knew how to read and adapt to public opinion. Its
detachment from the popular mood on national security
encourages those who believe that its time in office is
drawing to a close. It is the ministers, not their
critics, who have lost the plot.
The standard riposte is to point out that al-Qaida's
terrorist campaign against the west predated the military
interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq, so cannot be blamed
on them. That is obviously true, but it ignores the
essential point. Potent though it was, before 9/11
al-Qaida drew its support from a fairly narrow base -
mainly in Egypt and Saudi Arabia. The effect of our
foreign-policy miscalculations has been to expand that
base to places where it was previously weak or almost
nonexistent: not just Iraq and Pakistan, but also Britain,
where an alarming number of young Muslims have come to
view their country of birth as an enemy of their faith.
Britain was certainly a centre of Islamist extremism
before 9/11 and the Iraq war. The presence of foreign
clerics preaching violent jihad is something that could,
and should, have been stamped out much earlier. But apart
from the solitary case of the shoe bomber, Richard Reid,
there is nothing to substantiate the idea that al-Qaida
had established a meaningful presence among British
Muslims. John Reid recently claimed that the first
al-Qaida plot in the UK was identified in 2000. If so, it
was not considered significant enough to feature
prominently in the regular joint intelligence committee
assessments of what was then called UBL (Usama Bin Laden).
Whatever the government may want us to believe, evidence
suggests that the phenomenon of British-born Muslims
willing to carry out suicide attacks at home postdates the
Iraq war and has been inspired by it. As the intelligence
and security committee noted this year: "The judgments of
the JIC in 2002 suggest attacks against the UK were felt
more likely ... to be conducted by terrorists entering
from abroad than by British nationals resident in the UK.
By early 2004 perceptions of the threat, and the threat
itself, had changed."
We all know what caused that change. The only "danger" in
acknowledging it is to the credibility of those who have
been directing the war on terror over the past five years.
That's the real reason behind the collective ministerial
panic attack that followed the open letter.
The government argues that to change policy in the face of
a terrorist threat would be an act of moral cowardice that
would put us in even greater danger. But that would only
be true where the policy in question was both legitimate
and necessary in order to combat terrorism or serve some
other vital objective. It would, for example, be sheer
folly to abandon Afghanistan to the Taliban. Eliminating
al-Qaida's principal base of operations was fully
justified on grounds of self-defence.
The same cannot be said of Iraq. Saddam Hussein posed no
threat beyond his borders, and the main effect of our
intervention has been to create an enormous terrorist
threat that didn't previously exist. Short-term Muslim
anger might have been worth the creation of a model
democracy in Iraq and a modernising dynamic in the Arab
world. But that was never going to happen, and we ended up
backing the Shia brand of Islamic fundamentalism against
its Sunni equivalent.
The absence of legitimacy and necessity applies
particularly to the government's acquiescence in America's
support for Israel, which along with Iraq is the main
source of Muslim anger. In his book Celsius 7/7, Michael
Gove argues that to pressure Israel to trade land for
peace would be akin to another Munich. What he
conveniently omits to mention is that the land
Czechoslovakia was forced to surrender in 1938 was its own
and not someone else's. It can never be "appeasement" to
demand that a country ends an illegal occupation.
Blair's justification for pursuing a foreign policy that
lacks legitimacy has been the necessity of sticking close
to America. It follows that developing an alternative that
diminishes extremist sentiment would require a post-Blair
government to rethink its relationship with Washington.
This does not mean abandoning the transatlantic alliance
or reneging on our obligation to support America when it
is attacked. It simply means an end to deference and a
willingness to be firm when America has got it wrong.
There is no reason why this should not happen. As Lebanon
showed, the foreign policy advanced in Britain's name, but
without its support, is not Labour's, the government's or
even the cabinet's. It is shared by few people beyond
Downing Street and Blair's ever-decreasing circle of
admirers. That makes it all the more regrettable that so
many of his ministers felt the need to associate
themselves publicly with his errors. There is now a strong
public appetite for a change of foreign-policy direction,
and Labour will need to tap into that if it is to recover
the authority to govern.
. David Clark is a former Labour special adviser at the
Foreign Office
**********************************************************
(17) At the crossroads
By Khaled Amayreh
Al-Ahram Weekly
24-30 August 2006
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2006/809/re81.htm
Could the formation of a national unity government solve
the crisis of the Palestinian Authority? Very unlikely,
writes Khaled Amayreh
A Palestinian man looks at a building destroyed in an
Israeli air strike in the town of Jebaliya, northern Gaza
Hamas and Fatah, the two largest Palestinian
political-resistance groups, continue to discuss the
possible formation of a "national unity government" as
calls for dissolving the Palestinian Authority (PA) gain
momentum throughout the occupied territories.
A growing number of Palestinian intellectuals and
political leaders from across the political spectrum,
including prominent Fatah leaders, have recently urged the
Palestinian leadership, including the Fatah-dominated PA
and the Hamas-led government, to dissolve the PA on the
grounds that it has become a liability, rather than an
asset, for the Palestinian people and their enduring
national cause.
Within this context, the task of forming a Fatah- Hamas
coalition government is being viewed by many as a last
ditch attempt which, if it fails to tackle the multiple
crises facing the Palestinians, would make unavoidable the
dismantling of the PA.
Israel has been imposing a crippling financial and
economic blockade on the West Bank and Gaza Strip ever
since Hamas won parliamentary elections in January,
barring millions of Palestinians from accessing food and
work. Harsh and punitive sanctions have already pushed
many Palestinian families into abject poverty while others
are literally going hungry, having been denied due
salaries and access to work.
Moreover, Israel is withholding, for the eighth
consecutive month, hundreds of millions of dollars of
Palestinian tax revenue returns that are vital for the
functioning of the Palestinian government. This coupled
with manifestly vindictive American sanctions again banks
operating in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, which has
forced banks to refuse any dealings with the Hamas-led
government, has created catastrophic economic and social
effects as some 160,000 civil servants, including teachers
and health workers, have not received salaries for more
than six months.
This bleak situation deteriorated even further with the
abduction, by the Israeli occupation army, of nearly all
Palestinian government ministers in the West Bank,
including Deputy Prime Minister Nassurdin Al-Shaer as well
as dozens of lawmakers, most of them affiliated with
Hamas. The Israeli army has also abducted Parliament
Speaker Abdul- Aziz Duweik and his deputy Mahmoud
Al-Ramahi, rendering the functioning of the PA government,
with its legislative and executive branches, near to
impossible.
Meanwhile, talks between Fatah and Hamas are being held in
an atmosphere of mutual distrust, given traditional
rivalry and dichotomies between the two groups. Hamas is
insisting that the composition of any unity government be
based on legislative elections results that put Hamas in a
clearly preferential position vis-a-vis Fatah (Hamas
controls nearly 70 seats of the 132 seats making up the
Palestinian Legislative Council). This means that the
prime minister will have to be a Hamas member, which the
US, Israel and probably the EU wouldn't accept.
Moreover, Hamas is conditioning its acceptance of a
national unity government on the termination by the United
States and the EU of all sanctions against it, and also
the release by Israel of all government officials,
including abducted ministers and lawmakers. Fatah, which
is undergoing internal power struggles of its own, rejects
these conditions, insisting on complete parity with Hamas,
irrespective of Hamas's parliamentary majority. "We want
to be equal partners, not just an addition to the
government," said Fatah parliamentary leader Azzam
Al-Ahmed.
Further, PA President Mahmoud Abbas is demanding that
Hamas states its explicit, rather than implicit,
recognition of Israel in hope that this would pave the way
for ending Western sanctions on the PA. Hamas, for
deep-seated religious reasons, cannot furnish an explicit
recognition of Israel, especially as long as Israel
refuses to recognise a Palestinian state on 100 per cent
of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza Strip and agrees
to allow Palestinian refugees to return home in what is
now Israel.
The Hamas leadership instead has reminded Abbas that it
has already consented to the so-called "Prisoners'
Document" which settles for the creation of a Palestinian
state on the territories occupied by Israel in 1967 and
that raising this issue again was unnecessary.
Notwithstanding, it is amply clear that the ball is not in
the Palestinian court. The Palestinians, after all, have
agreed to an open-ended truce with Israel, provided that
Israel desist their ongoing acts of terror and murder
against Palestinians. The PA government also agreed to
release the captured Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit, in
return for the release by Israel of Palestinian detainees
and hostages abducted by Israel as bargaining chips.
Israel, which enjoys unlimited American backing, is
refusing even to consider Palestinian demands.
Indeed, the Israeli government, bruised by the war with
Hizbullah, is now viewing the entire Palestinian front as
a secondary issue, especially with the Bush administration
showing no sign of even nudging Israel to implement the
now-moribund "roadmap plan for peace".
The EU, for its part, is continuing with its flimsy and
indecisive posture vis-a-vis the entire Palestinian issue
while influential Arab states are basking in their
apparent powerlessness, making do with issuing periodic
appeals to an unhearing international community to force
Israel to resolve the Palestinian issue in accordance with
international law.
It is highly unlikely that the overall situation will
undergo any dramatic or substantive change in the coming
few weeks, given Israel's recalcitrance, American
tendentious apathy and official Arab impotence to help the
Palestinians in any meaningful manner. American and
European preoccupations with the Iranian nuclear crisis
will also be translated into more negligence of the
Palestinian issue, which will ultimately generate more
volatility, extremism and violence.
Israel, of course, doesn't want to return to a pre- Oslo
situation when Israeli army officers ran Palestinian
affairs, from municipal functions to economic policies.
Neither, however, does it want a national unity government
that could oppose its slow strangling occupation with
greater vigor. Rather, Israel wants the pre-Hamas status
quo restored: a quisling Palestinian regime at Israel's
beck and call.
Israel thus faces a quandary. On the one hand, it insists,
with fanatical American backing, that the PA is stripped
of any authority, sovereignty and immunity. On the other,
it needs to avoid the chaos and anarchy that this very
hobbling of Palestinian self-rule creates and which could
force Israel to reassume de facto responsibility for all
government, consigning the Oslo Accords to the graveyard
of history.
**********************************************************
(18) Psychological warfare
By Serene Assir
Al-Ahram Weekly
24-30 August 2006
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2006/809/fr3.htm
Diplomacy has replaced mass destruction as the preferred
weapon to eliminate the Lebanese resistance, writes Serene
Assir from Beirut
The small town of Tiri, not far from the better known Bint
Jbeil and Maroun Al-Ras, is typical of many towns and
villages in southern Lebanon. It commands a bird's eye
view of the surrounding hills and villages. It was also
the scene of one of the fiercer standoffs between
Hizbullah fighters and invading Israeli troops. Not far
from the Israeli border, there is little in the way of
geography, the massive destruction caused by Israeli
bombing, or support for Hizbullah that distinguishes Tiri
from great swathes of the south.
Despite the destruction inflicted by 34 days of continuous
bombing it is hard to escape the pervasive sense of
Hizbullah's military victory in southern Lebanon.
"After what they suffered here, the violence, the
psychological torture, there is no way the Israelis will
dare reinvade," Ali, a native of the town, told Al-Ahram
Weekly.
"The Israelis may have had tanks, planes, helicopters, but
they lacked the Hizbullah fighters' self-reliance. The
minute they sensed danger they would squeak like chicks.
You saw the images of Israeli soldiers crying on
television -- you know what I'm talking about. They knew
they could no longer fight their war on the military front
and even hope to win."
Instead the war against Lebanon is now being fought on the
diplomatic front, with rumour and Israel's continued naval
blockade among the weapons. And if Israel, along with some
in Lebanon, claimed that the 1,183 mostly civilians who
perished in the bombardment were "collateral damage", the
new front makes no such distinctions. It is the whole of
Lebanon that is now being squeezed.
While the continued naval blockade is not yet hampering
the arrival of humanitarian aid, it is strangling the
Lebanese economy.
"Humanitarian assistance is only a small input and it
targets the most vulnerable. But overall, if the naval
blockade continues, then the whole of Lebanon becomes more
and more vulnerable," says UN Humanitarian Coordinator
David Shearer. Israel, though, according to statements
issued by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, has no plans
to end that blockade despite repeated calls by the
Lebanese government for it to do so.
Israeli breaches of United Nations' Security Council
Resolution 1701, met by and large with silence on the part
of the international community, appear designed to
intimidate the Lebanese public by suggesting that Israel
is willing and able to reignite hostilities.
"The situation could spin out of control very easily,"
said Khaled Mansour, the UN spokesman in Beirut, echoing
statements made by UN special envoy Terje Roed-Larsen
following Israel's raid in Baalbek earlier this week. UN
Secretary- General Kofi Annan condemned the raid as a
breach of the resolution but, typical of the international
community's chastisements of Israel in the past, the
condemnation was verbal and there was no suggestion of any
action being taken.
Israel's attempts to propagate the atmosphere of fear and
uncertainty in Lebanon are, argue some observers, a
strategy to underline who it is that really calls the
shots when it comes to regional diplomacy.
"The statements issued by Larsen act as a form of
psychological pressure," says Charles Harb, a social
psychologist at the American University in Beirut, adding
that at this point the potential for an actual
re-escalation of the brutal war is next-to-nil.
And fear there is, along with a yearning for greater
stability among the better off sectors of Lebanese
society.
"We are sick and tired of war," said Hani, a young
supporter of the 14 March bloc headed in parliament by
Saad Al-Hariri. "What we want is a long-term, sustainable
ceasefire with Israel."
Indeed, it already appears that overtures for even more
than that have been made.
Statements made by Olmert earlier in the week suggest the
Israeli government is seeking a peace settlement with
Lebanon, something which Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad
Al-Siniora has not rejected out of hand.
"The challenge is how to convert what happened in Lebanon
-- the calamity that was inflicted on Lebanon -- into an
opportunity to move toward real peace," Siniora told
reporters.
While peace talks between Arab countries and Israel have
historically been long and complicated, and have sometimes
ended in failure, Olmert's recent statements on the
current Lebanese government's position speak volumes. "If
the Lebanese government continues this way and if Prime
Minister Siniora continues with his efforts to bring about
a change in Lebanon, I have no doubt that negotiations
with Beirut will lead to formal relations between the two
states," he said.
It would be foolish, though, to take the unreality
characteristic of both Lebanese governance and Israel at
face value. Statements by UN officials, and even by US
President George W Bush, on the dangers of a power vacuum
in south Lebanon continue to ring true, and the situation
on the ground is completely different from that which a
humiliated Israel and an uncertain Lebanese government
want to imagine. Now, more than ever, the only force with
any presence or outreach among the population in the south
-- and elsewhere in Lebanon, though particularly among the
majority Shias -- is Hizbullah.