News, 01-4/1/02

 

These news items are pretty old but I'm just making up the week I

interrupted when I went off on my travels. Nothing very interesting

except to note that, probably thanks to the efforts of Mr Wolfowitz's

chums, commentators are beginning to notice that the hard evidence for

Iraqi involvement in 'terrorism' is still very slight (terrorism against

Iran of course doesn't count). Do not fear, though. In the following

week's articles which will soon appear on your computer screens, Laura

Mylroie comes to the rescue.

 

INCITEMENT TO HATRED

 

*  Europe's Armory For Terrorism [The hatred this time is directed

against Belarus, accused of helping the Iraqi government to defend itself

against the illegal - even by the slippy criteria of the United Nations -

US and British violation of its airspace. It seems, however, that Belarus

is impregnable because it is already subject to international embargo and

so it has nothing to lose. The author does not seem to have noticed that

this is a good argument against the use of sanctions]

*  The Unspoken Case for Toppling Saddam {The author dismisses the usual

arguments justifying war on Iraq (Iraq doesn't support much terrorism and

probably doesn't have much in the way of weapons of mass destruction)

then adds a third even more unconvincing argument, that the fall of Mr

Hussein will unleash a wave of secularism throughout the Arab and Muslim

world. Of course,  there is secularism and there is secularism. Readers

will be interested to learn that a 'moderate secular regime' has recently

come to power in Kabul]

*  Lieberman, McCain hear Turkish concerns about extending war to Iraq

[Counsels of moderation from Turkey, anxious to keep the Kurds in their

place]

*  Iraq question at centre of 'War of Bush's Ear' [Counsels of moderation

from Brent Scowcroft who, it seems, is behind Condoleezza Rice]

 

URL ONLY:

http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=B48EF3D7-733D-447F

A57BAD4AA84F752D&Title=Should%20the%20US%20Go%20After%20Saddam%20Hussein%3F

*  Should the US Go After Saddam Hussein?

by Motabar Shirwani

Voice of America, 1st January

Graham Fuller, senior consultant at Rand, and Henry Barkey, professor of

International Relations at Lehigh University, together fail to contribute

anything new or interesting to the discussion.

 

IRAQI/UN RELATIONS

 

*  Iraq accuses the UN of obstructing contracts at a cost of 6 billion

*  Weapons Inspections in Iraq [Letter from UNMOVIC defending itself

against the criticisms of Khidr Hamza and indicating that its potential

for keeping sanctions in place indefinitely is almost as great as

UNSCOM's]

*  Iraq accuses UN Compensation Commission of mismanagement [It seems

there have been several cases of payment to different countries being

given out twice]

*  Syria on Security Council complicates terrorism fight [Horror that a

country that might timidly on occasion express disagreement with US

policy (aka 'the international consensus') should have a seat in the

United Nations Security Council Permanent Five spectators' gallery]

 

IRAQI/MIDDLE EASTERN-ARAB WORLD RELATIONS

 

*  Egypt, Iraq discuss spheres of economic, trade cooperation

*  Turkish forces incur into Iraq to chase Kurdistani workers party

members

*  Syria opposes US strike on Iraq: Minister

*  Some 8 Arab journalists were killed because of their career in 2001

 

REMNANTS OF DECENCY

 

*  Ramsey Clark says Iraq war no answer [Includes a brief, rather

disapproving, account of some highlights in Ramsay Clark's career as a

peace activist]

*  Teacher to Address Sanctions on Iraq

 

OIL

 

*  Iraq hails oil producers cooperation, production cut

 

INSIDE IRAQ

 

*  Iraqi minister looks into water, electricity, storage of pollutants in

Ninawa

 

 

 

News, 5-11/1/02

 

Some more out of date news. In this week (last week), the 'Incitement to

Hatred' section is wilting. Still plenty of hatred of course, but

counsels of timidity are prevalent (the old hawk/dove dispute in

Washington has been replaced by a hawk/mouse debate). Perhaps Safire,

Krauthammer, Kristol et al are still away on their Christmas holidays. On

the ground, in Turkey, Iran and Iraq, there seems to be a general

assumption that war is inevitable. Note the two articles on Australia in

the 'International' and 'Refugees' sections. On the one hand they rush to

compound the misery of the Iraqi people by enforcing the blockade; on the

other hand, they compound the misery of Iraqis fleeing their misery, or

opposing S.Hussein, by setting up concentration camps for refugees. Note

also the apparent increase in holds (up to $5 billion, according to Benon

Sevan) ‚ clearly a crude attempt to make 'smart sanctions' look more

attractive.

 

INCITEMENT TO HATRED

 

*  No, a U.S. Attack on Iraq Would Do More Harm Than Good [Leon Fuerth,

former adviser to Al Gore, argues that al-Qaida is sufficiently complex

to require all US attention in the near future]

*  Haig: Syria should be next target [Alexander Haig, ex-NATO Supreme

Commander. Some interesting thoughts, as, for example, that the presence

of 70,000 US troops in Germany is 'the bona fide of our economic success

... it keeps European markets open to us'. Also he doesn't seem to notice

the contradiction between his approach towards China ('interventionism

usually aggravates the improvement in human rights and sets things back')

and his approach towards Iraq, not to mention Syria]

*  We must attack Iraq and free its people [Geraldine Brooks' article in

The Guardian]

*  U.S. Hawk Hints Iraq Won't Be Next Target [Paul Wolfowitz sounding

like a 'dove'. Though in the present climate the word 'dove' has to

signify those who, like Colin Powell, only want to bomb the very easiest

of targets].

*  Stalling in Somalia? [Washington Times panics as the hairlines seem to

shift away from Iraq. In their desperation to try to impicate Iraq in the

war against terrorism they've discovered the Iranian Mujaheddin al-Khalq.

But really their strongest argument amounts to this: 'Iraq has shown no

sign of opposing terrorism'. And this despite all their efforts against

the Iranian backed Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution!]

*  Inspectors to Iraq? It's not that simple [Charles Duelfer, UNSCOM's

Deputy Chairman, says weapons inspections and the UN are no use because

they allow the regime to continue to exist, thus confirming that his role

as 'UN weapons inspector' was merely to prolong sanctions until such a

time as the regime might (somehow) fall.]

*  A smarter way of dealing with Saddam [The 'smarter way' consists of

simply continuing as before ‚ slow death by starvation, disease and

hopelesssness. Almost leaves one preferring the advocates of quick death

by blowing peoples' bodies to bits.]

 

IRAQI/UN RELATIONS

 

*  US criticised over Iraq relief contracts [by the UN Iraq Programme.

Benon Sevan is about to go to Iraq]

*  UN official sceptical of [Sanctions] Council committee [short extract

adding some figures to the previous article]

*  Iraq steps up protest on UN oil pricing

*  Diplomats: U.S. Quiet on Iraq Inspections

 

IRAQI OPPOSITION

 

*  Iranian official confers with Iraqi opposition [Iran seemingly anxious

to establish links with a wide range of opposition groups, not just the

Shi'i Islamist movement]

*  U.S. Seeks to Restore Funds to Iraqi Group [The title is of course

misleading]

*  Iraqi opposition links funding row to US policy differences [It seems

the State Department want the INC to build a strong presence inside Iraq

before they will give them any money to build a strong presence inside

Iraq. Catch 22?]

*  8 people executed, says Iraqi Oppn [Good to be reminded of the

existence of the Iraqi Communist Party, presumably the only substantial

opposition movement that isn't in anyone's pay (one assumes the Russians

aren't paying them)]

 

 

AND, IN NEWS, 5-11/1/02 (2)

 

IRAQI/INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

 

*  Iraqi consultant sounds double warning on Bula's oil ambitions [Irish

oil company. The Iraqi consultant is Riad el Taher, founder of Friendship

across Frontiers]

*  Diggers run Iraqi blockade [Plucky Australia cheerfully assumes its

share of the white man's burden]

*  Troop deployment not a sign of anti-Iraq plan: German minister [though

deploying chemical warfare specialists in Kuwait doesn't sound like part

of a pro-Iraq plan]

*  Iraq may allow private sector to handle shipment: Wheat exports [to

Pakistan]

 

IRAQI/MIDDLE EASTERN-ARAB WORLD RELATIONS

 

*  Diesel fuel transport operations resumed from north Iraq to Turkey

*  Turkish security belt in north Iraq [A very short article but a

sinister one to do with Turkish moves to prevent a flood of refugees into

Turkey in the event of a US attack]

*  Daily analyzes hidden part of Iraq in terrorism [Possibly significant

article from the Iranian Press Agency Irna saying that Iran won't support

Iraq in its efforts to prevent a US attack]

*  Iraqi revealed as owner of weapons ship

*  Iraq decries Israeli 'piracy'

*  Trial of Iraqi accused of smuggling arms to Palestinians opens in

Amman

*  Arab lawyers condemn American threats against Iraq

 

REMNANTS OF DECENCY

 

*  This is no way to run a foreign policy [by Gavin Esler. I'm not quite

sure it deserves the 'remnants of decency' tag but it does make some

sharp points about simplistic good/evil politics. It also includes the

following astonishing paragraph about the turkey shoot which ended the

war: 'I was in Washington at the time, and the war lay heavily on the

heart of Bush senior, who had a firm and decent religious faith. Bush

senior thought deeply about the morality of sending men into battle to

kill or be killed, and he did not want any needless killing of Iraqi

soldiers.']

 

MILITARY MATTERS

 

*  US fears Iraq radar can see stealth plane [Strange that an arms

company able to develop something so very desirable as a means of

detecting stealth bombers should go bankrupt. Is there a story there?

Felicity?]

*  US may face missile threat from N Korea, Iraq by 2015 [Summary of the

National Intelligence Estimate. Note the surprising last sentence: '"All

agencies agree that Iraq could test different ICBM concepts before 2015

if UN prohibitions were eliminated in the next few years," it said,

adding "most agencies, however, believe it is unlikely to do so, even if

the prohibitions were eliminated."'

 

INSIDE IRAQ

 

*  Fallen angel's role key in secret ritual [Interesting Kurdish

religious minority apparently treated better now than it was under

previous administrations. Finds solidarity with fellow Iraqis in the

army: 'We ... fight the enemy together']

*  New gas field discovery in Iraq

*  Saddam says attacks on Iraq will fail [Short extract which could be

interpreted as giving support to Al-Qaida, and website address for whole

text, for enthusiasts]

*  Blocked Contracts Hinder Breeding, Farming, FAO Official Says

*  Iraq's production capacity to rise-MEES

 

REFUGEES

 

*  The 'Crime' of Being a Young Refugee [On the conditions in the

concentration camps of Australia. Its a long article and I cut two

passages but the whole thing is worth reading.]

*  Hopes grow of a mercy visa for Iraqi mother of sea tragedy girls  

 

 

 

News, 12-19/1/02

 

This brings us back up to date. The hawks make a comeback this week led

by H.Kissinger and Sen. J.Lieberman. But they're still not quite up to

where they were a few weeks ago when they thought they had a good case

for an Iraqi/al-Qaida link. Nonetheless the Turks and the Iraqis are

still plainly worried. It is surely worth noting that in all the

speculation about whom the US is going to attack next, no-one seems to be

suggesting that there is a proper procedure for going to war laid down in

the UN charter to which the United States is supposed to be a signatory.

The US is being allowed a margin of freedom in this domain which, if it

was claimed by any other country in the world (if, for example, the UK

had claimed the right to bomb Dublin in the wake of the Brighton Hotel

bombing) would immediately provoke international outrage, not least from

the US. For a wonderful expression of American self delusion see the

article 'America the mighty'. For a rare intelligent assessment of US

interests with regard to Iraq, see 'No, to answer Iraqi question'.

 

INCITEMENT TO HATRED

 

*  Phase II and Iraq [by Henry Kissinger. The old mass murderer is at it

again ‚ inter alia expressing regret that he did not manage to kill

sufficient numbers of people in Vietnam (he modestly declines to mention

his triumphs in Cambodia and Laos). However, his 'international

consulting firm', Kissinger Associates, needs to shake up its research

team a bit. It has told him that there is a Kurdish minority, a Shia

minority and a Sunni majority in Iraq. In fact, the Sunnis only have a

majority if the Kurds are counted as Sunnis (though they tend to be

rather eccentric Sunni, inclined to Sufism). The basic argument is that

removing S.Hussein would be such a spectacular piece of terror that

everyone would fall trembling into line. He may be right.]

*  America the mighty: The U.S. can't lose by taking on Saddam ['The

American pattern in war is clear. We go there. We kill the bad guys. We

hand out food and blankets and medicine. Then we go home ... The

civilized in every nation should cheer whenever our troops take the

field. But envy rules in hearts where gratitude should reign.']

*  A blind spot called Iraq [Audacious argument based on new book by

Laurie Mylroie, that the 'loose network of Muslim extremists', including

Al-Qaida, is really just a cover for the activities of S.Hussein]

*  U.S. seeks al Qaeda link to Iraq [but if any new evidence has been

found it hasn't been revealed to the Washington Times]

*  Lieberman: Beware Iraq ['the unique threat to American security by

Saddam Hussein's regime is so real, so grave and so imminent that even if

no other nation were to stand with us, we must be prepared to act alone'.

All of which just goes to show that immeasurable wealth and unlimited

military superiority do not buy peace of mind and a sense of security.]

*  Will George jnr go the same way as his father? [Argues the quite

credible case that the US can't afford to and don't want to overthrow

Saddam because it would only strengthen Syria and Iran. Keith Suter

thinks the US government really wanted to find a means to rehabilitate

Saddam but Saddam wouldn't play ball. I think they wanted to deal with a

close associate who would replace him but resemble him closely - though

preferably not Uday or Qusay (someone resembling the grotesque array of

defectors that keep popping up every so often). This forlorn hope still

seems to live on in the State department]

*  No, to answer Iraqi question [Sensible article giving good, right wing

American reasons for seeking a modus vivendi with Saddam Hussein (the

author, Doug Bandow, is a fellow of the Cato Institute and former

assistant to R.Reagan. Perhaps he's still living in the 1980s). Makes the

unusual point that 'Baghdad is brutal, but no more so than, say, Syria.

Iraq persecutes its minority populations, but then, Turkey is little more

kind to its Kurds... ' Was it published anywhere other than in the Japan

Times?]

 

 

AND, IN NEWS, 12-19/1/02 (2)

 

IRAQI/MIDDLE EAST/ARAB WORLD RELATIONS

 

*  Iraqi Minister in Iran for Talks - Radio

*  Iraqi FM: Iraq wants full scale relations with Iran

*  Iraqi FM to visit Bahrain on Sunday: Report

*  Iraqi FM meets Bahrain's emir

*  Iraq Launches Diplomatic Initiative With Saudi Arabia, Kuwait [in

visit to Bahrain]

*  Turkey Worries Iraq Is Next on U.S. List of Targets

*  Turkish border measures to deter 'Iraq, Iranian missiles' [Building of

a US 'missile shield' in a Southern - presumably Kurdish - province of

Turkey]

*  Barzani and the Kurdish state [Turks accuse Barzani of behaving as if

there is a Kurdish state in northern Iraq]

*  Jordanian, Iraqi foreign ministers meet in Amman

*  Turkish Leader Softens on Iraq [Includes the following interesting

angle on the situation of the Kurds in Northern Iraq: Turkish journalist,

Derya 'Sazak said the Turks are floating the idea that alongside the

autonomous Kurdish region, an autonomous area for Iraq's Turkmen minority

should be created. Turkey would want the oil-rich area of Kirkuk to be

under control of the Turkmen, with whom Turkey has close ties.']

*  Dollar-chase for Turkey ['Ecevit will try to get relief for military

debts, support for more IMF help']

*  Ecevit opposes strikes on Iraq

*  Moroccan business delegation explores investment opportunities in Iraq

*  Kuwaiti- Sudanese parliamentary agreement to strengthen bilateral

cooperation [This rapprochement between the best behaved Muslim state and

the international pariah seems less surprising in the light of the

remarkable news of a US brokered truce between the two sides of the

Sudanese civil war.]

*  Saudis may ask US military to leave: Report

*  Sources say Saudis want U.S. military presence ended [Extracts giving

some details missing from the preceding article. Including this: 'The two

governments never signed an agreement about their presence in the

country.']

 

IRAQI NATIONAL DEFENCE

 

*  U.N. inspectors at arm's length [Account of Hans Blix and UMNMOVIC]

*  IAEA team to visit Iraq, inspect nuclear facilities

*  Saddam has super-gun, report says

*  Iraq At It Again? [CBS news at it again. We've had this story before

('Iraqi defector says he renovated secret weapons labs' in News,

13-22/12/01) - defector Adnan Ihsan al-Haideri who claims to have worked

on heavily protected, sealed chambers. Now, why would a country that is

constantly under threat of  unimaginably terrible attack from the most

powerful country in all human history want heavily protected sealed

chambers?]

 

IRAQI/INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

 

*  Iraq to send ambassador to Thailand [This article says Thailand sent

an ambassador to Iraq early last year]

*  Iraq, Thailand exchange ambassadors [This one says Thailand will send

an ambassador to Iraq this year]

*  Australia commits, and the navy bears the burden [Michael O'Connor,

executive director of the 'Australia Defence Association', argues that

imposing 'a new form of colonial rule' in very distant parts of the world

is 'by any measure ... not an illegitimate use of the right of national

self defense' and if Australians want to get in on the act they had

better spend more on their - er, um - 'defence' forces. We learn some

interesting things, as for example, that three of Australia's nine

frigates are devoted to 'catching asylum seekers', that new form of

international criminal. We get a mention too, as ' dupes in the West who

regurgitate his [S.Hussein's] claims of starvation and greatly increased

infant mortality. Iraq is perfectly capable of providing adequate

nutrition and health care provided it diverts money away from its

military and regime protection programs.' So it seems that Iraq, unlike

Australia, doesn't need a self defence capacity. Who, after all, is

threatening it? What sort of threat is it facing from hordes of starving

and desperate asylum seekers?]

*  Russia Is Top Iraqi Importer [Extract which indicates that the US is

very blatantly using its power to impose 'holds' on goods going into Iraq

as a means of exercising political pressure on Russia]

*  Zhirinovsky Cleans Up His Act, Loves America

*  Oil smugglers keep cash flowing back to Saddam

*  Baghdad urges Moscow to foil US plans

*  Russia to press Iraq for inspections

*  Russia introduces new export mechanism [Puzzling item, because the

'new' mechanism for exports to Iraq seems to correspond to what one

assumed was Russia's 'legal' obligation under the terms of the UN

embargo]

 

 

AND, IN NEWS, 12-19/1/02 (3)

IRAQI/UN RELATIONS

 

*  Sanction deal benefits only UN: Iraq

 

REMNANTS OF DECENCY

 

*  The land of the free becomes the home of the hypocrite

*  Iraq ‚ 11 years on [by Dr Omar Al Taher in the Jordan Times. This

article has been discussed at some length in the discussion list. I have

left out the account of Iraqi suffering to concentrate attention on the

political analysis. Which includes this, the key point that needs to be

made about the weapons inspections: 'The Iraqi leadership is aware that

if all its weaponry (from biological weapons to even hand grenades) are

accounted for and decommissioned, the sanctions are there to stay. So,

why cooperate?'. The Iraqi government co-operated for seven years to an

extent far beyond what anyone could reasonably have expected. Then one

day they realised that there was no point and who, watching the

subsequent behaviour of such as R.Butler and C.Duelfer could blame them?

One statement in the article now seems a bit anachronistic: 'After all,

war is governed by the Geneva Convention'. That was before the US

discovered the category of 'unlawful combatant.']

 

REFUGEES

 

*  Judge Denies Young Iraqi's Bid to Join Family [Case of Iraqi draft

dodger in US being sent back to join the Iraqi army. His argument that he

would be killed if he went back was rejected. Is this a sign that the US

doesn't intend to wage war on Iraq after all? (of course, had he been a

mass murderer, a specialist in the weaponisation of anthrax or a close

henchman of Mr Hussein's then he would have been a 'defector' and a

precious jewel in the crown of Messrs Duelfer, Woolsey et al)]

 

INSIDE IRAQ

 

*  Iraqi poll names bin Laden man of year

*  Arabs in Iraq Rally for Palestinians

*  Iraqi Oil Industry In 2002: A Turning Point [This may not really

belong in the news items (it was summarised in an article in last weeks

mailing - 5-11/1/02 (2), under 'Inside Iraq') but it appears to be a good

scholarly account of the present state of the Iraqi oil industry and of

the steady increase of its productive capacity (contrasting with recent

reports of a sharp fall in oil sales). One curious detail. The capacity

of the northern oilfield near Kirkuk appears to be declining but this is

being concealed by piping large quantities of southern oil up North.

Why?]

*  Iraq won't be caught off guard, Saddam says

 

NEW WORLD ORDER

 

*  Turkey Offers To Lead Peacekeepers

*  CIA memoir tells all [Account of book 'See No Evil' by Robert Baer

about the CIA which apparently includes what ought to be an interesting

account of the failed CIA operation in Northern Iraq in 1996. Note that

Martin Walker expresses astonished disgust that Robert Baer should have

been criticised for wanting to assassinate President Hussein. He should

have a word with Senator Lieberman, who would tell him that the attempt

to assassinate a President is 'the worst kind of terrorism' (see article

on Lieberman in Incitement to Hatred above. Of course Lieberman has a

different president in mind ...)]

*  War, part two [Extract, making the obvious point that US reliance on

proxies to do their fighting for them will often mean - and has often

meant - reliance on unpleasant proxies]

*  Central Asian nations choose their sides [Some small indications of

Russian anxiety about the possibility of a massive US military buildup on

their southern flank]

 

 

 

News, 19-26/1/02

 

The main development is that the air strikes have resumed after a pause

since November. And aggressively ‚ three strikes in the week. One of the

articles in the 'Incitement' section ('Turkish security circles and

Iraq', but its a piece of BBC gossip) suggests that this is part of a

strategy of provocations leading up to a final war. There are other

indications that a decision has been made to go to war, but they may just

be wishful thinking on the part of the authors. From the US point of

view, S.Hussein is under control whereas the likely beneficiaries of his

overthrow - Syria and Iran ‚ may not be. We can assume that the US

establishment knows that the 'weapons of mass destruction' aren't likely

to amount to very much despite the absurd rhetoric that abounds at the

present time. And that they probably won't amount to anything at all

unless Mr Hussein really has his back to the wall. So the only serious

reason they could have for going to war is that it is the only way (short

of restoring full control over the Iraqi economy into the hands of the

Iraqi government) of ending the murderous policy of sanctions. This

should be borne in mind. Those in the US and British establishments who

are arguing against military intervention are arguing for the indefinite

prolongation of sanctions and the continued steady death by starvation

and preventable disease of hundreds of thousands of people.

 

INCITEMENT TO HATRED

 

*  Complexities of Islamic tolerance [Conor Cruise O'Brien, reviewing a

book on the status of Christians and Jews under Islam, thinks 'the United

States and Israel' are going to 'launch a joint attack on Saddam

Hussein's Iraq' and that on the whole it'll all be all right and the

Arabs won't really mind. In passing he gives a very interesting quotation

from 'Diodoros, the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Palestine and Jordan', by

whom he presumably means Diodoros, Patriarch of Jerusalem.

*  Tribal Lessons for Dealing With Saudis and Iraqis [The central idea of

understanding these countries in terms of networks of tribal loyalties

rather than as 'people' or 'rulers' is important, but the article in the

end doesn't get anywhere.]

*  Secret plan to topple Saddam [Summary of an article in Newsweek which

suggests that there will be an attack on Iraq within six months. But

nothing is given that we don't already know]

*  Turkish security circles and Iraq

*  Bush Holding Off on Iraq Decision

*  Don't fumble on Iraq [Jerusalem Post getting nervous that the US

mightn't seize the time to attack Iraq but instead go running off after

Somalia and Philippines and other places in the world that are of no

earthly use for the security of Israel. Madeleine Albright is quoted as

saying recently that 'It is hard to see that deposing Saddam] is

feasible.' The article states: 'When the UN inspectors left Iraq, they

believed that Saddam had enough VX precursors to produce 200 tons of the

poison, and had 41 sites capable of doing so in a matter of weeks.' Does

anyone else remember that? or does it perhaps just appear in R.Butler's

book?

*  Rhetoric Fails to Budge Policy on Iraq [Extracts. The core of the

article is a complaint that the US isn't supporting any terrorist (they

prefer the word 'lethal', perhaps because it sounds a bit like 'legal')

activity inside Iraq. It goes on to give details about the auditing

complaints against the INC. It also mentions a letter to Bush by 'former

senior military and intelligence officials' arguing against a war on

Iraq]

 

URLs ONLY:

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_

ype1&c=Article&cid=1011481303993&call_page=TS_World&call_pageid=968332188854&ca

l_pagepath=News/World&col=968350060724

*  THE TROUBLE WITH SADDAM

by Olivia Ward

Toronto Star, 20th January

Long rambling article which reads like a not very competent cut and paste

compilation of all the articles that have been written recently for and

against the INC, and on the evidence for Iraqi involvement in Sept 11.

Records the Mohammad Atta/al-Ani  meeting in Prague as if it is an

established fact, and Milos Zeman's statement that they discussed

attacking Radio Free Europe without mentioning that he later withdrew

this as a mere  speculation.

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi

0201210171jan21.story?coll=chi%2Dnewsnationworld%2Dhed

*  U.S. SPLIT ON EXILES' ROLE VS. HUSSEIN

by Howard Witt

Chicago Tribune, 21st January

Another standard account of the INC except that the description of

anonymous, seedy premises in Knightsbridge here becomes a description of

anonymous, seedy premises 'in the shadow of the Capitol' in Washington.

 

MILITARY MATTERS

 

*  US can't halt Arabs buying arms: Iraq [though one doubts if the Iraqi

paper, Ath-Thawra really asserted in so many words a right to acquire

'weapons of mass destruction' as the article claims.]

*  Citing 'hostile Iraqi threats,' U.S. strikes anti-aircraft site [First

strike]

*  Coalition Forces Strike Iraqi Site, U.S. Says

*  Coalition Warplanes Bomb Iraq Site [Second strike]

*  U.S. warns Baghdad as jets bomb again [Third strike. Note the

statement - from Reuters - that 'it (Iraq) forced UN inspectors to leave'

and later, the more slippery formula 'inspectors had to abandon the

country in 1998'.]

*  Iraq says U.S. planes attacking sites in the south for 3 days [Extract

specifying where the latest attack took place]

*  Nuclear team [IAEA] heads for Baghdad

 

OIL FOR FOOD

 

*  Iraq got only half of medicines it needs in the frame of oil-for-food

program

*  UK accused of impeding Iraqi oil programme [The emphasis here is on

the effect of the US/British imposed pricing policy on Iraqi oil sales.]

*  Oil sales rise sharply, below average [Here the emphasis is on those

holds that sabotage the infrastructure of the oil industry]

*  'Oil-for-food' [Benon Sevan] chief in Iraqi Kurdistan [Although it

seems fairly obvious, I think this is the first time I've seen it said in

so many words that, whereas 1,854 contracts are on hold for Southern and

Central Iraq, only two are on hold for the Kurdish Autonomous Zone. Might

this not have something to do with the perceived superiority of the KAZ's

performance under Oil for Food?]

 

IRAQIS OUTSIDE IRAQ

 

*  Bank discriminated in closing account, Iraq-born man says [Closure of

an account used by Iraqis to wire money to relatives in Iraq. The bank

says it wasn't done on racial grounds, ie the fact that Hussain Alshafei

is an Iraqi had nothing to do with it. Um.]

 

AND, IN NEWS, 19-26/1/02 (2)

 

IRAQI/MIDDLE EASTERN-ARAB WORLD RELATIONS

 

*  Kuwaiti min describes ties with Tehran as rapidly expanding

*  Iraq: Iran to free 697 Iraqi prisoners of war

*  Iraqi call for exchange of visits with Kuwait

*  Saudis and Americans may adjust US presence

*  A chill wind from Teheran [Long Jerusalem Post discussion of

Iran-Palestine-Israel relations, expressing apprehension about an

Iranian/Arafat rapprochement. Only extracts given here, mainly on Iran's

nuclear potential. A worry for Israel. If they succeed in persuading

their protector to go after Iraq, the beneficiary may prove to be Iran.

Who may turn out to be worse than Iraq.]

*  Iraq calls on Annan to unblock oil contracts, seeks Tunisia deal

*  Iraq to sign free trade agreements with three Arab states in the first

quarter of 2002

*  First Iraqi prisoners go home [As is always the case these stories

concern prisoners being returned to Iraq from Iran, never the other way

round (Iraq denies that it has prisoners). One wonders what, apart from

the dead, the Iranians are getting in exchange]

*  Geostrategic gambit nets Turkey little [Some small satisfaction to be

had in the fact that all Turkey's twisting and bowing and scraping in the

courts of the mighty isn't doing her any good. For years Turkey has been

on the verge of EU membership, expected to follow all the fashions of EU

governments' policy. Now, ending state control over banking, transport

and communications have become the necessary conditions of entry. They

will do all that and the chances are they still won't be let in. If they

had any sense of dignity, they'd tell us to take a running jump and form

an alliance with their fellow Muslims ...]

*  Mousa says he will visit the US on January 30th

*  Arab League Chief Visits Kuwait

*  Iran Frees Hundreds of Iraqi Prisoners of War

*  Direct Iran-Syria air link via Iraq to start soon: Mazaheri

*  Air flights to be resumed shortly between Iraq, Iran [extract]

*  Arab League chief: A strike against Iraq unacceptable

*  Arab League Comments on Iraq Draw Criticism [from an Egyptian

commentator who says Moussa is merely reflecting what the Arab people

think, not what the people that count - the rulers - think]

*  Oil accord signed [with Tunisia]

*  The Arab view: The way Syria sees it [Extract on Iraqi/Syrian

relations. The article, published in the Jerusalem Post, seems to come

from a journal published in the United Arab Emirates but is written by

someone with an Anglo Saxon name.]

*  US anxiety drives Saddam to seek new Arab allies [Financial Times

account of recent Iraqi diplomatic initiatives, placing them in the

context of the forthcoming Arab League summit.]

*  Iraqi foreign minister arrives in Tehran

 

URL ONLY:

http://atimes.com/front/DA26Aa03.html

*  Syria turns to Iraq in moment of need

by George Baghdadi

Asia Times (from Inter Press Service), 26th January

Makes much the same points about Syria/Iraqi relations as 'The way Syria

sees it' above.

 

IRAQI/INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

 

*  India to build railway network for Iraq

*  Iraq to seek Russian support over UN sanctions [Aziz visiting Moscow

and China]

*  Russia Warns U.S. Against Military Strike on Iraq

*  Iraq defies US 'smart sanctions'

 

REMNANTS OF DECENCY

 

*  Troublesome priest? [The Archbishop of Wales, Dr Rowan Williams, who

was near the twin towers on Sept 11. He compares what he felt then to

what people in Baghdad and elsewhere must have felt when the bombs were

falling on them.]

*  46 Busted in Iraq Protest

 

NEW WORLD ORDER

 

*  Clinton: U.S. policies not to blame for terror by Muslim radicals

[Debate on 'America and Islam' organised by W.Clinton's own presidential

foundation]

*  Pipelineistan, Part 2: The games nations play [I don't know what this

is (Part 1 of Part 2 of what appears to be a speech) but its a splendid

bird's eye view of the geopolitics of oil, centring on Central Asia, but

taking in China and Kosovo. Its here because I like it, not because it

has much to do with Iraq, but it does state confidently that 'Saddam will

not be attacked, because Saddam is the ultimate reason for American

military bases in the Gulf - a splendid affair because on top of it all

it is a free ride, the expenses being paid by the ultra flush sheikdoms.'

And this is a man who seems to know what he's talking about.]

 

 

 

News, 26/1-2/2/02 (1)

Most obvious news item this week, Bush's State of the Union speech. The

full text was recently posted to the list and it reads to me more like a

tightening of sanctions than a call to war. It called for preventing the

countries of the 'axis of evil' from having access to weapons rather than

for their overthrow. Since there is presumably no intention of going to

war against Iran and North Korea, lumping them together with Iraq seems

to indicate a withdrawal from the idea of war. And we note also that Bush

intends to go after Hamas and Hezbollah in 'remote jungles' rather than

in Palestine and Lebanon.

 

But the flurry of Iraqi diplomatic activity shows that they are,

understandably, worried. It includes two developments that might be

significant - allowing the UN human rights inspector into Iraq, and

(though this may not be the first time they've promised it) restraining

the Iranian Mujaheedin al-Khalq.

 

The increasing tension between the US and Saudi Arabia is a hopeful sign.

The one pleasing thing about Sept 11 and its aftermath has been the

revelation that Saudi Arabia is something other than a country of

parasitic libertines hiding under a mask of hypocritical religiosity.

There is a civil society with a mind other than that of its government

and with some sort of commitment to its professed ideals. I've always

seen Saudi Arabia as the one country which has the possibility of

resolving the Iraqi problem if they would free themselves from dependence

on the US. So I've given a special section to articles on this

development even though they're not, for the most part, immediately

relevant to Iraq.

 

Don't miss (under International Relations) the little item 'Mail to Iraq

cleared.'  

 

INCITEMENT TO HATRED

 

*  President: Spend more to win war on terrorism

*  U.S. attack on Iraq is not the way to go [Account of a 'debate'

between Richard Perle, advocating immediate unconditional war on Iraq,

and Al Gore policy adviser Leon Fuerth advocating continued torture and

murder by starvation and disease. The general drift is that there is

something called 'progress' which the US wants to see and that the Iraqis

(and North Koreans) constitute an obstacle to it. The conclusion, as

given in the title - that it would be better to help both Iraqis and

North Koreans rebuild their economy - comes as a surprise.]

*  Bush targets 'axis of evil'

*  No Action Just Yet on Baghdad, U.S. Says

*  Good Economic News at World Forum [Advice against military action

given at the World Economic Forum.]

*  Bush's Comments Prompt Criticism [Some details of the Iranian and

Korean response to Bush's speech. Iran pulls out of the World Economic

Forum. South Korea is very unhappy with the attack on North Korea (you'd

think these people don't WANT to be liberated)]

*  Tactics may shift vs. other foes [States Iraq's continued WMD

programme as if it is an established fact (I have no reason to doubt it

but the 'evidence' that has been produced so far in news items is

paltry). The article also indicates that this possibility - Iraq's

supposed possession of WMD - is a strong argument against going to war,

which is surely a good argument for suggesting that Iraq OUGHT to be

developing WMD. Needless to say, the WMD capacity of other countries

(USA, Britain, France, Germany, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Pakistan,

India, China) isn't mentioned. Interesting prospect of heavy sanctions

(rather than war) being imposed on Iran - bad news for those of us with a

taste for pistachios. And some defence of North Korea. Though surely

North Korea has just been mentioned for the sake of having a non-Islamic

enemy. Funny how Burma/Myanmar never seems to get a mention these days]

*  It's Time to Pin Target On Saddam [New York Daily News tell us that

the Arab world really want a war on Saddam 'no matter what they say

publicly.' Quote of the week: 'while the U.S. presumably could continue

to live with rogue states, as it has for decades, it can't live with

evil'.

*  Give war a chance [Asia Times article editorial quoting Bush on the

values he seeks to defend and broadly agreeing with him, but pointing out

that logically the policy leads to a Trotsky-like state of 'permanent

revolution.']

*  No, This Isn't the Way to Change Regimes in Iran and Iraq

*  The Gun Is on the Table, and Iraqis Await Their Liberators [Given that

Mr Safire wants an Afghan 'solution' to the problems of Iraq, why does he

advocate '70,000 Kurdish fighters in Northern Iraq and a lesser Shi'ite

force' - given that the Shi'ites constitute the majority in Iraq? Why,

its because the main Shi'ite fighting force, and the only army actually

at work in Iraq (the only real equivalent of the Northern Alliance) is

the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution, backed by Iran, which is

next after Iraq on Mr Safire's list of target nations.)

*  US-Iraq [A brief statement of the amorality of US foreign policy,

contrasting the response to the invasion of Kuwait with the approval of

Indonesia's invasion of East Timor]

*  Albright blasts Bush for "axis of evil" tag [Have we really reached

the stage at which Madeleine Albright begins to look like a moderate! But

one can understand her annoyance that the only good thing she ever did in

her life (the rapprochement with North Korea) should be so casually

thrown in the dustbin by her successors. And give her credit. She has

broken the magic spell in which NO prominent American politician dares to

utter a cheap against Bush's foreign policy notions.]

 

URL ONLY:

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,198186,00.html

*  Why Saddam Remains a Tough Target

by TONY KARON

Time, 30th January

Some reasons for hesitation. I didn't see anything here we haven't seen

before.

 

 

AND, IN NEWS, 26/1-2/2/02 (2)

 

MILITARY MATTERS

 

*  Iraqi forces intercepted British, American warplanes formations

*  Iraq: The Phantom Threat [Scott Ritter pores scorn on the string of

defectors who provide the 'information' Wolfowitz, Woolsey and Perle are

so anxious to hear]

*  Iraq Co-Operated with Nuclear Inspection -- IAEA

 

SAUDI/US RELATIONS

 

*  America Goes Into the Energy Business With the Former Evil Empire

[This should really have been in last week's news. It is an intriguing

argument that the US is in the process of transferring its affections

away from Saudi Arabia, as a petrol producer, towards Russia, and that

this will bring about a new friendly relationship with Iraq, 'Saddam or

no Saddam'.]

*  Washington-Riyadh chill intensifies [Includes, as an interesting

passing remark, that Saudi Arabia 'was a close ally during the Cold War,

providing hundreds of millions of dollars to US-supported insurgents from

Angola to Afghanistan, to Nicaragua.' It seems that the Saudis have been

into the business of bankrolling 'terrorism;' for a very long time, and

that the US owes a lot to them. What interest did the Saudis have in

Nicaragua?]

*  Why We Need Ties With Saudis [Argument for staying in Saudi Arabia

despite the Saudi lack of enthusiasm]

*  Farewell, Saudi Arabia [Argument for pulling out. Saudi foot-dragging

has become intolerable. The Saudi authorities 'even resisted for a time

so sensible and modest a request as to give to American immigration and

law enforcement authorities basic biographical data about Saudis who

board the national airlines' flights to the U.S.' Does this mean Ireland

should have provided basic data on its citizens boarding Aer Lingus

flights to Britain during the worst of the troubles???]

*  Saudis are saying that 100 of their nationals are among those who are

detained by the US

*  Saudi ministry of the interior continues receiving inquiries about

Saudis arrested in USA

*  Crown Prince Abdullah address Saudi attitude towards US policy [Quite

a pleasingly tough statement in contrast to his Jordanian namesake below]

 

IRAQI/MIDDLE EASTERN-ARAB WORLD RELATIONS

 

*  Iraqi refugees to return home voluntarily [from Iran]

*  Syria Accused of Violating Sanctions [The article also mentions the

amount of oil that is being smuggled into Turkey without explaining why

it is Syria, not Turkey, that is under attack. Once again this has a

Britain-does-the-jobs-the-US-doesn't-want-to-touch feel about it]

*  Roundup: Iran, Iraq Edge Closer Before U.S. Shifts Anti-Terrorism

Battlefield

*  Iraq to Permit Direct Flights for Iranian Pilgrims

*  Tehran's Game [Righteous indignation from Time Magazine that Iran

might be interfering in Afghanistan by giving aid to its allies in the

country. Of course America would never think of doing such a thing. But

with two and a half million Afghan refugees in Iran the Iranians could be

said to have a legitimate interest in the matter]

*  Iraq, Iran agreement to halt Mujahidee Khalq activities

*  Iraq to Honor Female Bomber

*  Jordan's King Backs Bush on Iran, Iraq [Most depressing item of the

week. Abdullah of Jordan, beside Bush, says: "It is very obvious that

there are those on the side of good and those on the side of bad ...

There's some countries in the middle that haven't made up their mind....

And those countries better make up their minds pretty quickly."  No

indication that he might have a different idea of what constitutes 'good'

and 'bad' than Mr Bush. The article repeats the old lie that, during the

Gulf Massacre, 'Jordan sided with Iraq'. Jordan, like the Yemen,

condemned the invasion of Kuwait but attempted to do what the UN Charter

obliges everyone to do ‚ find a settlement through negotiation. Its

efforts were systematically sabotaged by the US and it was severely

punished economically afterwards by the other Gulf powers. Thenceforth

Abdullah's father behaved himself, co-operated with the embargo, kept his

mouth shut and all sorts of lofty people turned up to pay him homage at

his funeral.]

 

URLs ONLY:

http://www.irna.com/newshtm/eng/08103109.htm

*  Iranian president meets Iraqi foreign minister

Irna, 28th January.

Iraqi Foreign Minister Naji Sabri's visit to Iran. Just an exchange of

compliments but that has its own significance at the present time,

expecially since the Iranian side is represented by the (relatively)

virtuous (in US eyes) Mohammad Khatami.

 

http://dawn.com/fixed/subs/dinasub.htm

*  Iraq's diplomacy may ward off US attack

by Alistair Lyon

Dawn (Pakistan), 30th January, 15 Ziqa'ad 1422

Summary of Tariq Aziz's recent travels and initiatives addressed to Saudi

Arabia, Kuwait and Iran.

 

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/w-me/2002/jan/31/013101924.html

*  Allies More Important for Iraq

Las Vegas Sun, 31st January

Summary of Iraq's relations with immediate neighbours.

 

 

AND, IN NEWS, 26/1-2/2/02 (3)

 

IRAQI/INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

 

*  China advises Iraq to co-operate with UN {Aziz's visit to China]

*  Iraq asks EU for dialogue on UN sanctions

*  Russia Strongly Opposes Using Force Against Iraq: Duma Leader [Repeats

the figure we saw in last week's news of 1,854 holds on goods for South

and central Iraq as against 2 for the Kurdish Autonomous zone]

*  Iraqi diplomats leave Sweden amid accusations

*  Iraqi diplomats expelled from Sweden

*  Paris opposes toppling Saddam Hussein by means of force

*  Putin takes tough line on Iraq, nuclear arms cuts

*  Iraq deputy prime minister shortens visit to Russia [This seems an odd

decision, attributed in the article 'Putin takes a tough line' to a 'fit

of pique' brought on by Bush's speech. But the Iraqis must know that at

the present time Russia is very important to them.]

*  Mail to Iraq cleared [From New Zealand. Only two sentences, but the

nicest piece of news we've had for a very long time.]

 

IRAQI/UN RELATIONS

 

*  U.N. watchdog wants Iraq to engage in rights dialogue

*  UN "oil-for-food" chief ends tour of Iraqi Kurdistan

 

IRAQIS OUTSIDE IRAQ

 

*  Unwelcomed take another spin on a crazy carousel [More on the sad fate

of asylum seekers in Australia]

*  Businessman from Iraq, bank settle bias suit [Apparent end to saga

that began in last week's news]

*  Iraq native's business raided day after suit ends [Unexpectedly the

saga starts up again and becomes very interesting. Like the closure of

the Somali Barakat Wire Transfer, this seems to be using the 'war against

terrorism' - very crudely - as a weapon to prevent people helping their

relatives left behind in countries that have fallen into disfavour with

the US government]

 

NORTHERN IRAQ/SOUTHERN KURDISTAN

 

*  Baghdad Airs Kurdish TV to Win Over Iraqi Kurds

 

INSIDE IRAQ

 

*  Iraqi women's panel presents paper on role in public life [Argues that

Iraq was a pioneer in the field of women's rights since the beginning of

the century]

*  Iraqi oil sales resume average levels

 

IRAQI OPPOSITION

 

*  U.S. to give $2.4 million to Iraqi opposition group

*  U.S. Restores Funding for Iraqi Opposition [A couple of weeks ago,

readers may remember, Ahmed Chalabi was saying there were great

possibilities because the Iranians were going to back the INC. Now he

says he's greatly encouraged by Mr Bush's speech even though this

declared Iran to be part of an 'axis of evil'. He's turned his affections

back to the Kurds. He says that there are 40,000 of them ready to take up

arms. Which indicates a modest, cautious approach. William Safire

(Incitement: 'The Gun is on the table'), tells us there are 70,000]

 

REMNANTS OF DECENCY

 

*  Iraqi Dates Sales Make a Symbolic Breach in Sanctions [A heartening

item, all the more heartening for the role of Plaid Cymry in selling

Iraqi dates in the Parliament building in Brussels. Next stop the Welsh

Assembly? Or Westminster?]

 

 

 

News, 2/2/02-8/2/02

 

In 'US warns NATO allies' below, George ("Lord") Robertson is quoted as

complaining about Europe's 'military pygmy' status. So the pressure is on

to trail after the insane military budget that Bush is proposing for the

US. A degree of military spending that is alarming even some generally

pro-US commentators (Robert Scheer: An orgy of defense spending; Anatole

Kaletsky: Arrogance and Fear, both in the 'New World Order supplement).

Anyone remember the chatter there was after the fall of the Berlin wall

about the 'peace dividend'? Most notable tendency in what follows is the

Israeli anxiety to deflect attention away from Iraq (which is already

crushed) and on to Iran (which isn't). Oh. And a somewhat cavalier use of

the word 'evil'.

 

INCITEMENT TO HATRED

 

*  Iraq's next, NATO told [Evil Paul Wolfowitz and John McCain enjoy

treating their evil European allies with the contempt they deserve]

*  Rogue state delusions [Editorial from the evil Washington Times

attacking articles by one Michael Dobbs - articles we appear to have

missed - in the evil Washington Post, arguing that the 'threat' posed to

the evil US by evil Iraq, N.Korea and Iran is very exaggerated, as it

obviously is. The Washington Times argues that the US must eliminate all

threats, however small, since a small threat now could be a big threat in

the future. Evil Germany had better watch out!]

*  Allies Give Little Support on Iraq [Evil George ("Lord") Robertson

thinks that the evil US can't take on all the evil in the world without

some help from its evil allies. Well, if evil NATO proved to be

redundant, what would he do for a living?]

*  Saddam a smokescreen for the bin Laden fiasco [This article from the

Sydney Morning Herald has one short paragraph that is spot on. Here it

is: 'Saddam, for all his faults, has acted as an effective balance for

Iranian power. Having ousted him, the US would have to remain engaged in

Iraq for as long as it took to rebuild a fully functioning state able to

resume that role. Iraq's neighbours have always been reluctant for

America to push Iraq too hard because they fear America would not stick

around long enough to put Iraq back together again.' The rest of it isn't

much worth bothering over.]

*  US: Iraq is a strategic threat to implementing US policy in the Middle

East [A slightly more reasoned, less hysterical statement of the case for

bombing Iraq than we're used to. Also incidentally a tribute to the

courage, determination and political skill of the present Iraqi

leadership.]

*  US warns Nato allies they may be sidelined ['The best defence is a

good offense', says Paul Wolfowitz. Which is a justification for

S.Hussein's invasion of Iran, if not of Kuwait; the Japanese attack on

Pearl Harbour; Hitler's invasion of Poland. Do these people ever think

what they're saying?]

*  U.S. unlikely to launch war on Iraq, Iran [Some surprisingly sensible

remarks from former CIA director, Robert Gates: for example, this: "My

own view is that so far the U.S. has not really advanced in combating the

roots of terrorism ...Hopelessness and despair are two major sources of

terrorism" (I bet they hated him).]

*  CIA has its own view of Iraq [which is that Iraq isn't, and hasn't

been for some time, engaged in the business of terrorism. Terrorism

against evil Iran, of course, doesn't count]

*  Iran poses greater threat than Iraq, Israelis warn [Israeli leadership

perhaps wondering if its friends in the US haven't been pointing the guns

in the wrong direction]

*  Sharon and Bush to meet on moves against Iraq [Short extract revealing

existence of joint Israeli/US exercises against the eventuality of a war

with Iraq]

*  'Evil Axis' Tests Relationship [Mainly about the probability of a US

attack against on Iraq. Felgenhauer, who writes as one who knows, thinks

it likely, but not before the Autumn; and he thinks Russia should get in

on the act.]

*  Ben-Eliezer: We'll strike back if Saddam attacks us [Another good

reason for the US to hesitate about attacking Iraq. The article is quite

interesting on general US/Israel military relations.]

*  Iraq Kurds unconvinced U.S. has Saddam alternative [Tough talking from

Barzani and Talebani who aren't jumping at the chance to play Northern

Alliance to Iraq's Taliban. And in wanting to know what the alternative

might be to Saddam Hussein they make one thing plain. They don't think it

is Ahmad Chalabani.]

 

URLs ONLY:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/0202/05/opinion/opinion2.html

*  Rousing the troops to another strike for freedom

Sydney Morning Herald, 5th February

This dull article, proposing that evil Australia should join the evil US

in a war that 'will almost certainly extend beyond Christmas - this

year's, next year's and more besides' is notable for the surprise

appearance of evil Newt Gingrich, who, however, doesn't say anything you

wouldn't expect him to say.'

 

http://www.iht.com/articles/47204.html

*  Remove Saddam? The Chore Would Have to Be Well Done

by David M. Malone

International Herald Tribune, 7th February

'The writer, on leave from the Canadian Foreign Service, is president of

the International Peace Academy in New York. He contributed this comment

to the International Herald Tribune.' but the article could have been

written by any hack journalist on an off day.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002/02/08/iraq-main.htm

*  Officials: Afghan-style war might not work on Iraq

by Jassim Mohammed

USA Today, 8th February

Not very interesting musings as to what Iraq might or might not be

capable of in the event of a 'war'.

 

 

AND, IN NEWS, 2/2/02-8/2/02 (2)

 

IRAQI/MIDDLE EAST-ARAB WORLD RELATIONS

 

*  Syria denies British smuggling accusations [This article suggests,

curiously, that evil Syria's membership of the Sanctions Committee (as a

member, or rather observer, of the UN Security Council) renders it

diplomatically immune from the charge evil Britain is levelling against

it of smuggling Iraqi oil. When asked why he was challenging Syria and

not evil Turkey, 'Middle East expert, Carne Rosse' replied feebly that

'the oil travelling to Turkey by road has dropped in recent years'. Has

it? It declined very recently because the Iraqis stopped sending it to

put pressure on Turkey. Is that what evil Carne is thinking about?]

*  Turkey to warn Iraq it faces threat of war, paper reports

*  Iraqi Labor Union Sec-Gen calls on Majlis [Iranian Parliament]

deputies

*  Prince says Saudi would help oust Saddam [This isn't as bad as it

appears. The old torturer, Prince Turki al-Faisal, opposes a Gulf War

style invasion and argues for a covert operation to instal a new Iraqi

leader, of the type that has failed consistently over the past ten years.

On Saudi money going to terrorism he has the temerity to remind an

American audience of US money going to the IRA. What British politician

would ever dare to say such a thing?]

*  Iraq, Tunis discuss relations

*  Iraq accuses Turkey of air intrusion over northern Iraq [the article

calls this 'the first-ever report on alleged air intrusions from the

neighbouring country'. Really?]

*  Cheney to Visit Mideast, Iraq Neighbours in March

*  Iraqi president warns Turkey

 

IRAQI/INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

 

*  Italian parliamentarian confers with Iraqi minister

*  Russian companies to restore bombed Iraqi power station

*  Coddling Iraq a $40Bln Gamble {On the interest evil Russia has in

ending sanctions on evil Iraq]

*  Iraqi oil exports to US surged in 2001

*  New Zealanders Allowed to Send Humanitarian Goods Parcels to Iraq [We

had another version of this last week, but since its the only piece of

good news we've had, or are likely to have, for many years we might as

well have it again]

*  EU wants sanctions on Iraq modified

*  Government Says It Owes Iraq Only US $5.8m [Continuing story of

Ugandan government's debt to Iraq]

 

INSIDE IRAQ

 

*  Iraq says sanctions kill 15,000 in December [The figures are of total

numbers who died from particular illnesses without any attempt to

calculate what could be attributed to sanctions]

 

IRAQI/UN RELATIONS

 

*  Will Pressure Force Iraq to Admit U.N. Inspectors?

*  Iraq ready for dialogue with UN, says Arab League

*  Powell 'rejects' Iraq talks

*  Solution near for disputed Iraqi oil cargo

 

MILITARY MATTERS

 

*  Four Iraqis Killed in U.S., British Air Strikes

*  SAS 'left soldiers to die in Iraq' [But if British soldiers aren't

willing to die on the ground, what can they do that the US can't do for

itself?]

 

IRAQIS OUTSIDE IRAQ

 

*  Iraqi native pleads guilty to obtaining fraudulent license

*  Suicidal and angry: Iraqis suffer in PNG detention camp [More

Australian unpleasantness towards refugees who are fleeing the

consequences of the sanctions imposed by Australia, among others, on

Iraq]

*  Man Admits Selling Papers to Iraqis

 

 

AND, IN NEW WORLD ORDER SUPPLEMENT (2/2/02-8/2/02)

 

*  An Orgy of Defense Spending: Bush's 'axis of evil' rhetoric fabricates

a need [A splendid article from the Los Angeles Times, summed up in the

title and in this sentence: 'His astonishing budget makes sense only if

we are planning to use our mighty military in a pseudo-religious quest to

create a super-dominant Pax Americana.']

*  'Once It's Quiet, We Can Reach a State of Nonbelligerency' [An

interview between evil William Safire and evil Ariel Sharon. The article

is mostly about the need to topple evil Yasser Arafat and install a

puppet Palestinian regime, but this extract looks at Sharon's anxieties

over evil Iran]

*  Was the Clinton Administration Soft on Terror? [Short extract from

interview with evil Madeleine Albright. Less punchy than she was last

week.]

*  Grateful Powell hails Australia's war role [Powell pats Australia on

the head. And if its VERY good, he might even give it a bone.]

*  Power, counter-power, Part 2: The fractal war [Pepe Escobar again,

writing in the Asia Times. Who is he? The article doesn't have a lot to

say about Iraq but its good stuff. This is the sort of writing we need.

It is prophetic. It says that the future can be seen in in Sao Paolo. And

incidentally makes the interesting point that we haven't seen any photos

of the wonderful hi-tech, surely very photogenic caves there are supposed

to be in Tora Bora.]

*  Arrogance and fear: an American paradox [An intelligent analysis from

a pro-American viewpoint. Kaletsky thinks the US should be basking in

complacent self congratulation not working itself up into a state of

paranoid, mouth-frothing terror: 'By identifying America primarily as a

military power, by asserting that it will pursue its perceived national

interests regardless of international laws, coalitions or treaties, by

emphasising its unchallengeable superiority over every other nation and

global institution, by claiming an unconditional moral hegemony over any

adversary he cares to identify, and by acting so blatantly in the

interests of the US business establishment, Mr Bush is weakening America

and playing into the hands of its opponents.']

*  Missile Conference Opens in Paris [France proposing an international

treaty to limit the proliferation of ballistic missiles.]

*  Moscow revitalizes its old priorities in Asia [The other side of

Moscow's apparent support for the 'International Coalition against

Terrorism']

*  Peremptory tendencies: France fires a warning shot at the US

*  Chavez says he's democrat not communist [This is supposed to be Chavez

backing down under pressure from Powell. But he hasn't backed down all

the way: 'Noting that his visit to Iraqi President Saddam Hussein in

Baghdad in 2000 had "irritated some people in the world," Chavez said:

"What do we care? Let them get irritated. ... We are defending the sacred

interests of the Venezuelan people."']

*  The quest for balance in Eurasia [Asia Times again, this time in

pro-American mode. But a cool, rational - ie non American - geopolitical

approach all the same. Only extracts given here.]

*  Eurasia: An axis of uncertainty [from part two of the same]

 

URL ONLY:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A36140-2002Feb6.html

*  Questions About the Colossus

by Jim Hoagland

Washington, 7th February

Evil Jim Hoagland in awe of evil Bush's proposed military budget.

 

 

 

News, 9-16/2/02

 

The news this week is characterised by a flood of articles designed to

leave us with the idea that a definite decision has been made to bombard

Iraq, with or without provocation. If we were only to take notice of

attributable comments ‚ or comments attributable to anyone other than

Richard Perle ‚ we would conclude that this decision hasn't in fact been

made but, as Martin Woollacott points out (and he doesn't seem to mind),

a situation is being created which obliges the US to go to war or look as

if its bottling out. Oh, the burdens of great power. The only really

indispensable article in what follows is one that shouldn't be there

because its a press release not something actually taken from the news

(it was sent to me by Felicity): Save the Children UK warns of potential

humanitarian crisis in Iraq (specifically, and this is what is important,

in the Kurdish autonomous zone.). Its in the Inside Iraq section. Oh and

of course, Margaret Thatcher has called for the removal of 'Saddam'.

Mustn't forget that ...

 

WARMONGERING

 

*  Not again, Mr. Annan [This is a Richard Butler-style story of the 1998

weapons inspection crisis. We are told that: 'the Secretary-General

reached an agreement that gave legitimacy to Iraq's absurd accusations

about high-handed inspectors. Mr. Annan compromised the inspection scheme

by subordinating the deployed scientists to diplomats ... his mission to

Baghdad was an unmitigated disaster. It allowed Saddam to avoid war with

the West, and once the crisis had passed, later the same year, Iraq

reneged on Mr. Annan's plan, too.'. Avoiding a war seems to me to be not

a bad thing to do but in my memory, the problem was that it was the West

that reneged on the deal. The inspectors were unquestionably 'high

handed' - their principle function was to humiliate the Iraqis on every

possible pretext with a view to prolonging the sanctions regime. They

were unquestionably straightforward agents of US policy and did not

pretend to be otherwise. To present the likes of Richard Butler, Charles

Duelfer or Scott Ritter as dispassionate 'scientists' is to insult the

intelligence of the reader (though this is something the Toronto National

Post can probably do with impunity). Somehow, the new, reformed

inspection teams, in which other countries of the world were to have a

chance to see the behaviour of these so-called 'UN inspectors', never

materialised. Annan failed to protest, which is probably why he has been

allowed a second term in office. Given that the US has succeeded in

discrediting the whole idea of weapons inspection, and refuses to submit

to any such thing itself, the only solution seems to be that the Iraqis

should get their bomb and then, hopefully, we could be assured that our

leaders would think twice before attacking them]

*  Bush Right, Allies Wrong On Evil Axis [North Korea is evil because it

sells dangerous weapons to unpleasant people; Iran is evil because it

declares its enemies to be evil; Iraq is evil because it is (we are told)

manufacturing dangerous weapons. So who else is doing all these evil

things?]

*  US gives Israel nod to hit Iraq if attacked

*  'Saddam Hussein had more chemical weapons than I could destroy' [The

quote comes from a USAF commander, talking about bombing during the Gulf

(and of course not mentioning the consequences of bombing a chemical

weapons plant for the local population. In fact the quote is quite

revealing. At the time we were led to believe we weren't bombing these

plants because of the likely ecological consequences. Ha Ha!). The

article underplays what was destroyed by the UN weapons inspectors when

they still had some pretentions to that title but it does make the point

that chemical weapons, or the fear of them, is the only card Saddam

Hussein has in the event of a war. The dilemma for the Iraqis goes

something like this: subject oneself to endless petty humiliations and

reveal to the world that one doesn't have the means to defend oneself,

thus leaving oneself open to attack should the mood take America, which

it surely will. Or keep the inspectors out, create the impression that

one is capable of doing something nasty, thus at once deterring attack

and creating a pretext for it.]

*  Franks Says He Didn't Discuss Iraq in Kuwait

*  Holbrooke sees U.S. attempt to topple Saddam

*  'If you need terrorist allies you think Iraq' [Kanan Makiya ('Iraq's

most eminent dissident thinker') calls on the USA to massively carpet

bomb his country because S.Hussein destroyed something in the region of

4,000 Kurdish villages. Strange, then, that he doesn't seem to want the

USA to massively carpet-bomb Turkey, which has also distinguished itself

in the business of destroying Kurdish villages. Nor does he see fit to

explain to his American interviewer (who doesn't see fit to ask him) why

S.Hussein should have wanted to destroy such a large number of Kurdish

villages. It was, of course, an incident in the Iran/Iraq war, when the

Kurds - much more unambiguously than the Shi'ites - supported the

Iranians. I speak with a clear conscience on this one because, at the

time, my sympathies were with Iran. I had figured out ‚ through the usual

fog of media disinformation - that it was Iraq that had provoked the war,

and I thought it would be a splendid thing if the whole area were overrun

by fanatically anti-Western Islamic fundamentalists in triumphalist mode.

This was, however, a minority view in British politics at the time

(possibly a minority of one), and I'm sure it was not shared by Kanan

Makiya (or if it was, I'm sure he wouldn't like his interviewer to know

about it). Assuming that Kanan Makiya, like the whole of Western

'civilisation' wanted Iraq (= 'Saddam') to win the Iraq/Iran war - and he

nearly didn't - then he, like the whole of Western 'civilisation', is

obliged to explain how this could be done without destroying a large

number of Kurdish villages. And once they've figured that out, they would

be performing a large service to humanity if they would then explain it

to the Turks]

*  US picks ex-general to lead Iraq: paper [This is the State department

- Colin Powell (you know, the moderate) perspective. It cropped up in the

news reports last december ('US strategy, 13-22/12/01 (1) ‚ Searching for

Saddam's replacement, where we read: 'But some exiles, as well as U.S.

officials, are queasy about dealing with such figures as Nizar Khazraji,

a former Iraqi army chief of staff, now under investigation in Denmark,

where he lives in exile, for human rights violations under his command in

northern Iraq. The State Department is wringing its hands over whether to

even talk with Khazraji, an informed source said.' Apparently the hand

wringing has stopped. Good news for the Kurds?]

*  Allies Should Respect U.S. Leadership -- Powell [with a surprising

little squeak of dissent from Joschka Fischer]

*  See-no-evil crowd needs to get real [This one is such a concentrated

mass of nastiness and ignorance its impossible to know where to begin

with it. Perhaps here: 'terrorists are criminals, but they are in

specific cases state-sanctioned and supported. The specific cases

involve, as Bush noted, the states of Iraq, Iran and North Korea.' What

terrorists are sanctioned by North Korea? Or Iraq, apart from the

anti-Iranian freedom fighters of the Mujaheedin al-Khalq? Michael Kelly

is clearly out of the loop and has missed the nuances of the thing. We

don't accuse these regimes of supporting terrorists. We accuse them of

producing weapons of mass destruction (which is to say, modern weapons)

which MIGHT fall into the hands of terrorists. Got it?]

*  US targets Saddam [from the Guardian. This is still a matter of

anonymous officials and hearsay. But it is delivered with great

confidence.]

*  Iraq may consider some form of arms inspection: Aziz ['but only if

other countries in the region were subjected to the same', which is

actually what they've been saying for a long time]

*  To free Iraq: Blair must prepare party and country for military action

[Editorial from The Times. 'Britain, alone among European countries, is

on Mr Cheney's itinerary. That honour ...' requires an even greater

degree of slavish devotion than Mr Blair has been showing up to now]

*  Saddam's destruction is now a matter of honour America's resolve is

hardening against the Iraqi regime [article by Martin Woollacott in The

Guardian]

 

 

AND, IN NEWS, 9-16/2/02 (2)

 

WARMONGERING (contd)

 

*  US needs boots on ground for Iraq war

*  Cheney: Allies Will Back US on Iraq [In detail this turns out to be

less definite than the headline would suggest]

*  US split with allies grows [Guardian again]

*  Uncle Sam does not need you [Extracts giving views of John Nye (a

'moderate'), Charles Krauthammer and Wiliam Kristol (less moderate)]

 

URLs ONLY:

http://www.theage.com.au/news/state/2002/02/10/FFX4MBGAGXC.htmlCOMMENT  

  

*  Why I'm backing Bush's jihad

by ROGER FRANKLIN

The Age (Australia), 10th February

' I know the animals who would kill us need to be put down. Thank God

that George Bush has the balls to do it. Then, when the filth is dead and

buried ...' Want to read any more?

 

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/whitehouse/la

000010465feb10.story?coll=la%2Dnews%2Dpolitics%2Dwhite%5Fhouse

*  Bush's Team Targets Hussein

by ROBIN WRIGHT

Los Angeles Times, 10th February

Anonymous 'officials' say this 'n' that. The article starts tough then

increasingly fritters away into idle speculation, lost in the

complications of the thing.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,648189,00.html

*  Cheney tour lays ground for military strike on Iraq

by Duncan Campbell in Los Angeles

The Guardian, 11th February

This has some credibility from the fact its written by D.Campbell, but

its only really a rehash of the LA Times article which I haven't given

you above.

 

http://www1.timesofindia.com/articleshow.asp?art_id=601970

*  US planning campaign against Iraq

Times of India (from AFP), 11th February

Another version of the LATimes article I decided wasn't worth

reproducing.

 

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0,,7-204432,00.html

*  The bio-terror time bomb

by Robert Harris and Jeremy Paxman

The Times, 11th February

Actually its not clear if this is by RH and JP or a review of a book by

RH and JP. Either way its put me off watching University Challenge. It

does contain one piece of information I didn't know. Syria is accused (by

Amnesty International) of using cyanide against the Islamic

fundamentalists in the massacre of 1982. So 'Saddam' isn't the only one

who has used chemical weapons against 'his own people'. Among nations

developing these weapons no mention is made, of course, of Israel, which

has huge stocks of them, nor of course of the pioneering work done in the

field by the USA and Britain. Nor is it explained how else a relatively

poor nation can exercise deterrence power (and we're all believers in

deterrence, aren't we?) against the means now possessed by the USA and

its allies (or, as may soon be the case, ally).

 

http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_518558.html

*  Thatcher calls for 'removal' of Saddam Hussein

Ananova, 11th February

 

DOUBTS AND QUERIES

 

*  Iraq Calls Bush's Bluff on Weapons Scrutiny [by Scott Ritter: 'Baghdad

now has raised the question as to whether U.S. support for inspectors has

been merely rhetorical, a verbal foil designed to support the primary

policy objective of removing Hussein from power.' Though in fact everyone

has known the answer to this question for a very long time - long before

the weapons inspections stopped. And after weapons inspections, there's

still the little matter of reparations to keep the sanctions going (all

these things that were decided in the truce signed between Iraq and ...

who? Norman Schwarzkopf, wasn't it? In a bit of a hurry in order to let

'Saddam' back to the business of suppressing the Kurds and Shi'ites, as I

remember.) Actually I don't think the Americans actually ever really

cared very much about removing 'Saddam'. They just wanted to wipe the

grin from his face. And so far they haven't succeeded. Which is why

they're going mad.]

*  Use words, not war, to puncture inflated Iraqi threat [also by Scott

Ritter. He argues that its nonsense to say Iraq's wmd capacity poses a

great threat to the world in general or America in principle; but it

would be a good thing if it were checked, so 'Diplomatic engagement

intended to return U.N. inspectors back to Iraq, in exchange for lifting

economic sanctions that have punished the people of Iraq but have done

nothing to hurt the Iraqi regime, offers a path toward peace and

stability that should be vigorously pursued before any act of war.']

*  Bush has no plans to attack Iraq: Schroeder [So that's OK]

*  Russian Defense Minister Warns U.S. [Compendium of international

opinion against attack on Iraq. And Ari Fleischer's response. Which is to

say, so what? And given the generally craven nature of what passes for

'international opinion', we can hardly blame him.]

*  Bush govt planting seeds of its own undoing [The gist of this is that

the Americans are no longer even remotely pretending to have any interest

in or concern for 'international law': '"We all have to start using the

'H' word - hegemony - now to describe US policy," says Michael Klare, a

national-security expert at Hampshire College in Massachusetts.']

*  ChrÈtien cautions U.S. against targeting Iraq; Putin backs PM in

seeking limits to terrorism war ['in international politics, before you

invade a sovereign country, there has to be a process or else there is

international chaos," Graham (Canadian Foreign Affairs secretary) said.'

He doesn't seem to have noticed Panama, Nicaragua, Serbia ...]

*  The Right Has Put W On Wrong Warpath

*  Straw warns against early attack on Iraq

 

EMBARGO

 

*  Iran informs UN it tried to intercept contraband Iraqi oil [Shame on

Iran]

*  Ship suspected of running Iraqi oil seized [Shame on Canada]

*  Sanctions discussed [The article makes plain what we all know to be

the case ‚ that the US is using its power to impose holds on goods to

Iraq, without having to justify its decisions, as a means of exercising

pressure on Russia. And no-one complains?]

*  U.S. Avoids Confronting Syrians on Iraqi Oil [This article makes the

observation - interesting if true - that the US has given up on the idea

of tightening border controls on Iraq as part of the 'smart sanctions'

deal. They know that Iraq's neighbours won't wear it. Since this was the

most objectionable part of the smart sanctions deal it leaves me

wondering if its still worth opposing it. What is left, though far from

what is needed, might still be an improvement on the existing system of

sanctions.]

 

 

AND, IN NEWS, 9-16/2/02 (3)

 

INSIDE IRAQ

 

*  Iraq Says Over 1,400 Killed in U.S.-British Raids of No-Fly Zones

*  Oil-For-Food Program Needs Adjustments: U.N. Official [This should

have been an interesting article, but it doesn't give any details]

*  Mass grave found in northern Iraq ['International organisations

estimate that 182,000 people, mostly men, were forced from the Kurdish

areas and buried alive in mass graves in the southern deserts.' Wonder if

its the same southern desert that holds the mass grave of all the Iraqis

we murdered on the road to Basra in 1991.]

*  U.N. Rights Expert Arrives in Iraq

*  Save the Children UK warns of potential humanitarian crisis in Iraq

[Strictly speaking this doesn't belong in the collection since I haven't

seen it anywhere as a news item. Which is of itself scandalous because

only a few months ago the newspapers were full of the success of the

Kurdish autonomous zone as proof that it was 'Saddam', not sanctions,

that was responsible for Iraqi sufferings. But here we learn that:

'According to the report, large sectors of the Kurdish population in

Northern Iraq are dependent on relief rations for over 90 percent of

their food -- with over half of the population living in poverty. Most

have no household assets, and therefore nothing to fall back on in the

event of a decrease in their food rations, as they were forced to sell

their possessions in order to survive in the early 1990s.']

*  Opposition forces target oil installations [Terrorist activities in

Iraq]

*  War brought misery to Iraqi town [Basra. A little glimpse of reality

in the midst of the fog]

*  In Iraq, cult of Hussein thrives

 

IRAQI/INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

 

*  Myanmar sends economic mission to Iraq [Talk of the devil. Was it only

last week I was wondering where Myanmar had got to in all this talk about

axes of evil?]

*  Haider trip to Iraq embarrasses Austria [He has a sense of humour: '

according to his political allies, he is undertaking "mediation in favour

of Israel" with the Iraqi leadership.']

*  US wants Austrian government to report Haider's Iraq trip to UN

*  Austria's Haider Vows to Pull Back

*  Nakatani [Japanese Defense Agency chief] Disputes Remark Linking

N.Korea To Iran And Iraq

*  Iraq Threatens to Sue Foreign Firms For Unfulfilling Contracts

 

IRAQI/MIDDLE EAST-ARAB WORLD RELATIONS

 

*  Saudi companies in the exhibition for rebuilding Iraq [Some good news]

*  First Syria production exhibition opened in Baghdad [More good news]

*  Bahrainis wait for missing kin to return from Iraq

*  Iraq, Iran Criticize 'Axis of Evil' Policy [at a conference of

European and Islamic foreign ministers in Istanbul]

*  Turk PM Says Iraq May Be Ready to Compromise

 

URL ONLY:

http://www1.timesofindia.com/articleshow.asp?art_id=592478

*  Saddam to skip Arab summit

Times of India (from AFP), 10th February

[Hardly surprising, but worth noting that the speaker of the Iraqi

parliament, Saadun Hammadi, has been visiting ithe Sudan.]

 

NEW WORLD ORDER

 

*  Iranians Rally Against United States [Good to see there's still some

spirit left in the world]

* Afghan, Iraqi refugees renew allegiance with ideas of Islamic

Revolution

 

URL ONLY:

http://huknews.hoovers.com/fp.asp?layout=displaynews&doc_id=NR20020210670.2_815

003e4581c534

*  China arms entwined in "axis of evil"

by Glenn Schloss

Hoover's (Financial Times), 10th February

[Those who think that China might provide a useful counterbalance to US

power might find this interesting]

 

 

 

News, 16-23/2/02

Perhaps the only piece of hard news in the following mass of wearisome

nonsense is the crackdown on efforts of Iraqi refugees to help their

families at home. This follows on the similar move against Somalia a

couple of months ago, but this time there isn't the slightest pretence

that the money was being used to promote 'terrorism'. Its unthinkable

that the authorities didn't know that this was going on for a long time

and had decided to ignore it. Why did they suddenly swoop now? Its so

petty minded you could almost take it as evidence that they've decided

they don't dare attack Iraq (unforeseeable political consequences) and

this is a way of venting their frustration. The relevant articles are

under 'Iraqis outside Iraq'. Most were sent to the list, I think by Drew

Hamre, but I thought it useful to keep them on record here. Oherwise

there's lots to read and nothing much worth reading: 'Bombing Iraq', in

the British section; 'Iraq roadtrip' and 'War tensions tough on

Christians' in the 'Inside Iraq section, together with President

Hussein's reflections on the benefits of nuclear power. Most abject

article of the week: David Owen's 'We must stand by Bush' in the British

section.

 

INCITEMENT TO HATRED

 

*  Cakewalk In Iraq [This article really belongs to last week's mailing.

It argues that it will be easy to demolish Iraq because its pathetically

weak and has no military capacity; and that it is necessary to do so

because it is terribly dangerous and armed to the teeth. Only a short

extract is given so that the reader may savour the contempt with which

the USA regards its allies. 'Rinky-dink nations' is the memorable term

employed.]

*  Cheney Rattles Saber Against Iraq

*  Facing the Music On Iraq [Jim Hoagland sounding like the cat that got

the cream. He must be feeling the way Hitler felt when suddenly he

realised that his wildest ideas were no longer encountering any

opposition. Suddenly, everyone agreed with him. Extracts.]

*  Gung-ho and alone in Iraq [This article was sent to the list and I

don't know where it comes from. But its worth including because it refers

to the fact that UN Security Council Resolution 687  calls for "the

establishment of a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East region",

which, of course, includes Israel. Which is something that requires to be

said every time Iraq is accused of violating UN Security Council

resolutions.]

*  The purging of Baghdad [Short extract from a rather long article. On

the virtues of 'moral clarity'. Hitler would have appreciated this ...]

*  Parsing The Axis Of Evil [A cautionary voice from the US. But the

terrorist elite is right. The cautionary voices, which don't radically

challenge the morality of the whole policy on Iraq, are unconvincing and

weak, defending a policy of slow mass murder through starvation and

disease against a policy of quick mass murder by massive terror.]

*  Post-Saddam proves to be sticking point [Extracts, giving some quotes

from Al Gore, Richard Perle and Leon Fuerth]

*  U.S. still hasn't pinned down the best way to deal with Iraq [Will

they? Won't they?  Extracts]

*  It's Time to Exercise Our Veto Power on Iraq [Mr Gibson wants to go to

war to prevent Saddam getting nuclear wepons. He fails to explain why the

US should need nuclear weapons if Iraq (in an infinitely more dangerous

part of the world) doesn't. And of course, while admiring Israel's strike

against Iraq's nuclear installation at the time when Iraq was defending

Israel and the rest of the region against the wrath of the Ayatollahs,

there isn't a cheep about Israel's own nuclear weapons ... ]

*  Missing the target [James Rubin, ex-accomplice of M.Albright, tries to

draw a distinction between his own position and that of the Pentagon

elite. But its just a matter of 'spin'. The US is, as always, right. It

should, however, make a little more effort to explain things to the

dimmer nations of the world. Interesting to note that Rubin is now

'visiting professor of international relations at the London School of

Economics.' Is this a sign of the assimilation of the Universities to the

process of government, which is already very far advanced in the US, and

may not of itself be a bad thing?]

*  Bin Laden uses Iraq to plot new attacks [It was inevitable that

someone would suggest that Bin Laden has taken refuge in Iraq. Not so

inevitable that it should have been the Asia Times in what seems quite a

well argued and informed article]

*  Saddam to US: Overthrow my regime but don't strike Iraq [President

Hussein reminds us that of late the pretence that the war is againt his

regime not against 'Iraq' as such is becoming a bit thin.]

 

URLs ONLY:

http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/regional/index.ssf?/cgi

free/getstory_ssf.cgi?g8218_BC_MI--Attacks-Albright&&news&newsflash-michigan

*  FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE ALBRIGHT ADDRESSES MICHIGAN STUDENTS

by Alexandra R. Moses

The Associated Press, 21st February

[I would have included it if she'd said anything interesting. Honest I

would. She expresses distaste for the 'axis of evil' language but there's

no serious disagreement here on the substance of the matter.]

 

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020222-56041768.htm

*  WHITE HOUSE WANTS SADDAM OUT OF POWER BY 2005

by Rowan Scarborough

Washington Times, 22nd February

[More 'White House officials' and 'senior policy makers' speaking off the

record, this time presumably to deflate exepctations of immediate action]

 

 

AND, IN NEWS, 16-23/2/02 (2)

 

RINKY-DINK NATIONS

(1) EUROPE

 

*  Between Two Extremes [Joschka Fischer would like the USA to treat him

with respect]

*  Patten assails 'unilateralist' U.S. [Another little bleat from a

European collaborator begging to be treated with respect: "The lesson of

Sept. 11 is that we need both American leadership and international

cooperation ..."]

*  Simplistic Criticism of U.S. Overlooks Complex Realities [The

Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung argues that Europe will only be deserving

of respect when it has increased its military budget sufficiently to be

able to make a significant contribution to the fulfilment of US foreign

policy objectives.]

*  German official predicts growing US-EU differences over Iraq policy

[Germany pretends to have a mind of its own]

*  Germany urges int'l pressure on Iraq to let in UN inspectors [Germany

gives up pretending that it has a mind of its own.]

*  Italy Sticks to Policy of Dialogue With Iraq [We're not going to have

to start liking Silvio Berlusconi, are we?]

*  Patten seeks to calm rift with US [Europe, having uttered its little

yelp of alarm, settles back into its customary 'good dog' mode of

existence.]

*  France's Constructive Critic [Thoughts of Hubert VÈdrine put in the

best possible (to American eyes) light. Extracts.]

*  European Union alleges U.S. companies sent black-market cigarettes to

Iraq [Most of this is about smuggling to Europe but the sting comes in

the tail when it is suggested that the cigarettes were smuggled into Iraq

through the good offices of the (recently renamed) Kurdistan Workers'

Party]

*  France won't back U.S. attack on Iraq [Comparatively firm talk from

the French ambassador to the US]

 

URLs ONLY:

http://www.faz.com/IN/INtemplates/eFAZ/docmain.asp?rub={B1311FCC-FBFB-11D2

B228-00105A9CAF88}&doc={D136C16D-3E3E-4CF6-933E-E41A2E18EA32}

*  SOONER RATHER THAN LATER

by Leo Wieland

Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 17th February

[More worthless ruminations from Germany.]

 

http://www.unison.ie/southern_star/stories.php3?ca=44&si=692439&issue_id=6914

*  'WAR FOR CIVILISATION'

Southern Star, 18th February

[The Southern Star, apparently based in Skibbereen in Co Cork ‚ is it the

successor to the famous Skibbereen Eagle? ‚ denounces the evil of

Al-Qaida and weak kneed liberals with impressive, straght-faced

solemnity: 'All the actions in Afghanistan and possibly elsewhere,

represent a 'fight for freedom' the likes of which the world has never

before experienced and as our President said at the start, Ireland must

'stand shoulder to shoulder' with America, Britain and the civilised

democracies in order to rid the planet of such a horrendous evil.' etc]

 

http://dawn.com/fixed/subs/dinasub.htm

*  EUROPE FIRMLY OPPOSED TO ATTACKING IRAQ

by Peter Finn

Dawn (from Washington Post), 19th February, 06 Zilhaj 1422

[A round-up of opinions that have already been given elsewhere]

 

http://www.iht.com/articles/48455.html

*  EUROPE DOESN'T WANT WAR IN IRAQ

by Michael Naumann

International Herald Tribune (from The New York Times), 19th February

[More European handwringing and whingeing and inability to look evil in

the face and stand up to it, this time from 'a former German minister of

culture .... editor and publisher of the weekly Die Zeit'. Who makes his

timid criticism of US terrorism then mumbles that: 'A truly enforced

policy of serious sanctions against Iraq - and persuading Turkey to stop

breaking them - would be more useful.']

 

RINKY-DINK NATIONS

(2) IRAQ'S NEIGHBOURS

 

*  Kuwaiti minister denies a reported US attack against Iraq from Kuwait

*  Assad Warns US Against Attacking Iraq

*  Saudi, UAE oppose action against Iraq

*  Egypt urges rethink of sanctions against Iraq [No details given]

*  US to found a central leadership base in Bahrain [Strange to see the

Arabic News turning to The Sun for inside information about goings on in

Bahrain.]

*  Sudan opposes US strike on Iraq

*  Kuwait: we will not be the base to strike Iraq [Won't be the base ...]

*  The scenarios of striking Iraq [Will be the base ...]

*  Sudan urges Iraq to let U.N. inspectors return

*  Iraqi delegation holds talks in Turkey Ankara

 

RINKY-DINK NATIONS

(3) BRITAIN

 

*  Time to stop being America's lap-dog [An interesting article from Will

Hutton, which suggests rather naively that there is a good 'liberal'

America that has been swamped by a reactionary, ideologically motivated

one. He concludes: 'The Tories broke over Europe. Labour will break over

too-slavish fealty to this US.' But of course our basic problem is that

there is no worthwhile opposition in British politics. In this respect

the people who have usurped the honourable title of Tory (which once

meant anti-imperialist, anti-free trade, rural, Church and State

monarchist) are as bad as the people who have usurped the honourable

title of Labour.]

*  Perhaps a Russian-British lobby against war on Iraq? [Hugo Young. A

good first sentence but it quickly runs out of things to say].

*  Bombing Baghdad: a failed option [Its taken a long time for someone to

come up with this - a developed satire on the analogy between Al Qaida

and the IRA - but its still good to see it finally in print. For example:

'America, on the other hand, provides a bewildering number of targets.

Should the UK have bombed Washington, where the policies were formed? Or

should it have concentrated on places where Irishmen are known to lurk,

like New York, Boston and Philadelphia? The UK could have bombed any

police station and fire station in most major urban centres, secure in

the knowledge that we would be taking out significant numbers of IRA

sympathisers. ' What makes this good satire, as opposed to the mindless

obscenities of a Steve Bell, and the glutinous mass of eighth rate

cartoonists he has spawned, is that what is said here about IRA

sympathisers is EXACTLY what is being said everywhere at the present time

about sympathisers with those who believe in the establishment of an

Islamic state (as any serious Muslim must, just as most Irish people

sympathise with the aims of the IRA, whatever attitude they may have to

their methods.)]

*  We must stand by Bush [Here's a clever little piece of special

pleading. Bush must put pressure on Sharon to be nice to the

Palestinians. But he can't do it while the Israelis have reason to be

scared of Iraq and Iran (ie while there's any suggestion that Muslims

might have and be prepared to use any sort of substantial military

capacity). Iran will cease to be a scary place when the democratic

element replaces the clerical element (it being well known that the

Muslim 'street' wants nothing better than to make peace with Israel). But

that can't happen while Iran is scared of Iraq. Therefore ... And, as far

as Britain is concerned: 'the consequences of stepping aside now from

action to change the regime in Iraq would be devastating to our

international credibility. We would look like a beached whale,

pretentious and overblown.' After all, we are Tonto to the US's Lone

Ranger. Without the Lone Ranger, what would Tonto be?]

 

 

AND, IN NEWS, 16-23/2/02 (3)

 

RINKY-DINK NATIONS

(4) THE UNITED NATIONS

 

*  Iraq Says Over 2,400 Contracts Shelved by U.S., Britain

*  European banks jostle for Iraq's UN contract

*  Iraq: U.N. Special Rapporteur Concludes Visit, Prepares Report

*  Iraq Blasts U.N. Compensations Committee [which apparently has been

illegally hearing claims from individuals and corporations which have not

passed through their respective governments.]

*  Washington blocks $5bn supplies to Iraq [This one makes some attempt

to explain the disparity between UN and Iraqi figures]

 

OTHER RINKY-DINK NATIONS

 

*  Iraq seeks Pak expertise in power generation

*  [Canadian] PM stands firm on Iraq despite U.S. pressure

*  Baghdad backs anti-terror campaign in Chechnya [In the article,

Alexander Rose puts the term "anti-terrorist" in inverted commas,

referring to the Russian campaign in Chechnya. No-one seems to have told

him that a large number of the people blown apart in the Al Qaida camps

in Afghanistan were Chechens, even though not once, so far as I remember,

in all the literature we had to endure at the time of the Afghan

massacre, were the rights and wrongs of the Chechen question ever

discussed]

*  Russian Duma to Consider Draft in Support of Iran, Iraq, DPRK [Is the

Russian Duma now standing alone as the only free and honourable

institution left in the world?]

*  Self-interest should guide foreign policy [Unusually forthright

approach to the problem from Canada. For example: 'In a few months, the

U.S. will manufacture a causus belli for attacking Iraq, as by insisting

on impossibly intrusive U.N. inspections. If Saddam agrees, he'll suffer

a devastating loss of face as well as the loss of some of his weapons of

mass destruction. If he refuses, down come the bombs with Canada saying,

Aye, Aye.' Concludes that Canada's self interest means taking the moral

high ground. And opposing the war (but not, apparently, sanctions).]

*  What they're saying about intervention in Iraq [Extracts from

newspapers through the world. Too short to be very informative, but the

one from the Daily Star in Lebanon is a cracker: "Saddam, in short, is

the goose that continues supplying the US with fresh golden eggs every

morning. Remove Saddam and US troops will be booted out of the Gulf

before you can say 'Rumsfeld is a sucker.'"]

*  Go-slow approach makes sense [Another quite sensible article

advocating independence for Canada but still falling short of opposing

the existing murderous policy on Iraq.]

*  China warns Bush over bully tactics against Iraq

 

INSIDE IRAQ

 

*  Hussein rejects development of weapons of mass destruction [He said

Iraqi nuclear scientists' mission was to "increase Iraq's knowledge,

bring happiness to men and to employ science to serve mankind." Pretty

scary, eh?]

*  Alqanat [Arabic language daily] says Iraq buying advanced missiles

*  Saddam's Olympics

*  Iraq Decides to Distribute Money to Poor People

*  Iraq Roadtrip: Caught in the DMZ [This was sent to the list. I don't

know if 'Counterpunch' really counts as a newspaper but I thought it

would be good to insinuate a little hint of the reality of things into

the fantasy world of the newspaper cuttings service.]

*  Iraq sees 12 fold increase in cancer, depleted uranium cited

*  War tensions tough on Christians in Iraq [This article refers to the

importance of '"cousin aid" from the outside', which connects

interestingly with the stories about the suppression of attempts to send

money to Iraq from the US, especially the one concerning Detroit in

Michigan.]

 

 

AND, IN NEWS, 16-23/2/02 (4)

 

IRAQIS OUTSIDE IRAQ

 

*  Focus-Humans live like cattle in French refugee camp

*  Raid on Iraqi-owned market here prompts nationwide crackdown

*  Money-Transfer Agents Raided

*  Searches seek data on cash links between Twin Cities, Iraq

*  U.S. raids get evidence about cash sent to Iraq

*  Brooklyn Park man says he won't send money to Iraq any more

 

IRAQI OPPOSITION

 

*  Kurdish parties oppose toppling Saddam

*  Rebels balk as US targets Saddam [Refreshing to see that someone's

noticed the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, the only

body that is actually, already, against overwhelming odds, courageously,

conducting a terrorist war in Iraq.]

*  Iraqi opposition figure describes aftermath of Saddam Hussein ['Maj.

Gen. Najib al-Salehi who was nominated by certain Iraqi opposition forces

to be the President of Iraq' and who 'was a commander for the tanks

contingent which occupied Kuwait in 1990.']

*  Saddam mulling peace with rebel Kurds

*  Washington fetes its enemy's enemy [Interview with Ahmed Chalabi. the

article menions one 'Leith Kubba, who helped Mr Chalabi to found the INC

a decade ago, but who left after concerns that it was becoming a US

foreign policy tool ...' which sounds interesting. And it says that the

SCIRI is affiliated to the INC. Is it? They used to be very insistent

that they were not in alliance with the US.]

*  Dethrone Saddam (Granting Independence to the Kurds) [The Washington

Times thinking the unthinkable, but logical, and proposing the breakup of

Iraq. He suggests interestingly that an independent Iraqi Kurdistan would

oblige the Turks to improve their behaviour in their part of Kurdistan.]

 

URL ONLY:

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=138992

*  OPPOSITION LEADER 'READY TO SUPPORT LIBERATION OF IRAQ'

by Andrew Buncombe

Independent, 22nd February

[Not very interesting account of A.Chalabi.]

 

LEVEL OF IDIOCY IN A CATEGORY OF ITS OWN

 

[An unkind general heading for an article about people who lost relatives

on September 11, but are they so utterly incapable of understanding the

feelings of people who lost relatives in the bombing of Baghdad and

Basra?]

 

*  Families of Sept 11 Dead Sue Bin Laden, Iran, Iraq

 

NEW WORLD ORDER

 

URLs ONLY:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/134406420_saudi17.html

*  ISRAEL POLICY THREATENS FRAGILE U.S.-SAUDI TIES

by Robert G. Kaiser and David B. Ottaway

Seattle Times (from The Washington Post), 17th February

[The article suggests that in the run-up to Sept 11, Bush and the Saudis

were on the point of agreeing a policy for Israel/Palestine. It didn't

work out.]

 

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=134362

*  US STARTS A NEW WAR, FOR WORLD'S HEARTS AND MINDS

by Rupert Cornwell

Independent, 20th February

[The article is about the business of telling lies in warfare but it

barely scratches the surface of the subject. How could it, given Mr

Cornwell's support for the War Crimes tribunal at the Hague?  It asserts

incidentally that the story that the US had used germ warfare in Korea in

1952 was a KGB fabrication. For an alternative view - which was receiving

quite a lot of publicity at the time - see "The United States and

Biological Warfare - Secrets from the Early Cold War and Korea' by

Stephen Endicott and Edward Hagerman, Indiana University Press, 1998

(http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/e/endicott-biological.html)]

 

http://www.iht.com/articles/48885.html

*  LIES CAN COME BACK TO HURT YOU

by Flora Lewis

International Herald Tribune, 22nd February

[The article assumes that the purpose of the Pentagon's new Office of

Strategic Influence is to tell lies and then suggests that this might not

be a good idea. We are led to believe that such practises are the

exception rather than the rule.]