Welcome to Stand Down!Read this firstBlog rollZNet Anti War Campus Anti War LinksAngry Arab Juan Cole |
Latest NewsBy Hidari, Section Iraq-Iran-Syria
From the Guardian:
'Critics say Maliki is concentrating power in his office (the office of the prime minister) and his advisers are running "a government inside a government", bypassing ministers and parliament. In his role as commander in chief, he appoints generals as heads of military units without the approval of parliament. The officers, critics say, are all loyal to him. He has created at least one intelligence service, dominated by his clan and party members, and taken two military units - the anti-terrorism unit and the Baghdad brigade - under his direct command. At the same time he has inflated the size of the ministry of national security that is run by one of his allies. Maliki, who many say was chosen because he was perceived to be weak and without a strong grassroots power base, has managed to outflank everyone: his Shia allies and foes, the Americans who wanted him removed at one time, even the Iranians.' (650 words in story) Full Story By Hidari, Section Iraq-Iran-Syria
After the catastrophe of Iraq, of course, we are left with Afghanistan (and Pakistan, a subject to which we will return). As it happens, of course, the story of Iraq will probably go on for a lot longer than people think....as pointed out below the withdrawal plan is not really a withdrawal plan. However let's return to that at a later point.
For the moment let's return to Afghanistan, the 'good war'. However, as Simon Jenkins points out in the Guardian Afghanistan is really just Vietnam for slow learners. 'Before he became president, Obama was much taken by the idea that Afghanistan was a good and winnable war, a usefully macho contrast to his retreatism on Iraq. But in a military briefing at the time, he asked what was the exit strategy from Kabul and was met with silence. He has got the point. In Britain, Gordon Brown too has no answer. Whether speaking to troops in the field or to the House of Commons, he incants the unconvincing line that the war he is waging, and plainly not winning, against the Taliban is about "terrorism on the streets of Britain". He cannot believe this any more than do his listeners. His platitudinous references to Afghanistan in the counter-terrorism strategy launched yesterday are evidence of this, complete with its absurd insistence on "poppy eradication". This war remains what it was from the start, aggression against a foreign state intended to punish it for refusing to hand over the perpetrators of 9/11. It was later sanitised (largely by the British) as a liberal intervention to bring democracy and gender awareness to a poor people. The American architect of the war, Donald Rumsfeld, had no such lofty ambition. He just wanted to hit hard and get out. It was Tony Blair and the neocons who saw the country as a testbed for their new philanthropic imperialism.' (1176 words in story) Full Story By Hidari, Section Iraq-Iran-Syria
From Fox News (!).
'What Candidate Obama promised and President Obama delivered has many of his most ardent supporters on the left -- from members of Congress down to grassroots anti-war activists -- wondering whether he can be counted on to advance the liberal agenda. The president, speaking to Marines in Camp Lejeune, N.C, on Friday, announced that the U.S. will end the Iraq war over the next 18 months, ordering the immediate drawdown of the 142,000 troops in Iraq. The war will officially end on Aug. 31, 2010.' Or will it? (417 words in story) Full Story By Hidari, Section Iraq-Iran-Syria
First here's the news from the Independent: one of the few (indeed, practically the only) British newspapers that has stood firmly against the invasion and occupation from the beginning.
'Iraq and the United States have finally agreed on a security pact which would mean that US forces would withdraw from Iraq by 2011, American and Iraqi officials said yesterday. The accord became a major test of strength between the Iraqi government and Washington since negotiations began in March with the Iraqi Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki, pictured below, demanding US concessions on the date of the troop withdrawal and immunity for US troops. The pact replaces the UN Security Council resolution enacted after the American invasion...The accord has been on the verge of being signed several times in the past only for fresh objections to be made by the Iraqi government, which has become increasingly confident of its own strength. A compromise has been reached on whether or not US troops can be tried by an Iraqi court if they commit crimes while not engaged in operations. US troops are to withdraw from Iraqi towns and villages by the middle of next year and from Iraq entirely by the middle of 2011 said the government's spokesman, Ali Dabbagh. He said: "The withdrawal is to be achieved in three years. In 2011, the government at that time will determine whether it needs a new pact or not, and what type of pact will depend on the challenges it faces." The US administration will present the pact as a sign of its success in Iraq but in fact the accord is very different from originally envisaged by Washington which would largely have continued the occupation as before.' So far, so good. Or so it would seem. (758 words in story) Full Story By Hidari, Section Iraq-Iran-Syria
Pakistan was an important colony to the American Empire. Under the client king Musharraf the Americans could 'hold' (at least to a certain extent) the border with Afghanistan. Pakistan also borders, non-coincidentally, Iran.
So, given its strategic importance, it is unsurprising that the Americans fought the demands of the Pakistan people for democratic self-determination as long as possible. Luckily the Pakistan people fought hard against the Empire and eventually managed to get what they wanted: democracy. That's the good news. (16 comments, 740 words in story) Full Story By Hidari, Section Iraq-Iran-Syria
As always, simply 'reverse the polarities' of this story to see its significance.
'The Bush administration has conducted an extensive spying operation on Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki, his staff and others in his government, according to a new book by Washington Post editor and author Bob Woodward. "We know everything he says," according to one of multiple sources Woodward cites about the practice in "The War Within: A Secret White House History 2006-2008."' Now, just try to imagine how our 'free press' would have reacted if a foreign power: (841 words in story) Full Story By Hidari, Section Iraq-Iran-Syria
After all the problems with Georgia (or, to be more specific, Georgia's problems with South Ossetia) I bet you all thought the Iran situation had gone away, didn't you?
Hardly. On the contrary. With a newly emboldened Russia, and increasing signs of Iranian-Russian cooperation it hardly seems likely that the Americans are going to ease off Persia, especially since the Americans' embarassing humiliation in Georgia. So...this story is interesting. (352 words in story) Full Story By Hidari, Section News
Good article here from the Guardian putting the current spat between Georgia and Russia in context.
'The clash between Russia and Georgia over South Ossetia, which escalated dramatically yesterday, in truth has more in common with the Falklands war of 1982 than it does with a cold war crisis. When the Argentine junta was basking in public approval for its bloodless recovery of Las Malvinas, Henry Kissinger anticipated Britain's widely unexpected military response with the comment: "No great power retreats for ever." Maybe today Russia has stopped the long retreat to Moscow which started under Gorbachev.' (386 words in story) Full Story
|
Front Page
Thursday August 7th
Wednesday August 6th
Saturday July 19th
Sunday July 13th
Sunday June 29th
Wednesday June 18th
Sunday June 8th
Monday May 5th
Sunday May 4th
|