iraq update

what happened at the polls?

February 7, 2009 · Leave a Comment

What The Hell Just Happened In Iraq? Ctd.

<!– –>Iraqvoteahmadalrubayeafpgetty

Preliminary election results in Iraq are being reported. Lynch is worried about Baghdad:

Preliminary results from the Baghdad provincial council election have begun to filter out into the Iraqi press. The lead story will probably be that Maliki’s Rule of Law list won more than half the seats. But the more important story may be that all of the Sunni lists combined evidently only won four or five seats between them. That, combined with the fiasco in Anbar, could put Sunni frustration firmly back into the center of Iraqi politics – risking alienation from politics, intensified intra-Sunni competition, and perhaps even a return of the insurgency.

Juan Cole looks at the results as a whole and doesn’t sound as alarmed:

I think these results are encouraging for Obama.

The Sunni Arab ex-Baathist secular elites have reentered polities in the Sunni Arab areas. These election results put paid to the fantasies of Dick Cheney and John McCain that Sunni Arab Iraqis are pro-”al-Qaeda.” Most of them would not even vote for a religious party, much less for a radical fundamentalist terrorist group. Cheney said that if the US left, al-Qaeda would take over Sunni Arab Iraq. That is highly unlikely given these election results.

Ilan Goldenberg’s take:

Sunnis seemed to underachieve in Baghdad getting around 20% of the seats (This from a city that just a few years ago was 65% Sunni).  There is also still a great deal of tension in Anbar where the initial results had the IIP (The religious party) winning big and the some of the tribes threatening war in response.  It now appears that some of the tribal groups may have done better than initially reported and in fact defeated the IIP. The key question is whether all the players in Anbar will accept the election results or will this be the beginning of a new wave of intra-Sunni violence?

(Photo: An electoral worker readies to pick-up a full ballot box to be opened following last week’s nationwide provincial elections electoral tally center in Baghdad on February 6, 2009. A coalition backed by Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki was the star performer in Shiite-majority provinces in a show of confidence for the premier’s policies, election results showed. By Ahmad Al-Rubaye/AFP/Getty Images.)

Categories: Iraq · elections · military issues · suicide bombers

propaganda push

February 7, 2009 · Leave a Comment

Pentagon Propaganda Is Booming

Posted on Feb 5, 2009
USAF / Tech. Sgt. Charlein Sheets

Air Force Maj. Robert Brooks (right) waits for his cue from Sgt. 1st Class Jamie Posten, with the Army and Air Force Hometown News Service, to begin taping a holiday greeting at Kirkuk Air Base, Iraq, in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

 

The military’s spin budget—covering recruitment, advertising and public relations—has jumped 63 percent over the last five years, to $4.7 billion, according to a yearlong investigation by the Associated Press. The Pentagon pays nearly as many people to influence public opinion as the State Department has in its entire work force.

Ever hear of the Hometown News Service? You’re not supposed to. It’s an arm of the military’s influence regime that tries to place stories in mainstream news outlets. It is against the law for the Pentagon to propagandize at home, but that line has blurred over the years.

AP via Google:

An Associated Press investigation found that over the past five years, the money the military spends on winning hearts and minds at home and abroad has grown by 63 percent, to at least $4.7 billion this year, according to Department of Defense budgets and other documents. That’s almost as much as it spent on body armor for troops in Iraq and Afghanistan between 2004 and 2006.

This year, the Pentagon will employ 27,000 people just for recruitment, advertising and public relations — almost as many as the total 30,000-person work force in the State Department.

“We have such a massive apparatus selling the military to us, it has become hard to ask questions about whether this is too much money or if it’s bloated,” says Sheldon Rampton, research director for the Committee on Media and Democracy, which tracks the military’s media operations. “As the war has become less popular, they have felt they need to respond to that more.”

Categories: pentagon · propaganda

pakistani nuclear arms trafficker released

February 7, 2009 · Leave a Comment

Nuclear Scientist A.Q. Khan Is Freed From House Arrest

 
Nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan, shown at home in Pakistan, was never charged with a crime.
Nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan, shown at home in Pakistan, was never charged with a crime. (By B.k. Bangash — Associated Press)

 

 

 

Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, February 7, 2009

Early yesterday, the Pakistani scientist at the center of one of history’s worst nuclear scandals walked out of his Islamabad villa to declare his vindication after five years of house arrest. “The judgment, by the grace of God, is good,” a smiling Abdul Qadeer Khan told a throng of reporters and TV crews.

Moments earlier, a Pakistani court had ordered the release of the metallurgist who had famously admitted selling nuclear secrets to Iran, Libya and North Korea. Through years of legal limbo, Khan, 72, had never been charged, and now he never will be. “The so-called A.Q. Khan affair is a closed chapter,” a Pakistani government spokesman said.

In Washington, the news sparked criticism but little surprise. It was a jarring denouement to what had been one of the most celebrated successes against nuclear weapons trafficking in decades — a victory that has been increasingly tarnished by government failures in the aftermath of the ring’s breakup.

Nearly five years after Khan’s smuggling operation came to light, the international effort to prosecute its leaders is largely in shambles, yielding convictions of only a few minor participants and no significant prison time for any of them.

Meanwhile, the much-touted cooperation between the United States and its partners in the investigation of the network also is in disarray. In recent weeks, Washington has faced accusations that it withheld crucial documents from key allies and allowed its spies to run covert operations in friendly countries without permission.

Worst of all, the recent discovery of nuclear weapons blueprints on computers found in Switzerland and Dubai has prompted questions about whether the damage inflicted by the network was truly contained — or even understood. It is possible, U.S. officials concede, that Khan and his allies shared nuclear secrets with still-unknown countries and, perhaps, terrorist groups, as well.

Khan himself remains a hero in his homeland, immune from further prosecution and free now to travel abroad as he wishes. His lenient treatment is hardly likely to deter would-be traffickers, said David Albright, a former U.N. nuclear inspector who has spent years studying the network.

“Too many network members are getting off with little punishment,” said Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security, a Washington research group. “The busting up was handled far better than the rounding up.”

Khan’s international network collapsed in 2003 after U.S., British and Italian officials halted a Libya-bound ship in the Mediterranean loaded with machine parts used to make enriched uranium.

That discovery was the culmination of more than a decade of secret investigation by the CIA and other agencies of the business dealings of Khan, one of Pakistan’s best-known scientists and the father of the country’s nuclear weapons program.

U.S. and U.N. investigators ultimately accused Khan of heading a sophisticated network of businesses and front companies that manufactured and sold components needed to make nuclear bombs. But while the factories and shipping offices were dismantled, Khan proved to be beyond Washington’s reach. Pakistan’s then-President Pervez Musharraf, confronted with evidence of Khan’s deeds, persuaded the scientist to make a public confession but then officially pardoned him. Khan would remain under house arrest, but Pakistani officials refused to allow him to be questioned by U.S. officials or investigators of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog.

In the years since, the restrictions on Khan were gradually lessened, and many experts believed he would be freed.

Word of Khan’s release from even his modest confinement drew complaints and concern from the Obama administration.

At the State Department, spokesman Gordon K. Duguid said yesterday that Khan remains a “serious proliferation risk,” and the White House asked for assurances from Pakistan that the scientist will never be allowed to resume his former work.

Pakistan’s foreign ministry acknowledged the end of Khan’s confinement but said Islamabad will take “all necessary measures to promote the goals of nonproliferation.”

Despite such pledges, Khan’s release solidified a view among some U.S. officials and weapons experts that Pakistan had not shown proper resolve in investigating the network and bringing Khan and his cohorts to justice.

Jeffrey G. Lewis, director of the Nuclear Strategy and Nonproliferation Initiative at the New America Foundation, said Khan’s ability to essentially walk away from nuclear-smuggling charges “makes a mockery of our efforts to stop the spread” of nuclear weapons.

“In a spy novel, these guys would meet their fates at the murderous hands of spy agencies or each other,” he said. “In real life, the guys in the Khan network do a little house arrest or maybe some pretrial detention.”

Other alleged operatives got off nearly as easy, he said. “As far as I can tell, no one served a day after trial,” though a German importer spent some time behind bars in pretrial detention, Lewis said.

Efforts to prosecute alleged members of the network in Switzerland touched off a series of squabbles between Swiss and U.S. officials. Swiss prosecutors accused the Bush administration of withholding critical evidence needed to put three Swiss businessmen — a father and two brothers who worked with Khan in the 1980s and 1990s — behind bars.

Last month, one of the brothers confirmed in a Swiss television interview that he had been working undercover for the CIA, prompting the Swiss parliament to ask why Switzerland had not been informed about covert action inside its territory.

While the investigation has yielded few arrests, it has provided disturbing insight into the sophistication of 21st-century smuggling networks and their ability to move the most sensitive weapons technology across international borders, weapons experts said. Albright, the former nuclear inspector, said it is likely that other smugglers will eventually seek to take Khan’s place, and some may already have done so. If fact, he said, it would be unwise even to count Khan out.

“He likely still has or can access sensitive nuclear technology. He certainly knows how to organize nuclear smuggling internationally,” Albright said. “Khan remains a serious proliferation risk.”

Categories: arms deal · middle east · military issues · nuclear arms · pakistan

botched uganda mission leads to massacre

February 7, 2009 · Leave a Comment

A mission, carried out by the Ugandan military, was intended to “crush” the infamous Lord’s Resistance Army, which had been holed up in a village in neighboring Congo. But the offensive failed and the LRA fanned out, committing massacres that killed up to 900 civilians. Critics said the U.S. should have known the operation would have ended in massacres. American officials told the paper the U.S. had 17 military officers advising the Ugandans and equipping them with “satellite phones, intelligence and $1 million in fuel.” The assistance was approved personally by President Bush.

U.S. Aided a Failed Plan to Rout Ugandan Rebels

Vanessa Vick for The New York Times

recoveringindungucongo_xlarge1

Bertrand Bangbe, recovering in Dungu, Congo, was attacked by the Lord’s Resistance Army. V.Vick

By JEFFREY GETTLEMAN and ERIC SCHMITT
February 6, 2009

DUNGU, Congo — The American military helped plan and pay for a recent attack on a notorious Ugandan rebel group, but the offensive went awry, scattering fighters who carried out a wave of massacres as they fled, killing as many as 900 civilians.

dungucongo

The operation was led by Uganda and aimed to crush the Lord’s Resistance Army, a brutal rebel group that had been hiding out in a Congolese national park, rebuffing efforts to sign a peace treaty. But the rebel leaders escaped, breaking their fighters into small groups that continue to ransack town after town in northeastern Congo, hacking, burning, shooting and clubbing to death anyone in their way.

The United States has been training Ugandan troops in counterterrorism for several years, but its role in the operation has not been widely known. It is the first time the United States has helped plan such a specific military offensive with Uganda, according to senior American military officials. They described a team of 17 advisers and analysts from the Pentagon’s new Africa Command working closely with Ugandan officers on the mission, providing satellite phones, intelligence and $1 million in fuel.

No American forces ever got involved in the ground fighting in this isolated, rugged corner of Congo, but human rights advocates and villagers here complain that the Ugandans and the Congolese troops who carried out the operation did little or nothing to protect nearby villages, despite a history of rebel reprisals against civilians.

The troops did not seal off the rebels’ escape routes or deploy soldiers to many of the nearby towns where the rebels slaughtered people in churches and even tried to twist off toddlers’ heads.

“The operation was poorly planned and poorly executed,” said Julia Spiegel, a Uganda-based researcher for the Enough Project, which campaigns against genocide. The massacres were “the L.R.A.’s standard operating procedure,” she said. “And the regional governments knew this.”

American officials conceded that the operation did not go as well as intended, and that villagers had been left exposed.

“We provided insights and alternatives for them to consider, but their choices were their choices,” said one American military official who was briefed on the operation, referring to the African forces on the ground. “In the end, it was not our operation.”

Maj. Felix Kulayigye, a Ugandan military spokesman, declined to discuss the American involvement and simply said, “There was no way to prevent these massacres.”

The Lord’s Resistance Army is now on the loose, moving from village to village, seemingly unhindered, leaving a wake of scorched huts and crushed skulls. Witnesses say the fighters have kidnapped hundreds of children and marched them off into the bush, the latest conscripts in their slave army.

In Dungu, a 10-year-old girl lay comatose on a metal hospital cot, her face glazed with sweat, her pulse hammering in her neck. She had been sexually assaulted in a nearby village and shot in both legs, bullet through bone.

“The people who did this,” said her nurse, Rosa Apamato, “are demons.”

This used to be a tranquil, bountiful spot where villagers grew corn, beans and peanuts, more or less untouched by the violence that has plagued Congo’s east. But thousands have recently fled, and the town is now crawling with soldiers, aid workers and United Nations personnel, the movable cast that marks the advent of a serious problem.

The villagers who remain are terrified and confused. The Lord’s Resistance Army is not a Congolese movement. It is from Uganda. But once again, it seems that foreign armies are settling their scores in Congo, and the Congolese are paying the price. In the late 1990s and early 2000s, Congo became the battlefield for more than a dozen armies and rebel groups from neighboring African countries, and several million Congolese died.

Even now, Rwandan troops are battling militants hundreds of miles south of here. Congo invited the Rwandans in to go after a different rebel group and its commander, much in the same way it allowed Ugandan soldiers to cross the border and hunt down the Lord’s Resistance Army.

“Who are these L.R.A.?” asked Bertrand Bangbe, who had been axed in the head and left for dead. “Why are they here? Why are they killing us?”

There are few answers. The Lord’s Resistance Army may have had some legitimate grievances when it started more than 20 years ago as a cultish rebellion to overthrow the Ugandan government. The fighters hailed their leader, Joseph Kony, as a prophet and a savior for the historically oppressed Acholi people. The movement even proclaimed to be fighting for the Ten Commandants.

But it soon devolved into something more sinister. The Lord’s Resistance Army killed tens of thousands of people in northern Uganda, slicing off lips and terrorizing children, before the Ugandan Army drove it out about five years ago. Mr. Kony then marched his prepubescent death squads and dozens of teenage brides to Garamba National Park, a vast reserve of elephants and swamps near the border of Uganda and Sudan.

The Ugandan government has tried coaxing Mr. Kony out. But the International Criminal Court in The Hague has indicted him on charges of crimes against humanity, and he has long insisted the charges be dropped. In November, as he has many times before, Mr. Kony refused to sign a peace treaty.

After that, Major Kulayigye said, “the only option left open to us was the military option.”

The Ugandan government asked the American Embassy in Kampala, Uganda’s capital, for help, and the request was sent up the chain of command in November to President Bush, who personally authorized it, a former senior Bush administration official said.

The American advisers and Ugandan officers used satellite imagery and Ugandan field intelligence reports to triangulate where they believed Mr. Kony and his fighters were hiding. The plan was for the Ugandan military to bomb his camp and then cut off his 700 or so fighters with more than 6,000 Ugandan and Congolese ground troops. On Dec. 13, the day before the attack, several American advisers traveled to a staging site near the Uganda-Congo border for a final coordination meeting, a senior American military official said.

Thick fog delayed the attack by several hours, Ugandan officials said, and they lost the element of surprise. By the time Ugandan helicopters bombed Mr. Kony’s hut, it was empty. Ugandan foot soldiers, hiking many miles through the bush, arrived several days later and recovered a few satellite phones and some guns.

The Ugandans say they have destroyed the rebels’ control center and food supplies, rescued around 100 abducted children and killed several fighters, including some commanders. But the operation has been widely criticized by human rights groups as essentially swatting a hornet’s nest.

On Dec. 25, villagers in Faradje, a town near the national park, walked out of church as 50 to 70 armed men emerged from the bush. Most villagers had no idea who they were. Some Congolese towns had been attacked before the offensive, yet the raids were not so widespread that word would have trickled back to remote places like Faradje.

The armed men spoke a strange language, probably Acholi, but there was no misunderstanding them after the first machete was swung. Whoever could run, did. Christine Ataputo, who owns the one restaurant in town, watched from the forest floor as the rebels raped, burned and butchered. She was lying on her belly when she saw that her 18-year-old daughter, Chantal, had been captured.

“They took her away on a rope,” she said.

Chantal has not been seen since, and even more than a month later, Faradje still has the whiff of char. Around 150 people were killed Christmas Day. Several other villages, some more than 100 miles away, were simultaneously attacked. In one town, after the rebels killed 80 churchgoers, they ate the villagers’ Christmas feast and then dozed among the corpses, according to Human Rights Watch, which documented the massacre.

“These guys are just moving around, doing whatever they want, killing, raping, whatever,” said Charles Gaudry, a field coordinator for Doctors Without Borders, which says more than 50 villages in the area where it works have been attacked. “There’s zero protection.”

The United Nations has more than 16,000 peacekeepers in Congo, including about 250 in Dungu. But United Nations officials said they were spread too thin in other war-racked parts of eastern Congo to take on the Lord’s Resistance Army. At the time of the nearby massacres, the peacekeepers in Dungu were guarding the airfield.

Villagers across the area are now banding together in local self-defense forces, arming themselves with ancient shotguns and rubber slingshots. In the past in Congo, home-grown militias have only complicated the dynamic and led to more abuses.

Even where there are Congolese troops, there is not necessarily protection. The family of the 10-year-old girl in the hospital said she might have been shot by a Congolese soldier who missed the rebel who was assaulting her.

The other night, by the light of a flashlight, a young doctor took one look at the girl and ordered her evacuation to Goma, a city along the Congo-Rwanda border. She may lose a leg, he said. But at least in Goma there is a special hospital to treat girls who have been raped. In eastern Congo, there are tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of them.

Jeffrey Gettleman reported from Dungu, and Eric Schmitt from Washington.

Categories: blunders · civilian losses · massacre · mistakes · pentagon · war