' The governor of the North-West Frontier province, Owais Ghani, immediately spoke out against Obama, saying that the senator's remarks had the effect of undermining the new civilian government elected last February. Ghani warned that a U.S. incursion into the northwestern tribal areas would have "disastrous" consequences for the globe.
The governor underlined that a "war on terrorism" policy depended on popular support for it, and that such support was being leeched away by U.S. strikes on the Pakistan side of the border and by statements such as Obama's. A recent American attack mistakenly killed Pakistani troops who had been sent to fight the Pakistani Taliban at American insistence. The Pakistani public was furious. Ghani complained, "Candidate Obama gave these statements; I come out openly and say such statements undermine support, don't do it." '
And at the same site, don't miss Farideh Farhi's analysis of the Iranian negotiations with the US and Europe over its civilian nuclear research program.
Passage of Electoral Provision Likely will Delay Elections
It is not looking good for the holding of provincial elections in Iraq this year.
First the high electoral commission warned that if enabling legislation was not passed by the end of July, it would push them back from October to Dec. 22.
Now, the contentious issue of the province of Kirkuk may have delayed them further. Kirkuk has Kurds, Arabs and Turkmen. The Kurds wish to annex it to their Kurdistan Regional Government, seeing its oil wealth as potentially key to an independent Kurdish state in the future. The annexation is opposed by Arabs and most Turkmen. It is also opposed by Turkey.
ome had argued that Kirkuk should vote like any other province. But the parliamentarians voting on Tuesday, according to the LAT's Ned Parker, passed a "provision" that "called for a committee to be set up to review the problems in Kirkuk and take interim steps until local elections are scheduled, including apportioning power in the provincial government equally among Kurds, Arabs and Turkmens."
The secret ballot had been opposed by the Kurdish MPs, who staged a walk-out, along with some Shiite allies. When this provision was passed, they warned of blood in the streets in Kirkuk. (Actually, that development would not reflect well on the Kurds, since they would be turning to violence over a measure passed by a majority of the quorum in an elected parliament.)
It is widely expected that President Jalal Talabani with use his power of veto against the bill.
Al-Hayat writes in Arabic that the Kurdistan Alliance with 58 seats in parliament has been a key pillar of support for the al-Maliki government. Were the Kurds to be deeply angered, they could pull out of his de facto coalition, leaving him much weakened. The tiff with the Kurds comes only days after the Sunni Arab Iraqi Accord Front finally rejoined the government.
Kirkuk sees regular political violence. On Tuesday, McClatchy reports, "On Monday night, a roadside bomb targeted a police patrol in Kirkuk city. Two policemen were killed( including the deputy of Irouba police station Colonel Khabat Aziz) and 5 others were injured."
Troop Agreement Misses Deadline; Provincial Law Misses Deadline; Bombings in Mosul, Diyala, Fallujah
First there was going to be a status of forces agreement between the US and Iraq, which would be ratified by the Iraqi parliament and would grant the US long-term bases. Private security guards and US troops would be immune from Iraqi law. US commanders would launch operations at will, would decide who a terrorist was, and would arrest and imprison Iraqis at will.
Then al-Maliki went to Iran for consultations. And Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani forbade a giveaway of Iraqi sovereignty. And the Sadrists began demonstrating every Friday. Then the US launched a unilateral operation in al-Maliki's home town and killed his cousin.
So the private contractors won't have legal immunity. And the agreement will be just for a year, not long-term. And it won't be ratified by the Iraqi parliament, so it is just a vague agreement between two executives. It won't stipulate long-term arrangements, but its interpretive context will be one in which the Iraqi leadership has expressed a desire for US troops to leave in 2010. It isn't clear if US troops will have legal immunity or whether they will have full freedom of action or whether they will be able to arrest and incarcerate Iraqis at will.
You have to wonder whether the Iraqis and the Americans in the end won't have to go back to the UN for a troop mandate again. The Iraqis want out from under the UN but don't want to recognize that the American presence detracts from their sovereignty. D'oh.
McCain keeps boasting about being "right" about the "surge" and saying Obama was "wrong."
Look, it is more important that McCain was consistently wrong. He was wrong about the desirability of going to war against Iraq. He was wrong about it being a cakewalk. He was wrong about there being WMD there. He was wrong about everything. And he was wrong about the troop escalation making things better. The casualty figures dropped in al-Anbar, where few extra US troops were ever sent. They dropped in Basra, from which the British withdrew. Something happened. Putting it all on 30,000 extra troops seems a stretch. And what about all the ethnic cleansing and displacing of persons that took place under the nose of the "surge?" McCain has been wrong about everything to do with Iraq. And he is boasting about his wisdom on it!
' * MOSUL - A suicide car bomber killed two private security contractors serving as bodyguards to members of the Kurdish Democratic Party in an attack on their convoy in Mosul . . . The blast also wounded eight civilians nearby.
MOSUL - Gunmen killed two people when they opened fire on their vehicle in southeastern Mosul, police said.
MOSUL - Gunmen killed two brothers and their cousin in a drive-by shooting in northern Mosul on Sunday, police said. . . .
MOSUL - One body was found with gunshot wounds to the head in western Mosul, police said. . .
BAGHDAD - A parked car bomb killed one person and wounded four others on Sunday in Alawi district, central Baghdad, police said.
FALLUJA - Five people were wounded by two roadside bombs exploding within minutes of each other on different streets in central Falluja, 50 km (30 miles) west of Baghdad, police said.
Despite all the talk about Iraq being "calm," I'd like to point out that the month just before the last visit Barack Obama made to Iraq (he went in January, 2006), there were 537 civilian and ISF Iraqi casualties. In June of this year, 2008, there were 554 according to AP. These are official statistics gathered passively that probably only capture about 10 percent of the true toll.
That is, the Iraqi death toll is actually still worse now than the last time Obama was in Iraq! (See the bombings and shootings listed below for Sunday). The hype around last year's troop escalation obscures a simple fact: that Obama formed his views about the need for the US to leave Iraq at a time when its security situation was very similar to what it is now! Why a return to the bad situation in late 05 and early 06 should be greeted by the GOP as the veritable coming of the Messiah is beyond me. You have people like Joe Lieberman saying silly things like if it weren't for the troop escalation, Obama wouldn't be able to visit Iraq. Uh, he visited it before the troop escalation, just fine.
The troop escalation, which actually allowed the ethnic cleansing of the Sunnis of Baghdad and the expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis from the country, has largely been pushed as propaganda by the White House and the AEI. Here's an example of how their propaganda works. As is usual with news it does not like, the Bush administration attempted to muddy the waters this weekend regarding the interview of PM Nuri al-Maliki with Der Spiegel in which he expressed approval of Barack Obama's plan to get US troops out of Iraq within 16 months of next January. Al-Maliki told Der Spiegel in response to a question about how long US troops would be in his country,
'Maliki: As soon as possible, as far as we're concerned. U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes.
SPIEGEL: Is this an endorsement for the US presidential election in November? Does Obama, who has no military background, ultimately have a better understanding of Iraq than war hero John McCain?
Maliki: Those who operate on the premise of short time periods in Iraq today are being more realistic. Artificially prolonging the tenure of US troops in Iraq would cause problems. Of course, this is by no means an election endorsement. Who they choose as their president is the Americans' business. But it's the business of Iraqis to say what they want. '
Ali al-Dabbagh, who is usually described as al-Maliki's spokesman but actually seems to work for the CENTCOM or Pentagon Middle East command, was trotted out to make vague statements about Der Spiegel's having mistranslated or misinterpreted what al-Maliki said. This denial was issued through CENTCOM! When the original demand came from al-Maliki for a timetable for US withdrawal, it was al-Dabbagh who reinterpreted it as a 'time horizon.' Al-Dabbagh was contradicted by National Security Counsellor Muwaffaq al-Rubaie, who seems actually closer in this thinking to al-Maliki. My guess is that al-Dabbagh has been recruited by some agency in Washington, DC, to explain away al-Maliki's statements whenever they contradict Bush's.
Der Spiegel stood by its story. The text of Der Spiegel's statement is here. It turns out that the translator involved works for al-Maliki, not for Der Spiegel, and so presumably knew what the prime minister's words meant in Arabic. And for the piece de resistance, it turns out that Der Spiegel has an audiotape of the Arabic of the interview, which they leaked to The New York Times. Sabrina Tavernise and Jeff Zeleny write:
' But the interpreter for the interview works for Mr. Maliki’s office, not the magazine. . . The following is a direct translation from the Arabic of Mr. Maliki’s comments by The Times: “Obama’s remarks that — if he takes office — in 16 months he would withdraw the forces, we think that this period could increase or decrease a little, but that it could be suitable to end the presence of the forces in Iraq.” He continued: “Who wants to exit in a quicker way has a better assessment of the situation in Iraq.” '
But you see, it does not matter that al-Maliki actually said what he said. It does not matter that Der Spiegel can prove it. All that matters is that the Goebbelses around Bush and Cheney have managed to muddy the waters and produce doubt, taking the hard edge off the interview. Even AFP, the usually skeptical French wire service, asserted that al-Maliki had "denied" the accuracy of the Der Spiegel interview! Of course, al-Maliki has done no such thing. CENTCOM ventriloquising al-Dabbagh engaged in the denial, and a very vague one at that.
That is the way propaganda works, to obscure the truth and ensure it can be denied. Some wingnut even tried to pressure me to retract the little sentence I had written on the affair yesterday, on the grounds of "al-Dabbagh's" mendacious and ridiculous assertions. Our information system is so corrupt and easily manipulated that even a clumsy ploy can obscure the truth and bully the journalists.
Over the weekend, the Sunni fundamentalist Iraqi Accord Front rejoined the al-Maliki government. It had left last summer over accusations that al-Maliki ignored Sunni sensitivities, refused to speak to his vice president, Tariq al-Hashimi, coddled Shiite militias that ethnically cleansed Sunnis, and kept tens of thousands of Sunnis in prison without charges or due process. As Xinhua notes, al-Hashimi's Iraqi Islamic Party, one of three components of the Iraqi Accord Front coalition of Sunni parties, will face great competition in the provincial elections from the US-created Awakening Councils, which are paid and armed by the US military.
Speaking of this fall's provincial elections, the country's elections commission announced Sunday that they might have to be postponed, given that Parliament has still not passed the enabling legislation. The election law is mired in debates over the mixed province of Kirkuk in the north, and whether it should hold provincial elections along with the other provinces. The province is claimed by the Kurdistan Regional Government, which wants to annex it, even though the Turkmen and Arab populations do not want to join semi-autonomous Kurdistan (where the state schools are no longer Arabophone).
Al-Zaman writing in Arabic says that the new date has been set as December 22. It is official: The provincial elections in Iraq will not occur in time to affect the US presidential race. E.g., if the Sadrists sweep to power in many Shiite provinces, that could have been a factor in the US polls. Not going to happen.
A new airport, funded in important part by Iran has opened at the Shiite holy city of Najaf. It will likely bring millions of pilgrims from Iran, Pakistan, India and elsewhere to the shrine of Imam Ali, the son-in-law and cousin of the Prophet Muhammad. American authorities worried about Iranians in Iraq may as well just lay back; with millions going in and out, tracking them is going to be rather difficult.
An adhesive IED stuck to a civilian car detonated in Kem neighbourhood, Adhamiyah, northern Baghdad early Sunday killing the driver.
A roadside bomb exploded in Karrada, near al-Rahibat Hospital at 7.30 a.m. killing one civilian, injuring three.
A roadside bomb targeted a U.S. military convoy on Qanat Street in the direction of Qahira, northeast Baghdad at around 10.30 a.m. Sunday. No casualties were reported.
A roadside bomb targeted a police patrol in Qahira, near al-Nidaa Mosque at noon injuring five people including two policemen.
A parked car bomb detonated in Damascus intersection, central Baghdad at 6 p.m. killing one civilian, injuring seven people including one policemen and one baby girl.
Three unidentified bodies were found in Baghdad today by Iraqi Police; one in Amil, one in Baladiyat and one in Hurriyah.
Gunmen threw a hand grenade at a car selling alcoholic beverages, parked on the Jadriyah Bridge at 9 p.m. injuring four civilians.
A roadside bomb exploded in al-Jaara in Madain, to the south east of Baghdad injuring three civilians including a little girl.
Diyala
A roadside bomb targeted a pick up truck in Wajihiyah district, 20 km to the east of Baquba at 6.45 p.m. killing two policemen in plain clothes.
Nineveh
A suicide car bomb targeted a site where trucks carrying construction materials for the U.S military stop at 4 p.m. killing two foreign private security contractors.
Gunmen in a speeding car open fire upon a group of civilians in al-Hadbaa neighbourhood, Mosul city at 6 p.m. killing three.
Gunmen in a speeding car open fire upon a civilian in Aden neighbourhood at 7.30 p.m. killing him on his doorstep.
One policeman killed by sniper fire in al-Masarif neighbourhood, Mosul city at around 7.30 p.m.
Anbar
Iraqi Army servicemen captured a suicide bomber targeting a checkpoint in central Ramadi. The suicide vest was defused and the suicide bomber detained.
Salahuddin
An American Special Force raided the residence of Khalaf Issa Turk in al-Asri neighbourhood, Baiji at dawn, Sunday and opened fire upon Husam Hamed Hmoud al-Qaissi, son of the Governor of Salahuddin Province while he was asleep in the guest room and also opened fire upon Auday Khalaf Issa al-Qaissi, his cousin killing them both, and detained two others without giving any explanation, said a security source in Salahuddin Province. The American military said its forces shot two armed men during a raid because they felt they had "hostile intent". The statement added that the forces also injured and captured an al-Qaida financer during the operation.
Kirkuk
A roadside bomb targeted a police patrol in Tayaran Square, central Kirkuk Sunday morning, injuring one policeman.
Basra
Basra Police found the body of a 24 year old female in Jazair neighbourhood, central Basra Sunday. She was shot four times.
Aljazeera is showing footage of him addressing US troops who are going wild for him, and shooting hoops in the base gym. Meanwhile, the Prime Minister of Iraq, endorsed Obama's plan for a withdrawal US troops from Iraq. Although al-Maliki said he was not choosing up sides in the presidential race, it seems clear that he'd be much more comfortable with Obama.
CBS reports on the trip, which included a stop at the provincial eastern Pushtun city of Jalalabad. I was impressed that Obama got out of the capital.
Violence against NATO troops in Afghanistan is up 40% in 2008 over 2007, and more civilians were killed in the first half of 2008 than in all of 2007. AP has more.
The Observer's editorial on the situation in Afghanistan points out that the poppy crop this year will be a bumper one, that the Afghanistan government is riddled with corruption, that billions in foreign aid have made little difference (and that they may have been embezzled), and that more foreign troops in the country is unlikely to be the solution.
OSC: Afghan Observers Sceptical of Senator Obama's Plan To Send More Troops
The USG Open Source Center translates a report in Dari Persian on a parliamentarian and two close observers from Afghanistan who entertain the severest doubts about Barack Obama's plan to send more US troops to Afghanistan.
Afghan Observers Sceptical of Senator Obama's Plan To Send More Troops Voice of the Islamic Republic of Iran External Service Saturday, July 19, 2008 Document Type: OSC Translated Text
An Afghan parliamentarian has criticized one of the US presidential candidates for his plan to deploy more troops in Afghanistan. Elaborating on his foreign policy this week, Barack Obama said that as president, he would send two more US combat brigades to the Afghan theatre.
According to a report (source indistinct) from Kabul, Afghan MP Kabir Ranjbar asserted on Friday that increasing the number of US and other foreign servicemen would not help Afghanistan at all. Wahid Mozhda, another Afghan political observer, has also warned that the Obama's plan to deploy up to 10,000 additional troops will worsen the situation in Afghanistan. This Afghan observer states according to this plan, the US is trying to resolve the problem through military measures, which is obviously not an effective strategy.
In addition, Mr Fahim Dashti, a journalist and observer, has said that the US government officials have decided to increase troops in Afghanistan, at a time when they have failed to defeat remnants of the Taliban and Al-Qa'ida in this country. Fahim Dashti says sending additional US and other foreign troops to Afghanistan will cause more problems in the long term, because it may antagonize the people's anti-American feelings. The Afghan analyst accentuated that countries like the USA should organize and equip the Afghan native forces, including the national army and police, as soon as possible if they really want to put an end to insecurity in Afghanistan.
(Description of Source: Mashhad Voice of the Islamic Republic of Iran External Service in Dari -- Iranian government-run radio)
Bush has agreed in all but name with Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki on a timetable for US troop withdrawal from that country. As usual Bush's staff made up an implausible euphemism for the timetable, calling it a "time horizon" for "aspirational goals?" Language like that is a sure sign that Bush is too embarrassed to call it like it is.
Al-Maliki has gotten enormous pressure from the grand ayatollahs in Najaf and from the Sadr Movement not to sign away Iraqi sovereignty in making a status of forces agreement (SOFA) with the US. Al-Maliki is said to have despaired of getting a SOFA past the Iraqi parliament, since the MPs demand a timetable for US withdrawal. He will instead initial a Memorandum of Understanding with the Bush administration. Al-Maliki and Bush hope this MOU will take on the force of law even though no legislature in either country will have passed it.
So Bush has thrown al-Maliki the lifeline of a few euphemisms. But a time horizon is just a fancy way of saying "timetable."
Bush probably wants US troops in Iraq because they help nail down energy contracts between the US and Iraqi concerns. Without 140,000 troops in the country, the Iraqis would not have a good reason to favor US concerns like Hunt over China's Sinopec or Russia's Lukoil (see the next item).
The USG Open Source Center summarizes Russian press comment on the Gazprom deals with Libya and Iran. The deal with Iran is extremely important because if it goes forward, it would require Russia to tangle with US economic sanctions.
OSC Report: Russian Media View Implcations of Gazprom Deals With Libya, Iran Russia -- OSC Report . . . Friday, July 18, 2008
Russian Media View Implications of Gazprom Deals With Libya, Iran The Russian gas monopoly Gazprom held substantive talks with Libya and signed a memorandum of understanding with Iran, adding two more participants to its policy of geographical diversification of gas and oil sources. Many Russian media harked back to the idea of a "gas OPEC" and also pointed out that Gazprom's cooperation with the two countries made Europe's search for alternative energy suppliers much more difficult. While some media saw a chance for Russia to fill the void left by Western oil companies' decisions to pullout of Iran, others commented that the agreements were more political than economic and might not be carried out. . .
On 13 July, Gazprom signed a memorandum of understanding with the National Iranian Oil Company, with some provisions similar to the agreement reached with Libya. The two companies proposed a joint venture for exploration and development of gas and oil fields in Iran, and to build refining and transport facilities in Russia, Iran, and "third countries."
Some media hypothesized that the new cooperation agreement smight resurrect the idea of an international gas cartel similar to OPEC.
. Elite-oriented Gazeta opined that Russian-Iraniancooperation in producing gas "could lead to creation of a gas analog to OPEC" (14 July) . .
Many media opined that Gazprom's control over Libyan and possibly Iranian gas and oil exports would make Europe even more dependent onthe Russian company.
. Independent daily Nezavisimaya Gazeta stated that Gazprom had Europe "in a vise," expanding into areas like Africa, whichE urope had traditionally regarded as an alternative to Russian supplies."Europe risks being completely dependent on Gazprom," the paper predicted (15 July).
. Business Internet publication RBCdaily cited Kapitalcompany analyst Vitaliy Kryukov, who noted that Gazprom's strengthened positioncaused "a negative reaction in the world community" (10 July). . .
Government daily Rossiyskaya Gazeta recalled that the EU had viewed Libyan resources as an alternative to Russian supplies, butdue to Gazprom's deal with Libya, EU companies "trading with Libya willstill have to deal with Gazprom as a middleman" (11 July). . .
. Gazeta cited experts' opinions that Gazprom "had every chance to occupy the freed-up spot" formerly held by the French companyTotal (11 July).
. The oil and gas industry Internet site Novosti TEK, commenting on the Western companies leaving Iran, noted that Gazprom was "the only company which doesn't fear political instability in Iran" (16 July).
Some media and commentatorsexpressed doubt that the deal with Iran would be successful.
. Influential daily Kommersant cited Mikhail Korchemkin,director of East European Gas Analysis, who called the Gazprom-Iranian OilCompany memorandum a "political document" that would remain "onpaper" until the situation in Iran "changes profoundly" (15 July).
. biGness.ru quoted Troyka Dialog analyst Valeriy Nesterov,who pointed out that "concrete actions do not always follow memoranda ofcooperation," recalling many such memoranda Gazprom had signed with Westerncompanies that "were not fully carried out or not carried out at all"(15 July).
Vitaliy Portnikov, writing in the independent Internet site Politkom.ru,likened the situation in Iran to that in Iraq, where Russia's Lukoil had signedcontracts with Saadam Husayn only to lose out to Western companies when hisregime toppled. He suggested that if the situation in Iran stabilized, theleadership would again invite Western investors and Gazprom would be the loser (15 July). '
Winner, October 5, 2007, Scott Nearing Award for Courageous Scholarship (Awarded by the Graduate Students of the Political Science Department, University of Pennsylvania).
Click to join Infoco
