 |
|
James Conachy
Contrary to the predictions of the Bush administration, the Pentagon and much of the USA media, the capture of Saddam Hussein has not brought about any significant reduction in the intensity of Iraqi opposition. Nearly one year after the invasion, USA troops are compelled to conduct over 1,500 patrols per day to try and disrupt resistance activities and to maintain control over the country. According to the most recent briefing by the Provisional Authority, the number of attacks on USA forces has increased over recent weeks, from 18 to 24 per day. Summing up the impact of Hussein?s capture on the scale of fighting, a 101st Airborne colonel said, “I would say there has been no noticeable difference in any way, shape or form since the time he was captured.”
Mike Ferner
If a “rogue nation” or swarthy men with foreign accents did it, we know what we?d call it. What the world?s most powerful military did to the village of Abou Siffa must be called the same thing: terrorism. A small citrus grove was the last stop on our tour of this farming hamlet on the Tigris River, 30 miles north of Baghdad and Mohammed Al Taai wanted to give us a gift of fruit. I put the two oranges he gave me in my right coat pocket. In the left clinked two spent shell casings I?d just found on the ground that came from a 25mm gun mounted on a Bradley Fighting Vehicle. We listened to the story of how the U.S. military came to Abou Siffa three times in one month, leaving a terrorized community in its wake.
Salim Lone
Even as one recoils at the carnage caused by the suicide bombings at the offices of Kurdish political parties, it becomes ever more impossible to understand how the US can justify occupation policies that have singularly failed to quell the insurgency and the spectre of civil war - and have not won over even a tiny minority of Iraqis to support continued US control. The latest strikes will also complicate Kofi Annan’s decision on whether to field the UN’s world-class electoral team in Iraq, even though there is widespread agreement on the need for UN involvement in the process leading to the end of the occupation. In the darkness, however, there is a glimmer of hope.
Pepe Escobar
Much more than George W Bush vs. the-yet-unknown-Democrat-who-would-be-king, this is the ultimate confrontation of 2004. In one corner, the military might of United States power. In the other, the white-bearded, black-turbaned Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, 74, three wives, three sons and spiritual leader of 15 million Iraqi Shi’ites. As things stand, the Bush re-election scenario for Iraq goes like this: the Medusa - Saddam Hussein - has been decapitated by Perseus - Bush - the war hero. The Sistani scenario does not involve campaigning, spinning or propaganda. Its political agenda is monothematic: free, direct, one-man, one-vote elections in Iraq as soon as possible.
Jay Shaft for the World Crisis Web
Over the Christmas holidays I managed to find two US soldiers who were back from Iraq. They were both somewhat willing to be interviewed and describe their time in Iraq in their own words. You could see the strain in their faces, and an almost haunted look in their eyes. Thoughts of all the troops they had left behind were weighing heavy on their minds. Neither one knew the other before coming back on leave. They had met in the airport and realized they were both returning to the same hometown for leave. On the trip home they got to talking, and shared their experiences as officers leading combat troops on patrols and into battles.
Geoffrey Aronson
USA officials, particularly those in the Department of Defense, have always insisted that the political and security tracks in Iraq proceed independently of one another. The Bush administration may be prepared to recall American administrators from their desks in Baghdad, but the three- and four-star generals and forces under their command will remain for an indeterminate period. The reduction in USA military personnel over the next year to around 120,000 troops (from the current 150,000) is only being achieved by recruiting civilian contractors to do some jobs. In short, the administration envisages no reduction in the ability of USA forces to project their power throughout Iraq.
Dahr Jamail for the World Crisis Web
"Two weeks ago the Americans came and asked me to give them names of resistance fighters. I don?t know any resistance fighters. We were always against Saddam here. They roughed me up some, then said they would come back in a week and I?d better have some names. They came back a week ago, sent my family outside and locked the door. I told them I don?t know any names, so they tied my hands, put a bag over my head, and took me away in an armored vehicle. They beat me on my head, neck, shoulders and chest. They kicked my legs. Then they took me home and told me they could kill me. I told them I just don?t know anyone they are looking for, because I?m not in the resistance. They said they would come back.”
Hannah Allam and Tom Lasseter
Whispers of “revolution” are growing louder in Baghdad this month at teahouses, public protests and tribal meetings as Iraqis point to the past as an omen for the future. Iraqis remember 1920 as one of the most glorious moments in modern history, one followed by nearly eight decades of tumult. The bloody rebellion against British rule that year is memorialized in schoolbooks, monuments and mass-produced tapestries that hang in living rooms. Now, many say there’s an uncanny similarity with today: unpopular foreign occupiers, unelected governing bodies and unhappy residents eager for self-determination. The result could be another bloody uprising.
Sarah Whalen
The USA claims it wants to establish a fair, responsible and democratic system of government in Iraq. Traditionally, this would mean a speedy election of Iraqis, by Iraqis, and for Iraqis. The Bush administration has something different in mind, but in delaying truly democratic elections in Iraq, the USA reveals how far removed it has become from its own democratic origins, which commenced not with the colonial revolution or its 1776 Declaration of Independence, but much earlier - 1620, to be precise, when a small group of conservative religious fanatics, hated and reviled in their own European countries, crossed the vast expanse of the Atlantic Ocean and arrived at Plymouth, Massachusetts.
 |
 |
Get free membership of the World Crisis Web, entitling you to post your own views on the articles published here, and to receive email summaries of the best articles on the site, as well as analysis and comment from other key sites.
Your privacy will always be fully respected. No-one's details will ever be given, sold, or otherwise traded to anyone else.
The World Crisis Web gives you automatically updated RSS news feeds for desktop newsreaders, or to add to your web site.
Amnesty International - Global Justice Gap Condemns Millions to Abuse
The PA's Disingenuous Boycott Campaign
A Shameful War: Israel in the Dock
Somalia: Bad Policies of Strange Bedfellows
The End of Hypocrisy: Crime's Gleeful Abandon in Gaza
Contact the editor without having to bother with e-mail.