Informed Comment

Demonstrators Tear-Gassed, Fired On

noreply@blogger.com (Juan Cole) — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:51:00 +0000

Hundreds of protesters braved tear gas and even some live fire to march toward Tehran University on Thursday, commemorating a crushed student protest movement of 1999 a s well as protesting the allegedly stolen elections of June 12. Police intervened to disperse them. A new and significant feature of this demonstration was that simultaneous rallies also occurred in cities all around the country. Although the crowds were relatively small, this national coordination suggests a national underground organization is emerging. The authorities cut off text messaging capabilities on Thursday in a vain attempt to thwart networking.

Nico Pitney is doing his usual superb job of live-blogging today's events in Iran.

Aljazeera English has a backgrounder on today's protests

Nico Pitney's interview with me at the Brave New Studios in Los Angeles on Wednesday:

You can also see it at Robert Greenwald's Brave New Studio site, a treasure trove of progressive, web-distributed documentary film-making.

End/ (Not Continued)

Thursday Protests Called in Iran, State Threatens Crackdown

noreply@blogger.com (Juan Cole) — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 08:22:00 +0000

The opposition in Iran has called for further public nationwide demonstrations on Monday, urging protesters to use the techniques of nonviolent noncooperation. Those who are afraid to risk beatings in the streets at the hands of state security organizations are urged to drive around and honk their horns. Thursday commemorates the anniversary of 1999 student demonstrations that were violently repressed by the regime.

The Iranian authorities pledged to crack down hard on any demonstrations, since no permits for them had been sought or bestowed.

Only two of Iran's leading religious authorities outside the government have congratulated President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on his alleged victory in the June 12 polls. The state chose having naked power over having credible authority, which may come to haunt it in the future.

End/ (Not Continued)

41 Dead, 70 Injured in Iraq bombings; US will Not turn over Prisoners

noreply@blogger.com (Juan Cole) — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 06:41:00 +0000

Bombings in Tal Afar and Baghdad killed 41 persons on Thursday morning. Tal Afar is a northern city with a mostly Turkmen population and some Arabs. US military operations in Tal Afar caused the Turkmen Sunnis to leave for the most part, leading to a take-over of the city by the Shiite Turkmen. The Sunni Turkmen were allied with a minority Sunni Arab community, and both had thrown in with the secular Baath regime. After the US overthrew the Baath, many Sunnis in the region turned toward vigilante fundamentalism or "al-Qaeda," provoking a fight between the Sunnis and the Shiites. The Shiites won, with the help of US and NATO fighter pilots, and turned Tal Afar into a Shiite place.. The angry Sunni guerrillas are the ones most likely behind the bombing on Thursday.

That is,the massive ethnic cleansings in Iraq, under the nose of the US military forces, bodes ill for Iraq.

Al-Zaman reports in Arabic that Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki declined yesterday to release from prison those prisoners who said they had been tortured. He said he would only release them if they were proven innocent, not because their human rights had been violated. Nobody, he said, seems to care about the human rights of the orphans and widows created by these murderers, just about their supposed rights. Meanwhile, the United Nations confirmed that the Iraqi government has carried out secret, unannounced executions.

As a result of the likelihood that torture will be applied to them, the US military is declining after all to turn 26,000 Iraqi prisoners in its prisons in Iraq over to the Iraqi government. (Irony alert). The Status of Forces Agreement concluded between the Iraqi parliament and the Bush administration stipulates that the US must turn the Iraqi prisoners in its custody over to the Iraqi authorities. International, regional and Arab organizations, however, beseeched the US military not to turn the prisoners over until guarantees were by Iraq that their lives would be preserved. Their family members warned that there was a danger that the prisoners would be tortured and even executed unless the Iraqi government gives clear undertakings preserving them from torture and summary execution.

Ahmad al-Mas`udi, a spokesman for the Sadr Movement, told al-Zaman (the Times of Baghdad) that he had proof that prisoners in Iraqi penitentiaries are being tortured. He said that for the past three years, the families of prisoners who died under torture have been filing lawsuits. Prisoners in the Rusafah and Kazimiya facilities have gone on a hunger strike to demand an end to the torture to which they are subjected by police.

Michael Munk writes with regard to US casualties in Iraq:

' US Iraq Casualties rise to 72,377

US military occupation forces in Iraq under Commander-in-Chief Obama suffered 26 combat casualties in the week ending July 7 as the official total rose to at least 72,377. The total includes 34,890 dead and wounded from what the Pentagon classifies as "hostile" causes and more than 37,487 dead and medically evacuated (last reported April 4) from "non-hostile" causes.*

The actual total is over 100,000 because the Pentagon chooses not to count as "Iraq casualties" the more than 30,000 veterans whose injuries-mainly brain trauma from explosions - were diagnosed only after they had left Iraq.**

US media divert attention from the actual cost in American life and limb by occasionally reporting only the total killed (4,325 as of July 7) but rarely mentioning the 31,430 wounded in combat. To further minimize public perception of the cost, they cover for the Pentagon by ignoring the 36,624 (as of April 4))*** military victims of accidents and illness serious enough to require medical air evacuation, although the 4,325 reported deaths include 865 (no change) who died from those same causes, including at least 18 from faulty electrical work by KBR and 177 suicides through 2008.****

* The number of wounded is updated weekly by the Pentagon at http://www.defenselink.mil/news/casualty.pdf.

** New York Times, Jan 26, 2009

*** the number of "non combat" injured is reported irregularily by the Pentagon at http://siadapp.dmdc.osd.mil/personnel/CASUALTY/OIF-Total.pdf.

**** NYTimes, Jan 30, 2009'

End/ (Not Continued)

7 US Troops Killed in Afghanistan; Agreement with Russia allows US materiel to reach Afghanistan

noreply@blogger.com (Juan Cole) — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 04:55:00 +0000

The Obama administration has reached an agreement with the Russian government of Dimitri Medvedev allowing the US to transship military materiel to US and NATO troops in Afghanistan. As Russia Today reports, this step makes US and Russia strong allies, stronger than at any time since World War II. The RT report stresses the need to block heroin made from Afghan poppies from being exported by Afghanistan, suggesting one motivation for Russian cooperation. Video:

The agreement was made necessary by the closure of supply routes into landlocked Afghanistan. The Karachi-Khyber Pass route has been largely closed by the Pakistani Taliban. The potential Iran route looks chancey given recent political turmoil there and the even more damaged relationship between Washington and Tehran. The downside of the agreement is that the US will become captive to Russia on the basis of geopolitical exploitation. Russia already throws its weight around on the basis of its hydrocarbon investments. Now it will be able to extract further concessions by appeal to 'strategic rent,' the resources Moscow can gain from its security contribution with regard to Afghanistan.

Tom Engelhardt contrasts the obsessive interest in the US mass media in Michael Jackson's death with the nearly complete unconcern with innocent Afghan lives lost when the US and NATO militaries bomb Afghan wedding parties by mistake.

Speaking of the late Michael Jackson, you have to wonder whether some savvy satellite news channel could not make money counter-programing against channels that believe they have a divine right to all put on the same thing. Wasn't anyone at all interested in real news, such as the killing of 7 US troops in Afghanistan?

As noted, 11 NATO troops, including 7 Americans, have been killed by bombs, grenades or small arms fire during the past two days in Afghanistan.

Some 4,000 US military personnel, have swept into the troubled Helmand province, in the biggest operation of the Afghanistan War. Unfortunately for the success of the operation, Taliban fighters largely slipped away, some apparently disguised as women in burqas, heading for the southwest and northeast. Likely we will hear of an increased rate of violence in those provinces.

In fact, as McClatchy reports, German and Italian military commanders in Afghanistan are already grumbling that all the Helmand operation did was to displace militants into their areas of responsibility.

Aljazeera English reports on US troops in Afghanistan:

Meanwhile in Pakistan, the US military attacked via drone a Taliban position, killing 12-16 persons. Such strikes are extremely unpopular with the Pakistani public.

Despite the Swat campaign by the Pakistani military against the Tehrik-i Taliban Pakistan, the government's release of major militant leaders raises questions about its seriousness in winning against the vigilante fundamentalists.

For social issues of the past few months in Afghanistan, see this and other recent productions of Brave New Films, Robert Greenwald's progressive documentary project. See the site Rethink Afghanistan. Video on women's issues:

End/ (Not Continued)

Obama on Israeli attack on Iran: 'Absolutely Not'

noreply@blogger.com (Juan Cole) — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 20:17:00 +0000

I argued on Monday that Vice President Joe Biden did not intend, by his remarks on Sunday, to give Israel a US go-ahead to bomb Iran.

The fall-out from such an attack on US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan would be dire, which is one reason I'm quite sure Obama does not want such a thing.

In an interview on CNN, President Obama on Tuesday clarified his stance on Iran and also denied that Vice President Biden's remarks on ABC on Sunday were intended to give Israel a green light to bomb Iran:

' Obama was asked on CNN this morning, "Are you giving Israel a green light?"

"Absolutely not," the president replied. "And I think it�s very important that I�m as clear as I can be, and our administration is as consistent as we can be on this issue."

"I think Vice President Biden stated a categorical fact which is we can't dictate to other countries what their security interests are," Obama added. "What is also true is that it is the policy of the United States to try to resolve the issue of Iran�s nuclear capabilities in a peaceful way through diplomatic channels. That is our policy, I have been talking about this for the last two years, we are going to continue to pursue this, and you know we have said directly to the Israelis that it is important to try and solve this in an international setting in a way that does not create major conflict in the Middle East.

"Now this is a tough job and nobody is under any illusions that it will be easy, and I've always said that we, the United States, preserve the right, and I as the commander in chief preserve the right to take whatever actions are necessary to protect the United States. But we are committed to a peaceful resolution to this conflict and I think it is still possible, but ultimately if we present an opportunity to the Iranians at some point, they've got to seize that opportunity." '

The CNN report is here with video.

End/ (Not Continued)

Supreme Leader Warns against Western Meddling; Mousavi denounces National Security State, Explores Forming New Party

noreply@blogger.com (Juan Cole) — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 07:13:00 +0000

The White House denied on Monday that the US had given Israel a green light to attack Iran, in the wake of the disputed presidential election. I and other Iran experts are quoted in this Sfgate blog, trying to explain Biden's statement on Sunday about Israel attacking Iran.

Meanwhile, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei blamed discord in Iran over the announced results of the June 12 presidential election on Western agitators. He urged Iranians to be vigilant against such activities, and threatened the West with worse relations with Iran if it went on.

I had reported on June 23 that Hosain Marashi, the head of the Kargozaran Party loyal to former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, had called for a new political coalition to combat the "illegitimate" government of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. On Monday, the Kargozaran Party put out a communique saying, according to the intrepid Borzou Daragahi of the LAT:

' "We declare that the result is unacceptable due to the unhealthy voting process, massive electoral fraud and the siding of the majority of the Guardian Council with a specific candidate." '

Given the close association of the Kargozaran with Rafsanjani, Daragahi correctly suggests that the communique is an indirect announcement by Rafsanjani that he is irreconcilable with the new government, which has been accused of stealing the June 12 presidential election.

Daragahi also reports on the rising importance of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps in domestic Iranian politics.

Opposition leader Mir Hosain Mousavi on Monday denounced this trend, condemning Iran's growing national security state and demanding the release of arrested protesters. Mousavi is looking in to founding a full-fledged political party to continue the reform struggle.

Grand Ayatollah Yusuf Sanei issued a new statement, insisting that it is illegitimate to deprive the people of their rights, and dismissing the regime's show trials as mere coerced confession

Aljazeera English reports on the new media and the Iran election protests:

End/ (Not Continued)

OSC: Khamenei Blames Iran Discord on West

noreply@blogger.com (Juan Cole) — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 04:01:00 +0000

The USG Open Source Center translates the speech on Monday by Iran's Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, in which he denounces what he calls Western attempts to foment discord in Iran.

. . . Supreme Leader: Iran Will React To Western Attempts to Create Internal Divisions Speech by Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamene'i, in a meeting with people from different walks of life on the occasion of the birthday of the first Shiite Imam Ali, on 6 July -- recorded
Voice of the Islamic Republic of Iran Radio 1
Monday, July 6, 2009
Document Type: OSC Translated Text

. . . People in the Islamic countries today should see the hands involved in creating rifts among the Shi'is and Sunnis; they accuse and smear the Shi'is. They create conflicts among them. And a similar situation exists on this side (the Shi'is' side). Some people on this side instigate the emotions of their Moslem brothers. They upset and annoy their feelings.

The Islamic world should be unified. That is what the world wants today. The needs of the Islamic community today require the Islamic countries to stand side by side and together. They have to have solidarity and consensus. They should not allow some enemies to take advantage of their weakness - enemies who have no power of their own - what is Israel compared to 1.5 billion Moslems? Against 1.5 billion Moslems, the (number of the population of) Zionist enemy is not a substantial figure. It cannot be taken into account. The discord in the Islamic world, and the weakness that exists within the Islamic world, have helped the weak enemy to find its way and to find allies from amongst Moslem brothers. The enemy has been able to find allies.

The Iranian nation also has to pay attention to this. We are a united nation. Islam unified us. The revolution awakened us and brought us close to one another and intertwined our will and determination. We became a powerful and hard punch against the enemies of the Islamic system, Islam, Muslims and Iran. (Chants of indistinct slogans from the audience in support of the leader's comments)

The enemies are waiting for an opportunity to undermine our unity of word, to create discord and differences amongst the people, and to pit brothers against one another. The Iranian nation has to be vigilant.

During the recent overwhelming 22 Khordad (12 June) presidential election, the Iranian nation took a great measure. A great thing happened. This 40 million presence at the ballot boxes, meaning 85 percent of the people who were eligible to vote, is a unique number in the world.

Cont'd (click below or on "comments")

This brought a lot of honor to the Iranian nation (referring to the large number of people participated in the 10th presidential elections). It created a lot of strength for this great nation. It was an honor for the Revolution. It showed that after 30 years, the Revolution has such a power and capability to bring people to the scene.

The enemies became active to create differences among the people. They succeeded to some extent but the nation has to neutralize the enemy's moves. The policy of the Islamic system is a clear one. In my opinion, from my point of view the competition among the candidates of the presidential elections is like a domestic competition among the members of a family. Sometimes, it leads to anger, too. Two brothers in a family may confront each other. It is none of the enemies' business. It is none of the strangers' business. The aliens who stepped into this arena through various political and propaganda lines had the aim of creating differences and discord and separation (among people).

The leaders of certain Western countries, presidents, prime ministers, foreign ministers, and various other officials explicitly interfered in the Iranian nation's domestic affair. It is none of your business. Why do you interfere? They interfere in an issue that is related to the Iranian nation and then they say that they do not interfere. What does interfering mean?

Isn't instigating riots synonymous with interference? Isn't labeling the Iranian people as rioters called interference? Isn't it insulting? One group has voted for one candidate and another group has voted for another candidate. A minority and majority has emerged. There are rules. Naturally, those whose candidate has not won will be upset and disappointed. But this doesn't mean that they will create riots. They are not rioters. Rioters are those few people who are receiving the budget approved by a number of Western governments to create differences inside Iran. They are the rioters. The US and European media which are mostly under the influence of the Zionists and are the enemy of the Iranian nation, Islam, and the Islamic Republic system, are implying that a section of the Iranian nation are rioters. I and the Iranian nation would like to warn the leaders of some of the states who are trying to use one of our country's domestic affairs against the Iranian nation, to be careful. The Iranian nation will show a reaction. (Chants of indistinct slogans from the audience in support of the leader's comments)

Firstly, everyone, including the heads of the arrogant states and those meddlers who interfere in the Islamic Republic's affairs, must all know that if you, the enemies of the Iranian nation, get involved the Iranian nation will unite and become a strong fist against you even if they have some (domestic) differences. (Chants of indistinct slogans from the audience in support of the leader's comments)

You (the West) mustn't think that a certain current (inside Iran) will favor you just because you are supposedly defending or supporting it. This will never happen. We have a 30-year experience. For the past 30 years, the Iranian nation has recorded your enmity in its mind. The nation understands what you intend to do and what you're doing. They mention the names of the people they claim to be defending. They are lying. They aren't even defending them. They want to create differences. They intend to make the Iranian nation and Iran's elite cynical toward one another. They are lying.

What lies in their hearts, which are full of hatred, is that they wish this independent system, and the honor and dignity of this country, which has resisted against their bullying, will not exist. This is what they wish for. It is not the case that they are in favor of a certain individual in the Islamic system and not in favor of another one. No, in their opinion whoever is committed to this system, whoever is committed to this Constitution, and whoever is committed to the ideals of the Iranian nation, is an enemy. They don't want the Islamic Republic to exist. They want a puppet system, obedient to them, just like before (referring to Shah's time). This is what they pursue. This is their disturbed and vacuous dream.

The Islamic system's 30-year resistance has not woken them up, yet. The blows that this nation has dealt to their bullying and aggressive leaders so far have not made them conscious, yet. They still have a greed for our nation and country. They are wrong and they will definitely learn their lesson the hard way.
(People chanting slogans)

We will calculate the hostile behavior and remarks of these governments. We will write these down in their names. They should know this. These interferences will definitely have a negative effect in their future relations with the Islamic Republic. They should know this and understand this. The Iranian nation is not a nation that would bear bullying. The Iranian nation is a strong nation. The Islamic Republic's system is a deep-rooted and stable system. The officials of the Islamic Republic's system would be united together in safeguarding this country's independence and resistance against enemies despite their differences. The enemies should know this. They should not think that they can create a division among the nation.

(People chanting slogans)

Unfortunately, these propaganda and distorting systems which are against the Islamic Republic and the Iranian nation (referring to foreign media) have some audience inside the country. This was going on even during the sacred defense (Iran-Iraq war). They should also be aware. They should know that the support of these wild wolves will not do them any good.

They think of themselves. They are after their own interests. They use people as much as possible in achieving their own interests, just as they used Mohammad Reza (Shah) and Saddam. And when not required, they throw them away like a used tissue paper, just as they did not support Mohammad Reza in his miserable time. They did not support Saddam at his miserable and scandalous time. Don't give your heart to anyone. The people are aware. The elite are aware. Unfortunately a limited number of people fall for them. They are deceived by their deceptions. When they (people) are deceived, they (enemies) get the wrong signals and in a way they are deceived by these signals, too. The nation is and should be aware. I advise the entire Iranian nation that today, more than anything else, it is necessary for us to be aware. We need to know our friends and enemies. We should not mistake a friend for an enemy. We should not mix friends and enemies. We should not treat a friend with behavior that suits an enemy. This is for all the parties.
(People chanting slogans)

Naturally, the Islamic system will confront those who cause disturbance in people's security. This is the system's duty.

The Islamic system will not let some people be subject to the enemy's deception and plots and destroy people's lives and peace, and threaten young people. This country's children are dear. Everyone is dear. The system will not let this happen. But everyone should be aware not to mistake an enemy for a friend. We should not consider a friend as an enemy just because of one mistake. And on the other hand, people should not consider an arch-enemy as a friend and listen to him.

The enemy started those seditions with the hope that it would be able to fish in troubled waters. Thank God, the seditions are over. Any sedition will be destroyed against the truth and an aware nation. The dust will settle.
(People chanting slogans)

It has always been like this. The side effects of what was initiated by some enemies, some ignorant people, will be over. The main point will remain. The main point is that in a splendid election about 40 million Iranians participated. This is the main point. This is the true point. After 30 years from the (victory of) Revolution 40 million people showed their hope in the future and trust in the system with this participation. This is what will be remembered. The main point is that a president has been elected by winning more than 24 million votes. These are the main points of this issue. The side effects, the dust, the embellishments, the actions and remarks that please the enemy will be over. But this truth will live. (Koranic verse in Arabic) "For the scum disappears like froth cast out; while that which is for the good of mankind remains on the earth." Of course the officials and the elected president should also appreciate this trust by the people. People should be thanked by serving them entirely and completely to solving their problems. There should be efforts for the country's development and safeguarding the unity among the great people of Iran. These are existing truths.

You, the Iranian nation, did something big at this point of time, a major movement and the great God will bless this move and it will make progress. The officials should serve and the people should keep their unity, awareness, brotherhood, and kind approach towards one another. The enemy doesn't want this to happen and you should try to do what makes the enemy angry. And what makes pleases the heart of the Lord of Age (the 12th Shi'i imam) is unity, kindness, cooperation, joy, and the revolutionary move of the Iranian nation. I hope the Lord of Age includes you all in his prayers. And hopefully the spirit of the great imam (Ayatollah Khomeyni) and the spirits of the martyrs would be happy with all of us.
(People chanting slogans)

(Description of Source: Tehran Voice of the Islamic Republic of Iran Radio 1 in Persian -- state-run radio)

Silverman: Drought, Agriculture, and Social Problems in Iraq

noreply@blogger.com (Juan Cole) — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 04:01:00 +0000

Adam L. Silverman, PhD, writes in a guest op-ed for IC:

The crippling sandstorms in Iraq, which disrupted the trip to that country of Vice President Joe Biden last weekend, underline the challenges confronting Iraq in the wake of two years of drought. The dry spell and poor policy choices have also, of course, badly affected agriculture. While deployed in Iraq, my teammates and I were stationed in a primarily agricultural area and we spent a lot of time, pre-mission and during the mission, studying agricultural issues in order to support our brigade�s economic and reconstruction initiatives. From that primary and secondary source research we learned that a significant issue for Iraq�s ongoing development is the lack of an active agricultural sector. While this is part of the larger problem with drought in the region, as well as food disruptions that got a fair amount of press coverage in 2008, the Iraqi problem set goes beyond the issue of access to food.

There are four overlapping areas that need to be tracked regarding agricultural disruption in Iraq. The first is the regional dynamic: both Turkey and Iran, in an attempt to deal with the effects of the drought, are drawing down the water supplies that ultimately run into Iraq, further depleting the water available for Iraqi usage. This is a problem of regional politics and stability. If Iraq is deprived of its fair share of water, it creates a new set of grievances that are ripe for exploitation and can further destabilize the region. While the US, the Iraqis, and their neighbors have invested a lot of time into the resolution of this problem, failure to settle it quickly, effectively, and definitively could have negative repercussions.

The second set of issues has to do with the actual physical terrain of Iraq. A great deal of Iraq�s breadbasket, where agriculture was essentially invented, is notable for two things: 1) a high saline content in the soil that is pushed down, locked in, and reduced through regular, repeated, and rotated planting of crops and 2) the use of canal and sluice irrigation � akin to the acequias of the Southwestern US and of Spain. The low river levels because of the drought makes it that much harder to get water into the irrigation canals, which in turn affects the ability to plant crops and mitigate the salinity issue. For each planting cycle that is missed because of lack of available water, the salinity levels increase, meaning that once water becomes available for planting it will take several years of planting �throw away� crops before anything can be produced that is usable. Additionally, the ongoing soil erosion leads to further desertification and increased heat and dust storms, which has a measurable negative impact on the quality of life of the Iraqis.

The third major issue is economic. Since the amount of water available is limited, placing a real limit on the amount of agricultural product that can be produced by the Iraqis, fruits, vegetables, and fish have to be imported. In our interviews with the Iraqi population of our Operating Environment (OE) we were repeatedly told that not only are the local produce and fish superior in taste, but that much of these food stuffs now have to be imported from Iran. Given that many Iraqis, both Shii and Sunni, accurately recognize that the Government of Iraq is being run by exile or domestic based political movements that were established, supported, or funded by Iran, the reliance on food imported from Iran also enhances the common Iraqi boogeyman: that the Iranians are trying to control everything. This is the Iraqi equivalent of the black helicopter fear for some Americans � it is used to explain away bad things that have no readily identifiable explanation.

The final issue, an outgrowth of the predictable economic concerns of higher food prices and lack of income is the human impact. The disruption to Iraq�s agricultural sector is also a major cause of disruption to the community and communal life of Iraq. Moreover, the lack of these traditional forms of employment, especially in the districts and provinces that ring Baghdad, contributed to the flight of individuals to the large cities, or even the smaller towns. This in turn overwhelmed the almost nonexistent social services. The influx of large numbers of Iraqis seeking employment, or just sheltering with more well off family members, is a major contributing factor to the political violence in Iraq. As is so often the case people moved to the more populous areas looking for work, but there was none. Or they fled violence in the cities and established themselves on largely empty land in more rural economic areas. In both cases this created Internally Displaced Persons (IDP) issues that exacerbated existing grievances, especially along sectarian lines.

Additionally, the displaced are more likely to seek any form of income and therefore become biographically available for recruitment to commit negative acts. Essentially the agricultural crisis has created an artificial life course for terrorism and political violence in Iraq. Large numbers of unemployed men, especially young men, many nursing resentments, are willing to take money to feed and house themselves and their families to build or emplace improvised explosive devices. It is from the same pool of desperate young men that the politically or religiously dogmatic interest entrepreneurs recruit their suicide bombers. One of the key solutions to the political violence problem in Iraq is to get the agricultural sector functioning again. By doing so it would function like a pressure release valve, drawing people from the cities and towns back to their villages, settlements, and farms, reducing the available pool of individuals for recruitment, reducing the potential for political violence over property and resources, and increasing the potential for the alleviation of the economic crisis in Iraq.

A key dilemma is that in order to fix the agricultural problem you have to fix the water problem, which is contingent on fixing the power problem � you can not pump water through the canal system without consistent electrical power generation. As a result of decisions made by the Coalition Provisional Authority and continued by the Iraqi Transition Assistance Office to leave rebuilding and renovation of the Iraqi power system to the Iraqis and the private sector over the next ten years, there is only so much that the US military and their civilian agency allies can do to alleviate the problem and the resulting societal pressure.

-
Adam L. Silverman, PhD is the Social Science Advisor for Strategic Communications and a Staff Social Scientist for the US Army Human Terrain System and was the Field Social Scientist and Socio-Cultural Advisor for the 2BCT/1AD assigned to Human Terrain Team Iraq 6 in 2008. The views expressed here are his alone and do not necessarily reflect those of the US Army�s Human Terrain System, the US Army�s Training and Doctrine Command, the 2BCT/1AD, and/or the US Army.

End/ (Not Continued)

Iraqis Project Hopes, Fears onto Biden; Biden Firm that US will Engage Iran; If Israel wants an Attack, must carry it out Itself

noreply@blogger.com (Juan Cole) — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 04:59:00 +0000

The top myths in the press this weekend about Vice President Joe Biden are that he was rebuffed in Iraq when he offered his good offices with regard to effecting Arab-Kurdish reconciliation, and that he gave Israel a green light to attack Iran. Neither thing appears to be true.

So what really happened? Biden was given the job of working on Iraq reconciliation precisely because most elected Iraqi leaders want reassurance that the US is not abandoning the country to its fate.

Biden met with Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, with Vice Presidents Adel Abdel Mahdi and Tariq al-Hashimi, and talked on the phone with President Jalal Talabani. The NYT reported Biden saying,

�To quote one of the four principals with whom I met: �With your concerns with Afghanistan, Pakistan, Korea, we were concerned we were moved to the bottom shelf,� � he said. �And so I said, �Well, you�re not. And evidence of that is, as the vice president of the United States I�m here talking to you.� And it was clear that they � it was like, �Yeah, we get it.� �

On ABC This Week with George Stephanopolous, Biden explained what exactly his mission was in Iraq this weekend:

' one of the reasons I'm here, George, is to push the last end of that, which is the need for political settlement on some important issues between Arabs and Kurds and among the confessional groups. And I think we're well on our way . . .

What we offered the prime minister, as well as the speaker, as well as the two vice presidents, was that to the extent -- let me give you an example. The United Nations has started a process to deal with what they called the "disputed internal borders." And that is the debate between the Kurds and the Arabs as to where the line is.

Kirkuk is probably the biggest flashpoint. And we were asked that we would -- would we be helpful to the United Nations in doing this? I was further asked that would I communicate to the Kurdish leadership, who I have a close relationship with, that their passing a constitution through their parliament in Kurdistan was not helpful to the process that was under way. '

So the conflict over the disposition of the oil-rich province of Kirkuk, among Kurds, Arabs and Turkmen, has heated up in recent months, as this detailed Observer report shows.

This conflict has the potential to provoke an Arab-Kurdish civil war in the north and to draw in Turkey (and maybe also Iran and Syria).

Biden's task is to use diplomacy to settle this issue before it can tear Iraq apart.

On the one hand, Az-Zaman writing in Arabic maintains that Biden's offer of mediation between the two sides was received lukewarmly and not in the way the Americans had hoped for.

On the other hand, Biden according to the NYT is seeking a new discourse that will underline the central Iraqi role in their security, downplaying the American connection.

The two reports seem contradictory because high Iraqi politicians are themselves sometimes at odds over the relationship with America. Or, as Biden suggests, some politicians may be aiming their talking points at the Jan. 2010 parliamentary elections, and so seeking to maintain an image in public of independence and sovereignty even as they behind the scenes seek US support and cooperation.

A complicating factor is the growing dispute between the Arab members of the federal parliament and the parliament of the Kurdistan Regional Government. The civil Kurdistan parliamentarians are working on a new constitution that Arabs see as threatening the unity of Iraq.

Biden was asked by Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to lend his good offices to resolving those affairs. He initially had planned a trip to the Kurdistan capital of Irbil, but this weekend's massive sandstorm knocked him out of it, and he had to speak to the Kurdistan leaders by phone.

As for the other news of the weekend, I think Biden's remarks on Israel and Iran were aimed at underlining the independence of US policy-making toward Iran. He underlined twice that the US would not alter its own posture toward Iran, regardless of what others did. That he also said that the Israelis are sovereign and that the US could not stop them from launching a missile strike on Iran, is just the United Nations Charter. I.e. it is boilerplate. In my view the significant bit is this:

' BIDEN: Look, Israel can determine for itself -- it's a sovereign nation -- what's in their interest and what they decide to do relative to Iran and anyone else.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Whether we agree or not?

BIDEN: Whether we agree or not. They're entitled to do that. Any sovereign nation is entitled to do that. But there is no pressure from any nation that's going to alter our behavior as to how to proceed.

What we believe is in the national interest of the United States, which we, coincidentally, believe is also in the interest of Israel and the whole world. And so there are separate issues. '

So what Biden was really saying is that the Obama administration intends to engage Iran diplomatically, and that if anyone wants Iran attacked they will have to do it themselves. This is not a green light to the Israelis, who hardly need one. It is a tough message to the right wing of the Israel lobbies that the Obama administration is not going to launch any hostilities with Iran, even after the hard line power grab of three weeks ago.

Oh, and the statement may serve as a reminder to a recalcitrant Iran of what might happen to Tehran if it refuses to negotiate in good faith over its nuclear enrichment program. (By the way, that there is no good evidence that Iran is working on a nuclear warhead, and that its current technological capacity is too limited for it to dream of such a thing any time soon, was again underlined by incoming International Atomic Energy Agency head Yukiya Amano.

Meanwhile, the real administration position on hostilities with Iran was clearly stated by Adm. Mike Mullen, which is that they would produce enormous instability (implied is that such instability would be bad for US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan).

In my view, Biden watchers still for the most part haven't gotten him right.

End/ (Not Continued)

OSC: Israeli Rightwing Press Attacks Obama, Denies Rights to Palestinians

noreply@blogger.com (Juan Cole) — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 04:02:00 +0000

The USG Open Source Center translates or paraphrases opinion pieces in the press of the right wing Israeli settler movement in the Occupied Palestinian West Bank.

Highlights: Review of Israeli Right-Wing, Settler Commentaries 26 Jun-3 Jul 09
Israel -- OSC Summary
Sunday, July 5, 2009

Arabs Have No 'Rights Whatsoever to Any Part of the Land of Israel'

Ronny Gordon's cartoon, posted on Arutz Sheva Online on 29 June, mocks the planned settlement freeze.

An untitled 26 June Women in Green commentary, referring to correspondent Nadav Shragay's commentary in left-of-center Haaretz in English, says: "Below is an article by Nadav Shragai with an important message. We are forwarding it to our Women in Green list even though we do not agree with one sentence in his article in which Shragai says 'our friends need to hear from us that the historic, religious, legal and sentimental links that bind the people of Israel with Hebron and Beit El are no less legitimate than those of the Palestinians.'

"We want to correct Nadav Shragai on this point. The Arabs whom some call 'the Palestinians' have no historic, religious or any rights whatsoever to any part of the land of Israel. The one and only People who have a legal, historic, religious and moral right to the Land of Israel is the Jewish People.' (Jerusalem Women in Green in English -- Website of right-wing organization dedicated to preservation of Greater Israel and of Jewish heritage; URL: http://www.womeningreen.org)

Obama 'Trashing' US Heritage, Netanyahu Must Be Prevented From Trashing Jewish Heritage by Enabling Palestinian State

Cont'd (click below or on "comments")

Prof. Paul Eidelberg's 29 July commentary, entitled "Where is the Outrage?" says: "Many Iranians were outraged by the June 12 presidential election. They know that Iran's democratic elections are a charade. They know that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is the real power in Iran. The election was merely a facade to dignify the re-appointment Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as president. Iran's leaderless (hence doomed) revolution was not merely against an ostensibly rigged election, but against the SYSTEM, the mullocracy. This is why John Bolton, former US ambassador to the United Nations is calling for 'regime change.'

"Even if the elections were not rigged, it needs to be stressed that democratic elections do not guarantee government of the people, for the people, and by the people. Witness Israel."

"No doubt the flawed and uninspiring character of Israeli politicians must ultimately be attributed to serious shortcomings in their education. Moral relativism is prevalent in Israeli universities and has even influenced the Command and Staff College. Relativism erodes conviction in the justice of a nation's cause. I saw it Sharon, in Barak, and in other politicians. No wonder they endorsed a Palestinian state. Relativism can transform heroes into 'men without chests.'

"Barack Obama, never a hero, was weaned on the moral relativism prevalent in American universities. No wonder he's the darling of the anti-American internationalists. No wonder America's two-dimensional president did nothing to aid the Iranians who rebelled against the mullocracy. No wonder anti-war movements flourish on American campuses where relativism is rampant.

"The Obama administration is trashing the American heritage, a heritage very much influenced by Jewish law, as was recognized by learned men of eighteenth-century America. Are you going to let the Netanyahu government trash the Jewish heritage by allowing the followers of Muhammad establish an Islamic state in Judea and Samaria? Where is the outrage? Where is a Tom Paine, a Patrick Henry? Do we have only Benedict Arnolds!" (Jerusalem Foundation for Constitutional Democracy in English -- Website of right-wing group led by Professor Paul Eidelberg, promoting a constitution based on Jewish principles, electoral and judicial reforms, and a free-market economy; URL: http://www.foundation1.org)

Concessions Encourage Arab 'Violence,' Won't Lead to Peace

Ronny Gordon's cartoon, posted in Arutz Sheva Online on 5 July, shows Obama riding a tissue-paper steamroller, out to crush little Israel.

Obadiah Shoher's commentary, entitled "Peace Doesn't Come Through Withdrawal," posted on the website of Samson Blinded on 29 June, maintains: "Arabs will not decrease violence to allow Israel an honorary withdrawal from the West Bank. Just like the Jewish fighters haunted the British in Palestine in 1947, Arabs will continue killing Jews even if Isr ael evacuates Gaza and the West Bank. Diplomats cannot understand why Arabs keep on killing Jews even in the face of diplomatic surrender. Simple: Arabs correctly view their victory as the product of fighting rather than diplomacy. Add their hatred of Jewish occupiers, and Arabs will continue killing the Jews until the last Jew leaves their land--which is not limited to the West Bank. The peace process only prompts the Arabs to kill the retreating enemy."

"Concessions -- mini-victories -- prop up their pride and they push to continue. Counter-intuitive as that may sound, concessions lead to no peace. Historically, too, peace negotiations between nations have commenced near the war's end. Negotiations during the war embolden the aggressor and encourage him to persist in violence." (Samson Blinded in English -- Website operated by "Obadiah Shoher," pen name for a USSR-born "veteran politician" calling for action against Arabs and the Israeli left and citing Rabbi Kahana as a model; URL: http://samsonblinded.org)

Obama, Netanyahu's New US Ambassador Both Moral Relativists

"The Plague of Moral Relativism" is Prof. Paul Eidelberg's commentary, disseminated on 30 June. Eidelberg writes: "Various Israeli journalists, including Caroline B. Glick of The Jerusalem Post, have become aware of the fact that President Barack Obama is a moral relativist. This became evident to me during last year's presidential campaign, when I learned about Obama's early mentors, the most notorious of which was the philosopher of the New Left.'

"Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is not a moral relativist. I know this from a brief encounter with him at a conference in Jerusalem. Nevertheless, it may come as a surprise to Ms. Glick and others that Mr. Netanyahu appointed a relativist (ala Yair Evron) as Israel's ambassador to the United States -- the historian Michael Oren! Thus, in his highly-touted book Six Days of War, Oren writes: 'My purpose is not to prove the justness of one party (Egypt) or another (Israel) in the war, or to assign culpability for starting it.'

"Perhaps Mr. Oren will also write a morally neutral history about the war between the PLO and Israel. That should not be too difficult. After all, Mr. Oren endorsed a Palestinian state some time before Netanyahu appointed him as Israel's ambassador to the United States. Mr. Oren and President Obama have a lot in common!"

Appeasement Led to Israel's Humiliation by US, France Moshe Feiglin's commentary, entitled "Dwell Alone", posted on the Jewish Leadership website on 2 July, states: "Currently, Israel's very essence is its unrequited ambition to be reckoned among the nations. Official Israel does all in its power to be 'normal' -- in other words, to be like the nations of the world. Israel yearns to be accepted, to 'belong,' to enjoy the patronage of the nations. It will settle for almost anything. As long as it will not have to dwell alone.

"But when Israel scrounges for some 'acceptance' crumbs from the nations, its American 'ally' humiliates it and shows it the soles of his shoes. Even its good friend from France joins the Israel-bashing trend and takes the liberty of rearranging Israel's ministerial positions - and of course leaks the content of the scolding to the press.

"Israel tries to appease the nations. It surrenders to their demands. It has given them a foothold and even sovereignty in the very heart of the Land. It does not strive to be a 'nation that dwells alone' but rather to establish 'two states for two nations' in the land in which it is destined to dwell alone. Israel is b eing trampled. Obama and Sarkozy are just the beginning.

"With G-d's help, Israel will soon have true Jewish leadership; leadership that does not seek the patronage and approval of the nations. Soon we will have leadership that will focus on the challenges at home and strive to fulfill the historical destiny of the Nation of Israel." (Ginot Shomron Jewish Leadership in Hebrew -- Website of Jewish Leadership movement, led by Likud MK Moshe Feiglin; URL: http://he.manhigut.org) Understating Israel's Security Sacrifice Causes World To Demand Further Action Aaron Lerner's commentary, entitled "Let's Tell the Truth: Risking Israeli Civilian Lives To Increase Palestinian Mobility," posted on the IMRA website on 2 July, states: "The Netanyahu administration has decided to very significantly risk Israeli civilian lives via a series of steps it has taken to increase Palestinian mobility.

"Now I am not here to judge the wisdom of the move. I am not about to claim that I have access to all the facts and considerations that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu weighed in order to reach the conclusion that significantly increasing the possibility that Israelis will die in terrorist attacks was a reasonable price to pay. But here's the problem: It is one thing to make such a decision. It is far another to concede to the nation that the choice was knowingly made.

"And so, instead of telling the world - and President Barak Obama specifically - that Israeli civilian lives have been put on the line in order to increase Palestinian mobility, we end up with announcements that try to imply that there is no significant risk associated with the wholesale removal of critical roadblocks.

"The result of understating the magnitude of the Israeli sacrifice is that the world - and President Obama specifically - react to these measures with 'nice start - do more'.

"I will be cynical and say that I don't expect a politician to take the exposure of admitting for the record that he is knowingly risking the lives of his constituents. He might get someone in the IDF to leak to the press just how concerned everyone who has reviewed the measures is. But that's not going to get much bang overseas.

"So let's be completely cynical: Let's at least think through what Israel should do in response to a terrorist attack. Something more than just restoring some roadblocks. Netanyahu's team should be seriously preparing the 'response file'. And I'm not talking about plans for camera angles, human interest story models and headline grabbing visual aids that could be employed to cover a terrorist attack. If Israeli lives are being risked then there damn well better be a pay off if they die.

"Authorize one of the 'unauthorized' outposts and dedicate it in the name of the victims? That's one idea. Hopefully there's time to come up with more." (Kfar Saba Independent Media Review & Analysis -- Website of Dr Aaron Lerner, right-leaning analyst of Arab-Israeli relations; URL: http://www.imra.org.il) Nations 'Trying Every Means; To Stop Jews From Settling 'Holy Land' "Balak: The Witching Hour," a commentary by Levi Chazen, director of the English Division of the Yeshiva of the Jewish I dea in Jerusalem, was distributed by the yeshiva on 2 July. Chazen writes: "Now, after forty years of wandering and waiting in the desert to enter the Promised Land, the time had almost come. Before them led the path to the redemption, to enter the land, conquer and destroy the seven nations living there, anoint a king who would kill off the Amalekite people and build the holy Temple."

"Today, too, as the Jewish people return to their home after 2,000 years and the redemption light gathers momentum, the nations cannot and will not come to grips with it, for it exposes their falsehood and shows the uniqueness of the Jewish people. And, as in times of old, today too the nations are trying every means at their disposal to stop the Jewish people from controlling and settling the Holy Land. Some come at us through war -- but they are unable; the more sinister among them come with their mouths as if to bless us, but really babble a final solution to the Jewish problem. Too bad for them that they have not learned the lesson of history. The G-d of Israel does not and will not abandon His people, and like the nations before them who all fell, so too all who try to stop the redemption from coming into b eing will fall by the wayside, destined never to rise again." (Jerusalem Yeshiva of the Jewish Idea in English -- Website of followers of yeshiva founded by late Rabbi Me'ir Kahana to promote his extremist views; URL:

http://kahane.blogspot.com/ http://kahane.blogspot.com )

Mary Maguire Speaks from Israeli Jail

noreply@blogger.com (Juan Cole) — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 08:17:00 +0000

Aljazeera English reports on the activists abducted by Israel as they attempted to deliver food and other civilian aid to Gaza, which is under a debilitating blockade by Israel.

This site explains the dire character of the Palestinians' straits.

A reader asked what would happen if someone tried to get food aid to Cuba. That person unwittingly underlined how extreme Israel's policies are, since Russia and others. routinely ship food aid to Cuba despite the US embargo.

End/ (Not Continued)

Mousavi Details Fraud; Shariatmadari Calls for Opposition to Be Prosecuted

noreply@blogger.com (Juan Cole) — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 04:59:00 +0000

WaPo reports that opposition leader Mir Hosain Mousavi has released documents alleging bias in the June 12 presidential elections in Iran. He slams the Revolutionary Guards for interfering in the election.

Mousavi's website in Persian is here.

Hosain Shariatmadari, a close adviser to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, called in an editorial Saturday for Mousavi and Karroubi to be prosecuted for their continued agitation against the announced outcome of the June 12 elections.

On the other side of the aisle, the reformist Assembly of Qom Seminary Scholars and Researchers issued a condemnation of the Guardian Council for playing a partisan and unfair role in the presidential elections, and warning that it could never again be trusted.

Veteran BBC correspondent Jim Muir thinks that the conflict in Iran will go on for some time.

Ayatollah Mohsen Kadivar, an important reformist thinker now teaching at Duke University, told Der Spiegel that the Iranian form of theocracy has failed and that Khamenei made a foolish error in tying himself so closely to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Despite wanting reforms, Kadivar is a Khomeinist and not a revolutionary. That he is so disheartened as to declare the regime a 'failure' is a sign of how far things have gone in Iran.

MP Masoud Pezeshkian bravely addressed the Iranian parliament on June 2, decrying state violence against the protesters:

Pezeshkian had been Minister of Health and Medical Education in Iran during former president Mohammad Khatami's second term, 2001-2005. He was elected a member of parliament from Tabriz in 2008.

End/ (Not Continued)

OSC: Shariatmadari: Try Mousavi and Karroubi

noreply@blogger.com (Juan Cole) — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 04:18:00 +0000

The USG Open Source Center translates a hard line editorial by an adviser to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, calling for opposition leaders Mir Hosain Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi to be put on trial.

Rightwing Iranian paper calls for prosecution of Musavi and Khatami
Keyhan Online
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Document Type: OSC Translated Text

Text of editorial by Hoseyn Shari'atmadari, the managing editor of Keyhan, headlined "A political party or a fifth column?" published in Persian in Iranian newspaper Keyhan on 4th July

1- "Dear volunteer for the national university entrance examination! From now on, you should tell all your friends and relatives that you are going to receive the highest grades in the nation-wide university entrance examination for the year 88 (the academic year that starts next September). After the result of the examinations have been announced, don't be worried that your name is not on the list of those who have received a pass grade. Issue a statement and announce that the examinations have been rigged! However, be careful never to give in to the invitation of the examination board to lodge a legal complaint to review the examination papers, because in that case you would lose out."

Mirhoseyn Musavi's headquarters (subhead)

On Wednesday afternoon 10/4/88 (1st July 2009) when the MSM system and text messages through the mobiles was once again restored after a short break, the above message was one of the messages that was sent on text message system in an extensive way among the citizens. Although the text of that message is laughable, yet it is exactly in keeping with Mirhoseyn Musavi's claim about fraud in the election, and his strange and inexplicable refusal to go through the legal channels to follow up his claim. Even stranger is the fact that in his latest statement Mr Musavi has repeatedly stressed the need to abide by law and resolving the problems through legal means. He goes so far as saying that 'even the corpse of the law must be respected!"

Cont'd (click below or on "comments")

So many overt contradictions, double standards and contradictory approaches cannot be explained in any logical way or through any natural and rational justification. There can only be two possibilities behind such behaviour, without the possibility of a third option. The first possibility is that Mr Musavi and some of his supporters are suffering from a strange illness and have lost the benefit of reason and thinking. The second possibility is that Mr Musavi and some of those who are surrounding him are committing those crimes as a part of a "mission". This second possibility is so strong that it is almost impossible to reject it.

Not only are there many signs and indications in support of this proposition, but there are also many undeniable facts and documented evidence that point to a mission directed from abroad. In this connection, one may only ask which of their stances and way of behaviour has not been exactly in keeping with pre-formulated American prescriptions! Which of their demands has not been in keeping with the 30-year demands of American officials that have been repeated time and again? Nearly none!

It was not for nothing that America, Israel, the European Union, all counter-revolutionary organizations without exception, those involved in economic corruption, major industrialists, the plunderers and... (All ellipses as published) have risen in unison to support Musavi and his gang, and have used all their political and media capabilities in support of that group.

Here, we must point out that one should separate the accounts of those who have voted for him due to their political views and due to their lack of knowledge about the foreign mission entrusted to Musavi and the circles around him. The Iranian people always respect those people.

2- On the basis of available facts and documents, that corrupt movement has been implementing a foreign mission in order to encourage unlawful activities, kill innocent people, create a rebellion, plunder public property and weaken the power of the Islamic system. However, these days when they failed to perform their mission and were disgraced, instead of repenting and apologising to God and to the people for their mistake, they have started a new act in their conspiracy.

On Sunday, 7th Tir 88 (28th June) in a note headlined "those in charge of the circles", Keyhan had referred to this stage of the conspiracy. It pointed out: "Turning the recent failed conspiracy into 'embers burning under the ashes' and keeping it going as a 'festering wound that has not been pierced' in order to 'create a flame and do mischief in the future' is the next stage in the American (-led) velvet coup d'etat." In that note, we had pointed out that this stage of the above-mentioned conspiracy would be implemented due to a feeling of despair in the heart of the conspiracy about the continuation of the riots and the fact that their big lie about fraud in the election has been exposed. The aim of that stage of conspiracy would be to pave the way for the creation of an "opposition" party with the slogan of "the tenth government is illegitimate".

The latest act in the dictated American project started on Wednesday 10/4/00 (29th June), namely a day after the final and proven results of the election were released. That project started by releasing a statement in a few pages with - and we stress only with - Mirhoseyn Musavi's signature. In that statement, without referring to his numerous illegal activities, Musavi repeatedly stressed the need to abide by law, and pursuing one's demands by legal means. At the end of the statement, he came to the main reason for issuing that statement and spoke about the formation of a political party with the membership and participation of those around him!

An interesting point in that statement is that Musavi declares one of the goals of his anticipated party "to protect the violated rights and votes of the people in the last election, through the publication of the documents and facts about violations and frauds that took place in that election, and referring them to judicial authorities"! He does not explain why if he possesses certain documents and files about fraud in the election, despite the repeated demands of legal authorities, he has refrained from producing those documents! If, on the other hand, he does not accept any of the legal authorities, then first of all why is he talking about adherence to law? Secondly, why did he register his candidacy in the presidential election and why did he compete in the election through the same legal channels of this system? Thirdly, why does he now speak about turning to the same legal authorities? There are scores of other contradictions in his statement, but dealing with all of them is beyond the scope of this note.

3- Although in his recent contradictory statement Musavi has implemented another part of his mission that had been dictated to him from abroad - as had been anticipated - nevertheless, there is another aim behind the publication of that statement. That aim is to escape from definite punishment for the murder of innocent individuals, inciting riots and rebellions, hiring some thugs and ruffians to attack the lives, property and honour of the people, clear collaboration with foreigners, performing the role of the fifth column inside the country, and scores of other undeniable crimes. Those are frightful crimes and overt acts of treason for which the main culprits, including Musavi and (Mohammad) Khatami, must be tried in an open court in front of the eyes of the oppressed people who demand that the blood of their loved ones should be avenged.

4- Establishing a political party requires adhering to some defined laws, which include the political health of the founding members and organisers of that party. Consequently, the party that in his recent statement Mr Musavi has spoken of cannot be legal, because its main (founding) members, namely individuals such as Mirhoseyn Musavi and Mohammad Khatami, are accused of having committed many crimes that were referred to in the previous paragraph. Therefore, as law-breaking is the known and overt characteristic of Musavi and the circle of people around him, it is not unlikely that they would form their party without receiving a legal permit for it. In that case, the true name of that organization should be a "fifth column". It would be another version of the "fire burning under the ashes of sedition", and there is no other option to deal with it except, in the words of His Holiness Imam Ali (peace be upon him), to "crush the sedition before it materialises".

5- Finally, without any doubt, the tenth presidential election was a divine blessing. In the course of that election, the bond between Islamism and the republicanism of the system was demonstrated in an amazing way as the result of 40 million votes and 85 per cent participation of the voters in the election. Also, in the course of that election the true face of those who for so many years had made claims (to being faithful to the revolution) but had hid their faces behind a mask of deception and corruption, has now been made clear to all the people.

These purges (palayesh, also means cleansing) in the upper circles will no doubt be accompanied with growth in the body (of the public). The unlawful behaviour and the rebellious nature of those who claimed to be reformists had remained hidden from some people who had been deceived by their reformist and law-abiding slogans, but now those doubts have been dispelled and...

(Description of Source: Tehran Keyhan Online in Persian -- conservative Tehran evening daily. Published by the Keyhan Institute and edited by Hoseyn Shari'atmadari, Leader Khamene'i's representative at the institute; URL: http://www.kayhannews.ir)

Mediterranean Piracy on the Fourth

noreply@blogger.com (Juan Cole) — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 05:56:00 +0000

US hostages held in foreign country on Fourth of July, including a former Congresswoman, after having been captured in a naked act of piracy in international waters after the Americans attempted to respond to a crisis provoked by crimes against humanity, as detailed by Amnesty International.

Once upon a time, Americans would have had the guts to mind such a thing.

See also Paul Craig Roberts.

Gazans and other Palestinians under Israeli occupation do not enjoy "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," and have not been able to "institute" a "government" of their own to secure those rights. The occupation authority that rules them does not derive its "powers" from the "consent of the governed" The occupation government has become destructive to these ends. I think we know what the American Founding Fathers would say the Palestinians need.

End/ (Not Continued)

Remembering Iran's Protests on the 4th of July

noreply@blogger.com (Juan Cole) — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 04:10:00 +0000

Remembering the protests in Iran in pictures and film on the occasion of the America Declaration of Independence:

Aljazeera English on "Mousavi and the Masses", part I:

Mousavi and the Masses," Part II:

Parnaz & Ashkan:

"The Owner of this Land":

And some relevant print reports:

LAT on one innocent man's 10 days in Iran's labyrinth of a prison system, just because he stopped to help a fallen protester.

A coordinated international response is building against Iran's plan to put Iranian UK embassy employees on trial.

Fareed Zakaria's (implicit reply to Bomber Bolton):

CNN: What about a military strike?

Zakaria: It would be bizarre to bomb Iran-- which means bombing Iranians -- now that we have seen the inside of that country. Moussavi and his supporters want a less confrontational approach to the world. So do many members of the establishment.

Moussavi attacked Ahmadinejad repeatedly for his aggressive foreign policy. So we now know the answer to the question, "Are there moderates in Iran?" Yes, millions of them.'

End/ (Not Continued)

Mousavi Said Calling for General Strike; Hard Liners Call for his Arrest

noreply@blogger.com (Juan Cole) — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 05:47:00 +0000

In what may be a major development, it is being alleged that Iranian opposition leader Mir Hosain Mousavi and his wife Zahra Rahnavard are calling for a general strike next week. Such a strike would be harder for the regime to forestall than crowds coming into the streets, and whether it has a big effect or not would be a way of measuring the support for the reformists in the country.

Predictably, hard liners in the Iranian parliament are calling for Mousavi to be arrested. As it is, seven members of what the regime calls "anti-government groups" from Tehran and Qazvin were arrested yesterday.

Not satisfied with having held an Egyptian-style election, some Iranian politicians apparently want to adopt the Burmese model. How do you say "Myanmar" in Persian?

A

Meanwhile, one price the regime will pay for phonying up the election results and violently repressing peaceful demonstrations is even greater diplomatic isolation. Although this LA Times piece questions whether sanctions will be tightened, I think that is also a possible outcome. Many Iranians are fearful that what was done to Iraq, in reducing it to a fourth-world country, will ultimately be done to Iran by the US/UNSC if things go on like this.

The 27-member European Union is intervening with Iran over the holding of British embassy personnel. This is a powerful intervention. One third of all Iran's trade is with the EU and it is Iran's number one trading partner. The EU imported 11.3 bn. Euros in goods from Iran in 2008 and exported 14 bn. Euros to Iran-- maninly "machinery and transport equipment (54.6%), manufactured goods (16.9%) and chemicals (12.1%). "

End/ (Not Continued)

Saddam, the FBI and Cliocide in Iraq

noreply@blogger.com (Juan Cole) — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 05:02:00 +0000

Joyce Battle (with help from Brendan McQuade) has posted twenty interviews of Saddam Hussein by the FBI to the National Security Archives at George Washington University, having done the hard work of FOIAing them.

In this pdf file, the FBI interrogator asks a lot of leading questions about al-Qaeda and Saddam shoots them down effectively.

In this pdf file, Saddam explains, "Hussein stated Iran was Iraq's major threat due to their common border and believed Iran intended to annex Southern Iraq into Iran. The possibility of Iran trying to annex a portion of Southern Iraq was viewed by Hussein and Iraq as the most significant threat facing Iraq. hussein viewed the other countries in the Middle East as weak and could not defend themselves or Iraq from a attack from Iran. Hussein stated he believed Israel was a threat to the entire Arab world, not specifically Iraq."

Aljazeera English reports on Saddam Hussein's fear of Iran (the reason he did not publicly admit to having destroyed his chemical and biological weapons), his distaste for al-Qaeda, and his toying with a new alliance with the US against Iran.

As a professional historian of the Middle East, I am appalled by these documents. They are very odd because the agenda for the interviews was clearly set by Cheney and they were intended to justify the Bush administration. The historical questions are naive and elicit no interesting new information. I can't think of anything in the documents that couldn't just have been found in Saddam's old speeches. And the blanked-out document is very suspicious; presumably the answers there reflected poorly on Bush or Washington or something.

Saddam Hussein was a tyrant and a mass murderer. But to have him so shoddily and self-interestedly debriefed and then lynched by the Mahdi Army was a great disservice to history. It is the sort of thing we came to expect from the Bush administration, which oversaw the destruction of the entire twentieth-century historical record for Iraq, as well as crushing and destroying under tanks and helicopters entire libraries of ancient Iraqi civilization, a crime I have dubbed "cliocide."

End/ (Not Continued)

Cheney Worries about Wasting the Sacrifices made in Iraq on behalf of Big Oil

noreply@blogger.com (Juan Cole) — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 08:00:00 +0000

Dick Cheney reacted to the cessation of unilateral US patrols of major cities in Iraq, saying that he had concerns that the "insurgents" might launch more attacks and that �I would not want to see the U.S. waste all the tremendous sacrifice that has gotten us to this point."

First of all, Cheney didn't make any sacrifices in Iraq. He deferred his own military service five times because he 'had other things to do.' The 'sacrifices' were caused because he purveyed falsehoods to the US public in order to get up that war, hinting around that Saddam was in bed with Usama Bin Laden and telling senators that Iraq was two years away from having a nuclear bomb. So the sacrifices were of other people's children, and his role was merely that of an Aztec high priest cutting the heart out of the victims.

Second of all, from the dawn of time until 2003, there had never been a suicide bombing in Iraq. Iraqis are not essentially violent. Like all human beings, they deploy violence at some points to further political goals. Cheney launched a violent illegal war of aggression on Iraq. And Cheney created the "insurgency" by invidious policies that unfairly disadvantaged the Sunni Arabs in the new Iraq he helped midwife.

Third, Cheney's own administration (it was Bush-Cheney, remember Dick?) that negotiated the Status of Forces agreement under which the cessation of stand-alone US patrols of major Iraqi cities was scheduled for this summer. Cheney is trying to imply that this policy is that of the Obama administration!

Fourth, Cheney kept talking about 'liberating' Iraq and democratizing the Middle East. The patrols are ceasing precisely because the elected Iraqi parliament insisted on it! Cheney only likes democracy when it functions as an elective dictatorship for him and his cronies.

Fifth, Jason Leopold reviews the documentary evidence that Dick Cheney combined his energy task force with planning for an overthrow of the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq.

Leopold writes,

' [An] April 2001 report, "Strategic Policy Challenges for the 21st Century," was prepared by the James A. Baker Institute for Public Policy and the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations at the request of then-Vice President Dick Cheney. In retrospect, it appears that the report helped focus administration thinking on why it made geopolitical sense to oust Hussein, whose country sat on the world's second largest oil reserves.

"Iraq remains a de-stabilizing influence to the flow of oil to international markets from the Middle East," the report said.

"Saddam Hussein has also demonstrated a willingness to threaten to use the oil weapon and to use his own export program to manipulate oil markets . . . The advisory committee that helped prepare the report included Luis Giusti, a Shell Corp. non-executive director; John Manzoni, regional president of British Petroleum; and David O'Reilly, chief executive of ChevronTexaco. . . [the notorious crook] Ken Lay, then chairman of the energy-trading Enron Corp., also made recommendations that were included in the Baker report.'

And then Leopold adds is this:

'The New Yorker 's Jane Mayer later made another discovery: a secret NSC document dated Feb. 3, 2001 - only two weeks after Bush took office - instructing NSC officials to cooperate with Cheney's task force, which was "melding" two previously unrelated areas of policy: "the review of operational policies towards rogue states" and "actions regarding the capture of new and existing oil and gas fields." [The New Yorker, Feb. 16, 2004]

By March 2001, Cheney's task force had prepared a set of documents with a map of Iraqi oilfields, pipelines, refineries and terminals, as well as two charts detailing Iraqi oil and gas projects, and a list titled "Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts," according to information released in July 2003 under a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by the conservative watchdog group, Judicial Watch.
'

In other words, what Cheney is really worried about is that a US military withdrawal from Iraq on the timetable his administration negotiated with the Iraqi parliament might lead to further instability of a sort that would keep the US oil majors from getting at Iraqi petroleum in a big way. His invocation of the 'sacrifies' made by other people's children on the basis of his hateful manipulations is the ultimate desecration.

For my own account of Cheney, Iraq and Big Oil, see

Engaging the Muslim World

End/ (Not Continued)

US Forces Launch Helmand Campaign; Pakistani Public turns Against Taliban but Still Rejects US Intervention

noreply@blogger.com (Juan Cole) — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 05:05:00 +0000

Some 4,000 US military personnel and 650 Afghan troops are launching an assault on Taliban positions in Helmand Province, with an aim to 'take, clear and hold' in emulation of the counter-insurgency tactics deployed successfully in some parts of Iraq. Helmand has been a particularly violent province in recent years, and is also the major poppy-producing area of Afghanistan. Past US/Afghan government forcible poppy eradication campaigns angered local farmers and probably contributed to the increased guerrilla activity. This policy of forcible eradication has now been abandoned, though drug interdiction efforts continue. I am not sure the people the US forces in Helmand will be fighting are actually 'Taliban' in the sense of being seminarians loyal to Mulla Omar of Quetta.

Presumably this campaign has been launched now in anticipation of the August 20 presidential elections, which President Hamid Karzai is widely anticipated to win. The elections will require more law and order in some southern, Pushtun provinces than has recently been the case.

A new poll by worldpublicopinion.org has found that the Pakistani public has turned against the Taliban in a big way, with 81% now seeing the Taliban in the Northwest of Pakistan as a critical threat to the country. This is up from 34% in September, 2007. And some two-thirds of Pakistanis view all religious militant groups in the country as a whole as a critical threat to it. This proportion is up from 38% in September of 2007, and it is a significant shift, since a lot of Pakistanis had view the religious militants as freedom fighters for the cause of Kashmir or the liberation of Afghanistan from Western occupation.

The bad news for President Obama is that the Pakistani public's souring on the Taliban has not resulted in higher favorability ratings for the United States. A majority does not trust Obama to do the right thing. Overwhelming majorities believe the US wants to divide and weaken the Muslim world, and 82% reject Obama's predator drone strikes on Pakistani soil. Some 79% want the war in Afghanistan ended now.

In other words, as religious nationalism appears to have declined in Pakistan (something visible in the parliamentary elections of 2008), other forms of secular nationalism have taken its place, no less anti-imperialist in character. Pakistan was born in a struggle to throw off two centuries of British rule in South Asia, and once you go through a thing like that, having Western troops actively intervening in a Muslim neighbor is just not welcome.

End/ (Not Continued)

Iran: Mousavi Remains Defiant; Journalists Held

noreply@blogger.com (Juan Cole) — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 04:35:00 +0000

Reuters reports that Iranian opposition leader Mir Hosain Mousavi is continuing to assert that the newly formed second-term government of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is illegitimate. He called for a lifting of censorship and the release of the some one thousand Iranians arrested by security forces for participating in demonstrations against the allegedly stolen election. He was joined joined in this continued defiance of Supreme Leader Khamenei by his rival, Mehdi Karroubi and others in the reform camp. My guess is that they aren't far from a jail cell.

The regime is already conducting Stalinist show-trials, as in the case of Maziar Bahari, who recently appeared with me on Fareed Zakaria's GPS Sunday interview show. Please politely protest Mr. Bahari's detention and the coerced 'confession' to Mohammad Khazaee, Ambassador and Permanent Representative, email address: iran@un.int . While you are at it, demand the release of Greek journalist Iason Athanasiadis and the others listed by Amnesty International. If you can, it is best to write by land mail to: Ayatollah Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi, Howzeh Riyasat-e Qoveh Qazaiyeh, (Office of the Head of the Judiciary) Pasteur St., Vali Asr Ave.,south of Serah-e Jomhouri,
Tehran 1316814737, Islamic Republic of Iran (Salutation: Your Excellency).

Another ayatollah, Jalaoddin Taheri, has issued a fatwa calling Ahmadinejad's election illegitimate and fraudulent. In 2002, Taheri, long a critic of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, resigned after thirty years as Friday prayer leader of the major city of Isfahan (sort of like being archbishop of Boston). More significant senior ayatollahs, such as Yousuf Sanei, have also shown discomfort with the way the elections were conducted.

Ali Reza Eshraghi explains why most clerical authorities in Iran are afraid of rocking the boat to much, and have more or less acquiesced in Khamenei's decision.

One fall-out of the widespread questioning of the probity of the election process is that Ahmadinejad has had to cancel a trip to Libya to appear at the conference of the African Union, since his being on the roster there had become controversial. Khamenei may win his battle to move the Iranian state further to the repressive Right for the moment, but it may well be a pyrrhic victory since it is likely to isolate Iran further from the international community and to set the stage for further unrest in the future.

Hard as it is to watch all this repression unfold, I agree with Eric Margolis that there is little the US can or should do at this point. Countries have their own developmental history, class structures, and political cultures, and foreign military or covert interventions on behalf of state-building and democratization have very seldom succeeded in modern history.(See Elizabeth Thompson's new study on democratization in the Middle East for USIP-- the pdf is here.) Not to mention that Bush-Cheney and the Neocons tied up the US military and intelligence apparatuses in another illegal war of aggression, which rather weakened US international legitimacy for such purposes. As with post-Tiananmen Square China, the US will just have to deal with the Iran that exists.

Here is the graphic novel of the past three weeks' events in Iran, in the style of Marjane Satrapi's Persepolis (she is not involved in this production).

Aljazeera English reports from the streets of Tehran on the aftermath of the massive protests against the announced outcome of the June 12 presidential elections.

Iran experts Ambassador Nicholas Burns, Abbas Milani, and Karim Sadjadpour discuss the aftermath of the election and its implications for U.S. foreign policy in the region at the Carnegie Endowment for Peace. David Ignatius moderated the discussion.

End/ (Not Continued)

Coda: Final Dispatch from Tehran

noreply@blogger.com (Juan Cole) — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 14:57:00 +0000

This message was received by email from Tehran three hours ago. I have anonymized it and made a couple of orthographical corrections and am passing it on for what it is worth. - JC

And on the thirteenth day Michael Jackson died. Voice of America and BBC Persian are back up, if intermittently, and we crowd around like the rest of the world for the latest news. It is almost a relief. Being a full-time revolutionary is hard work, difficult to sustain. Seeing the non-stop coverage, the obvious distraction of his passing, we grimly joke that Michael was a martyr for the cause. At least he had the decency to delay his death until the worst violence had already passed.

Things are going back to their regular marks. In the afternoons the parks fill up again with old ladies and young couples. There's badminton and soccer for kids to play at night. Well-dressed men in jackets and dress pants exercise on the cardio equipment provided by the city. The scenes around the squares, lately the places of so much celebration and trouble, are almost back to normal. Traffic is back. A car flies towards Ariashahr Square, a young man with slicked back hair and aviator glasses leans out of the passenger window chest first. He removes his shades and turns his palms upwards, beseeching the ladies in the car next to him to pull over. Unimpressed, or maybe they're being coy, the girls pull away and race ahead of their pursuers. The two boys give chase. Cops and basijis hang around the circle but do nothing, what do they care...?

Every young person I see I wonder, What were you doing three weeks ago? Who were you then? I look for signs of subversion. A girl wears a green headscarf. A kid shifts gears in his Kia Pride with an arm encased in a green cast. What does it mean? Together, in a crowd, the color green added up to something. Alone, spread apart and without context, they are just moments of coincidence.

Television has become almost unbearable. Stories alternate between the mundane and the absurd. The evening news shows us parents waiting outside of testing halls where their kids are taking the Konkur, the once-yearly high stakes university entrance exam. This year, more than ever, the Konkur is an act of faith. For the less than half who get accepted and manage to finish their studies, one wonders what kind of job market will await them. A friend remarks, We've got to be the most educated unemployed in the world. Sometimes it seems that all we do is attend class, schooling has become the ultimate distraction.

The report on the Konkur ends and the next item is the case of Neda Khanom. Like Jim Garrison in JFK, the reporter shows us step-by-step how her death could NOT have been the result of a single gunman. The caliber doesn't match, it occurred on side streets, why is there footage of her before the incident, etc.. The reporter hints ominously at darker forces active inside of the country, that her death was no doubt a setup by a foreign power. Even by IRI standards, the report is breathtaking. Rather than hide the incident or pretend like it never happened, they try to play it to their advantage. There seems to be nothing beyond the pale, no outrage too great...We reminisce about better days, when the lying had enough truth in it that you could at least fool yourself into believing.

Khoobe, khoobe, bezar begand. Harchi bishtar, baytar. Good, good, let them say it. The more the better. Hamintor khatra siatar mikonand. They'll only darken the line separating the people from the government. We sit and plot, kitchen revolutionaries at work. It is late and the drink is loosening our tongues. What we need is leadership. What about Mousavi? Poor Mousavi, all alone...If only Khomeini were still around, he would have put all of these guys in their places!, this last bit said by someone who has never accepted the Revolution. At 10 the neighbors start up, Allah Akbar! Allah Akbar! We keep drinking, pressing our hands flat against the table and wondering if maybe they're letting us thrash around for a few weeks even as the screws tighten...

Still...I've written elsewhere that none of this was supposed to happen. It remains true. It is the people, the mellat, that has taken on the most creative and unexpected role in this drama. Their scenario remains the least predictable, and therefore most hopeful, of all of the actors, foreign or Iranian. Iran's conspirators clearly did not expect the population to show up in such defiant numbers after June 12 and the truth be told, neither did many of us...

We are told, Mellat e Iran ra nashenakhtim. The state says that the turnout and election results shows that the world and by implication the opposition didn't understand the Iranian people. Mellat e Iran ra nashenakhtim. We didn't understand the Iranian people, say certain analysts in Europe and the U.S.. The vote proves that Ahmadinejad is loved and the West once again didn't get the "true Iran."

Still...as the unrest continues, daily taking new forms---Iran's innumerable revolutionary, religious, and national holidays promise to be new sites of protest--it would appear that it is the state and its band of fellow travelers in the West that has failed to understand what has happened...

Cats are on the prowl in the kuchehs and sidestreets of Tehran. They've never had it better. A two-year effort by the city to outfit the capital with trash bins has gone to waste. In a few nights of protest practically every bin in the city has been kicked over, stomped on, melted into its primal elements. Neighbors have gone back to placing trash-filled yellow and black grocery bags at the end of the alley (sar e kuche) at night. The cats wait until no one is around and then show up sniffing, padding about, looking for their night's food.

Throughout the capital there are deep marks etched onto the asphalt, mottled grooves in the shape of a blocky "u" from where the bin fires burned hot against the pavement. The scars run at regular intervals across Tehran's many neighborhoods, sometimes in overlapping pairs or threes. It will be some time before these blemishes are repaired. Entirely new roads will have to be built...

(Dedicated to the geniuses at Nokia/Siemens)

End/ (Not Continued)

Death Toll in Kirkuk Rises to 33; Growing Arab-Kurdish Violence Threatens Stability of Iraq; 4 US Troops Killed

noreply@blogger.com (Juan Cole) — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 09:15:00 +0000

The casualty toll in the Kirkuk bombing on Tuesday has risen to 33, with about 100 injured.

Four US troops were killed in Iraq on Tuesday, as well, though the circumstances are still murky.

The Iraqi civil wars kicked off by the American invasion of 2003 continue. I'm sure a lot of observers think it is all one internal war, but it is not. It is multiple. Nor is the bombing relevant to the American withdrawal from the cities, as some press reports are implying, since there were never very many US troops in Kurdistan or the Iraqi north generally. (Though settling the Arab-Kurdish problem before they leave will be essential to a good exit for Americans).

A bombing like this in Kirkuk means something different than a similar event in Baghdad or in Shiite Nasiriyah in the south. A lot of the violence in the south is among Shiite militias; there are few Sunnis, and their freedom of movement is constrained (a Tikriti "r" is different from the "r" used in the south, and so the religio-ethnic difference can sometimes be heard; plus, Sunnis typically don't know the details of the lives of the 12 Imams sacred to the Shiites and so can fairly easily be caught out.)

A bombing in Baghdad typically indicates continued conflict between Sunni Arabs and Shiite Arabs, though my best guess is that Sunni Arabs are only 10-15% of Baghdad now, so that the bombings are more helpless raging revenge than effective guerrilla politics.

But in Kirkuk, even if it is the radical vigilantes ("Salafi jihadis" or what the US press calls 'al-Qaeda in Iraq') that are behind the bombing, it has a different significance. Kirkuk is the arena for a potentially epochal struggle between the Arabs (both Sunni and Shiite) and the Kurds (mostly Sunni, who do not speak Arabic as their mother tongue).

Tuesday's blast was the second major such attack in a week and a half, since 70 were killed in Kirkuk in a bombing just 10 days ago.

The Kurdistan Regional Government is a special federal region within Iraq, comprising what used to be 3 provinces that have now been conjoined into one administration. But the KRG is not satisfied with this territory. Its leaders what to annex large swathes of Iraq proper, including the oil-rich province of Kirkuk. The Kurds, who were favored by the Neocons and assisted on the ground by powerful American supporters such as Peter Galbraith and Brendan O'Leary, had an article put into the new Iraqi constitution demanding a referendum on the future of Kirkuk, to be conducted in that province, by the end of 2007. It never happened, because it was a sort of ultimatum, and military historians know that ultimatums usually kick off a war. Since the Kurdish authorities largely control the police and security forces in Kirkuk province (a legacy of the cooperation of the Kurdish Peshmerga paramilitary in helping the US take the city of Kirkuk in the 2003 war), the Kurdistan authorities have been in a good position to flood the province with Kurdish immigrants, some of them returnees who had been ethnically cleansed in the name of Arabization by Saddam Hussein, but some at least of whom are probably new to the province. So the Kurds would probably win a referendum.

But the Arabs and Turkmen, who together form at least a plurality, are die-hard against being dragooned into Kurdistan (remember, the practice in the KRG has been to erase provincial borders and meld the administration into one, which means that Kirkuk Arabs and Turkmen will be a tiny minority in the sea of a unified Kurdistan).

On Monday, 50 Iraqi members of parliament had entered a protest against the draft constitution for Kurdistan, which will be submitted to a referendum in the KRG, since it explicitly claims Kirkuk and parts of Ninevah and Diyala provinces and appears to endorse a Greater Kurdistan that would threaten Turkey, Iran and Syria as well as Arab Iraq. The new constitution is also being criticized by Kurdish secularists for making Islam the state religion and forbidding the civil legislature to pass laws contrary to sharia or Islamic canon law.

Kurdistan leaders are increasingly intolerant of press criticism, having on more than one occasion jailed journalists or confiscated runs of publications.

So the bombing is not just a manifestation of fundamentalist terrorism, though it may be that. It is political, and aims at achieving political aims, in a way that the random and ineffectual bombings in Baghdad no longer can hope to.

I am not sympathetic to movements coming out of 19th century romantic nationalism, which tend to reify ethnicity in an almost racist manner and posit essentialist connections between land and people (especially silly in those parts of the Middle East, such as Iraq, where a third to a half of people were pastoralists wandering around until the twentieth century). The Arab-Kurdish divide in Iraq is extremely unfortunate and economically irrational. If Iraq can ever reestablish security and develop the southern oil fields, which are enormous, Kurds will be drawn down south as workers in large numbers, and get spread around the country. The Kirkuk fields are old, water-logged and on the way to being worked out. Iraq's future probably lies elsewhere and therefore probably so does the future of Kurdish citizens of Iraq. Kurds would be wiser to forget about trying to control territory in the 19th century way and surrender to the messiness, ethnic mixing and multiple identities, and uprootedness of postmodern life. And nothing better exemplifies such postmodernism than the polyglot hydrocarbon states of the Gulf. If Kurds aren't careful they'll be stuck landlocked, with small resources, and surrounded by powerful local enemies fearful of their separatism, while Nepalis, Pakistanis and Sri Lankans get rich working in the oil economy of the Arab Shiite south of Iraq.

End/ (Not Continued)

With a Whimper, not a Bang; A Milestone on the Way to the End of American Iraq

noreply@blogger.com (Juan Cole) — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 06:09:00 +0000

T.S. Eliot wrote at the end of "Hollow Men" in 1926, "This is the way the world ends/ Not with a bang but a whimper." He may as well have been talking about the war George W. Bush launched in Iraq in 2003.

The end of routine, independent patrolling of major Iraqi cities by US troops today is a major milestone in modern Iraqi history.

Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki declared Tuesday "National Sovereignty Day." Some 86 US bases have been closed in recent weeks (see the Jim Muir report). The LAT says that on Monday night, people in Baghdad danced in the streets, sang and set off (non-lethal) fireworks even in the midst of a dust storm.

Some Americans might find all this celebrating offensive. But the US public has mostly moved on, little interested in the foreign wars its armed forces are still fighting, and worried much more about the long-term consequences of the Republican Party's Ponzi-scheme economy of 2001-2008, the collapse of which has cost them or their family and friends their jobs. As in the 1930s, even celebrity gossip and the glitz of Hollywood are more present in people's minds than distant armies on the march. The public and the mass media mysteriously ignored the Afghanistan War right from 2002, and now Iraq is being given the same treatment, even though there are 130,000 or so US troops in Iraq and 38,000 in Afghanistan, and both contingents are still fighting and dying.

The end of US patrolling should neither be exaggerated nor downplayed as a turning point. Of course, US troops will still be in Iraqi streets from time to time, accompanying Iraqi forces. Special Operations teams will likely engage in surgical strikes in coordination with their Iraqi colleagues for years to come.

But there is an essential difference between such occasional interventions of a collaborative sort and routine patrols by a foreign military of densely populated urban areas in an Arab, Muslim country. The latter is viewed as a form of neo-colonialism by most Iraqis. The former could be welcome if it adds to law and order.

I was talking to a US military officer who had been in Baghdad in December, and he told me that he thought that Iraqi troops were now capable of patrolling independently, something he would not have said a year or two earlier. If they get into trouble, he said, they stand and fight. They still have poor logistical support. If the firefight lasts 5 hours rather than one hour, they might be in trouble because no one is bringing them ammunition and water. Az-Zaman writes in Arabic that the governor of Najaf remarked Sunday that US troops would still provide logistical support to Iraqi ones, despite the end of routine American patrols.

The Iraqi military has been setting up extra patrols and checkpoints in preparation for the cessation of American patrols. The az-Zaman article cited above speaks of some mysteries, including the incarceration of dozens of Iraqis in the provinces. And there is the sudden release of a major Mahdi Army militia commander. Is Washington trying to cut a deal as it leaves?

That the Iraqi military has experienced a sudden increase in efficiency is attested by relatively successful campaigns in 2008 against the Mahdi Army Shiite militia in Basra, Amara, Nasiriya, and Sadr City (East Baghdad). Security appears tangibly to have improved in the south in the aftermath. Still, of course the Iraqi police and other security forces have a long way to go toward professionalism.

Aljazeera English has video on the constant threat to police from guerrillas:

Of course, the operations in Basra and east Baghdad succeeded in part because the US air force gave the Iraqi military close air support. That is another way that the US is not just vanishing from Iraq. Iraq does not have an air force and will not have one for something close to a decade, and its government wants the US to act as a surrogate Iraqi air force for the time being. Note, however, that such air support can be proffered from al-Udeid base in Qatar. It does not require a base inside Iraq.

More US troops will be withdrawn, though Gen. Ray Odierno wants to have a big enough force in January to help provide security for the parliamentary elections that month. I think there is some fear that if US troops are not sufficient in number to help lock down the country for the elections, that paucity of troops may encourage Sunni Arab radicals to disrupt the balloting with massive car bombings. Moreover, there is a danger of Iranian hard liners trying to steal the Iraqi elections, as a repeat performance of what happened in Iran on June 12, by using petrodollars to buy votes for their hard line Shiite allies.

In the medium term, the bombings by Sunni Arab guerrilla groups who cannot reconcile to the Shiite- and Kurdish-led new government, will likely continue. It is not clear, however, that such bombings can actually undermine the new government or force a radical change. If they cannot, they are useless.

The end of major US combat operations, prematurely announced by Bush on the USS Lincoln in 2003, may finally be at hand. Iraq faces many challenges going forward. Corruption is almost crippling for reconstruction. There has been little political reconciliation. Guerrillas are still deadly, as are sectarian militias. An Arab-Kurdish struggle over oil-rich Kirkuk of some ferocity could break out at any time. Increasingly, however, these problems will have to be dealt with by the new Iraqi elite itself.

End/ (Not Continued)

Sunday's Protest March Broken Up; Rafsanjani Defers to Khamenei

noreply@blogger.com (Juan Cole) — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 05:00:00 +0000

The phase of mass protest in the aftermath of the controversial election results of June 12 has drawn to a close for the moment. Movement activists can no longer put tens of thousands of protesters in the street because the security forces are too well organized and too loyal to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to allow it. Opposition leader Mir Hosain Mousavi has been increasingly indecisive on tactics even if he has been steadfast in demanding a rematch with incumbent Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

AP reports that the march for Mir Hosain Mousavi on Shariati Street by some 3,000 activists was violently repressed by the security forces, despite its having been a legal procession in part commemorating the killing in 1981 of revolutionary founding father Mohammad Beheshti (see below). Police used tear gas and clubs to disperse the marchers, attacking them and in some case breaking bones. The demonstrators had been chanting "where's my vote?" and some were wearing green, the symbolic color of the Mousavi movement. They also by their chants tied Mir Hosain Mousavi to Imam Hosain, the grandson of the Prophet Muhmmad, who was killed by the repressive Umayyad government in 680 CE. The implication is that Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei is the equivalent of the Umayyad Caliph Yazid, who is despised by Shiite Muslims as the author of the martyrdom of Imam Hosain.

Opposition leader Mehdi Karroubi himself had joined in the march on Sunday.

The European Union condemned Iran for detaining 8 Iranian employees of the British Embassy on charges that they were involved in fomenting the post-election protests-- charges that the British government vehemently denied.

Reuters reports that late Sunday some of the embassy personnel were released.

In a bad sign for Mousavi, his ally former president Akbar Hashimi Rafsanjani appeared to desert him on Sunday. The USG Open Source Center translates from official Iranian radio:

'FYI -- Iran: Rafsanjani Cites 'Complicated Plots,' Calls for 'Solidarity'
Vision of the Islamic Republic of Iran Network 1
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Document Type: OSC Summary

Tehran Vision of the Islamic Republic of Iran Network 1 in Persian at 1630 GMT on 28 June broadcast its scheduled newscast, which included an item on remarks by Ayatollah Hashemi-Rafsanjani, Chairman of the Expediency Council, in a meeting the families of the "martyrs" of the 7 Tir incident, that is 28 June 1981, when the head of Judiciary and some other officials were killed in a bomb blast.

Rafsanjani referred to the recent incidents after the results of the presidential elections, saying: "The incidents were the results of complicated plots by obscure sources with the aim of creating separation and differences between the people and the system. And with the aim of making the people distrust the Islamic system."
He said Ayatollah Khamene'i's expedience in extending the deadline by the Guardian Council for a better study of the issues and providing convincing explanations and clearing any doubts was a very valuable measure. He added: "In my opinion, the recent order by the leadership was one of the very valuable decisions he made. That is he asked the Guardian Council to extend the legal time, which was over, to study the complaints. And a group was appointed to help the Guardian Council with this regard."

Rafsanjani said: "We should all make a step with cooperation and solidarity to remove the obstacles and solve the problems." He also said: "We should always end the election results with solidarity. If every election would result in discord - we have an election once a year - and there would be hatred and fighting, then there will be nothing left." . .

(Description of Source: Tehran Vision of the Islamic Republic of Iran Network 1 in Persian -- state-run television) '

Rafsanjani has clearly decided to defer to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei on handling the outcome of the elections, and has come out as critical of the crowd politics and occasional turbulence they produced. As a multi-billionaire and man of the establishment, he may well have been frightened that the massive street rallies for Mousavi a week ago signalled a danger to the status quo, which he is attempting to preserve. From Rafsanjani's point of view, Khamenei, Ahmadinejad and others have been making a slow-motion coup, reducing the sigificance and openness of the of the system by excluding the reformists from running for office. Wanting to go back to 1997 is not the same as wanting a revolution.

On the other hand, Grand Ayatollah Bayyat Zanjani issued a statement defending the right of the protesters to rally peacefully and condemning the violent crackdown on them. There are nearly 30 grand ayotallahs in the Shiite world, the majority of them resident in the holy city of Qom in Iran. Despite their lack of political power, they could be influential in determing how the public remembers the election and what aspirations Iranians have for the future.

The real victors of a successful squelching of the protest movement would be the Revolutionary Guards, who have been making a hard line slow-motion coup for some time.

Dilip Hiro explains the background of the current events and concludes that Iran's regime has moved in an authoritarian direction, raising questions about whether a fundamentalist Muslim movement is compatible with democracy.

Middle East Report has a substantial overview of the Iran crisis and its historical roots.

End/ (Not Continued)

Moaddel Guest Op-Ed: Iran�s Crisis and the U.S. Option: Support Mousavi now or fight Ahmadinejad tomorrow

noreply@blogger.com (Juan Cole) — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 04:05:00 +0000

Mansoor Moaddel writes in a guest editorial for IC:

The current civil uprising in Iran reflects not just a protest against a rigged election. Nor is it primarily a symptom of contentions for power or clashes between opposing perspectives on the nature of the Islamic regime. It is, rather, resistance against a political coup, whose engineers plan to impose a Taliban-style Islamic government on Iran. The coup has been organized by an alliance between the supreme leader and the most militant and fundamentalist faction within the ruling establishment, backed by the Revolutionary Guard.

The political attitudes of one of its most notorious ideologues, Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi, demonstrates the danger Iranians and the world would be facing should this militant faction get its way. Mesbah Yazdi does not believe in the republican aspects of the Islamic regime, but rather views Islamic law as supreme and must be unquestionably followed. The supreme leader, he says, is not elected but rather discovered by the clerics. For him, Ayatollah Khamenei is the exemplar of such a leader. He has characterized the ideas of representative government and legislative functions as belong to the decadent system of Western liberalism. He has likened reformist ideas to the AIDS virus. He has publically endorsed the construction of a nuclear bomb.

These ideas have much appeal for Ahmadinejad, who claims that the past governments were corrupt and deviated from the Islamic path. Some of the former leaders, people like Rafsanjani and Natiq Nouri, have abandoned the ideals of the revolution. Ahmadinejad argues that for the sake of Islam, such individuals must be sacrificed and the society must be restored to the principles of the Islamic revolution. Under his presidency, be claims, this restoration has been launched, ushering a new beginning for a truly Islamic state in Iran.

Ahmadinejad�s deeds are Islamic extremism in action. He has already restricted the freedom of Iranian citizens, expanded men�s authority over women, increased political persecution, undermined the rights of religious and ethnic minorities, and supported terrorism and political adventurism abroad. He has also recruited members of the Revolutionary Guard to fill key governmental positions and awarded them lucrative government-sponsored projects. These actions, and his administration�s economic mismanagement, promoted the formation of a broad coalition in Iran comprised of reformist politicians, conservative pragmatists, and ordinary citizens representing the majority of the Iranian public.

Realizing the growing strength of this coalition in the run up to the election, the Revolutionary Guard acted to stifle the movement and the ruling party awarded itself a landslide victory � an uncontestable mandate for four more years of growing religious extremism and global isolationism.

The outcome of the current civil uprising is certainly consequential for the development of democracy in Iran. It has also far reaching implications for regional stability, international peace efforts, and the security of the United States. At this point, the regime cannot secure its rule without unleashing a reign of terror. And if this coup succeeds, the regime will forge ahead with its expressed plans for nuclear development and support for religious extremism abroad.
It would be a mistake to think that people like Ahmadinejad are reasonable. It is counter productive to base policy on the untenable premise that he would be amenable to a cost-benefit analysis on the nuclear issue. Time and again he has announced that the nuclear issue is off the table. To believe or hope otherwise would be a profound and resonant error.

The option that is left for the United States is either to effectively support Mousavi�s camp today or risk a military confrontation with Ahmadinejad tomorrow.

Mansoor Moaddel, Professor of Sociology, Eastern Michigan University
Research Affiliate, Population Studies Center, Institute for Social Research, The University of Michigan

End/ (Not Continued)