Archive for the ‘US policy’ Category

Truth and other casualties of war

July 26, 2008

The US military’s censorship of a photographer in Iraq raises stark questions about how graphic we want war reporting to be

artillery memorial

A fellowship of death: the artillery memorial in London

The row over the American photojournalist Zoriah Miller should put the media’s narcissistic warbling about the right to know about Max Mosley’s kinky affair in the shade. I doubt if it will, however.

Miller, a freelance photographer, was embedded with a US marine unit at Fallujah two years ago. On July 26 2006, he was due to go with the marines to a town council meeting at Garma. He decided instead to accompany a marine troop on a routine patrol. As they were out on the streets they heard an explosion. A suicide bomber had struck the council meeting.

Arriving on the scene, Miller was left to photograph the devastation. More than 20 people had been dismembered by the blast and a number were severely injured.

“As I ran I saw human pieces … a skullcap with hair, bone shards,” he told a blog news wire in San Francisco. “Of the marines I jogged in with, someone started to vomit. Others were standing around, not knowing what to do. It was completely surreal.”

Some of the bodies he photographed wore the shredded uniforms of the marines. He edited the pictures back at the camp, checking that none of the other marines objected, and later put them on his own website, including the images of the American corpses.

For this, his embed was terminated. He was told by letter that he had violated paragraphs 14 (h) and 14 (o) of his signed agreement with the American authorities. By these he had agreed, apparently, not to divulge “any tactics, techniques, and procedures witnessed during operations”, and not to provide “information on the effectiveness of enemy techniques”.

The US marine commander in Iraq, Major General John Kelly has insisted that Miller is banned from access to all US military units in Iraq.

The case has brought into sharp focus the whole business of accrediting war correspondents and embedding journalists with operational units. His transgression – for no one could be daft enough to call this a crime – was that he showed images of dead Americans killed in the service of their country. Though more than 4,000 American service personnel have been killed in Iraq, there have been surprisingly few photos of the dead, and the flag-draped coffins have often been kept away from the public gaze in hangars on air bases.

Despite the pervasive nature of images of war and the ease with which they can be transmitted, our authorities are squeamish about showing that war kills. Dead foreigners are one thing, but showing the images of dead British, American or French allied soldiers are off limits on the grounds that they are an unwarranted intrusion on grief for the relatives, dismay the community at home, and encourage the enemy.

Continued . . .

Exposing Bush’s historic abuse of power

July 25, 2008

Salon has uncovered new evidence of post-9/11 spying on Americans. Obtained documents point to a potential investigation of the White House that could rival Watergate.

By Tim Shorrock | Salon.com, July 23, 2008

The last several years have brought a parade of dark revelations about the George W. Bush administration, from the manipulation of intelligence to torture to extrajudicial spying inside the United States. But there are growing indications that these known abuses of power may only be the tip of the iceberg. Now, in the twilight of the Bush presidency, a movement is stirring in Washington for a sweeping new inquiry into White House malfeasance that would be modeled after the famous Church Committee congressional investigation of the 1970s.

While reporting on domestic surveillance under Bush, Salon obtained a detailed memo proposing such an inquiry, and spoke with several sources involved in recent discussions around it on Capitol Hill. The memo was written by a former senior member of the original Church Committee; the discussions have included aides to top House Democrats, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Judiciary Committee chairman John Conyers, and until now have not been disclosed publicly.

Salon has also uncovered further indications of far-reaching and possibly illegal surveillance conducted by the National Security Agency inside the United States under President Bush. That includes the alleged use of a top-secret, sophisticated database system for monitoring people considered to be a threat to national security. It also includes signs of the NSA’s working closely with other U.S. government agencies to track financial transactions domestically as well as globally.

The proposal for a Church Committee-style investigation emerged from talks between civil liberties advocates and aides to Democratic leaders in Congress, according to sources involved. (Pelosi’s and Conyers’ offices both declined to comment.) Looking forward to 2009, when both Congress and the White House may well be controlled by Democrats, the idea is to have Congress appoint an investigative body to discover the full extent of what the Bush White House did in the war on terror to undermine the Constitution and U.S. and international laws. The goal would be to implement government reforms aimed at preventing future abuses — and perhaps to bring accountability for wrongdoing by Bush officials.

Continued . . .

Puppet President Karzai ‘protecting drug lords’

July 25, 2008

Al Jazeera, July 25, 2008

Afghanistan produced 93 per cent of the world’s opium last year [AFP]

A former senior US anti-drug official has accused Afghanistan’s president of playing the US “like a fiddle” and protecting drug lords in his country for political reasons.

Thomas Schweich, who until June served as US state department co-ordinator for counter-narcotics and justice reform for Afghanistan, said Hamid Karzai was impeding the so-called war on drugs.

But the US government underscored its continued support for Karzai on Thursday despite the allegations.

Schweich wrote in an article on the New York Times website on Wednesday that “narco-corruption went to the top of the Afghan government”.

He said the Taliban fighting Karzai’s government profited from drugs, but Karzai was reluctant to move against big drug lords in his political power base in the south, where most of the country’s opium and heroin is produced.

“Karzai was playing us like a fiddle,” Schweich wrote.

“The US would spend billions of dollars on infrastructure development; the US and its allies would fight the Taliban; Karzai’s friends could get richer off the drug trade,” he wrote.

“Karzai had Taliban enemies who profited from drugs but he had even more supporters who did.”

Schweich also accused the Pentagon and some US generals of obstructing attempts to get military forces to assist and protect opium crop eradication drives.

Nato and US military commanders have been reluctant to get involved in the drug fight, arguing that destroying farmers’ crops would alienate tribesmen and increase support for the Taliban.

Warlord government

Hillary Mann Leverett, a former US National Security Council official for Afghanistan, told Al Jazeera that the US knew that government ministers in Afghanistan, including the minister of defence in 2002, were involved in drug trafficking.

Afghan ministers at that time had little expertise but were appointed because “they were warlords, they were thugs, they represented various ethnic and sectarian constituencies”, Mann Leverett said.

She added that the US government chose to work with them in an attempt to stop Afghanistan becoming a haven for al-Qaeda.

“Instead of funding the warlords we could have funded the UN to have a security peacekeeping force throughout the country.

“Instead we left Karzai without any troops, without any weapons, without any money, without any backing, to the warlords.”

US defends Karzai

Gonzalo Gallegos, a state department spokesman, did not directly address Schweich’s allegations but defended US policy and backing for Karzai.

“Karzai was playing us like a fiddle. The US would spend billions of dollars on infrastructure development; the US and its allies would fight the Taliban; Karzai’s friends could get richer off the drug trade”

Thomas Schweich,
ex-US state department co-ordinator for counter-narcotics and justice reform for Afghanistan

“We know and understand that there is a corruption issue in Afghanistan but we’re working with the sovereign government,” Gallegos said on Thursday.”President Karzai has shown us through word and deed that he is working with us to help improve the plight of that country.”

Gallegos added that corruption was a deeply rooted problem and solving it would take time.

Drug production has skyrocketed since the US-led invasion that ousted the Taliban.

In 2007, nearly 200,000 hectares of land in Afghanistan was used to cultivate poppy – more than double the area in 2003 – and the country produced 93 per cent of the world’s supply of opium, the raw material of heroin.

Karzai says his government is succeeding in the war on drugs and has repeatedly promised his US backers that he is committed to rooting out endemic corruption and fighting the drug trade.

His counter-narcotics ministry says 20 of Afghanistan’s 34 provinces will be poppy-free this year, compared to 13 provinces in 2007.

But in the south, cultivation remains rampant.

Pakistan warns that US-India nuclear deal could lead to new arms race

July 25, 2008

Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh arrives at parliament house in New Delhi

(Manish Swarup/AP)

Indian prime minister Manmohan Singh, who successfully pushed the deal with the US through parliament earlier this week

Pakistan warned the international community yesterday that a deal allowing India to import US atomic fuel and technology could accelerate a nuclear arms race between Delhi and Islamabad.The warning was made in a letter addressed to more than 60 nations as the Indian Government, having survived a no-confidence vote on Tuesday, dispatched diplomats to clear the deal with international regulators.

Later, in a concession to Islamabad, the United States said that it planned to shift $230 million (£116 million) in aid to Pakistan away from counter-terrorism to upgrading its F16 fighter jets seen as crucial for maintaining military parity with India. That announcement came four days before Yousuf Raza Gilani, Pakistan’s new Prime Minister, is due to meet President Bush at the White House for talks on co-operation in combating Islamic extremists.

Pakistan is a key US ally in the War on Terror and has long complained that India’s nuclear deal, agreed in 2005, will upset the strategic balance of South Asia by endorsing it as a nuclear weapons state.

India and Pakistan both tested nuclear weapons in 1999, but cannot buy nuclear supplies from most countries because they refuse to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

The nuclear deal bypasses that by lifting a US ban on nuclear sales to India imposed after Delhi tested its first nuclear device in 1974.

India must still win approval from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), whose board meets on August 1, and the Nuclear Suppliers’ Group (NSG). Pakistan warned IAEA and NSG members in its letter that the deal would impair non-proliferation efforts and “threatens to increase the chances of a nuclear arms race in the sub-continent”.

India and Pakistan have fought three wars since independence from Britain in 1947, and though a peace process has stabilised relations since 2004, they remain deeply distrustful of each other.

Mohammad Sadiq, a spokesman for the Pakistani Foreign Ministry, confirmed the contents of the letter, which he said was distributed to IAEA members. He said: “There should be a model agreement that could be signed with any country that meets the criteria. It should not be country-specific.” The US Congress must also approve the deal and American officials have repeatedly said they could struggle to do that before President Bush steps down. Condoleezza Rice, the US Secretary of State, said yesterday that the White House would push to get it approved in time.

Congress must also approve the White House’s proposal to shift two thirds of annual US military training and equipment aid to Pakistan towards upgrading the F16s.

Congress demanded last year that military aid to Pakistan — $1 billion annually since 2002 — be spent on law enforcement or fighting terrorism.

Dana Perino, a White House spokeswoman, said that the F16s were used for counter-terrorism. Military experts said that they were rarely used against militants and designed more for a potential war with India.

India has sent its top diplomats to Germany, which holds the rotating chair of the NSG, and to Ireland, an NSG and IAEA board member and a strong proponent of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

The NSG — founded in 1974 — is an informal group of 45 nuclear-exporting countries committed to preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

India has submitted a draft agreement to the IAEA, under which it would separate civilian and military nuclear facilities and allow agency inspections of the former.

Europe’s Obama cheers ring hollow in the Middle East

July 25, 2008

Here the US leader has much less power. Israel calls the shots, and the reality on the ground is gloomy and anti-peace

What a contrast. In western Europe Obama-mania is in full flood, epitomised by raving crowds in Berlin last night as well as the polls which show the Democratic candidate to be far more popular than John McCain in almost every country. In Israel he is met with apprehension, and in the Palestinian territories there is only the faintest hope that the deadlocked conflict will ever end.

The difference is that Europeans know the American president holds the keys to war or peace. He has enormous influence in dragging European governments after him, as the disastrous Iraq adventure showed. So it is not surprising that many Europeans are crying out for a man in the White House who will be less aggressive, less unilateral, less imperial, and more attuned to the complexities of international policy. Obama seems to be the one.

In the Middle East the US leader has much less power. Israel calls the shots, and what’s happening on the ground is deeply gloomy and anti-peace. The chances of creating a viable Palestinian state have almost vanished as Israeli settlements on the West Bank go on increasing and yet more checkpoints appear.

No wonder that, while they like Obama more than McCain, Palestinians feel little optimism. “Obama might create a different atmosphere,” says Yasser Abed Rabo, the secretary general of the Palestine Liberation Organisation, stressing the “might”. “Bush polarised things between him and Osama bin Laden. The moderates were the big losers. People in the middle felt crushed,” he argues.

Others expect Obama will take time to focus on the Middle East in spite of his promise this week to be engaged in peace from day one. “He’ll concentrate first on Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and the economy, which all matter more for Americans,” an adviser to the Palestinian negotiating team told me.

His visit to the Israeli border town of Sderot was one-sided, not just because he did not balance it with visits to places where Palestinians are oppressed. Sderot is more than a place under threat of terror. It is a model for how ceasefires are negotiable, and why they are the vital first step towards any serious peace agreement. Yet Obama ignored the point.

Continued . . .

$5000 reward offered for Rice’s citizen’s arrest

July 24, 2008

stuff.com.nz, July 24, 2008

A $5000 dollar reward is being offered to any Auckland University student who can make a successful citizen’s arrest of United States Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice during her visit to the country this weekend.

Auckland University Student Association (AUSA) president David Do said the arrest would be for her role in “overseeing the illegal invasion and continued occupation” of Iraq.

“It is hard enough living as a student in Auckland these days without having a war criminal coming to town, so we thought we’d give our students a chance to make a dent in their student loans and work for global justice at the same time.”

Dr Rice will be in Auckland on July 26, where she will meet with Prime Minister Helen Clark, Foreign Minister Winston Peters and Opposition leader John Key.

She will make her first trip to New Zealand after attending a meeting of the Asean Regional Forum this week in Singapore.

– NZPA

SOME MATTER MORE – WHEN 47 VICTIMS ARE WORTH 43 WORDS

July 24, 2008
Media Lense, July 22, 2008

Bad Form

In his classic work, Obedience to Authority, psychologist Stanley Milgram observed:

“There is always some element of bad form in objecting to the destructive course of events, or indeed, in making it a topic of conversation. Thus, in Nazi Germany, even among those most closely identified with the ‘final solution’, it was considered an act of discourtesy to talk about the killings.” (Milgram, Obedience to Authority, Pinter & Martin, 1974, p.204)

The same “bad form” is very much discouraged in our own society. One would hardly guess from media reporting that Britain and America are responsible for killing anyone in Iraq and Afghanistan, where violence is typically blamed on “insurgents” and “sectarian conflict”. International “coalition” forces are depicted as peacekeepers using minimum violence as a last resort.

In reporting the November 2005 Haditha massacre, in which 24 Iraqi civilians were murdered by US troops, Newsweek suggested that the scale of the tragedy “should not be exaggerated”. Why?

“America still fields what is arguably the most disciplined, humane military force in history, a model of restraint compared with ancient armies that wallowed in the spoils of war or even more-modern armies that heedlessly killed civilians and prisoners.” (Evan Thomas and Scott Johnson, ‘Probing Bloodbath,’ Newsweek, June 12, 2006; http://www.newsweek.com/id/52312/page/1)

The truth was revealed in a single moment of unthinking honesty by a senior US Army commander involved in planning the November 2004 Falluja offensive and convinced of its necessity. He visited the city afterward and declared:

“My God, what are the folks who live here going to say when they see this?” (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/04/ weekinreview/04burns.html?fta=y&pagewanted=all)

The answer was provided by physician Mahammad J. Haded, director of an Iraqi refugee centre, who was in Falluja during the US onslaught:

“The city is today totally ruined. Falluja is our Dresden in Iraq… The population is full of rage.” (http://www.countercurrents.org/iraq-awad100305.htm)

In July 2005, the Independent commented on US actions in Iraq:

“The American army’s use of its massive fire-power is so unrestrained that all US military operations are in reality the collective punishment of whole districts, towns and cities.” (Patrick Cockburn, ‘We must avoid the terrorist trap,’ The Independent, July 11, 2005)

In April 2004, the Daily Telegraph reported the disgust of senior British army commanders in Iraq with the “heavy-handed and disproportionate” military tactics used by US forces, who view Iraqis “as untermenschen. They are not concerned about the Iraqi loss of life… their attitude toward the Iraqis is tragic, it is awful.” (Sean Rayment, ‘US tactics condemned by British officers’, Defence Correspondent, Daily Telegraph, April 11, 2004)

READ FULL ALERT >>


What is Media Lens?

Media Lens is our response to the unwillingness, or inability, of the mainstream media to tell the truth about the real causes and extent of many of the problems facing us, such as human rights abuses, poverty, pollution and climate change.
CONTINUE

 bloggers

Former Gitmo Prosecutor Says Trials Rigged

July 24, 2008

Air Force Col. Morris D. Davis, who resigned last year after two years as chief prosecutor at Guantanamo, today described the military commissions system as fatally “tainted” by politics and designed to produce guilty verdicts, no matter what the costs.

The possibility of the system delivering “credible verdicts is doubtful,” Davis said Tuesday in a remarkable interview on NPR’s Diane Rehm Show.

“The process has been so tainted, such a black eye to the country, that we have to make every effort possible to have an open trial…

“I’m afraid that what has happened, though, is that we’ve had a rush, in order to get things done before the election, rather than taking the time — and getting evidence declassified in order to have an open trial is a frustrating, time consuming process, but in my view a necessary step if these things are going to have credibility.

Morris said the politicization of the system began at the top, with the appointment of Susan Crawford, a “political appointee” with no time in uniform, to run the military commissions.

Morris also said that Brig. Gen. Thomas W. Hartman, senior legal advisor to the convening authority, “broke the law” by exercizing command influence on the proceedings.

“Most people were watching to see what DoD was going to do about it, to see if he’d be fired. But instead they charged six more detainees and pressed ahead.”

Morris also said that on Jan. 2, 2007, two hours after President Bush withdrew the nomination of DoD General Counsel Jim Haynes, implicated in torture policy memos, to be a federal judge, Haynes called him up to demand the quick prosecution of Australian David Hicks, a Guantanamo inmate who has since been freed.

”How quickly can you charge David Hicks?” Haynes said, according to Morris.

“At that time we had no statute in place, no convening authority for military commisions, no regulations for military commissions. The major pieces were not in place, and I’m having to deal with the general cousel who’s asking how soon we can charge David Hicks.”

Haynes compared the Guantanamo proceedings to the Nurenburg trials of Nazi officials at the end of World War Two. But when Morris noted that those trials had also rendered aquittals, Haynes expoloded.

“Acquittals? We’re not going to have any acquittals,” Haynes said, according to Morris. “We’ve been holding these guys for years. How could you explain that if we had acquittals? We’ve gotta have convictions.”

Morris said there was no doubt in his mind that Salim Hamdan, on trial now, was far more than a cluless chaffeur for Osama bin Laden. But the “black eye” the proceedings have earned will taint his conviction. (Listen to the audio tape here.)

US-led forces kill more Afghan civilians

July 23, 2008
By Jerry White | World Socialist Web Site, 22 July 2008

US and NATO forces killed at least 13 Afghans over the weekend, adding to the toll of civilian deaths as the military intensifies efforts to crush opposition to the nearly seven-year-old US occupation.

The two latest incidents occurred as Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama visited Afghanistan and called for more US troops to be sent to the war-ravaged country.

On Sunday, US-led coalition forces killed four Afghan police officers and five civilians in the Anar Dara district in the western province of Farah, near the Iranian border. Coalition forces, which entered the area around midnight, waged a four-hour firefight and called in air strikes after reportedly receiving small arms fire from a group of local policemen.

Provincial Deputy Governor Younus Rasuli said the US-led convoy of troops never informed local police or officials of their plans to be in the area, and the policemen mistook them for Taliban fighters.

The US military issued a perfunctory statement justifying the action against what it described as a “non-uniformed hostile force.” Coalition forces, the statement said, had “engaged the enemy with precision close air support.”

In a separate incident Saturday night, NATO forces killed at least four civilians in eastern Paktika province when International Security Assistance Forces (ISAF) fired two mortar rounds that landed nearly half a mile short of their target. The Associated Press reported that NATO was investigating whether three other civilians were also killed in the attack, which occurred in the Barmal district, an area made up mostly of Sunni Pashtun people.

The ISAF issued a statement saying it “deeply regrets this accident” and would investigate the incident. The alliance acknowledged it was providing medical aid to four others who were wounded in the attack.

As has been the case in previous such incidents in which, all told, thousands of Afghan civilians have been killed by US-led forces, military commanders insisted they were taking every precaution to prevent civilian deaths, which they said, were ultimately the fault of the insurgency.

The slaughter of innocent men, women and children, however, is inevitable given the neo-colonial character of the war and the counter-insurgency methods the US and NATO forces are using against growing popular resistance.

The number of attacks launched against the occupation forces has jumped by over 40 percent this summer. For the first time last month, US and allied casualties in Afghanistan surpassed those in Iraq.

In response to the deteriorating military situation, 646 bombs were dropped in June—the second highest total for any month of the war. In the first half of 2008, 1,853 bombs and missiles were used, 40 percent more than the same period last year.

The escalating violence took place as Obama visited Kabul on Sunday. In the morning he met with US troops at Camp Eggers, a heavily fortified military base in the city, praising them for their “excellent work.”

Later, in a meeting with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, he pledged additional military support to the puppet regime. Karzai’s spokesman said Obama was “committed to supporting Afghanistan and to continue the war against terrorism with vigor.” He said Democrats and Republicans “are friends of Afghanistan and no matter who wins the US elections, Afghanistan will have a very strong partner in the United States.”

In an interview from Kabul broadcast by CBS News on Sunday, Obama said the situation in the country was “precarious and urgent” and reiterated his position that Afghanistan had to become the focus of US military action, as opposed to the “strategic mistake” in Iraq that had diverted the US from the so-called “war on terror.”

Obama said as US troops left Iraq, at least 7,000 should be sent to the Central Asian country and that plans to increase US presence should not wait until the next administration takes office.

The massacre of Afghan civilians exposes the brutal, neo-colonial reality of US imperialist policy that is supported by both parties and both presidential candidates.

Madness and Shame

July 23, 2008

by: Bob Herbert, The New York Times

You want a scary thought? Imagine a fanatic in the mold of Dick Cheney, but without the vice president’s sense of humor.

In her important new book, “The Dark Side: The Inside Story of How the War on Terror Turned Into a War on American Ideals,” Jane Mayer of The New Yorker devotes a great deal of space to David Addington, Dick Cheney’s main man and the lead architect of the Bush administration’s legal strategy for the so-called war on terror.

She quotes a colleague as saying of Mr. Addington: “No one stood to his right.” Colin Powell, a veteran of many bruising battles with Mr. Cheney, was reported to have summed up Mr. Addington as follows: “He doesn’t believe in the Constitution.”

Very few voters are aware of Mr. Addington’s existence, much less what he stands for. But he was the legal linchpin of the administration’s Marquis de Sade approach to battling terrorism. In the view of Mr. Addington and his acolytes, anything and everything that the president authorized in the fight against terror – regardless of what the Constitution or Congress or the Geneva Conventions might say – was all right. That included torture, rendition, warrantless wiretapping, the suspension of habeas corpus, you name it.

This is the mind-set that gave us Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and the C.I.A.’s secret prisons, known as “black sites.”

Ms. Mayer wrote: “The legal doctrine that Addington espoused – that the president, as commander in chief, had the authority to disregard virtually all previously known legal boundaries if national security demanded it – rested on a reading of the Constitution that few legal scholars shared.”

When the constraints of the law are unlocked by the men and women in suits at the pinnacle of power, terrible things happen in the real world. You end up with detainees being physically and psychologically tormented day after day, month after month, until they beg to be allowed to commit suicide. You have prisoners beaten until they are on the verge of death, or hooked to overhead manacles like something out of the Inquisition, or forced to defecate on themselves, or sexually humiliated, or driven crazy by days on end of sleep deprivation and blinding lights and blaring noises, or water-boarded.

Continued . . .