Peace and Justice Post

By George McGovern | Los Angeles Times, April 20, 2009

President Obama holds my admiration with high hopes for his message of change in Washington. It is puzzling, however, that he has adopted most of the previous administration’s formula for dragging out the withdrawal of our troops from the mistaken war in Iraq for nearly three more years. Very little “change” here.

Three years ago, public opinion polls indicated that a majority of Americans believed our policymakers were wrong in ordering troops into Iraq. It is widely accepted that this sentiment more than any other factor in the 2006 congressional elections resulted in Democratic majorities in both the House and Senate.

Are we now going to ignore for another three years the public mandate of 2006 against this costly, preemptive war based on deceit? And how can we justify putting thousands more U.S. troops into Afghanistan? We have already exhausted our treasury. We are also close to exhausting our soldiers.

Can there be any doubt that the enormous war cost has contributed to the financial crisis here at home? The expense of waging two Middle East wars, plus the loss of revenue caused by the previous administration’s tax cuts, have skyrocketed the national debt to a record high. Do we ever consider what the interest alone is on our $10-trillion national debt — much of it paid to China?

Frankly, we cannot afford a two-war commitment year after year if we want to balance the federal budget and restore our economy. The huge bonuses that directors of failing corporations have awarded themselves and their chief executives have rightfully angered people, but those figures are peanuts compared with the $12 billion a month we have poured into Iraq and Afghanistan over the last six years.

Has either the great God above or his creatures here below designated us to run the Middle East? What do we say to the Iraqi people who have indicated overwhelmingly in several polls that they want U.S. troops out of their country now? Why would we not understand this sentiment considering that our military equipment has smashed Iraqi homes, public buildings and infrastructure, including electricity and running water?

Of course, the most painful cost of these wars is the deaths of more than 4,200 brave American troops and tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians. This is to say nothing of the decline of our political judgment and moral standing in the world.

The Obama administration recommends we leave 50,000 troops in Iraq to “police” that troubled country through 2011. There may well be flare-ups that will keep them there indefinitely, struggling to police the war-induced chaos.

In June 1950, President Truman ordered our troops into Korea, stating it would only be a brief police action that did not require a declaration of war. Three years later and after 38,000 American soldiers had been killed, the new American president, Dwight D. Eisenhower, the commander of Allied forces in World War II, promptly ended our involvement in the Korean War, to the relief of our combat soldiers and the American public.

Unfortunately, Washington left 40,000 American soldiers behind to police the 38th Parallel — for a brief time. Yet, more than 50 years later, nearly 30,000 American troops are still in South Korea. So much for brief police actions.

Our policymakers in Washington contend that we must maintain U.S. troops in the Middle East to curb terrorism. I strongly believe that it is our military presence in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere in the Middle East that is driving terrorism against the United States. No country that longs for national sovereignty wants a foreign army in its midst. We taught that lesson to the British Empire in 1776 when George Washington and his ragtag guerrilla army drove the British military from our shores.

My generation has lived through half a dozen wars, beginning with World War II and then Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and several smaller conflicts. The only one of those wars I really believed in and still do was the U.S. participation in World War II, in which I served as a combat bomber pilot against Hitler’s Nazi Germany.

I believe we aging veterans have an obligation to share what we have learned with the American people and with our young president, who seems open to well-meant suggestions.

In that spirit, I urge President Obama to bring our troops home from the Middle East this year. A good target date for completing an orderly withdrawal from two ill-conceived and costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan would be Thanksgiving 2009.

For our sake and God’s sake, let’s get out of there and begin healing our own bankrupted land.

George McGovern is a former presidential candidate and senator from South Dakota.

By Liaquat Ali Khan | Counterpunch, April 20, 2009

In a case filed with the Pakistan Supreme Court, the petitioner states: “The Americans, like in Musharraf’s time, have also been given a free hand by President Zardari and fundamental rights of the (indigenous) people are being violated daily in tribal areas and (in northern areas of) Dir, Swat and Chitral. A large number of (indigenous) people have migrated from these areas and suffered tremendous losses with no hope of returning to their homes because of US drone attacks, but the government is sitting as a silent spectator.”

Since August 2008, nearly 60 drone strikes in tribal and other northern areas have massacred over 500 individuals belonging to a population that qualifies as indigenous people under international law. The majority of victims are poor and frightened men, women, and children. They have little to do with militants who are fighting the NATO occupation forces in Afghanistan. To escape future drone massacres of their families, thousands of residents living in target areas, have left their homes and businesses to seek asylum in other parts of Pakistan. Wretched stories of these internally displaced persons (IDPs) and their trail of tears have made little news in the international media.

After extending a hand of friendship to the Muslim world in his inaugural speech, President Barack Hussein Obama has personally authorized the continuance of drone attacks. In hopes of destroying the nesting places of Muslim militancy, the Obama administration is poised to expanding the drone warfare to other parts of Pakistan. Presuming that Pakistan is secretly supporting drone strikes, the vengeful militants have begun to attack the citadel cities of Lahore and Islamabad. As drone attacks continue to kill and generate the IDPs among the indigenous population and as militants undertake retaliatory measures in major cities, the nuclear-armed Pakistan is predicted to plunge into uncontrollable chaos and carnage threatening international peace and security.

Before Pakistan turns into another Iraq, the Obama administration should reconsider the wisdom and legality of drone strikes as a means of fighting the militants in Pakistan.

Self-Righteous Militarism

For the indigenous people of tribal areas, the drone aircraft has turned into a despised symbol of American militarism, even though the United States armed forces and the CIA have not even once assumed responsibility for drone attacks. Ironically, in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and other Central Asian Muslim states, the drone has previously been known as a note or chord which is continuously repeated in musical pieces, Sufi songs, most notably in qawwalis. Torn from its musical connotations, the drone is now associated with unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) engaged in repeated massacres. UAVs perform a host of military functions, including intelligence gathering, surveillance, and launching missiles on electronically-nominated targets. For the indigenous people of Pakistan, however, the drone is a white American jahaz (aircraft) that, all too often around the time of morning prayer, sneaks into the tribal airspace,  strikes fragile houses and compounds, and murders scores of people in each sortie.

In deploying military might, American policymakers consistently fail to comprehend a simple point: No nation looks forward to foreign military attacks. Be it in the Philippines, Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Sudan, Iraq, Afghanistan, or Pakistan, the American military is rarely seen as a force of liberation or virtue. The American armed forces did serve the cause of liberation in the Second World War. Even during the Cold War, the American military retained some of its moral underpinnings. No longer, however, is the American military welcome in developing nations. Ignoring this plain truth, American policymakers, driven by unexamined self-righteousness, continue to impose deadly military solutions over complex geopolitical problems.

The drone attacks in Pakistan, which has been a submissive American ally for more than sixty years, complicate problems and not simplify them. They invite retaliation from militants and sow resentment in the Muslim world. Killing the indigenous people in Pakistan under the Obama flag will be as unsuccessful as has been killing Iraqi people under the Bush flag.

Unlawful Collateral Damage

Drone attacks are not only unwise, they are also unlawful. Even when perpetrated with Pakistan’s permission, drone attacks are violations of international law because they produce unacceptably high collateral damage. Collateral damage is a military term to describe damage caused to civilians, facilities, equipment, and property while attacking a lawful military target. The damage can occur to friendly, neutral, or enemy forces. “Such damage is not unlawful so long as it is not excessive in light of the overall military advantage anticipated from the attack.” As a rule, therefore, the military benefit must be much higher than the cost of collateral damage. A military strike is unlawful if the collateral damage exceeds lawful military advantage. In tribal areas, the collateral damage has been egregiously high since drone strikes kill hundreds of civilians in order to neutralize a few militants. On the basis of casualty count alone, the drone attacks are contrary to international law.

These attacks turn blatantly illegal when the collateral damage is fully assessed and aggregated. In addition to causing death and injury to non-combatants, drone attacks degrade the social and economic life of indigenous tribes. As noted above, hundreds of families have fled targeted areas to seek refuge elsewhere. Small businesses that sustain communities have been disrupted. Facing the uncertainty of drone attacks, parents decline to send children to schools. When American officials threaten to broaden the drone warfare, panic and the consequent social and economic disruptions are further increased. The physical, social, and economic cost inflicted on the tribal areas cannot be justified under the limited military advantage that drone attacks yield to the United States.

If the Obama administration is serious in turning the page in the Muslim world and if the American war on terror, which is shifting from the Middle East to South Asia, is to be conducted under the rule of law, the drone attacks against indigenous populations of Pakistan’s tribal areas must immediately be called off.

Liaquat Ali Khan is professor of law at Washburn University School of Law in Topeka, Kansas, and the author of the book, A Theory of International Terrorism (2006).

By Avi Issacharoff, Haaretz Correspondent | Haaretz, Apr 20, 2009

The water-supply regime used by Israel and the Palestinians must be changed, according to a World Bank report that is to be published today.

The report notes that an average Israeli gets four times as much water as the average Palestinian, and warns that the Palestinian Authority water system is “nearing catastrophe.”

It concludes by recommending that the current water-distribution arrangement, mandated as part of the Oslo II accords, be changed to improve the Palestinian system.

The report, requested by the PA, is likely to be particularly problematic for Israel due to the regional water crisis. The agreement between the two sides is asymmetrical and exacerbates the crisis greatly as far as the Palestinians are concerned.

This is the first such document presented by the World Bank on the subject of Israeli and Palestinian water use.

According to the report, the understandings reached at Oslo fall far short of fulfilling the needs of Palestinian civilians.

The unequal division of the resources, as well as constraints on information regarding the area’s water supply, have impeded the Palestinians’ ability to develop water sources – a problem that is intensified by the weakness of Palestinian government institutions.

The report says this has lead to an emergency situation with grave ramifications vis-a-vis the economy, the society and the ecology of the PA. Water-related humanitarian crises are frequent in parts of the West Bank and Gaza.

The report states that Palestinians have access to only one-fifth of the mountain aquifer supply, while Israel pumps out the rest, reaching its allocated quota without due authorization from the joint water committee set up in the Oslo accords.

Over-pumping from the aquifer creates a danger of salinity, the report maintains.

It also notes that Palestinians dig comparatively shallow wells and cannot reach water sources, because of Israel’s much deeper drilling.

According to the World Bank, Israel has a satisfactory water distribution and management system, while the PA is struggling to maintain a minimal infrastructure with minimal financial means. In Gaza, the meager investment in water and sanitation has lead to a lack of water-quality control, posing great risk to public health.

Related articles:
• Officials: Kinneret to suffer irrevocably if water not conserved
• Palestinian water authority: 40% of Gazans lack running water
• Officials: Hamas seizes control of Gaza water agency working with Blair

MATTHEW LEE and MIKE BAKER
AP News | Antiwar Newswire
Apr 20, 2009 18:04 EST

Armed guards from the security firm once known as Blackwater Worldwide are still protecting U.S. diplomats in Iraq, even though the company has no license to operate there and has been told by the State Department its contracts will not be renewed two years after a lethal firefight that stirred outrage in Baghdad.
Private security guards employed by the company, now known as Xe, are slated to continue ground operations in parts of Iraq long into the summer, far longer than had previously been acknowledged, government officials told The Associated Press.
In addition, helicopters working for Xe’s aviation wing, Presidential Airways, will provide air security for U.S. diplomatic convoys into September, almost two years after the Iraqi government first said it wanted the firm out.
The company’s continued presence raises fresh questions about the strength of Iraq’s sovereignty even as the Obama administration urges the budding government to take more responsibility for the nation’s future.
Iraqis had long complained about incidents caused by Blackwater’s operations. Then a shooting by Blackwater guards in Baghdad’s Nisoor Square in September, 2007 left 17 civilians dead, further strained relations between Baghdad and Washington and led U.S. prosecutors to bring charges against the Blackwater contractors involved.
That deadly incident was the end, Iraqi leaders said. Blackwater had to get out.
But State Department officials acknowledge the company is still there.
The company declined to comment about a timetable for leaving. “We follow the direction of our U.S. government client,” Xe spokeswoman Anne Tyrrell said. Last February, Blackwater changed its name to Xe — pronounced ZEE — in a bid to leave its controversial reputation behind.
Defense analyst Loren Thompson of the Lexington Institute in Arlington, Va., said Iraq’s ability to enforce bans on companies like Blackwater may provide an early measurement of the strength of its internal sovereignty. As the Iraqi leaders gain more control, he said, the final exit for Blackwater will be inevitable.
“But let’s face it, they’re not entirely their own masters yet,” he said.
In Baghdad, an Iraqi security official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk to the media, said that while Xe will not be allowed to work in Iraq, the company needs “some time” to fully shut down its operations there. The official did not give further details on the timetable.
The State Department’s continued reliance on Blackwater also underscores the difficulties facing the U.S. government in finding other options to protect its diplomats in dangerous areas.
Department officials said this month that Blackwater guards would stop protecting U.S. diplomats on the ground in Baghdad on May 7, when the company’s contract for that specific job expires and a new security provider, Triple Canopy, takes over.
But in its statement following the Iraqi government’s decision to prohibit Blackwater from operating there, State did not reveal that the firm has two other contracts — known as “task orders” — that do not expire until August and September respectively.
Blackwater guards will remain on the ground protecting American diplomats in al Hillah, Najaf and Karbala, all south of Baghdad, until Aug. 4, according to the department.
And Presidential Airways — which operates some two dozen helicopters — will continue to fly until Sept. 3, it said.
After the Nisoor Square deaths, Iraqi officials ruled that North Carolina-based Blackwater would be barred from operating in the country. Despite the ban, the State Department renewed Blackwater’s contract seven months later, in April, 2008.
It wasn’t until January of this year, when Iraqi authorities denied the company an operating license, that the Obama administration said it would not renew the company’s existing task orders.
On Jan. 30, the department said it had informed Blackwater in writing that it “did not plan to renew the company’s existing task orders for protective security detail in Iraq.”
On Feb. 2, though, the department signed a revised task order for Presidential Airways that allowed the Blackwater-owned airline to operate through Sept. 3, according to a federal public procurement database.
Department officials deny any impropriety in the move because the change in the task order was a revision of an old contract. Karl Duckworth, a State spokesman, said the Iraqi government did not tell U.S. officials until March 19 that it would bar Presidential Airways’ flights.
“Based on the government of Iraq’s decision, the department notified Xe in writing that it did not plan to renew the company’s task order for aviation services in Iraq,” Duckworth said.
Duckworth said that State would “re-compete the aviation task order,” allowing Xe and Virginia-based DynCorp and Triple Canopy to bid for the air security contract.
Xe is technically allowed to rebid under federal law because it holds the existing task order. But State would not grant the company a contract because it lacks an operating license in Iraq, officials said.
The State Department has not yet selected a successor to Blackwater for ground protection in al Hillah. But both Triple Canopy and DynCorp have the capability to do the job.
Some of the same security personnel who worked for Blackwater might simply transfer to the new companies operating there, industry experts say.
“As Triple Canopy’s work expands, the logical place to start looking and interviewing and evaluating employees will be those who are already there, those who have some skills and are already employed by Blackwater,” said Alan Chvotkin, a senior vice president and counsel for the trade group Professional Services Council.
Xe, DynCorp and Triple Canopy are all members of the council.
Chvotkin added that in view of the controversies over Blackwater’s role, “Triple Canopy and other security companies are making an independent assessment of any individual before deciding whether to hire them.”
The Iraqi official also said that some former Blackwater officials could remain in Iraq, depending on their experience.
The transition from Blackwater to a new air security firm may be even more complicated. Chvotkin said it will not be easy to find a firm with Blackwater’s air resources. Blackwater should not be ruled out as an option, he said.
“Since the nature of the work is so very different, there may actually be authority for them to operate the air services contract even though they don’t have a license for private security,” Chvotkin said.
Blackwater has been shifting its focus to other lines of business, including international training and air support in places like Afghanistan and Africa.
___
Mike Baker reported from Raleigh, N.C. Associated Press Writer Brian Murphy contributed to this report from Baghdad.
Source: AP News

Red Cross doctors treat 1,500 injured evacuees

by Gethin Chamberlain near Pulmoddai, Sri Lanka| The Guardian, UK, April 19, 2009

Hundreds of civilians are being killed or seriously injured in artillery and gun attacks as the Sri Lankan army attempts to finish off the last Tamil Tiger rebels trapped in a shrinking pocket of land.

The Observer was refused access to the Putumattalan field hospital by the military, but a doctor, Thangamutha Sathiyamorthy, sent this picture of injured Tamils awaiting treatment. (Photograph: Thangamutha Sathiyamorthy)

Injured civilians lucky enough to get out have told of carnage in this so-called “no-fire zone” – a 17 sq km strip of coast where the Tigers are penned in with their backs to the sea.Horrific stories of limbs ripped off by shellfire and bodies buried where they fell are emerging, despite the government’s efforts to hide the scale of the killing by confining the injured to hospitals in a military area around the government-declared no-fire zone, from which the media are strictly excluded.

The casualties’ graphic accounts of a fierce onslaught on the no-fire zone, supported by the evidence of their severe wounds, have been reported by doctors who have treated them at a field hospital at Pulmoddai, inside the military area, where thousands of evacuees have been taken by ship. According to the senior doctor handling the casualties for the Sri Lankan government as they arrive at Pulmoddai, shells are falling among the tightly packed tents and shelters that are home to tens of thousands of civilians, killing and wounding dozens every day.

“Most of the people have shell blast injuries and gunshot injuries. Some people have lost their limbs, other people have lost other parts of the body, some people have wounds in the abdomen, some in the chest,” said Gnana Gunalan, a doctor who treats the flood of casualties as they arrive by Red Cross ship.

Gunalan, chairman of the local Sri Lankan Red Cross, said: “All these people are very badly traumatised. Some have lost all their loved ones and come here alone, one boy losing both legs. One girl came who had lost her husband and children and everybody.”

The doctor said the accounts of the evacuees appeared to support previous claims from doctors in the no-fire zone that the shelling had not come from Tamil Tiger positions in the zone. The Sri Lankan government has vehemently denied firing into the zone, but it is not possible to verify the claims.

Gunalan – who is based in the town of Trincomalee, surrounded by heavy Sri Lankan army security – said that the field hospital at Pulmoddai had treated 1,468 casualties among the 5,456 people evacuated by sea from the no-fire zone in the last month. Doctors say most of those killed have been buried near where they died and there has been no attempt to bring out the bodies.

Determined to resist international pressure to stop the fighting before it has finished off the hardcore rump of the Tamil Tigers cornered by the military, the Sri Lankan government has kept casualties away from the eyes of the world. This weekend the government rejected an appeal by the UN to give civilians more time to leave the no-fire zone.

And last night the Sri Lankan military sources said 2,857 civilians had broken through Tamil Tiger lines and made their way to safety during the day. They added that 5,000 people had tried to escape and had come under fire from the rebels. But it was not possible to verify the reports because the military has denied access to the area surrounding the no fire zone.

Until last month the government allowed civilians injured in the no-fire zone to be taken to the larger hospital in Trincomalee, but then decreed that they must be kept inside the military area.

At Pulmoddai the most serious injuries are stabilised by a team of Indian doctors working in temporary metal huts. By Friday, 26 had died at the Pulmoddai field hospital. It is not possible to verify the doctors’ accounts, because neither side will allow access to the no-fire zone. The military has permitted international media access on occasional day trips to the surrounding military area only. The Observer was refused entry to the hospital, turned back at a checkpoint on the edge of Pulmoddai, and refused access to the camps where those who have escaped the fighting are being held.

Pulmoddai is two and a half hours’ drive north of Trincomalee, a journey involving countless military checkpoints. Soldiers are everywhere, in bunkers or standing beneath trees watching the road. No one can move without permission from the Defence Ministry.

However, reports continue to get through. Two regional health directors, defying government instructions, have described at length the extent of the unfolding humanitarian disaster.

One, Thangamutha Sathiyamorthy, told the Observer on Friday that civilians were still being killed and injured by shelling inside the zone. He also said there had been a number of attacks by helicopters. He said the previous day, five people had died in the hospital from their wounds and a child of 13 had perished from the effects of diarrhoea.

He said many people had dug shelters in the sand to try to escape the shelling. “The fighting is continuing. Shells are falling. But these people have no alternative. They cannot move. Most of the injuries we are treating are from shells and bullets. Today we received 58 injured civilians, including 16 children.”

Most of the Tamil Tiger fighters were on the front line, he said, but some were moving among the civilians, visiting family members or moving casualties. He said Tamil Tiger police were still operating, attempting to control the crowds.

The Sri Lankan health secretary, Athula Kahandaliyanage, last week accused Sathiyamorthy and another doctor of spreading “malicious propaganda”, claiming their accounts “cannot be credible, since these officials are operating under duress and the dictates” of the Tamil Tigers.

The Health Ministry says both doctors will face disciplinary action. But Sathiyamorthy denied he was under pressure from the LTTE. “We are telling the truth. The government has strongly asked us not to tell the truth, but we must.”

© 2009 Guardian News and Media Limited