Insurgentjg

Since the War on terror has begun, critics have restricted their comments regarding the surge to disarmament, deterrence, and links to terrorism. They hardly referred it to liberation, democratization of the Middle East, and other matters that would prove the weapons inspection irrelevant and the actions rendered by the Security Council or within governmental domains an obnoxious dramatization of the whole issue.
Critics of the war on Iraq restricted their comments regarding the attack to the administration arguments relating the whole process to; disarmament, deterrence, and links to terrorism.
Nor anything has been said about how the critics previously supported Saddam Hussein or others like him, still continuing) nor have they shown any signs of contrition for having helped him develop weapons of mass destruction (WMD) when he really was a serious danger. They do no mention the fact that why and when they let go off the view about Iraqi junta and Saddam Hussein in 1990, when they overlooked his British-backed crimes. Their names are noteworthy by their absence from the parliamentary record of protests against these crimes, including Tony Blair, Jack Straw, Geoff Hoon, and other leading figures of New Labour.
Jack Straw backed Iraq judiciary system when in 2001, being a home secretary denied asylum to Iraqi refugees. Explaining that Straw “is aware that Iraq, and in particular the Iraqi security forces, would only convict and sentence a person in the courts with the provision of proper jurisdiction,” so that “you could expect to receive a fair trial under an independent and properly constituted judiciary.”
It is not only Iraq; other countries also enjoy support for the violation of human rights. Straws conversion is quiet similar to President Clinton’s discovery in 1999, about Indonesian violence in East Timor for past twenty to twenty five years when it enjoyed incessant support from the US and Britain.
Fall of 2002, clarified the attitude towards democracy when it became necessary to deal somehow with the overwhelming popular opposition. British government maintained its stance as “junior partner” of a US lead war on terror, overseeing the opinion of more than fifty percent of the population.
Two major European countries who supported the views of the large majority of their populations were Germany and France. This lead to the bitter condemnation by Washington and many commentators. Donald Rumsfeld categorised Europe in to old and new in which old Europe was harshly criticised for it was not inline with Washington. Italy symbolised New Europe, whose Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, rejected the overwhelming opposition to the war. Categorisation of old & new Europe is done on simple criterion:”a government joined Old Europe in its iniquity if and only if it took the same position as the vast majority of its population and refused to follow orders from Washington.”
US and the allies for war declared that intend to carry out their war whether or not the United Nations or anyone else agrees with it. Old Europe, did not backed the idea of the war neither did the New Europe, at least if people are part of their countries.
Gallop international and other local poll results shows that in most of Europe support for the war did not rise above 11 percent in of the countries. Support for a war if mandated by the UN ranged from 13 percent (Spain) to 51 percent (Netherlands).Polls reveal interesting results about the New Europe’s opposition for US led war, Results state that opposition in most parts & particularly in Italy and Spain it was higher than France and Germany.
New Europe was joined by the former communist countries. Their partnership with new Europe and US was explained by Powel as the “coalition of the willing” without UN’s authorisation. Countries who were collating for war were doing so because of fear of their survival, for example; Latvia’s former foreign minister explained that we have to “salute and shout, ‘Yes sir.’ . . . We have to please America no matter what the cost.”
Journals which proclaimed that democracy has a significant value, head lines should have been publicizing the vast majority of people in Old Europe and that new Europe is constituted of few leaders who decided to line up with Washington disregarding the opinion of their population. Rather media played quiet an opposite role, actual reporting was mostly scattered and oblique, depicting opposition to the war as a marketing problem for Washington.

University of Alberta is a part of new United Nations project designed to help rebuild education system of war torn Iraq. Programme participant, a chemistry professor says that “While years of war and violence have emptied most classrooms of books and basic equipment, students keep coming to her to learn. It isn’t easy, we are suffering. But despite of all these things, the people they come,”

People of Iraq like everybody else in the world want to live and to study for prosperous future generations. In an attempt to help rebuild her country’s devastated educational system, UNESCO, the United Nations’ culture agency, has sent Prof. Al-Salihi and 13 other Iraqi professors to the University of Alberta on a twenty three day long course to learn from the school’s education experts and to return to Iraq to teach other teachers. Teacher Training Network for Iraq is partly funded by the Iraqi government. Programme focuses on numerous teaching skills apart from teaching techniques it also includes how to design instructional packages and modernize their outdated curriculums. Northern Iraq is more stable as compared to the central and southern parts of the country. War trodden country lacks buildings, books, and equipments such as chemicals and microscopes. War on terror isn’t the only hurdle, country is facing ongoing deadly violence fuelled by sectarian an ethnic conflicts. Iraq has one of the worst records for school attacks in the world. Since the U.S. lead invasion begun in 2003, more than 200 university professors have been killed. Dozens more are either kidnapped or fled the country. Apart from the U.S. invasion many militants view university campuses as centres of non-Islamic thought and routinely target them, which makes these institutions even more vulnerable to violence.

Two most interesting news items about US involvement in Iraq is the Congressional Democrats’ “flagship proposal” and a ’strategic partnership’ being proposed by Iraq. Both the news cause one to shake one’s head in wonder about the ideas Bush & the congress has about the future of the country in concern.

Flagship proposal will allow up to 70,000 US soldiers to remain in Iraq for years to come. Their main duty of action will be Counterterrorism, training Iraqi security forces and protecting US assets. This threefold mission of US military will be no different from what the forces are doing now in their camps now. Mr. Bush’s reason to attack and invade the sovereign country was to stop terrorism. Off course time proved that Iraq was not the hotbed of terrorism.

US government claimed that once Saddam Hussein will be disposed off and when Iraqi security forces be trained completely, US involvement in Iraq will come to an end. But why the Bush administration is not being able to oversee the flawed thinking that training Iraqi forces against their own people is a goal impossible to achieve. Their only want is to expel the foreign occupiers from their soil. The goal of whole training negates their nationalistic desires.

At the time of the murderous inhumane attack there were few US assets in the country. Now one can imagine the importance of US soldiers’ presence in the country. They will be putting their lives on the line to protect U.S. oil rigs and refineries and other related businesses to rip off Iraq’s natural resources.

Strategic Partnership offers U.S. a long term presence in Iraq in exchange of U.S. security guarantees. The associate press has summed up the strategic partnership efficiently; ‘Preferential treatment for U.S. investors could provide a huge windfall if Iraq can achieve enough stability to exploit its vast oil resources.” So dedicated U.S. soldiers will ensure the necessary stability to provide U.S. investors with a ‘huge windfall. Iraqi administration is apprehensive about internal resistance which they refer as a “foreign threat”. It is interesting to note that realization of foreign threat is what has brought this country a chaotic civil war killing more than 1,000,000 civilians and at least 3,000,000 &more to become displaced. Strategic partnership is best way to rule this new U.S. new colony, where the U.S. investors will be able to funnel Iraqi oil into American SUVs on cost of more then 4000 U.S. soldiers and innumerable citizens dead.

This article is rephrased version of Robert Fantina’s article “The future of Iraq”

Fate of Iraqis seeking asylum in Lebanon is quiet bleak, it is almost impossible for Iraqis to take refugee in Lebanon. Many Iraqi asylum seekers end up in jails or are deported back to their country, which is full of life threatening risks.

There are approximately 50, 000 Iraqis in Lebanon who are treated as illegal immigrants. If they are found by the authorities, they can be arrested for lacking residency papers or work permits. A report by Lebanese Human Rights Watch states that there are about 580 Iraqis are in Lebanese prisons, most of who will have to “agree” to go home to secure their release.

HRW report entitled “Rot Here or Die There: Bleak Choices for Iraqi Refugees in Lebanon” states that Iraqi refugees in detention has no choice but to agree to go back to the countries they fled from or continue to suffer indefinite detention in Iraqi prisons where the condition are intolerable.

Lebanon does not ratify 1951 UN Refugee Convention and has no domestic refugee law. In such conditions Iraqis who have some how managed to flee in to the country, has no legal rights. Such condition exposes them to exploitation by employers and landlords. Arrests are not systematic, but cause widespread fear. Some parents send their children, who are less likely to be arrested, out to work to provide for the family.

Human Rights Watch in its report to General Security Department urged the need to address issues related to Iraqi refugees. It also states that the international community must help countries forced to support refugees only because they share a region. “Lebanon played no role in creating the Iraqi refugee crisis, and has no more responsibility than any other country to solve it.”

In her essay, “Operation Iraqi Freedom Exposed”, Marjorie Cohn[1] talks about the real reasons of US led invasion in Iraq and how, the revelation of Bush signing the agreement for a permanent military presence in Iraq before his term is up, clarifies the intentions of the unjustified war.War on terror was never about the weapons of mass destruction or about finding the links between Saddam Hussein & Al-Qaeda nor it was ever about bringing democracy in Iraq. All these justifications were lies to cover up real intentions behind “Operation Iraqi Freedom” which was nothing else but the permanent presence of American troops in Iraq.Bush with all his authority declared that Iraqi leaders require American assistance in all spheres even after the Bush regime is over. His emphasis is on Direct Foreign Investment in which preferential treatment should be given to U.S. investments. This not the first attempt to temper Iraqi Oil Law. He has been touting the law which would transfer three-quarters of Iraq’s oil to foreign companies and hey will also enjoy the fake impression of progress and development of the country. But in the face of opposition by the Iraqi oil unions, the parliament has refused to pass that law.Camp Anaconda, which is 15 square miles of Iraqi soil, is a fortified city for American ambassadors and his fellow men with its very own power and water supply and generating units. It’s the largest embassy in the world costing more than $600 million and the architecture is visible from the space. Embassy is a mini USA in the middle of Iraq.Cohn in her article refers to Al-hayat report in Arabic which clearly states that the Sadr Movement and the Sunni Iraqi Accord Front rejected the “memorandum of understanding” between the United States and Iraq that Bush and Nuri al-Maliki signed. They are also apprehensive about the lack of determined timeline for the withdrawal of U.S. troops.John Pilger comparing the mass killing with Rwanda genocide states that the number of Iraqis being killed, makes Operation Iraqi freedom the biggest single act  of mass murder of the late 20th century and the 21st century.

Cohn in her article urge the importance of people’s voice from all over the world to force USA and allies in war on terror to withdraw their troops from Iraq. She stresses upon the urgency to force United States not to attack on Iran. Otherwise we will once again be witnessing the episode of mass killing.

[1] This article is rephrased from Marjorie Cohn’s article “Bush Negotiates Permanent Presence in Iraq”, www.counterpunch.com. Marjorie Cohn is a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and president of the National Lawyers Guild. She is the author of Cowboy Republic: Six Ways the Bush Gang Has Defied the Law

Living practically on morsels and under life threatening situations will certainly urge one to find a best possible way out and that’s what has put interpreters into dilemma. Their fellow countrymen consider them to be traitors and occupying army as an employee whom they give money to get the work done.
It has been warned time and again that British government is not taking any decisions regarding the plight of Iraqi interpreters who are working with British army in Basra. There are innumerable cases of kidnapping, torture and killing by Iraqi militiamen, who consider interpreters blood traitors, collaborating with their country’s occupiers. Unlike British government, Danish government is considering the grave threat to its interpreters flew all sixty of its interpreters back to Denmark with its troops.
According to the Times, “bitter squabbling between the Ministry of Defense, the Home Office and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) in recent months lies behind Tony Blair’s decision not to grant asylum to translators, despite the demands from leading military figures and politicians from all parties that the Government should meet a moral obligation to Iraqis who have served Britain.”
To get asylum in third country is yet another illusion. To get asylum in third country, one has to travel to one of the neighboring country; Syria or Jordan. Such an option is becoming increasingly difficult because both the countries have tightened their entry restrictions to Iraqi refugees.
In an interview to BBC, Des Browne said that about 20, 000 Iraqis have helped British forces since 2003 and that British government will be able to come up with positive resolution before the end of autumn. But the understanding of fear that granting asylum to the translators will set a precedent that might open the floodgates to thousands more claims, rise the apprehensions about timely review in any policy by autumn.
Interpreters face mortal danger in both ways for their efforts to earn living. On one side it’s the troops and on the other its militia hunting them down for their jobs.

I was in London five years back, working as a teacher’s assistant for the children with learning difficulties and belonging to displaced families – refugees settled in shelters. In my group I had six kids from Somalia and a boy named Ali from Iraq. Ali shared the same fate of many in most of the war trodden areas of the world.Today when I was presented with a task to write about “War in Iraq”, I had a flashback of all those moments when in the middle of a lesson, kids of no more then eight or nine years of age, burst into tears for the fear that someone will break open the door to take them away or how a big bang few blocks away has changed the pattern of their lives forever, taking away their parents, uncles, aunts, siblings and friends!I have chosen few of the recent reports to examine the impact of fifth year of immense scale of death, destruction and oppression wrecked by the US occupation on Iraqi children. Current situation confirms that US operations in Iraq and other regions are the deliberate and systematic murder of an entire society.

The Independent (British daily) estimated that as many as 260,000 children have died since March 2003. According to UNICEF, 10 percent of Iraqi children under five are acutely malnourished, while another 20 percent are chronically malnourished. For those children, who do live to see their fifth birthday, Iraq has become a hostile and often deadly environment.

Before the invasion there was 100 percent attendance in the schools and now less then a third of Iraqi children go to school, a mere trip to school is a deadly risk. On the other hand, ruthless killings have left thousands of Iraqi children being orphans and homeless. UN’s IRIN news agency reports that; “Thousands of homeless children throughout Iraq…survive by begging, stealing or scavenging garbage for food. Only four years ago, the vast majority of these children were living at home with their families.”

The present war is not only killing the present generation but has traumatised the entire young generation – which will have the more far reaching effect upon Iraqi society. A survey of 1000 school children, by the association of Iraqi psychologists, has found that 92 percent of children had learning impediments caused by the climate of violence and fear.

Iraqi mothers and children face a grave humanitarian crises, before the war it was years of repression, internal conflicts and external sanctions. Report by Save the Children states that number of children dying is higher than when the country was under UN economic sanctions in 1990, following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait which continued till 2003. “Sanctions enforced by the UN on Iraq since the Gulf War have killed more people than the two atomic bombs dropped on Japan in 1945, including over half a million children - many of whom weren’t even born when the Gulf War began and now the imposed war”, a documentary film by John Pilger “Paying The Price: Killing The Children Of Iraq” states all about the plight of Iraqi children and their marked future and may be of many of us in times to come.

Desperate plight of Iraq’s childrenI was in London five years back, working as a teacher’s assistant for the children with learning difficulties and belonging to displaced families – refugees settled in shelters. In my group I had six kids from Somalia and a boy named Ali from Iraq. Ali shared the same fate of many in most of the war trodden areas of the world.

Today when I was presented with a task to write about “War in Iraq”, I had a flashback of all those moments when in the middle of a lesson, kids of no more then eight or nine years of age, burst into tears for the fear that someone will break open the door to take them away or how a big bang few blocks away has changed the pattern of their lives forever, taking away their parents, uncles, aunts, siblings and friends!

I have chosen few of the recent reports to examine the impact of fifth year of immense scale of death, destruction and oppression wrecked by the US occupation on Iraqi children. Current situation confirms that US operations in Iraq and other regions are the deliberate and systematic murder of an entire society.

The Independent (British daily) estimated that as many as 260,000 children have died since March 2003. According to UNICEF, 10 percent of Iraqi children under five are acutely malnourished, while another 20 percent are chronically malnourished. For those children, who do live to see their fifth birthday, Iraq has become a hostile and often deadly environment.

Before the invasion there was 100 percent attendance in the schools and now less then a third of Iraqi children go to school, a mere trip to school is a deadly risk. On the other hand, ruthless killings have left thousands of Iraqi children being orphans and homeless. UN’s IRIN news agency reports that; “Thousands of homeless children throughout Iraq…survive by begging, stealing or scavenging garbage for food. Only four years ago, the vast majority of these children were living at home with their families.”

The present war is not only killing the present generation but has traumatised the entire young generation – which will have the more far reaching effect upon Iraqi society. A survey of 1000 school children, by the association of Iraqi psychologists, has found that 92 percent of children had learning impediments caused by the climate of violence and fear.

Iraqi mothers and children face a grave humanitarian crises, before the war it was years of repression, internal conflicts and external sanctions. Report by Save the Children states that number of children dying is higher than when the country was under UN economic sanctions in 1990, following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait which continued till 2003. “Sanctions enforced by the UN on Iraq since the Gulf War have killed more people than the two atomic bombs dropped on Japan in 1945, including over half a million children - many of whom weren’t even born when the Gulf War began and now the imposed war”, a documentary film by John Pilger “Paying The Price: Killing The Children Of Iraq” states all about the plight of Iraqi children and their marked future and may be of many of us in times to come.

Right amongst the people deprived of basic necessities and under life threatening situations, construction of a huge embassy is a reality which still puzzles and enrages Iraqi nation that how is it that the Americans can manage to build the biggest embassy but cannot keep the electricity running in Baghdad for more than a few hours a day.
United States embassy is the first major construction project in Iraq. Its edifice is as large as the Vatican with an ambassador’s residence of 16,000 square feet and is designed to have its own water and power supply. This is highly unusual construction and facility in a country like Iraq where only 32% of the population has access to potable water and many residents have electricity only for four hours a day.
In July 2007, Major Gen. Charles Williams (Ret.), the Director of Overseas Building Operation (OBO) at the State Department before the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, stated that the project is on schedule and that the embassy personnel will begin shifting in shortly and that OBO is proud of the project quality. This year is nearly ending and no one is certain when anyone will move in and it is $144 million over budget.
Local residents call this massive US Embassy “George W’s Palace” rising from banks of Tigris. Irritation rises when people deprived of air conditioning and potable water after the US-led invasion, watch the massive construction that is bigger than anything Saddam Hussein built. Common people are not impressed by the structure and architecture which is claimed to be visible from space. They are more interested in knowing that the US has paid for the place or simply took it. Local residents are also apprehensive about the fact that the Kuwaiti contractor has only hired foreign staff for construction when people suffer from mass poverty and hunger.
The question over here is that what should be the priority in allocating budgets? Does the heavily guarded 42-hectare (104-acre) site — which will have a 15ft thick perimeter wall — impressive residences for the Ambassador and his deputy, six apartments for senior officials, and two huge office blocks for 8,000 staff to work in, is major priority or re-settling the refugees is of more importance. Question is either to build a biggest swimming pool in Iraq, a state-of-the-art gymnasium, a cinema, restaurants offering delicacies from favourite US food chains, tennis courts and a swish American Club for evening functions[1] or to provide safe drinking water & sanitation system and rebuild schools and hospitals. Priority should be given to build a secure environment where children can go to school without a threat of being killed or should a multi million green zone, the fortified and sealed-off compound be built where international diplomats and Iraq’s leaders can live and work in utmost safety.

[1] Christopher Brauchli, Iraq’s Gilded palaces,www.counterpunch.com