SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: stockman_scott who wrote (158802)7/27/2003 12:09:40 PM
From: Victor Lazlo  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 164684
 
AFTER THE WAR
Quagmire?
America has already won in Iraq.

BY F.J. BING WEST
Sunday, July 27, 2003 12:01 a.m.

URL:http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110003803

In the doldrums of summer, a gun battle that erased the sons of Saddam has perked up the news. Uday and Qusay were the pillars of Saddam's brutal regime, and perhaps the most feared of all its members. This intelligence and military success will surely infuse some balance into the saturnine reporting from Baghdad. The raid that led to their richly merited deaths demonstrated the unremitting pressure that is squeezing the remnants of Saddam Hussein's regime. So will the naysayers at last concede that we are doing something--anything--right?

The news brought celebrations in the streets of Baghdad, previously peopled, we've been told, only by surly Iraqis who hate our presence there. The market immediately reacted by dropping the price of oil. Yet it is hard for a reader to determine the trends in Iraq when most headlines focus solely on American casualties. Because shipwrecks make news, headlines about sinking ships are not a reliable measure of maritime safety. Late last March, the press rushed so quickly from one side of its own Good Ship Integrity to the other that it almost capsized. There were reports about U.S. forces bogged down in the desert and a flawed Pentagon strategy. While these stories were coming in, Baghdad fell. Phew, that was close.

Similarly, today the media may be overemphasizing the problems in Iraq. We understand that Baghdad is sweltering, electricity is intermittent, Iraqis are sullen, American soldiers are sweaty and their wives want them home. Each American casualty is featured as if our troops were stuck in a quagmire of increasing combat. More than three dozen Americans have been killed in action since May 1. Each death is a tragedy on an individual level; on a national level, however, this does not presage a crisis. If that rate continued for six months, the risk of a soldier dying would be 1 in 2,000. A recent Gallup Poll found that 74% of Americans believed the current rate of casualties was to be expected. During the campaign from Kuwait to Baghdad last March, the risk was much higher. And that rate pales in comparison with casualties in Vietnam, Korea and World War II. By historical standards no American unit in Iraq is engaged in serious combat.

Last March, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld predicted that some in the press would call Iraq a quagmire. In argument by analogy, Iraq is compared to the past U.S. presence in Somalia and of course in South Vietnam, which fell to a North Vietnamese army equipped with Soviet tanks and Chinese artillery. The quagmire tagline refers to Vietnam between 1962 and 1965, when the success of the Viet Cong guerrillas led to higher numbers of American troops and casualties. When the Viet Cong were attrited, the North Vietnamese took their place.
The emotional effect of suggesting a quagmire is to induce pessimism or, as Shakespeare would say, to take counsel from one's fears. According to this line of logic, the low-level violence in Iraq can be quelled only by more foreign troops, such as the French, who are sidelined due to the administration's unilateralism. So, owing to the absence of the United Nations, more American troops will have to be sent to Iraq, leading to more casualties and placing an intolerable strain on the U.S. military.

It is not clear, though, that the sky is falling. Iraq is a large country with multiple story lines. For instance, whatever became of those Marines last seen in April pulling down that huge statue of Saddam, symbolizing the fall of Baghdad? Ten thousand Marines are now providing security for 12 million Shiite Iraqis in the southern half of Iraq, an area about the size of Utah. It's hot south of Baghdad, the towns are a mess. The Marines are patrolling there in small units, often without helmets and flak jackets.

But shoot at them and they will kill you. Marines know how to fight. Correction: Marines like to fight. They also, in their own parlance, "do windows," meaning they consider it a core mission to act as police, to train a constabulary and to assist in civilian infrastructure and governance. They like to say "no better friend, no worse enemy." We hear nothing about them because shootings are rare, power is restored, crops are irrigated and police are deployed. Yet a few months ago the Shiites in the south were supposedly the real threat, because they would be infected by the virulent anti-Americanism of the Iranian ayatollahs. (There are thousands of U.S. soldiers in Bosnia performing similar jobs and we hear nothing about them either. Shipwrecks make the news, while normalcy is boring.)

The shootings will diminish dramatically when Saddam is put to rest and as the Iraqis establish a governance that treats Saddam loyalists as their enemy. The open terrain does not favor guerrilla bands, and the shooters, far from swimming in a sea of friendly people, are hiding their identities. As the killing of Uday and Qusay reveals, the Iraqi people are willing to give them up. President Bush has it right: If radicals sneak into Iraq to attack Americans, they will die there. That's better than having them plot against New York City. A quagmire refers to organized resistance supported and sheltered by a willing population. In Iraq, the vast majority of the people welcomed the American forces.
To be sure, the Iraqis have been disappointed by the slow pace of restoring security, power and jobs. The Pentagon was as ill-prepared for the peace as it was well-prepared for the war. Yet that institution recognized its mistakes and quickly shifted personnel and plans. In rebuilding Iraq, the U.S. will carry the major external burden, as we did in Korea, and before that in Europe. This will not be particularly dangerous work, but it will be messy and take years.

We should get on with the job. The next American general to grumble that his troops are not policemen should be relieved. Yes, they are policemen--and criminals and Saddam loyalists alike should fear them, while the average citizen should not fear an indiscriminate fusillade from them. Because freedom from risk does not exist, American casualties will continue to make the news. With the death of Saddam's sons, however, it certainly appears the U.S. Army units inside the "Sunni triangle" have taken the offensive and more raids can be expected. In Iraq as in Afghanistan, our troops will indefinitely confront hostile armed bands.

There is nothing new about this. Seventy years ago, the Marine Corps issued a "Small Wars Manual" with instructions for patrolling in barrios, feeding mules, drilling wells and holding elections. The Iraqi war is over and the seemingly tedious work of helping that country pull itself together has begun. Turbulent conditions and episodic violence are definitions of nation- building, a term eschewed yet practiced by the administration. There will no doubt be more shootouts like the one in Mosul. But make no mistake, the tyranny has been removed; this war is already won.

Mr. West, a former assistant secretary of defense, is a co-author of "The March Up: Taking Baghdad with the 1st Marine Division," due out from Bantam Books in September.



To: stockman_scott who wrote (158802)7/27/2003 12:12:18 PM
From: Victor Lazlo  Respond to of 164684
 
Insight on the News - World
Issue: 08/05/03

Jesse, Liberia and Blood Diamonds
By Kenneth R. Timmerman

With the Congressional Black Caucus clamoring for President George W. Bush to dispatch U.S. troops to Liberia, after having voted almost unanimously against the U.S. war in Iraq, the president and his national-security team are weighing the costs of joining a multinational peacekeeping force in a nation that has ripped through several of them during the last decade. One thing neither Bush nor the Congressional Black Caucus is talking about publicly, however, is how Liberia began this latest phase of its spiraling descent into chaos.

And for good reason. The current crisis was in part the creation of the Rev. Jesse Jackson, a Democratic Party activist who claims to champion the rights of Africans to self-governance. As special envoy for democracy and human rights in Africa, starting in October 1997, Jackson was President Bill Clinton's point man for Africa. It was Jackson who spearheaded Clinton's 10-day African safari in March 1998, at a cost to taxpayers of $42.8 million. And it was Jackson who legitimated Liberian strongman Charles Taylor and his protégé, the machete-wielding militia leader in neighboring Sierra Leone, Cpl. Foday Sankoh. Without Jackson's active intervention, both leaders were headed toward international isolation and sanction. Thanks to Jackson, both retained power to murder another day.

At Jackson's prompting, Clinton made an unprecedented phone call to Taylor from Air Force One while flying over Africa. Until then the United States had shunned Taylor because of his grisly past. Among Taylor's many "accomplishments" were the murder of American Catholic nuns in Liberia and the storming of the U.S. Embassy in Monrovia.

The mainstream media has resolutely ignored Jackson's involvement in the diamond wars of Liberia and Sierra Leone, and he never has been hauled before a congressional committee to account for this behavior [see Kenneth R. Timmerman's New York Times best seller, Shakedown: Exposing the Real Jesse Jackson (Regnery Publishing, March 2002)].

Jackson first met Taylor in Monrovia on Feb. 11, 1998, thanks to the intercession of an old friend, a Liberian named Romeo Horton who had become a close aide to Taylor. Taylor had just been elected president of Liberia after a campaign riddled with intimidation in which he sent his infamous "Small Boys Units" throughout the countryside, waving their machetes at anyone who refused to vote for their man. But instead of hectoring Taylor on human rights and democracy - after all, that was Jackson's brief - Jackson embraced the Liberian strongman, as shown in a State Department after-action memo obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.

"During his 24 hours in Liberia, the Rev. Jackson met several times privately with President Taylor and appeared to establish a strong personal bond with him," the April 29, 1998, memo from the U.S. Embassy in Monrovia reads. "After Jesse Jackson's visit, President Taylor went out of his way to stress that Liberia is America's best friend in Africa, and that it was time to improve the bilateral relationship - a 180-degree change in direction from the public posture of the Taylor government before the Jackson visit."

In neighboring Sierra Leone, Sankoh and his Revolutionary United Front (RUF) militia had massacred tens of thousands of civilians and, teamed with disgruntled military officers, had driven elected president Ahmad Tejan Kabbah into exile. Jackson said in an interview that he considered Sankoh and Taylor to be like the gang leaders in Chicago, who could be "redeemed" by his careful ministrations. Rather than confront them, Jackson befriended them, over the howls of the State Department professionals.

"Secretary [of State Madeleine] Albright delegated Africa policy to [U.S. Rep. Donald] Payne [of New Jersey] and the Congressional Black Caucus," Sierra Leone's outspoken ambassador to Washington, John Ernest Leigh, told this reporter. A House International Affairs Committee staffer who followed Jackson's meetings with Taylor put it more bluntly: "The whole effort under Clinton was to mainstream Charles Taylor, and Jesse Jackson had a lot to do with it."

Just two months after his first meeting with Taylor, Jackson played host to a "reconciliation conference" at his Operation PUSH headquarters in Chicago. It was meant to drum up support for Taylor in the United States and to portray him as a modern democratic leader. Taylor appeared on a huge video screen that dominated the stage, while Jackson chirped, "It's morning time in Liberia."

Harry A. Greaves, a Taylor opponent who helped found the Liberia Action Party, called Jackson's conference "a PR exercise by Charles Taylor. The general perception in the Liberian community was that Jackson was a paid lobbyist for Charles Taylor." Jackson insisted to me that he "got absolutely no money from the government of Liberia" to play host to the conference. But Jackson had tried to exclude the opposition from the conference entirely, until Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Howard Jeter telephoned Jackson and insisted otherwise.

"If there are any adversaries who are not ready to reconcile, please leave the room," Jackson told the auditorium. He then demanded that Liberians stop using the Internet to publish information on Taylor's atrocities. "The international community frequents the Internet and takes note of whatever information is disseminated on the information superhighway," he said. "So, please stay off the Net."

In September, just five months after the "reconciliation" Jackson hosted in Chicago, Taylor's Special Security Service went on a killing rampage in an effort to track down and eliminate rival warlord Roosevelt Johnson, an ethnic Krahn whom Taylor accused of plotting a coup. When Johnson sought refuge in the U.S. Embassy, Taylor's men gunned him down in the entryway, wounding two embassy employees. The State Department was not amused, and asked Jackson to reprimand Taylor by phone. No record of what Jackson actually said was released but, in November 1998, during another visit to the region, Jesse again treated Taylor as a statesman.

With help from Britain and Nigeria (but not from Jackson), Sierra Leone's elected president Kabbah managed to return to power in March 1998. Sankoh's RUF guerrillas were forced back into the bush, and Sankoh himself was arrested, tried for treason and sentenced to death. It all could have ended there - if it hadn't been for Jackson, who intervened with Kabbah to get the death sentence against Sankoh lifted.

In January 1999, Sankoh's troops went on another killing spree and launched an offensive that brought them into the streets of Freetown. A West African peacekeeping force led by Nigeria managed to drive the rebels out of the capital and fought them to a stalemate. Again, it could have ended there if it hadn't been for Jackson's active intervention.

In May 1999, Jackson decided it was time to reinvent Sankoh, whose troops now controlled Sierra Leone's rich diamond mines. By this point, the United Nations and private investigators had published detailed reports on how Sankoh and Taylor were using "blood diamonds" to fuel West Africa's civil and regional wars, leading to international controls on the diamond trade. On the margins of a conference in nearby Ghana, Jackson "kidnapped" Kabbah, according to Kabbah advisers I interviewed for my book, and flew him to neighboring Lomé, Togo, where Jackson forced him to sign a cease-fire with Sankoh. "We had not expected or planned that agreement," former assistant secretary of state Susan E. Rice tells Insight, "or that Jackson would have a role in it." The impression among African policymakers at State was, she says, "Where did this come from?"

In July, under the terms of a power-sharing agreement that Jackson helped negotiate and which Kabbah vigorously resisted, Sankoh was released from house arrest, made a vice president in a new national-unity government and put in charge of Sierra Leone's diamond mines.

Now in government, Sankoh began smuggling out thousands of diamonds, many of which he sent to Taylor in Liberia in exchange for weapons. Jackson repeatedly raised the issue of the illicit diamond trade and the clandestine arms supplies with Taylor, who simply denied the charges, the State Department transcripts show. Jackson never pressed him further.

Jackson maintained direct contact with Sankoh after the Lomé accords were signed, telephoning him repeatedly with words of encouragement and promising him a "full pardon." Braced by Jackson's support, Sankoh and his RUF fighters built up their forces, thanks to the diamond trade, ignoring Jackson's pleas to disarm and give peace a chance. New fighting broke out in January 2000 in the hinterland. The cease-fire Jackson brokered lasted less than six months. By May the fighting took on crisis proportions when Sankoh's fighters murdered U.N. peacekeepers and took 500 of them hostage. Meanwhile Liberia, which produces no diamonds, reported that it had exported $300 million worth of the precious stones the previous year.

Jackson made one final attempt to halt the bloodshed in mid-May 2000. He tried in vain to cajole Taylor to "negotiate" an end to the hostage crisis, since Taylor was widely (and correctly) viewed as godfather of the RUF and as Sankoh's arms and diamond broker. In one telephone conversation with Taylor, on May 7, 2000, Jackson gushed: "Brother Taylor, word is coming through that you are playing a constructive role. Two or three wire-service stories. Congratulations! Your public leadership is important."

When challenged by African reporters during a May 12, 2000, press conference as to why he was relying on Taylor and Sankoh to get the U.N. hostages released, when in fact they had orchestrated the hostage crisis themselves, Jackson said, "There is blood on everybody's hands and no clean hands. If Charles Taylor can talk to the [RUF] commanders and they hear that, that would be positive. It would be different if he were encouraging fighting, but he is not."

Then Jackson made a blunder that would make him an object of ridicule and scorn across Africa: He compared Sankoh to former African National Congress leader Nelson Mandela, who went on to become president of South Africa. On May 16, Jackson was all set to take off for Sierra Leone when an urgent message came into the State Department, warning that Jackson could be assaulted physically should he attempt to land. Foreign Minister Sama Banya even went on state radio in Freetown, urging Jackson to stay away. "When people in Freetown heard Jesse Jackson's statement comparing Foday Sankoh to Nelson Mandela, they were up in arms," recalls Sierra Leone Ambassador Leigh. "Comparing Nelson Mandela to a guy who was ripping arms off of babies was the biggest insult to Africa you could think of. Jesse Jackson destroyed the credibility of the United States."

During a conference call to leaders in Freetown, Jackson tried to retract his earlier statements but was openly attacked as a RUF "collaborator." One local journalist wrote bitterly that Jackson was known as a civil-rights leader in the United States, but that in Africa he was better known as a "killer's-rights" leader.

Arriving in Monrovia, Liberia, on May 17, 2000, Jackson declared, "President Taylor has been doing a commendable job negotiating for the release of the hostages. All the hostages should be freed and freed now. There is no basis for delay, there is no basis for negotiations." Jackson's comments would have been laughable were it not for the quantities of innocent blood that had been shed, thanks to his self-serving misbehavior.

By this point, the State Department had suffered enough of Jackson's alleged diplomacy and the failed agreement he had brokered. State Department spokesman Philip Reeker declared on June 5, 2000, that the United States was "not part of that agreement." Jackson summarily was fired as Clinton's special envoy shortly afterward.

But the Clinton State Department is not innocent in this affair. In a series of dispatches and briefing documents stamped "Secret," which the State Department declassified at this reporter's request, it is clear that Assistant Secretary of State Rice, an Albright protégé, and Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Jeter primed Jackson with intelligence, talking points and background papers throughout the entire three-year period he was Clinton's envoy. Indeed, the entire bureaucracy of U.S. diplomacy was put at Jackson's disposal with tragic results.

However, it also is clear that Jackson repeatedly took initiatives on his own, especially when it came to forging that strong personal bond with the Liberian dictator.

The United States and the citizens of West Africa now have a historic opportunity with the war-crimes indictment against Taylor that was released in June by the U.N.-backed Special Court for Sierra Leone. Taylor is seeking asylum in neighboring Nigeria, but already voices are being raised among Liberian opposition politicians and their U.S. supporters that he should not be allowed to escape prosecution.

Among the first questions they believe prosecutors should ask Taylor is who he paid off using Sankoh's diamonds. U.S. intelligence officers and their assets on the ground in Liberia reported back to Washington concerning these payoffs at the very moment that Jackson was negotiating a favorable role for Taylor and for Sankoh in Lomé, former CIA officers and other sources have told this reporter.

Who received the diamonds, how they were brokered onto the international marketplace in Europe and where the cash proceeds went remain mysteries. Charles Taylor knows many of the answers.

Kenneth R. Timmerman is a senior writer for Insight magazine.