Bogus End To A Bogus War
By Investigations Editor Neil Mackay
JUST seconds before he decapitated the US hostage Nick Berg, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi addressed these words to “the mothers and wives of American soldiers”: “You will see nothing from us except corpse after corpse and casket after casket of those slaughtered in this fashion.”
Zarqawi and his two lieutenants, who filmed the whole gruesome execution, then fell on Berg, literally sawing off his head. The video was made for one purpose: propaganda. And the message was quite clear: the Americans, their allies or those Iraqis who “collaborated” with the occupying forces were all targets and they would die in the most dreadful fashion possible.
This month, Zarqawi – an al-Qaeda affiliate and the most prominent Islamic fundamentalist terrorist in Iraq – and other disparate groups including Saddam loyalists and the Shia followers of the radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr have made many more Bergs.
On Thursday, more than 100 people were killed in rebel attacks in five cities. On June 17, 41 died in a car bombing. June 16 saw the killing of the security chief of the Iraqi oil fields in Kirkuk. On June 14, 12 died in a car bombing in Baghdad. On June 12 and 13 two assassinations claimed the lives of an education ministry official and the interim deputy foreign minister. And on June 8, 15 died in car bombings in Mosul and Baquba. These are by no means all the killings – just selected atrocities in the daily horror of life in occupied Iraq.
Such overwhelming violence has made the official handover of sovereignty from the occupying powers to Iraq on Wednesday a paper exercise . In theory, Iraq will regain its sovereignty, but in practice nothing will have changed. Zarqawi and his followers will still be killing Iraqi “fifth columnists” and foreign troops, US and British soldiers will still be controlling the day-to-day lives of ordinary people.
Nothing symbolises just how cosmetic the entire handover process is more than the fate of Saddam Hussein. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) says Saddam’s detention by US forces must also end on Wednesday. From the moment that the handover takes place, the US no longer has the power to hold Saddam and he must either be given to the Iraqis or released.
Under the Geneva Convention, a prisoner of war can only be held for as long as they are considered “enemy combatants” who are not charged with any crime. Once the conflict ends, the prisoner must be released.
“His case is the same as all other prisoners of war,” said Nadia Doumani of the ICRC. “Saddam can be convicted for war crimes, for crimes against humanity … he can be tried and prosecuted. If he is not charged, then the law says that at the end of the war, of occupation, he should be released.”
Officials in the US State Department have referred to the possible transfer of Saddam from American to Iraqi custody, saying that they are “not aware of any plan that’s been worked out on this”.
The determination to keep Saddam under US control comes from the very top. President George W Bush has said Saddam will only be handed over when “appropriate security” is in place in Iraq. In other words, the US doesn’t believe that the Iraqis would be able to have Saddam in custody without him escaping or being lynched.
US Secretary of State Colin Powell confessed that the security situation in Iraq is about as dire at it gets. Powell said on Friday that the US underestimated the rebellion against the occupation. He said: “The insurgency that we are looking at now, fuelled by old Saddam regime loyalists and by terrorists, has become a serious problem for us.”
Powell also hinted that disbanding the Iraqi army in order to purge Saddam loyalists from power had been a mistake. But the Iraqi army is far from defunct. The Centre for Global Research recently published interviews with two Iraqi generals and a colonel who are among the main leaders of the resistance movement. The trio, who are being hunted by the coalition, said they were happy to talk “because today we are sure we’re going to win”. Their words confirm fears that the handover of power will be played out against a background of bloodshed and mayhem.
Speaking before Thursday’s bloodbath, the generals made clear they had no weapons of mass destruction, but added: “On the other hand, we have more than 50 million conventional weapons.” On Saddam’s instructions, an arsenal of mortars, anti-tank mines, rocket-launchers, missiles, AK-47s and ammunition was stored in secret locations across Iraq.
The generals said they knew at the time of the invasion that the Iraqi army had no chance against US and UK forces –“the war was lost in advance” they said – so they fought briefly to save their honour and then dispersed. This strategy had been planned for up to a year before the invasion in March 2003. Their current plan is simple – “to liberate Iraq and expel the coalition – to recover our sovereignty and install a secular democracy, but not the one imposed by the Americans”.
They claim there is no lack of volunteers. Some 5000 “kamikazes” – both men and women – are ready to launch suicide missions. The generals say that 90% of them are Iraqi, with the rest made up of foreign fighters.
“The resistance is not limited to a few thousand activists – 75% of the population supports us and helps us, directly and indirectly, volunteering information, hiding combatants or weapons,” they said.
The targeting of “collaborators” is one sure route to ruining any chance of stability in the wake of the US handover.
“Every Iraqi or foreigner who works with the coalition is a target,” they said. “Ministers, mercenaries, translators, businessmen, cooks or maids, it doesn’t matter the degree of collaboration. To sign a contract with the occupier is to sign your death certificate. Iraqi or not, these are traitors.”
All rivalry between the disparate resistance groups has been put aside. The resistance, the Baathist generals said, is comprised of “all movements of national struggle against the occupation without ethnic or political distinction. Contrary to what you imagine in the West, there is no fratricidal war in Iraq.” The only rivalry that existed, they said, was to do with which group could kill the most Americans.
They claimed responsibility for the death in September of Akila al-Hashimi, a diplomat and member of the US-appointed Iraqi Governing Council, and also last month’s car bomb which killed the head of the council, Ezzedin Salim, right in front of the entrance to the Green Zone in Baghdad where the coalition has its headquarters. The generals admitted kidnapping foreigners but denied having any part in Berg’s death, nor did they launch the attack against the UN in August last year or the Red Cross in October.
The resistance leaders also sent a warning to Washington and London that the “puppet” government in Baghdad would be destroyed: “If [Bush and Blair] have won a battle, they have not won the war yet. The great battle is still to begin. The liberation of Baghdad is not far away.”
Just days later, the resistance unleashed a wave of co-ordinated attacks, storming police stations and government buildings on Thursday, leaving more than 100 dead and at least 325 injured. American forces had to fight to control cities around Baghdad and the resistance brought down a US helicopter. It was the Iraqi police force which suffered the most casualties in these military-style attacks.
Everywhere in Iraq today people talk about “maku aman” or “no security”. Under constant attack, some police officers have switched sides and gone to fight with the resistance, while others have just stopped going to work, making everyday life unbearable for ordinary people.
Police officers and members of the Iraqi Civil Defence Force have also refused to fire at insurgents, fearing to do so would court assassination.
Such conditions mean that the elections planned for next year are likely to see queues of voters being attacked or polling stations being bombed, making it impossible for the new Iraqi government to actually govern.
sundayherald.com |
