|
|
|
This is pretty impressive, and probably will not get reported in The New York Times or other commercial media.
Iraqi Letter reports: A new office for the Iraqi Communist Party was opened in Al-Thawra City (Sadr City) in Baghdad on 5th December 2008. The ceremony, held in open air in Jamila district, was attended by a big gathering of party members and supporters, as well as a delegation from the party Central Committee. The president and members of the municipal council of Sadr City, and other guests were present.
Note: This vast very poor neighborhood was long known as "Revolution (al-Thawra) City" until the Islamic Shiite upsurge after the U.S. toppled Saddam Hussein. Today, reports indicate the standing of religious parties has suffered as Iraqis are turned off by the sectarianism and violence.
Abdul Hussein al-Rubaei, representing the party district committee, stressed in his speech the political significance of opening the new party office in this toiling [working class] area. Comrade Izzet Abu-el-Timmen, member of the party Political Bureau, conveyed the greetings of the Central Committee, and reiterated the party's support for the population of the City and their demands to aleviate the injustive they had suffered under the former dictatorial regime. He also called upon them to participate actively in the forthcoming provincial elections and to give their support to the electoral list "Madaniyoun" (No. 460) that represents the democratic forces.
 The secular and democratic left in Iraq has wide and deep roots, and is vastly under-reported in U.S. commercial media and in the left. The provincial elections, currently set for Jan. 31, will show something about how the political trends are shaping up in Iraq. That's why there's been an upsurge of violence with various reactionary elements (right-wing Islamists, former Baathists, etc.) trying to intimidate or eliminate their opponents. See more photos here.
Some U.S. anti-Iraq-war people are starting to zero in on all the flaws and weak points of the proposed Iraq-U.S. agreement, but I'd say they are pretty much missing the forest for the trees.
What are they offering as a concrete and realizable alternative? "Out now"? Let's get serious. The nub of the issue right now is that the UN authorization for the U.S. occupation expires Dec. 31. What should happen Jan. 1? Do we, like the Iraqis judging from most reports, want to see Iraq get out from under the UN mandate and start taking over from the U.S.? And do we, like the Iraqis, want some restrictions on the U.S. military during this process -- Or are we just going to sit back and talk in slogans?
This report from Leila Fadel at McClatchy Newspapers, which has done a pretty good job reporting from Iraq, spells out some of the huge changes this agreement represents, for example:
If Iraq's parliament endorses the agreement, in six weeks American forces would have to change the way they operate in Iraq, and all U.S. combat troops, police trainers and military advisers would have to leave the country by Dec. 31, 2011. President-elect Barack Obama's campaign plan to leave a residual force of some 30,000 American troops in Iraq would be impossible under the pact. ...
The American military now can come and go as it pleases in Iraq. It raids homes without judicial approval, controls Iraq's airspace, detains civilians without warrants for as long as it wants and conducts unilateral operations against high-value targets, including a recent cross-border attack on an al Qaida in Iraq member in Syria that was condemned by Iraq, the Arab League and Syria.
The agreement forbids attacks on other countries from inside Iraq, and if it were approved, beginning Jan. 1 all U.S. operations would have to be conducted in cooperation with the Iraqi government. "It is not permitted to use Iraqi land, water and airspace as a route or launching pad for attacks against other countries," the pact says, according to an Arabic copy that McClatchy obtained. The military also would have to get arrest warrants from the Iraqi government, judicial orders for raids on homes and to consult in advance on every operation, including the attacks on high-value targets that American forces now routinely conduct on their own. ...
The Green Zone, where American contractors, some military personnel and officials live and work, would come under Iraqi control on the first day of next year. U.S. soldiers currently protect the area in central Baghdad, and checkpoints are manned by Peruvian mercenaries. State and Defense department officials breeze through the checkpoints, while most Iraqis are subjected to long searches. Control of Iraqi airspace would be transferred to the Iraqis the day the agreement took effect, and after that the Iraqi government would issue annual permits to all U.S. military aircraft. Currently, the U.S. controls all air traffic over Iraq, including civilian flights, and it could shut down Iraq's airspace.
In provinces that have been turned over to Iraqi control, U.S. troops couldn't remain in cities, villages or towns after the agreement took effect, and as of June 30, all American combat troops would have to be in agreed-on locations outside populated areas.
They'd have no right, beginning next year, to venture off their bases and outposts without Iraqi authorities' approval and cooperation.
The Bush administration refused to meet Iraqi demands for legal jurisdiction over American military personnel, but the agreement does give Iraqi authorities the right to prosecute private contractors ...
It's also important for Americans to recognize that there is a political struggle going on in Iraq over the direction of their country. It remains to be seen if the Iraqi Parliament will ok the agreement, but don't get fooled by the political posturing and maneuvering going on there - a lot of it is geared toward the upcoming provincial elections and efforts by various parties to strengthen their hands in that contest. When push comes to shove, most seem prepared to support this agreement as a better alternative than keeping Iraq completely subjugated to the U.S. Clearly, too, this agreement is in line with Obama's approach on getting out of Iraq. A recent New York Times article sheds light on the dynamics: “Before, the Iraqis were thinking that if they sign the pact, there will be no respect for the schedule of troop withdrawal by Dec. 31, 2011,” said Hadi al-Ameri, a powerful member of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, a major Shiite party. “If Republicans were still there, there would be no respect for this timetable. This is a positive step to have the same theory about the timetable as Mr. Obama.” ...
Many Shiite politicians had been under intense pressure from Iranian leaders not to sign a security agreement. Iran, which has close ties to Shiite politicians, has feared the agreement would lay the groundwork for a permanent American troop presence in Iraq that would threaten Iran.
But now, the Iraqis appear to be feeling less pressure from Iran, perhaps because the Iranians are less worried that an Obama government will try to force a regime change in their country. ...
with Iraqis believing that Mr. Obama, as president, would move faster to withdraw American troops, Iraqi and American officials said obstacles to a security agreement appeared to be fading.
Jabeer Habeeb, an independent Shiite lawmaker and a political scientist at Baghdad University, put it simply: “Obama’s election shifts Iraq into a new position.”
The New York Times web site informs us that:In an elaborate hoax, pranksters distributed thousands of free copies of a spoof edition of The New York Times on Wednesday morning at busy subway stations around the city, including Grand Central Terminal, Washington and Union Squares, the 14th and 23rd Street stations along Eighth Avenue, and Pacific Street in Brooklyn, among others. The spurious 14-page papers — with a headline “IRAQ WAR ENDS” — surprised commuters, many of whom took the free copies thinking they were legitimate. The paper is dated July 4, 2009, and imagines a liberal utopia of national health care, a rebuilt economy, progressive taxation, a national oil fund to study climate change, and other goals of progressive politics. The hoax was accompanied by a Web site that mimics the look of The Times’s real Web site. A page of the spoof site contained links to dozens of progressive organizations, which were also listed in the print edition.
Later on Wednesday morning, the Yes Men (those pranksters who fooled WTO folks and others - subject of a 2004 documentary) issued a statement claiming credit for the prank. The statement said, in part: In an elaborate operation six months in the planning, 1.2 million
papers were printed at six different presses and driven to prearranged
pickup locations, where thousands of volunteers stood ready to pass
them out on the street.
Articles in the paper announce dozens of new initiatives including the
establishment of national health care, the abolition of corporate
lobbying, a maximum wage for C.E.O.s, and, of course, the end of the
war.
The paper, an exact replica of The New York Times, includes
International, National, New York, and Business sections, as well as
editorials, corrections, and a number of advertisements, including a
recall notice for all cars that run on gasoline. There is also a
timeline describing the gains brought about by eight months of
progressive support and pressure, culminating in President Obama's "Yes
we REALLY can" speech. (The paper is post-dated July 4, 2009.)
"It's all about how at this point, we need to push harder than ever,"
said Bertha Suttner, one of the newspaper's writers. "We've got to
make sure Obama and all the other Democrats do what we elected them to do. After eight, or maybe twenty-eight years of hell, we need to start
imagining heaven."
Check it out yourself here.
And be sure to check out the brilliant mea culpa parody of Times columnist Thomas Friedman.
An Iraqi Communist Party leader told a packed Baghdad meeting yesterday that the global financial crisis marks the beginning of the end for the economic, social and political policies of neo-liberalism.
As reported at the Iraqi Letter blog (see blog for photos), Saleh Yassir, member of the Central Committee of the Iraqi Communist Party, presented an extensive analysis of the current global financial crisis at a meeting held on Tuesday, October 14, 2008, at the party headquarters at Andulus Square in central Baghdad.
More than 200 people packed the hall to listen to an in-depth presentation of the political economy of the crisis, its causes and repercussions, as well as its principal characteristics compared with previous crises.
Yassir concluded that the crisis marks the beginning of the end for neo-liberalism on several levels: economic, political and social. He predicted that the global financial system will not return to what it was before, but will witness significant changes in terms of an end of the brutal chaos of globalized state monopoly financial capitalism, and towards intervention by the state in controlling the financial markets of each state and on the global level.
Does the crisis mean the end of the capitalist system? Replying to this question, Yassir said "No. The end of capitalism requires waging a social struggle and requires broad class alliances that will not evolve and develop in a short time period."
A more extensive report of the meeting will be published later.
With the widening economic crisis grabbing so much of our attention, ending our occupation of Iraq may be taking a back seat in some minds, but it will be a major, pressing issue for the next president.
Here's an under-reported development that fits very well with Barack Obama's pledge to start pulling troops out in a systematic way, with a view to ending our military role there, and with Obama's emphasis on a new foreign policy that emphasizes diplomacy rather than military force:
The Boston Globe reports today that:
Members of a team that worked to produce a framework for political reconciliation in Iraq told a congressional subcommittee yesterday that the United States must involve the international community in further peace negotiations and allow Iraqis to take the central role in the process. Representatives of South Africa's African National Congress, veterans of both sides of the bloody Northern Ireland conflict and others with experience in difficult national reconciliation told a committee chaired by Rep. William Delahunt (D-Mass.) how they are working with Iraqi political leaders spanning the spectrum from Islamists and former Baathists to Communists, to move forward national reconciliation in Iraq. As with South Africa and Northern Ireland, such a process will be essential to bringing peace to Iraq. It will also be key to enabling Iraq to stand up to interference from the U.S., transnational corporations, etc. A series of meetings involving all the Iraqi groups and the reconciliation experts over the past several months resulted in what's known as the Helsinki Agreement, signed by 37 Iraqi parties in Baghdad in July. A useful commentary by Max Bergman of the liberal National Security Network calls attention to the significance of this process for Obama's vow that "we must be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in." Bergman draws the following conclusions: 1. Political reconciliation is not something that will happen over night.
2. The one thing Iraqis are united on is opposition to U.S. occupation.
3. In Iraq, political reconciliation will have to be largely self-reinforcing, as it is in Northern Ireland. He says: Iraqis are united in wanting us out. Maliki is driving such a hard bargain with us, because it is politically popular to oppose the U.S. presence. This matters because it potentially makes the U.S. not only a focus for potential violence from a nationalist backlash, but because reconciliation for Iraqis must be seen as a means by which to regain their sovereignty.
and There is no military solution to building trust. Less violence helps, but even if people feel more secure or safe in their neighborhoods that does not mean that they will have any more trust in the intentions of their Sunni or Shia neighbors or politicians. Addressing this takes a long long long time and lots and lots of talks between political leaders and the process set up with Helsinki is an important first step. This process has to ramp up as troops begin to withdraw. Additionally, part of a withdrawal strategy has to attempt to get the countries in the region to play a constructive role in supporting political reconciliation. The upshot, in his view? A timetable for withdrawal is not just about moving troops out. It is also a negotiating timetable for Iraqis, as well as for Iraq's neighbors. While our military efforts decline, our diplomatic efforts will have to ramp up. Read the two articles here and here. This is an important process to follow.
Considering the Bush administration and the GOP is trying to "take away" the Iraq war as a major issue in this election with their phony withdrawal plans, I think this is a great initiative.
United For Peace and Justice Helps Organize Million Doors for Peace
25,000 Volunteers to Contact One Million People in One Day Event Will Be the Year's Largest Antiwar Action www.unitedforpeace.org New York, NY - United for Peace and Justice, the nation's largest grassroots anti-war coalition, has joined forces with other major organizations to organize what promises to be this year's largest anti-war mobilization. Million Doors for Peace, scheduled for Saturday, Sept. 20, will ask at least one million people throughout the country to sign petitions urging the next Congress to bring U.S. troops home from Iraq within one year. The action combines the best of grassroots activism and support from the netroots. The campaign will allow tens of thousands of volunteers to download a neighborhood "walk list" from a website designed specifically for this project. The volunteers will use this public information to talk to and identify neighbors who oppose the Iraq war and will invite them to join the efforts to end the war. The Million Doors for Peace website, www.MillionDoorsForPeace.org, was launched this week. As a neighborhood-based mobilization, organizers said Million Doors for Peace is unique in the history of anti-war movements. Instead of bringing tens of thousands of people together for one visible protest, participants will be organizing on the ground across the U.S., with an eye toward one-on-one public education and influencing members of Congress. Leslie Cagan, National Coordinator of United for Peace and Justice, said, "The antiwar sentiment throughout the country has never been stronger. To help bring greater visibility to the depth of opposition to the war in Iraq, on Sept. 20th the Million Doors for Peace project will put thousands of people out on the streets in communities in all 50 states. This massive national mobilization will send a clear message: it is time to bring all the troops home!" "This will be the largest anti-war mobilization effort of 2008," said Tom Swan of USAction and director of Iraq Campaign 2008. "But instead of coming together in one place, such as the National Mall, we are going to go talk to people where they live. When the next Congress is seated early next year, we want one million people to remind them that Americans strongly oppose this war and it's time to responsibly end it." The coalition organizing Million Doors for Peace includes: Catholics United, Cities for Peace, CodePink, MoveOn.org, Pax Christi USA, Peace Action, Progressive Accountability, Progressive Democrats of America, United for Peace and Justice, USAction & TrueMajority.org, Voters for Peace and Win Without War. Combined, the coalition boasts a membership in the millions and hundreds of state and local affiliates. The overarching goal of recruiting more than one million war opponents is to broaden and expand the nation's antiwar constituency so that when the next Congress convenes it will not be able to ignore the call for immediate action to end the war in Iraq. "Million Doors for Peace takes the anti-war movement in a new direction," Swan said. "Each year during the Iraq war, we have seen large antiwar demonstrations in Washington and around the country. This year the tactics and strategy are different. Instead of gathering in one place, we will be in every state in the country. We will meet people on their front door steps in order to expand the antiwar constituency in this country and remind our leaders of America's antiwar sentiment. The cost of this war has been too great." "When Congress returns next year, members will have to answer to constituents determined to bring an end to this seemingly endless war," Cagan concluded. "Too many people have died, and precious resources have been squandered while the needs of our communities continue to go unmet." ###
The Iraqi Women's League has started a new campaign demanding that Iraq's government and parliament take action to protect Iraq's children.  The danger which threatens Iraq's childhood, in its present and future, has become greater than ever before. The devastation inflicted on children by the wars and militarization of society by the dictatorship, was further aggravated by occupation. As a result of war and terrorism, in addition to the intensified struggle among the forces fighting over power and wealth, the suffering of children has been exacerbated on all levels. ...
Poverty has forced families to make their children leave school and seek food in waste dumps, work as street vendors or turn into beggars. Children toiling to earn a living has become a commonplace scene in the streets of Iraq. Under these tragic conditions, children are subjected to murder, kidnapping and rape, in addition to being exploited in acts of terrorism. ...
400 children become orphans every day ...
The overall tragic situation of children in Iraq makes them among the most miserable children in the world. ...
Read more here. And an Iraqi writer in Baghdad reports: Recent statistics ... reveal that the number of orphaned Iraqi children has reached 4-5 million and that there are some 500,000 street children. ...
A further study conducted for the UNDP [United Nations Development Program] by the Fafo Institute for Applied Social Science, found that “acute malnutrition among Iraqi children has almost doubled since the US invasion despite UN efforts.” The study based on a survey of 22,000 Iraqi homes said that approximately 400,000 Iraqi children now suffer from malnutrition and said that acute malnutrition has increased to 7.7 percent since March 2003 for those aged between six months and five years. The horrible legacy of the war based on lies.
“Projected total US spending on the Iraq war could cover all of the global investments in renewable power generation that are needed between now and 2030 in order to halt current warming trends.”
This and other useful information is contained in a recent report by Oil Change International. Read it here: A Climate of War.
|
|
