http://www.antiwar.com/orig/hadar.php?articleid=4712
Don't Expect Shiites to Toe American Line
Full Version: Iraq
Common Ground Common Sense > Issues that Affect Our Lives > Foreign Policy and National Defense > Foreign Policy & National Defense Issues Archive
Iraqi Election Commission Says Main Shi'ite Coalition Maintains
Strong Showing
http://enews.voanews.com/t?ctl=B62363:2F72C9D
Partial results show United Iraqi Alliance with 2.2 million of 3.3
million votes counted so far
Iraqi woman holds finger up after voting, SundayThe Iraqi election
commission says the main Shi'ite coalition has maintained a strong
showing in Sunday's landmark elections.
Partial results show the United Iraqi Alliance, which has the support
of influential Shi'ite cleric Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, with 2.2
million of the 3.3 million votes counted so far.
The party of interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi is in second
place with less than 20 percent support.
The results so far are from mainly Shi'ite regions, and a complete
tabulation is not expected for another week.
Meanwhile, the U.S. military says an American soldier was killed
Thursday when a troop convoy was hit by a roadside bomb in the
northern city of Mosul.
Some information for this report provided by AFP and AP.
Strong Showing
http://enews.voanews.com/t?ctl=B62363:2F72C9D
Partial results show United Iraqi Alliance with 2.2 million of 3.3
million votes counted so far
Iraqi woman holds finger up after voting, SundayThe Iraqi election
commission says the main Shi'ite coalition has maintained a strong
showing in Sunday's landmark elections.
Partial results show the United Iraqi Alliance, which has the support
of influential Shi'ite cleric Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, with 2.2
million of the 3.3 million votes counted so far.
The party of interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi is in second
place with less than 20 percent support.
The results so far are from mainly Shi'ite regions, and a complete
tabulation is not expected for another week.
Meanwhile, the U.S. military says an American soldier was killed
Thursday when a troop convoy was hit by a roadside bomb in the
northern city of Mosul.
Some information for this report provided by AFP and AP.
Iraq's Sunnis Rethink Strategy
By Anthony Shadid
BAGHDAD, Feb. 4 -- Influential Sunni Arab leaders of a boycott of last Sunday's elections expressed a new willingness Friday to engage the coming Iraqi government and play a role in writing the constitution, in what may represent a strategic shift in thinking among mainstream anti-occupation groups.
To view the entire article, go to http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...er=emailarticle
By Anthony Shadid
BAGHDAD, Feb. 4 -- Influential Sunni Arab leaders of a boycott of last Sunday's elections expressed a new willingness Friday to engage the coming Iraqi government and play a role in writing the constitution, in what may represent a strategic shift in thinking among mainstream anti-occupation groups.
To view the entire article, go to http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...er=emailarticle
Occupation Watch Bulletin
www.occupationwatch.org
5 February 2005
By Marjorie Lasky
THE IRAQI ELECTIONS: WHAT DO THEY MEAN?
On Feb. 4, Borzou Daragahi in Baghdad reports, "Partial results from Sunday's election suggest that U.S.-backed Prime Minister Ayad Allawi's coalition is being roundly defeated by a list with the backing of Iraq's senior Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al- Sistani, diminishing Allawi's chances of retaining his post in the next government. Sharif Ali bin Hussein, head of the Constitutional Monarchy Party, likened the vote outcome to a 'Sistani tsunami' that would shake the nation. 'Americans are in for a shock,' he said, adding that one day they would realize, 'We've got 150,000 troops here protecting a country that's extremely friendly to Iran, and training their troops.'"
"U.S. 'In for a Shock' In Early Election Results, Shiite Cleric's Alliance Trouncing U.S. Favorite"
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=9112
But, is this early result such shocking news? Didn't people throughout the world, including the United States, understand the significance of the Iraqi elections?
To counter the reports in the corporate media and offer analyses on the elections, Occupation Watch sent the following request to several individuals:
"We're writing on behalf of the International Occupation Watch Center with a request for a quick response from you regarding today's election in Iraq. With the blizzard of media stories that will be coming out right after the election (many of them worthless drivel or propaganda), we would like to organize and publish an article that helps people frame the election in the context of the real situation of the Iraqi people and the reality of the occupation."
Among the responses, Imad Khadduri, an Iraqi nuclear scientist based in Canada, writes about rigged elections:
"Why would we conclude anything other than a rigged election, from start to finish? 6o million ballot sheets were flown to Iraq days before the election. If all legitimate voters had participated, they would have needed about 15 million ballots. The Iraqi minister of the interior claims that 8 million participated. Why did they need more than 40 million ballot sheets?
“The people in the three Kurdish provinces had an extra piece of ballot, one with an Iraqi flag and a Kurdish flag, with a place to place your thumb stamp next to either flag. One would assume that this extra polling effort was done with the agreement of whoever is organizing the elections in order to measure the percentage of the people in these three provinces who would support Kurdish independence.
“Why did they not also offer the Iraqi people in all provinces a similar small piece of paper asking the voters whether they wish the occupiers to stay or to leave? That would have been a mandate for the incoming government as representatives of the will of the people. Its absence, in contrast to allowing the above Kurdish paper, is another manifestation of rigging.
“As for the legitimacy of this election, I believe this is the first time in modern times that 7500 candidates, scattered among 257 lists, with at least 6000 of them fearful to declare their names till election day, are offered to people living under armed occupation and a general state of infrastructure paralysis yet are asked to vote, simply to vindicate the morbid figment of George Bush's imagination on the legitimacy of this election."
Tahrir Swift of Arab Media Watch offers several thoughts:
"It is hardly surprising that most Iraqis would like to believe that their voice can have some sort of influence on the events on the ground after years of silence. The real danger comes if they come to realize that the elections made little difference.
“Two things one should be aware of: When the Americans or their stooges talk about withdrawal, they do not mean eradicating the American presence in Iraq.
“Some candidates seem to have promised the Iraqis the earth in a situation that is not totally under their control. The proof as they say is in the pudding!
“The other matter is 25 Iraqi towns and cities that boycotted the elections were ignored by the media.
“There were calls within Iraq for a reconciliation conference after Fallujah, that was rejected by Allawi, the media is not asking why?
“Has Negroponte ceased to be Iraq's real ruler?
“The acid test for the elected government is to stop the privatizations (order 39) and reject the Americans long term military presence.
“For whose benefit is the big hype in the British and American media on the 'elections' celebrations' in Iraq?"
Munir Chalabi of Iraqi Democrats Against Occupation queries:
"Will this be the turning point election? Despite the reservations we all had on the election, millions of enthusiastic Iraqis went to vote by their own free will to choose their future for the first time in their lives. Heavy voting covered the Kurdish and Shia areas. However, there were much lower numbers of voters and enthusiasm within the Sunni communities.
“So is this election going to be the turning point to end the occupation and start an inner Iraqi political process to establish a new democratic Iraq? The answer will depend first on whether or not the CIA and their puppet Allawi will decide to rig the results heavily in their favour. This will cause millions of Iraqis in the south and the centre who have mostly restrained themselves from taking up arms to now do so if the election was rigged.
“But if the US chooses to limit its interference in the election results as part of its new “Exit strategy” then the election could become a turning point to the winners, but not necessarily to the whole of the country.
“The two major winners seem to be the Sistani list, with the Kurdish list following. If the winners show that they have the wisdom and ability to bring together all sectors and religions in Iraq to widen the political process then this will unite all Iraqis in their struggle to end the occupation, stop the blood bath, and build a democratic future. Alternatively, if such a process does not take place then the division between different sectors of Iraqis will increase, resulting in more Iraqi blood being shed and the occupation continuing.
“The cause of such a large turn out was the heavy price paid during the 35 years of Saddam's ruthless repression, the failure of the occupation to improve the standard of living and end the occupation, and a rejection of terrorist organizations that killed thousands of innocent civilians and further destroyed the infrastructure.
“The election has shown that the majority of Iraqis believe that democratic methods are the way to solve the problems facing them and unite them to end the occupation."
Some Iraqis chose not to vote. In an open letter prior to the election, a group of Iraqis explained the significance of the elections and why they weren't voting: "Iraq is being denied free and fair elections, after enduring decades of Saddam's brutal dictatorship. The US and British occupation governments have engineered a process for reproducing the US-appointed Iraqi Interim Government, to prolong the occupation and incite sectarian and ethnic conflicts."
"Iraqis Boycott Election Fraud"
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=9043
Hawra Karama reflects upon why she didn't vote. With a touch of irony, Karama recalls voting in previous one-question elections in which Iraqis were asked to approve Saddam Hussein as their leader. Karama then translates the meaning of the January 31 ballot into a series of questions that should have been but were not asked. These include:
"1. Do you prefer to be tortured by A) American soldiers or
British soldiers; 2. When occupying soldiers stop you on the street, would you rather be strip-searched A) With blindfold or Without blindfold?"
Needless to say, Karama had the same reaction to marking the ballot as in the previous two elections; she left the polling place without voting.
"The Iraqi Ballot, Translated"
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=9037
After the election, in contrast to "the blaring trumpets of corporate media hailing [the Iraqi election] as a successful show of 'democracy,' Dahr Jamail maintains that Iraqis voted to end the occupation. Believing that "the National Assembly which will be formed soon will signal an end to the occupation...they expect the call for a withdrawing of foreign forces in their country to come sooner rather than later."
"What They're Not Telling You about the 'Election'"
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=9053
Sabah Jawad agrees that Iraqis voted to end the occupation. In addition, Jawad denounces the elections as being anything but free and fair and argues, "If Iraq's elections had taken place anywhere else, they would have been denounced by the 'international community' as hopelessly flawed. If they had happened in Zimbabwe, they would have been cited by the White House as a reason for 'regime change' and possible invasion." Jawad's rationale:
"o[The election] took place under a state of emergency. The usual practice in authoritarian regimes is to lift a state of emergency during an election in order to give the appearance of normality and free choice. In occupied Iraq, the opposite happened.
oThe election commission was appointed by the US and remains secret.
oThe identity of most of the candidates themselves was also kept hidden.
oOccupation forces and Iraqi police have been pictured putting up posters for the party list of Iyad Allawi, the pro-occupation puppet “interim prime minister”.
oThe international observers sent to monitor the vote in fact didn't set foot in the country and “observed” from Amman in Jordan.
oThen there is the small matter of the brutal repression of people by the occupation. Over 300,000 people were driven from their homes in the city of Fallujah alone."
"The vast majority of Iraqis want the US to get out"
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=9110
Juan Cole also maintains that the elections "were deeply flawed as a democratic process." However, Cole among other analysts recognized, even before the publication of any electoral results, that the elections "represent a political earthquake in Iraq and in the Middle East. The old Shiite seminary city of Najaf, south of Baghdad, appears poised to emerge as Iraq's second capital. For the first time in the Arab Middle East, a Shiite majority has come to power."
Were Americans not listening?
"The Shiite Earthquake"
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=9058
Clearly, Noam Chomsky was listening and speaking. In an excerpt from a presentation made prior to the election, Chomsky hypothesizes that as a result of the much-anticipated Shi'ite victory, feelings in the Shi'ite regions of Saudi Arabia might be stirred up and "you might find what in Washington must be the ultimate nightmare-a Shiite region which controls most of the world's oil and is independent."
"The Future of Iraq and U.S. Occupation"
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=9071
However, Chomsky's vision of a Shi'ite region controlling the world's oil contradicts an earlier article by Antonia Juhasz in which she posits that the election might very well lead to American investors and companies obtaining large "chunks of Iraq's national oil company." In Juhasz's analysis, the current Iraqi Finance Minister Abdel Mahdi, who ran for election on the ticket of the leading Shi'ite party, has proposed "to privatize Iraq's oil and put it into American corporate hands."
"Of Oil and Elections"
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=9111
Robert Fisk sees the elections as a "Triumph and Tragedy for Iraq." The triumph--"the sight of those thousands of Shi'ites, the women mostly in black hejab covering, the men in leather jackets or long robes, the children toddling beside them, that took the breath away."
The tragedy--the absence of Sunnis at the polls; "[for] without that vital minority component, who will believe in the new parliament or the constitution it is supposed to produce or the next government it is supposed to create?"
"Triumph and Tragedy for Iraq"
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=9033
James Carroll thinks about the election in Iraq while reflecting on the previous week's train wreck in California where a man drove his Jeep Cherokee onto the railroad tracks. Leaving his SUV, the man watches while an onrushing train "crashed into his SUV, derailed, jackknifed, and hit another train. Railroad cars crumbled. Eleven people were killed and nearly 200 were injured, some gravely. The deranged man was arrested." First reports claimed the man was suicidal, leading Carroll to speculate, "Whatever troubles had made him suicidal in the first place paled in comparison to the trouble he had now." For Carroll,
"Iraq is a train wreck."
"Train Wreck of an Election"
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=9044
Aside from the positive factor of Shi'ites turning out en masse, Phyllis Bennis argues that Iraqis generally will not benefit from the election because:
oThe millions of Iraqis who came out for the elections were voting their hopes for an end to violence and occupation, and a better life; their hopes are not likely to be met.
oGeorge Bush will be the major victor in this election, using it to claim legitimacy for his occupation of Iraq.
oThe election, held under military occupation and not meeting international criteria, including those of the Carter Center, remains illegitimate; legitimacy is not determined by the number of people voting.
oEven the expected victory of Shi'a-led political parties is not likely to result in the new assembly calling for an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops.
oU.S. domination of Iraq 's economic, political and social life will continue through the military occupation and the continuing control of money, the legal system, and political patronage.
oThe U.S. has a long history of using elections held under conditions of war and occupation to legitimize its illegal wars."
"Reading the Iraqi Elections"
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=9051
What is the real meaning of the elections? A "Shi'ite Tsunami"; a tragic loss of Sunni voices; a deeply flawed or corrupt process; a reflection of Iraqis' desire to rid their country of the US occupation; a reckoning over who controls Iraqi oil; or an imperialist exploitation of an occupied people--perhaps, all of these and more.
It well behooves us to recall a New York Times article of September 4, 1967. In that article, Peter Grose recounts that "United States officials were surprised and heartened today at the size of turnout in South
Vietnam's presidential election despite a Vietcong terrorist campaign to disrupt the voting." According to Grose, " A successful election has long been seen as the keystone in President Johnson's policy of encouraging the growth of constitutional processes in South Vietnam...The hope here is that the new government will be able to maneuver with a confidence and legitimacy long lacking in South Vietnamese politics. That hope could have been dashed either by a small turnout, indicating widespread scorn or a lack of interest in constitutional development, or by the Vietcong's disruption of the balloting."
"U.S. Encouraged by Vietnam Vote: Officials Cite 83% Turnout Despite VietCong Terror"
http://patachon.dailykos.com/story/2005/1/31/2335/87390
READ DAHR JAMAIL'S DISPATCHES FROM IRAQ:
http://dahrjamailiraq.com/weblog/
www.occupationwatch.org
5 February 2005
By Marjorie Lasky
THE IRAQI ELECTIONS: WHAT DO THEY MEAN?
On Feb. 4, Borzou Daragahi in Baghdad reports, "Partial results from Sunday's election suggest that U.S.-backed Prime Minister Ayad Allawi's coalition is being roundly defeated by a list with the backing of Iraq's senior Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al- Sistani, diminishing Allawi's chances of retaining his post in the next government. Sharif Ali bin Hussein, head of the Constitutional Monarchy Party, likened the vote outcome to a 'Sistani tsunami' that would shake the nation. 'Americans are in for a shock,' he said, adding that one day they would realize, 'We've got 150,000 troops here protecting a country that's extremely friendly to Iran, and training their troops.'"
"U.S. 'In for a Shock' In Early Election Results, Shiite Cleric's Alliance Trouncing U.S. Favorite"
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=9112
But, is this early result such shocking news? Didn't people throughout the world, including the United States, understand the significance of the Iraqi elections?
To counter the reports in the corporate media and offer analyses on the elections, Occupation Watch sent the following request to several individuals:
"We're writing on behalf of the International Occupation Watch Center with a request for a quick response from you regarding today's election in Iraq. With the blizzard of media stories that will be coming out right after the election (many of them worthless drivel or propaganda), we would like to organize and publish an article that helps people frame the election in the context of the real situation of the Iraqi people and the reality of the occupation."
Among the responses, Imad Khadduri, an Iraqi nuclear scientist based in Canada, writes about rigged elections:
"Why would we conclude anything other than a rigged election, from start to finish? 6o million ballot sheets were flown to Iraq days before the election. If all legitimate voters had participated, they would have needed about 15 million ballots. The Iraqi minister of the interior claims that 8 million participated. Why did they need more than 40 million ballot sheets?
“The people in the three Kurdish provinces had an extra piece of ballot, one with an Iraqi flag and a Kurdish flag, with a place to place your thumb stamp next to either flag. One would assume that this extra polling effort was done with the agreement of whoever is organizing the elections in order to measure the percentage of the people in these three provinces who would support Kurdish independence.
“Why did they not also offer the Iraqi people in all provinces a similar small piece of paper asking the voters whether they wish the occupiers to stay or to leave? That would have been a mandate for the incoming government as representatives of the will of the people. Its absence, in contrast to allowing the above Kurdish paper, is another manifestation of rigging.
“As for the legitimacy of this election, I believe this is the first time in modern times that 7500 candidates, scattered among 257 lists, with at least 6000 of them fearful to declare their names till election day, are offered to people living under armed occupation and a general state of infrastructure paralysis yet are asked to vote, simply to vindicate the morbid figment of George Bush's imagination on the legitimacy of this election."
Tahrir Swift of Arab Media Watch offers several thoughts:
"It is hardly surprising that most Iraqis would like to believe that their voice can have some sort of influence on the events on the ground after years of silence. The real danger comes if they come to realize that the elections made little difference.
“Two things one should be aware of: When the Americans or their stooges talk about withdrawal, they do not mean eradicating the American presence in Iraq.
“Some candidates seem to have promised the Iraqis the earth in a situation that is not totally under their control. The proof as they say is in the pudding!
“The other matter is 25 Iraqi towns and cities that boycotted the elections were ignored by the media.
“There were calls within Iraq for a reconciliation conference after Fallujah, that was rejected by Allawi, the media is not asking why?
“Has Negroponte ceased to be Iraq's real ruler?
“The acid test for the elected government is to stop the privatizations (order 39) and reject the Americans long term military presence.
“For whose benefit is the big hype in the British and American media on the 'elections' celebrations' in Iraq?"
Munir Chalabi of Iraqi Democrats Against Occupation queries:
"Will this be the turning point election? Despite the reservations we all had on the election, millions of enthusiastic Iraqis went to vote by their own free will to choose their future for the first time in their lives. Heavy voting covered the Kurdish and Shia areas. However, there were much lower numbers of voters and enthusiasm within the Sunni communities.
“So is this election going to be the turning point to end the occupation and start an inner Iraqi political process to establish a new democratic Iraq? The answer will depend first on whether or not the CIA and their puppet Allawi will decide to rig the results heavily in their favour. This will cause millions of Iraqis in the south and the centre who have mostly restrained themselves from taking up arms to now do so if the election was rigged.
“But if the US chooses to limit its interference in the election results as part of its new “Exit strategy” then the election could become a turning point to the winners, but not necessarily to the whole of the country.
“The two major winners seem to be the Sistani list, with the Kurdish list following. If the winners show that they have the wisdom and ability to bring together all sectors and religions in Iraq to widen the political process then this will unite all Iraqis in their struggle to end the occupation, stop the blood bath, and build a democratic future. Alternatively, if such a process does not take place then the division between different sectors of Iraqis will increase, resulting in more Iraqi blood being shed and the occupation continuing.
“The cause of such a large turn out was the heavy price paid during the 35 years of Saddam's ruthless repression, the failure of the occupation to improve the standard of living and end the occupation, and a rejection of terrorist organizations that killed thousands of innocent civilians and further destroyed the infrastructure.
“The election has shown that the majority of Iraqis believe that democratic methods are the way to solve the problems facing them and unite them to end the occupation."
Some Iraqis chose not to vote. In an open letter prior to the election, a group of Iraqis explained the significance of the elections and why they weren't voting: "Iraq is being denied free and fair elections, after enduring decades of Saddam's brutal dictatorship. The US and British occupation governments have engineered a process for reproducing the US-appointed Iraqi Interim Government, to prolong the occupation and incite sectarian and ethnic conflicts."
"Iraqis Boycott Election Fraud"
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=9043
Hawra Karama reflects upon why she didn't vote. With a touch of irony, Karama recalls voting in previous one-question elections in which Iraqis were asked to approve Saddam Hussein as their leader. Karama then translates the meaning of the January 31 ballot into a series of questions that should have been but were not asked. These include:
"1. Do you prefer to be tortured by A) American soldiers or
British soldiers; 2. When occupying soldiers stop you on the street, would you rather be strip-searched A) With blindfold or Without blindfold?" Needless to say, Karama had the same reaction to marking the ballot as in the previous two elections; she left the polling place without voting.
"The Iraqi Ballot, Translated"
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=9037
After the election, in contrast to "the blaring trumpets of corporate media hailing [the Iraqi election] as a successful show of 'democracy,' Dahr Jamail maintains that Iraqis voted to end the occupation. Believing that "the National Assembly which will be formed soon will signal an end to the occupation...they expect the call for a withdrawing of foreign forces in their country to come sooner rather than later."
"What They're Not Telling You about the 'Election'"
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=9053
Sabah Jawad agrees that Iraqis voted to end the occupation. In addition, Jawad denounces the elections as being anything but free and fair and argues, "If Iraq's elections had taken place anywhere else, they would have been denounced by the 'international community' as hopelessly flawed. If they had happened in Zimbabwe, they would have been cited by the White House as a reason for 'regime change' and possible invasion." Jawad's rationale:
"o[The election] took place under a state of emergency. The usual practice in authoritarian regimes is to lift a state of emergency during an election in order to give the appearance of normality and free choice. In occupied Iraq, the opposite happened.
oThe election commission was appointed by the US and remains secret.
oThe identity of most of the candidates themselves was also kept hidden.
oOccupation forces and Iraqi police have been pictured putting up posters for the party list of Iyad Allawi, the pro-occupation puppet “interim prime minister”.
oThe international observers sent to monitor the vote in fact didn't set foot in the country and “observed” from Amman in Jordan.
oThen there is the small matter of the brutal repression of people by the occupation. Over 300,000 people were driven from their homes in the city of Fallujah alone."
"The vast majority of Iraqis want the US to get out"
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=9110
Juan Cole also maintains that the elections "were deeply flawed as a democratic process." However, Cole among other analysts recognized, even before the publication of any electoral results, that the elections "represent a political earthquake in Iraq and in the Middle East. The old Shiite seminary city of Najaf, south of Baghdad, appears poised to emerge as Iraq's second capital. For the first time in the Arab Middle East, a Shiite majority has come to power."
Were Americans not listening?
"The Shiite Earthquake"
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=9058
Clearly, Noam Chomsky was listening and speaking. In an excerpt from a presentation made prior to the election, Chomsky hypothesizes that as a result of the much-anticipated Shi'ite victory, feelings in the Shi'ite regions of Saudi Arabia might be stirred up and "you might find what in Washington must be the ultimate nightmare-a Shiite region which controls most of the world's oil and is independent."
"The Future of Iraq and U.S. Occupation"
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=9071
However, Chomsky's vision of a Shi'ite region controlling the world's oil contradicts an earlier article by Antonia Juhasz in which she posits that the election might very well lead to American investors and companies obtaining large "chunks of Iraq's national oil company." In Juhasz's analysis, the current Iraqi Finance Minister Abdel Mahdi, who ran for election on the ticket of the leading Shi'ite party, has proposed "to privatize Iraq's oil and put it into American corporate hands."
"Of Oil and Elections"
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=9111
Robert Fisk sees the elections as a "Triumph and Tragedy for Iraq." The triumph--"the sight of those thousands of Shi'ites, the women mostly in black hejab covering, the men in leather jackets or long robes, the children toddling beside them, that took the breath away."
The tragedy--the absence of Sunnis at the polls; "[for] without that vital minority component, who will believe in the new parliament or the constitution it is supposed to produce or the next government it is supposed to create?"
"Triumph and Tragedy for Iraq"
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=9033
James Carroll thinks about the election in Iraq while reflecting on the previous week's train wreck in California where a man drove his Jeep Cherokee onto the railroad tracks. Leaving his SUV, the man watches while an onrushing train "crashed into his SUV, derailed, jackknifed, and hit another train. Railroad cars crumbled. Eleven people were killed and nearly 200 were injured, some gravely. The deranged man was arrested." First reports claimed the man was suicidal, leading Carroll to speculate, "Whatever troubles had made him suicidal in the first place paled in comparison to the trouble he had now." For Carroll,
"Iraq is a train wreck."
"Train Wreck of an Election"
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=9044
Aside from the positive factor of Shi'ites turning out en masse, Phyllis Bennis argues that Iraqis generally will not benefit from the election because:
oThe millions of Iraqis who came out for the elections were voting their hopes for an end to violence and occupation, and a better life; their hopes are not likely to be met.
oGeorge Bush will be the major victor in this election, using it to claim legitimacy for his occupation of Iraq.
oThe election, held under military occupation and not meeting international criteria, including those of the Carter Center, remains illegitimate; legitimacy is not determined by the number of people voting.
oEven the expected victory of Shi'a-led political parties is not likely to result in the new assembly calling for an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops.
oU.S. domination of Iraq 's economic, political and social life will continue through the military occupation and the continuing control of money, the legal system, and political patronage.
oThe U.S. has a long history of using elections held under conditions of war and occupation to legitimize its illegal wars."
"Reading the Iraqi Elections"
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=9051
What is the real meaning of the elections? A "Shi'ite Tsunami"; a tragic loss of Sunni voices; a deeply flawed or corrupt process; a reflection of Iraqis' desire to rid their country of the US occupation; a reckoning over who controls Iraqi oil; or an imperialist exploitation of an occupied people--perhaps, all of these and more.
It well behooves us to recall a New York Times article of September 4, 1967. In that article, Peter Grose recounts that "United States officials were surprised and heartened today at the size of turnout in South
Vietnam's presidential election despite a Vietcong terrorist campaign to disrupt the voting." According to Grose, " A successful election has long been seen as the keystone in President Johnson's policy of encouraging the growth of constitutional processes in South Vietnam...The hope here is that the new government will be able to maneuver with a confidence and legitimacy long lacking in South Vietnamese politics. That hope could have been dashed either by a small turnout, indicating widespread scorn or a lack of interest in constitutional development, or by the Vietcong's disruption of the balloting."
"U.S. Encouraged by Vietnam Vote: Officials Cite 83% Turnout Despite VietCong Terror"
http://patachon.dailykos.com/story/2005/1/31/2335/87390
READ DAHR JAMAIL'S DISPATCHES FROM IRAQ:
http://dahrjamailiraq.com/weblog/
Iraq Sunnis demand US exit timetable as price for rejoining ...
Turkish Press, Turkey - 5 hours ago
BAGHDAD (AFP) - Iraq's leading Sunni clerics group demanded a timetable for the withdrawal of foreign troops as the price of their participation in drawing up ...
http://www.turkishpress.com/world/news.asp...16.uo0nm01z.xml
Turkish Press, Turkey - 5 hours ago
BAGHDAD (AFP) - Iraq's leading Sunni clerics group demanded a timetable for the withdrawal of foreign troops as the price of their participation in drawing up ...
http://www.turkishpress.com/world/news.asp...16.uo0nm01z.xml
Top Iraq Shiites Exert Influence on Constitution
New York Times - 8 hours ago
By EDWARD WONG. NAJAF, Iraq, Feb. ... But the clerics of Najaf, the holiest city of Shiite Islam, have emerged as the greatest power in the new Iraq. ...
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/06/internat.../06shiites.html
New York Times - 8 hours ago
By EDWARD WONG. NAJAF, Iraq, Feb. ... But the clerics of Najaf, the holiest city of Shiite Islam, have emerged as the greatest power in the new Iraq. ...
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/06/internat.../06shiites.html
Iraq police find eight slain officers
Big News Network.com, Australia - 2 hours ago
Police said seven of the men had been shot in the forehead at point-blank range, and the eighth had been beheaded. The bodies were ...
http://feeds.bignewsnetwork.com/?rid=11b06...8de8e630faf3631
Big News Network.com, Australia - 2 hours ago
Police said seven of the men had been shot in the forehead at point-blank range, and the eighth had been beheaded. The bodies were ...
http://feeds.bignewsnetwork.com/?rid=11b06...8de8e630faf3631
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A...anguage=printer
Top Shiite Welcomes Overtures by Sunnis
Top Shiite Welcomes Overtures by Sunnis
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/06/internat...d5de8c9&ei=5070
Cheney Turns Aside Concerns on Emerging Iraqi Government
Cheney Turns Aside Concerns on Emerging Iraqi Government
Iraqi resistance have killed 21 Iraqis and two US soldiers in recent assaults, showing there has been no respite in the fight against US-led forces and their allies since Sunday’s election.
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?p..._6-2-2005_pg7_1
http://tinyurl.com/3tn8m
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?p..._6-2-2005_pg7_1
http://tinyurl.com/3tn8m
Iraqi Shia leaders demand Islam be the source of law:
Iraq’s Shia leader Grand Ayatollah Ali Al Sistani and another top cleric on Sunday staked out a demand that Islam be the sole source of legislation in the country’s new constitution.
http://tinyurl.com/5ths6
Iraq’s Shia leader Grand Ayatollah Ali Al Sistani and another top cleric on Sunday staked out a demand that Islam be the sole source of legislation in the country’s new constitution.
http://tinyurl.com/5ths6
Sadr Group Says Future Government “Illegitimate” :
“In Mr. Sadr’s words: ‘The occupiers are doctoring the election results,’ and therefore we don’t believe in the fairness of the polls,” he added.
http://www.islam-online.net/English/News/2...article02.shtml
http://tinyurl.com/4kdjt
“In Mr. Sadr’s words: ‘The occupiers are doctoring the election results,’ and therefore we don’t believe in the fairness of the polls,” he added.
http://www.islam-online.net/English/News/2...article02.shtml
http://tinyurl.com/4kdjt
Kurds accused of rigging Kirkuk vote:
Turkmen and Arab political parties in the Iraqi city of Kirkuk have accused Kurds of fixing the result of provincial elections held on the 30 January.
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/563...91377A4FB19.htm
http://tinyurl.com/6ag4h
Turkmen and Arab political parties in the Iraqi city of Kirkuk have accused Kurds of fixing the result of provincial elections held on the 30 January.
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/563...91377A4FB19.htm
http://tinyurl.com/6ag4h
"Iranians Would Rather Fight in Baghdad, Than in Tehran"
Sistani's Triumph; Allawi's Bust
http://www.counterpunch.org/patrick02052005.html
Sistani's Triumph; Allawi's Bust
http://www.counterpunch.org/patrick02052005.html
--------------------
Iraqi Cleric Takes Center Stage
--------------------
Having guided a Shiite alliance to likely victory, Grand Ayatollah Sistani is in a position to mold the new government and the constitution.
By Alissa J. Rubin
Times Staff Writer
February 6 2005
BAGHDAD — Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, the black-turbaned cleric who was the architect of what appears to be a landslide victory by Shiite Muslims in last week's landmark Iraqi elections, is now poised to shape the new government, including its choice of prime minister and the drafting of the country's constitution.
The complete article can be viewed at:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/wo...0,4830513.story
Iraqi Cleric Takes Center Stage
--------------------
Having guided a Shiite alliance to likely victory, Grand Ayatollah Sistani is in a position to mold the new government and the constitution.
By Alissa J. Rubin
Times Staff Writer
February 6 2005
BAGHDAD — Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, the black-turbaned cleric who was the architect of what appears to be a landslide victory by Shiite Muslims in last week's landmark Iraqi elections, is now poised to shape the new government, including its choice of prime minister and the drafting of the country's constitution.
The complete article can be viewed at:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/wo...0,4830513.story
--------------------
Miles of Barren Desert Dotted With Smugglers, Insurgents
--------------------
As Washington accuses Syria of providing a haven to militants, Marines try to halt the flow of fighters and weapons into Iraq.
By Tony Perry
Times Staff Writer
February 7 2005
QAIM, Iraq — This is Iraq's wild west, where for a year Marines have fought a relentless battle with insurgents and smugglers along hundreds of miles of barren desert that is the unmarked border with Syria.
The complete article can be viewed at:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/wo...headlines-world
Miles of Barren Desert Dotted With Smugglers, Insurgents
--------------------
As Washington accuses Syria of providing a haven to militants, Marines try to halt the flow of fighters and weapons into Iraq.
By Tony Perry
Times Staff Writer
February 7 2005
QAIM, Iraq — This is Iraq's wild west, where for a year Marines have fought a relentless battle with insurgents and smugglers along hundreds of miles of barren desert that is the unmarked border with Syria.
The complete article can be viewed at:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/wo...headlines-world
U.S. Officials Say a Theocratic Iraq Is Unlikely
By ERIC SCHMITT
Vice President Dick Cheney said Grand Ayatollah Ali
al-Sistani opposed direct clerical involvement in governing.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/07/politics/07diplo.html?th
By ERIC SCHMITT
Vice President Dick Cheney said Grand Ayatollah Ali
al-Sistani opposed direct clerical involvement in governing.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/07/politics/07diplo.html?th
U.S. Officials Say a Theocratic Iraq Is Unlikely
By ERIC SCHMITT
Vice President Dick Cheney said Grand Ayatollah Ali
al-Sistani opposed direct clerical involvement in governing.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/07/politics/07diplo.html?th
By ERIC SCHMITT
Vice President Dick Cheney said Grand Ayatollah Ali
al-Sistani opposed direct clerical involvement in governing.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/07/politics/07diplo.html?th
TODAY'S EDITORIALS
Building on Iraq's Election
Iraq's historic vote has not solved the significant problem
of Sunni alienation from the political process.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/07/opinion/7mon1.html?th
Building on Iraq's Election
Iraq's historic vote has not solved the significant problem
of Sunni alienation from the political process.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/07/opinion/7mon1.html?th
Suicide Bombings Kill 27 in Iraq
http://enews.voanews.com/t?ctl=B6FFC0:2F72C9D
Attacks in Baquba, Mosul target Iraqi police, who have been the most
frequent victims of terrorist activity
Blood stain is seen on the ground at the scene of a suicide bombing in
Mosul, Iraq Two suicide bombers killed at least 27 people in two Iraqi
cities, on the deadliest day since Iraq's elections just more than a
week ago. The number of attacks nationwide declined in the days
following the poll, but the last two days have seen a resumption of
the violence.
The deadliest attack came in the town of Baquba, 50 kilometers
northeast of Baghdad. A car bomb exploded near a police station, where
reports say a large crowd of people were waiting to enlist in the
police force. It was not immediately clear how many of the dead were
police recruits and how many were civilians.
In the northern city of Mosul, a man wearing an explosive-laden vest
walked into a crowd of police officers on a hospital compound and blew
himself up, killing 12.
The al-Qaida group in Iraq claimed responsibility for both attacks in
an Internet statement. The group is led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the
Jordanian-born militant who carries a $25-million-bounty on his head.
The attacks in Baquba and Mosul targeted Iraqi police, who have been
the most frequent victims of terrorist activity in Iraq. Scores of
police officers have died in the line of duty, and many officers try
to conceal their identity so they will not be targeted
But police officials say that since the election, they are receiving
more tips from Iraqi citizens, allowing them to make inroads in the
fight against the insurgency.
Baghdad merchant Salem Mustafa says the police have been fighting an
uphill battle.
"I think they need more support from the people. I think they need
some experience," he said.
The relative calm that followed the January 30 election has been
repeatedly shattered during the past several days, but the two suicide
bombings made this the deadliest day since voters defied insurgent
threats and went to the polls.
Most of the attacks have taken place far from Baghdad, though, and the
streets of the Iraqi capital have remained relatively calm. Several
Western newspapers have run stories about what they call the changed
mood in Baghdad since the election, a feeling that life has returned
to something closer to normal.
But five foreigners have been kidnapped in Baghdad during the past few
days, and many residents are still on guard. Baghdad University
political science student Rana Fadhil is one of them.
She said, "I think the security situation has not completely changed,
but there has been a partial change. We are still hearing about car
bombs and roadside bombs and kidnappings, but I think it is a little
better than before."
http://enews.voanews.com/t?ctl=B6FFC0:2F72C9D
Attacks in Baquba, Mosul target Iraqi police, who have been the most
frequent victims of terrorist activity
Blood stain is seen on the ground at the scene of a suicide bombing in
Mosul, Iraq Two suicide bombers killed at least 27 people in two Iraqi
cities, on the deadliest day since Iraq's elections just more than a
week ago. The number of attacks nationwide declined in the days
following the poll, but the last two days have seen a resumption of
the violence.
The deadliest attack came in the town of Baquba, 50 kilometers
northeast of Baghdad. A car bomb exploded near a police station, where
reports say a large crowd of people were waiting to enlist in the
police force. It was not immediately clear how many of the dead were
police recruits and how many were civilians.
In the northern city of Mosul, a man wearing an explosive-laden vest
walked into a crowd of police officers on a hospital compound and blew
himself up, killing 12.
The al-Qaida group in Iraq claimed responsibility for both attacks in
an Internet statement. The group is led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the
Jordanian-born militant who carries a $25-million-bounty on his head.
The attacks in Baquba and Mosul targeted Iraqi police, who have been
the most frequent victims of terrorist activity in Iraq. Scores of
police officers have died in the line of duty, and many officers try
to conceal their identity so they will not be targeted
But police officials say that since the election, they are receiving
more tips from Iraqi citizens, allowing them to make inroads in the
fight against the insurgency.
Baghdad merchant Salem Mustafa says the police have been fighting an
uphill battle.
"I think they need more support from the people. I think they need
some experience," he said.
The relative calm that followed the January 30 election has been
repeatedly shattered during the past several days, but the two suicide
bombings made this the deadliest day since voters defied insurgent
threats and went to the polls.
Most of the attacks have taken place far from Baghdad, though, and the
streets of the Iraqi capital have remained relatively calm. Several
Western newspapers have run stories about what they call the changed
mood in Baghdad since the election, a feeling that life has returned
to something closer to normal.
But five foreigners have been kidnapped in Baghdad during the past few
days, and many residents are still on guard. Baghdad University
political science student Rana Fadhil is one of them.
She said, "I think the security situation has not completely changed,
but there has been a partial change. We are still hearing about car
bombs and roadside bombs and kidnappings, but I think it is a little
better than before."
Iraqi Shiites Leaders say Islam Should Guide Constitution
http://enews.voanews.com/t?ctl=B6FFC1:2F72C9D
Clerics warn values and traditions of Koran must form foundation for
any government
A man holds up a flag with Koranic scripture on it, as worshippers
give Friday prayers at the Qufa Mosque near Najaf in IraqIn a
statement, a representative of Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Ishaq al-Fayad
warns that Shi'ite clerics will not accept a constitution that
separates church and state. The statement said Islamic values and
traditions as outlined in the Koran must form the foundation of any
Iraqi government.
Grand Ayatollah Fayad is one of five Najaf-based religious leaders,
known collectively as the marjaiya. The marjaiya is led by the
reclusive Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, who cemented his stature as
the most powerful man in Iraq after last Sunday's historic elections.
Election officials are still counting the ballots. But based on
partial results, it is clear that, despite insurgent threats, an
overwhelming number of Shi'ites followed Ayatollah Sistani's
instructions to vote. And millions of those who went to the polls cast
their ballots for the Sistani-endorsed coalition, known as the United
Iraqi Alliance.
Shi'ite politicians within the alliance are now poised to take as many
as 135 seats in the new 275-member transitional assembly, which is
charged with appointing an interim government and drafting a
constitution.
The five leading Shi'ite clerics have said that they have no intention
of taking office themselves. But the marjaiya has also stated its
intention to shape the constitution through Shi'ite politicians.
A member of Iraq's former royal family, Ali bin Hussein, led a secular
slate of Sunni Arab and Shi'ite candidates in the elections,
supporting the establishment of a British-style constitutional
monarchy.
In an interview with VOA, Mr. Hussein expressed concern that Shi'ite
religious leaders are becoming so confident of a large mandate for the
United Iraqi Alliance, they are now in danger of alienating Iraqis who
do not share the clerics' vision of an Islamic state. "We are passing
the message that they should be cautious when dealing with the rest of
Iraq. It is important that we ensure that all communities, whether
they be Sunnis or secular Shi'ites, have a say in the writing of the
constitution. It really has to reflect the balance of political power
in Iraq with enough flexibility, so that the fears of different
communities are allayed. The victory of the alliance causes great
concern among other Iraqis, because it implies dictatorship of the
majority and demagoguery, which makes everybody very nervous," he
said.
Meanwhile, a group comprised of more than eight-thousand Iraqis who
monitored last Sunday's elections says, overall, they believe the
balloting was conducted freely and fairly in most areas of the
country.
The group, Iraqi Election Information Network, made an exception for
the turbulent northern city of Mosul, where tens-of-thousands of
people, mainly Iraqi Christians and Turkmen, say they were unable to
vote.
Electoral commission officials acknowledge that security concerns
prevented many polling sites from opening in Mosul. Some of those that
did open could not be supplied with ballots and other election
materials.
The acting director of the monitoring group, Ali al-Dabbagh, said the
observers have recommended that the Iraqi Electoral Commission give
the people in Mosul, who could not vote, a second chance. "Because of
the irregularities, and because people were deprived of their right of
voting, we just request, is there a possibility for them to vote later
on, to prepare an annex or something. We have forwarded the request,
and we hope that they will answer our request and let those people
vote. They're so keen about voting," he said.
Earlier this week, electoral commission officials said that there was
little hope that elections could be held to rectify voting problems in
Mosul and elsewhere, where complaints have emerged.
http://enews.voanews.com/t?ctl=B6FFC1:2F72C9D
Clerics warn values and traditions of Koran must form foundation for
any government
A man holds up a flag with Koranic scripture on it, as worshippers
give Friday prayers at the Qufa Mosque near Najaf in IraqIn a
statement, a representative of Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Ishaq al-Fayad
warns that Shi'ite clerics will not accept a constitution that
separates church and state. The statement said Islamic values and
traditions as outlined in the Koran must form the foundation of any
Iraqi government.
Grand Ayatollah Fayad is one of five Najaf-based religious leaders,
known collectively as the marjaiya. The marjaiya is led by the
reclusive Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, who cemented his stature as
the most powerful man in Iraq after last Sunday's historic elections.
Election officials are still counting the ballots. But based on
partial results, it is clear that, despite insurgent threats, an
overwhelming number of Shi'ites followed Ayatollah Sistani's
instructions to vote. And millions of those who went to the polls cast
their ballots for the Sistani-endorsed coalition, known as the United
Iraqi Alliance.
Shi'ite politicians within the alliance are now poised to take as many
as 135 seats in the new 275-member transitional assembly, which is
charged with appointing an interim government and drafting a
constitution.
The five leading Shi'ite clerics have said that they have no intention
of taking office themselves. But the marjaiya has also stated its
intention to shape the constitution through Shi'ite politicians.
A member of Iraq's former royal family, Ali bin Hussein, led a secular
slate of Sunni Arab and Shi'ite candidates in the elections,
supporting the establishment of a British-style constitutional
monarchy.
In an interview with VOA, Mr. Hussein expressed concern that Shi'ite
religious leaders are becoming so confident of a large mandate for the
United Iraqi Alliance, they are now in danger of alienating Iraqis who
do not share the clerics' vision of an Islamic state. "We are passing
the message that they should be cautious when dealing with the rest of
Iraq. It is important that we ensure that all communities, whether
they be Sunnis or secular Shi'ites, have a say in the writing of the
constitution. It really has to reflect the balance of political power
in Iraq with enough flexibility, so that the fears of different
communities are allayed. The victory of the alliance causes great
concern among other Iraqis, because it implies dictatorship of the
majority and demagoguery, which makes everybody very nervous," he
said.
Meanwhile, a group comprised of more than eight-thousand Iraqis who
monitored last Sunday's elections says, overall, they believe the
balloting was conducted freely and fairly in most areas of the
country.
The group, Iraqi Election Information Network, made an exception for
the turbulent northern city of Mosul, where tens-of-thousands of
people, mainly Iraqi Christians and Turkmen, say they were unable to
vote.
Electoral commission officials acknowledge that security concerns
prevented many polling sites from opening in Mosul. Some of those that
did open could not be supplied with ballots and other election
materials.
The acting director of the monitoring group, Ali al-Dabbagh, said the
observers have recommended that the Iraqi Electoral Commission give
the people in Mosul, who could not vote, a second chance. "Because of
the irregularities, and because people were deprived of their right of
voting, we just request, is there a possibility for them to vote later
on, to prepare an annex or something. We have forwarded the request,
and we hope that they will answer our request and let those people
vote. They're so keen about voting," he said.
Earlier this week, electoral commission officials said that there was
little hope that elections could be held to rectify voting problems in
Mosul and elsewhere, where complaints have emerged.
NEWS TRANSCRIPT from the United States Department of Defense
DoD News Briefing
Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld
Sunday, February 6, 2005 - 9:00 a.m. EST
MR. RUSSERT: First, joining us now on "Meet the Press" is the
secretary of defense, Donald Rumsfeld. Welcome back.
SEC. RUMSFELD: Thank you, sir.
MR. RUSSERT: The elections have been held, as we well know. The early
counting seems to indicate the Shi'ites have done very, very well in the election.
The headline in the Sunday New York Times, Mr. Secretary, "Top Iraq Shi'ites
Pushing Religion in Constitution" -- that they want to use Islam as the guiding
principle in drafting the constitution. How do you feel about that?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Well, a lot of states that have a predominantly Muslim
population have a way of including that without having it dominate. And certainly
if you would look at Afghanistan, that's the case there. I think that of all the
headlines I've seen, that's not the one I would have cited. I would have cited the
ones that point out that all of the people who were involved in the election are
reaching out to the Sunnis, are in fact engaged in political discussions and
negotiations. Think of it -- in Iraq, after 35 years of a repressive dictatorship,
what we're hearing is political debate and discussion and who should be prime
minister and who should be president and deputy president, and how should this work and how should we sort that out and who's going to fashion the constitution.
That's thrilling. That is absolutely thrilling.
I would say this: The Shi'ia in Iraq are Iraqis. They're not
Iranians. And the idea that they're going to end up with a government like Iran,
with a handful of mullahs controlling much of the country I think is unlikely.
MR. RUSSERT: But when they say that they would like to have a
constitution which says that daughters would get half the inheritance of sons, do
you find that troubling for all the bloodshed we have spilled for Iraq?
SEC. RUMSFELD: The first thing we have to begin with is that Iraq
belongs to the Iraqis. And the Iraqis are going to have a solution for Iraq that's
an Iraqi solution. They're not going to have an American solution or an Afghan
solution. And the wonderful thing that's taking place is that the great sweep of
human history is for freedom. And we're seeing it in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in the
Palestinian Liberation Authority, in the Ukraine, in Indonesia. And what's
happening is healthy. It's good.
Look at our Constitution when it was first fashioned. Look what it did
with respect to women not voting. Look what it did with respect to blacks and the
way they were counted in the population. So you don't get from where they were to where they're going "on a feather bed," as Thomas Jefferson said. You get there through tough discussion, trials, error, mistakes, good things. And they're on
that path, and I think people ought to step back and say, Isn't that amazing?
Isn't that a wonderful thing for that region?
MR. RUSSERT: If they decide that they do not want Prime Minister
Allawi to remain as prime minister, we would accept that?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Well, it isn't a matter of accepting it or not
accepting it. The Iraqis had a vote. They're going to decide who the president
and the deputy presidents are going to be. They're going to decide who the prime
minister is going to be. They're going to decide who the ministers of these
various ministries are going to be. That's what that's about.
MR. RUSSERT: One of the Iraqis said this -- he's the head of the
Constitutional Monarchy Party: "Americans are in for a shock," adding that one day they would realize, quote, "We've got 150,000 troops here protecting a country
that's extremely friendly to Iran."
SEC. RUMSFELD: You know, I could go to the press, and I could pull out
a quote on almost any side of every issue. And your question is what do I think
about that particular quote. First of all, I don't think it's representative.
Second, I'm always amazed at the things that can happen in the world, and I don't
doubt for a minute that there are going to be some surprises for everybody. Third,
let's face it, Afghanistan has Iran as a neighbor, and they talk to each other.
Most countries do talk to their neighbors. And that's a very different thing from
suggesting that the model that Iran has is necessarily going to be the model for
Iraq. I don't believe it is. I think the Shi'ia in Iraq are Iraqis first and
Shi'ia second. And just as in Afghanistan, you don't see Mr. Karzai fashioning a
government that's a replica of one of his neighbors. He's got an Afghan solution
to his problems.
MR. RUSSERT: So you're confident that we will not have an Islamic
fundamentalist state in Iraq?
SEC. RUMSFELD: I think it would be just an enormous mistake for that
country to think that it could succeed with all of its opportunity, with its oil,
its water, its intelligent population -- to deny half of their population, women,
the opportunity to participate fully, I think, just would be a terrible mistake.
MR. RUSSERT: Our next guest, Senator Kennedy, has said now that the
elections are over, we should have a specific timetable for the withdrawal of
American troops. The president said that would embolden the terrorists. Why?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Well, first of all, let's point out the truth. The
president and I and anyone would dearly love to be smart enough and wise enough to know precisely when our troops could leave. It would be such a relief for people to know that. It's not knowable. The important thing to do is to see that we do not create a dependency, that we encourage them to take over that responsibility. And our forces are doing that. We're helping to train and equip the Iraqi security forces. And the president believes, and I agree with him, that we don't want to be there any longer than we have to, but we want to be there as long as we're needed. And it seems to me that the answer as to when our troops can come out is dependent upon the conditions on the ground and whether or not the Iraqis are capable of managing the security situation there. We're working very hard to see that they can.
MR. RUSSERT: RUSSERT: Why not give the Iraqis benchmarks that in six
months, we're going to withdraw 50,000 troops -- you better have 50,000 troops
ready to replace them?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Because we've been -- our country has invested a lot of
lives, a lot of heartbreak. The courage of our troops and the sacrifice of those
that have fallen and were wounded is important. And the idea that you should just
arbitrarily say this is going to happen on that date -- think of it, the last
administration did that in Bosnia. They said we'd be out by Christmas. Six,
eight, 10 years later, not out. It is misleading people to think that you know
something you don't know. And we know we don't know.
MR. RUSSERT: Did you believe two years ago that at this stage of the
war we would have 135,000 Americans on the ground, 1,400 dead, 10,000 wounded or injured?
SEC. RUMSFELD: We were asked, and at that time we told the truth. And
the truth was you can't know how long it'll last, you can't know how many troops
it'll take, and you can't know how many dead and wounded there would be. No one in any war has ever been able to predict that. People who do predict it make a terrible mistake, because they set expectations based on nothing but hope.
MR. RUSSERT: One area that has created a lot of debate is the number
of Iraqi forces that are now ready and trained and available. The chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, Richard Myers, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that only about a third of Iraq's 136,000 trained security forces have enough training to engage in combat with insurgents. As he says, quote, "40,000 who can go anywhere in the country and take on any threat. He used the figure 136,000 security forces, big umbrella. This is what Donald Rumsfeld said in February of last year, a year ago: "I would say there's not been a slowness in forming the Iraqi security forces. Indeed, if you think about it, last June or July there were no Iraqi security forces, and today, in February of 2004, there are over 210,000 Iraqis
serving in the security forces. That's an amazing accomplishment." How did we get from 210,000 a year ago --
SEC. RUMSFELD: Very simply. There are people that are trying to make
this more complex, for whatever reason, than it is. It's not complex. It's
simple. We did start with zero, and we ended up over 200,000, and that included
74,000 site protection people. Those people did not report to the Ministry of
Interior or to the Ministry of Defense. When we took that number out of the 200
(thousand), it went down, obviously, and we no longer include them. Every paper we put out has a footnote stating exactly why that's the case.
Now, let's go to Dick Myers' comment. We have 136,000 Iraqi security
forces, excluding the 70,000-plus in the site protection, and they are in the
Ministry of Interior, the Ministry of Defense, and there's a lot of different
types. Some are policemen and they walk a beat. Some are border patrol and they sit on a border in a patrol place. Others are in commando units and they operate in a region and go in on special assignments. Still others are in the regular army, and they're being trained for that type of function. A small number of them -- as Dick Myers said, something like 40,000 -- are highly mobile, can move anywhere in the country and be sustained.
Now, would you -- he answered the question perfectly honestly. We have
136,000. The implication that the rest are not useful is silly. It's nonsense.
The policeman on the beat outside your office doesn't need to be mobile and
sustainable and go into Los Angeles.
MR. RUSSERT: Senator Joe Biden says 40,000 is not an honest number,
that it's more like 4,000 truly trained Iraqi forces that can take on the
insurgents. Is he right?
SEC. RUMSFELD: He's wrong, obviously. I mean, General Petraeus put
this out very clearly in a press briefing and laid it out. When I say Senator
Biden is wrong, what I mean is this: When you train some people to be policemen,
they're very good policemen, and that's part of the Iraqi security forces. If you
train them to go after the -- do a counterterrorism job, then that's a very
different function, and we have a certain number of those. And we announce and
release the number of those. But that's true of our military. We have people who
are -- whose job is military police. We have people whose job is to be part of a
special operations team that can go in and do counterterrorism-type activities. We
have people who do entirely different things. And that, to suggest that therefore
the numbers are wrong is incorrect.
The other thing I should say is talking numbers is not terribly useful
always, because if a person comes out of training the first day, they're not a
battle-hardened veteran. They are trained and they are equipped. You compare them with somebody who's been out a year, who's been in Fallujah and had a success there, or been involved in the election, where the Iraqi security forces
successfully secured 5,000 election sites. The inner perimeter and the outer
perimeter were all Iraqis doing that at 5,000 sites. Now, that was a major
accomplishment. And I think to belittle them or to question the numbers because
some do police work and some do counterterrorism work is a misunderstanding of the situation.
MR. RUSSERT: How many Iraqi security forces do we need fully trained
and capable of fighting insurgents?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Well, the answer to that question is not complicated.
We need as many as are needed. If you have an insurgency that's this level, you'll need X. If you have an insurgency that's that level, you'll need X-plus. And if you have an insurgency that's quite low, you'll need X-minus. And to think that
you can sit here today and -- I mean, no one predicted the level of the insurgency
as it is today. Partly it's a function of money. Partly it's a function of what
the Syrians and the Iranians are doing. Partly it's a function of how many
criminals they can hire to participate. Partly it's a function of how much money
Zarqawi gets to hire suicide bombers. And that goes up and down.
MR. RUSSERT: But right now, knowing what you know about the
insurgency, how many fully trained Iraqi troops do you think we need in order for
the United States to withdraw?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Okay, what we've done is we made an initial assessment when the major combat operations ended. Six months later we sent in General Eichenberry and he made an assessment. General Casey then went in last June and made an assessment. We just sent in General Luck, and what we do is keep looking at the changing circumstance on the ground and reevaluating what that ought to be. You've got to remember the enemy has a brain. It isn't as though the enemy's an inanimate object and that you can then measure what you need to deal with that inanimate object. He watches what we do and adjusts to it, just as we watch what they do and adjust to it. And, therefore, it's a moving target. It's not static.
MR. RUSSERT: The Iraqi intelligence services director said that the
insurgency is larger than the U.S. Army -- it is more than 200,000 people. Is he
right?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Who said that?
MR. RUSSERT: Mohammad Abdul Sussami, the Iraqi Intelligence Service
director, on January 3rd, 2005. He's a general.
SEC. RUMSFELD: I've never seen that number, and I don't know where it
came from.
MR. RUSSERT: It's a lot larger than the dead-enders that you had
talked about some time ago.
SEC. RUMSFELD: I talked about it?
MR. RUSSERT: Yes.
SEC. RUMSFELD: I think I've always characterized it as a mix of
people. There are some Ba'athists who are dead-enders, that's true. There are
some jihadists who've come in from other countries, and Zarqawi and that team of
people who are particularly lethal. There are criminals. There are always -- I've
always included --
MR. RUSSERT: But in June of 2003, we were talking about small
elements, 10 to 20 people, no large network.
SEC. RUMSFELD: That's what they were functioning as during that period
immediately after the major combat operations. That's right. And the insurgency
has --
MR. RUSSERT: And it's changed?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Absolutely. That's why we keep sending in assessment
teams.
MR. RUSSERT: Let me turn to what we need on the ground right now.
About 40 to 45 percent of our troops are National Guard and Army Reserve. The head of the Army Reserve said that we are rapidly degenerating, quote, "into a broken force." He's worried about retention, recruitment. The National Guard has reached only half its goal in January in terms of retention and recruitment. The Marine Corps for the first time in a decade has not reached its recruiting goal. Will it be necessary to say to the National Guard, You may have to serve another 24 months -- not just the original 24 months that we sent you, but we may break you and have to send you back again?
SEC. RUMSFELD: We have no plans to do -- to change the rulings and the
methods that we're operating on at the present time. For the first time we've
begun to see some goals and targets not being fulfilled. And but generally
recruiting and retention has been on track and is today generally on track.
One of the reasons that the National Guard and the Reserves are
slightly down is because we're enlarging the size of the Army and in that process
more people are staying in. And one of the pools that you draw on to build the
Guard and Reserve is people coming off active duty, as you know. So there's fewer people coming off active duty. Therefore, we've increased the number of
recruiters, we've increased the incentives, and we just simply have to recognize
that the stress on the force is real, and take the kinds of steps that we've taken
to anticipate that and see that we're able to attract and retain the people we
need. We have still only used about 40 percent of the Guard and Reserve that's
available in this country, since the beginning of the Afghan operation.
MR. RUSSERT: So you have no plans to change the rules in terms of
extending tours?
SEC. RUMSFELD: No, the rules -- there's been a debate in the press
about whether you wanted to change 24 months to cumulative or consecutive, and it's being left at consecutive, not cumulative.
MR. RUSSERT: Let me show you some comments that some have made --
SEC. RUMSFELD: Or cumulative. I misspoke.
MR. RUSSERT: Yeah, I understand. Some things that members of Congress has said. This is Susan Collins, a Republican -- not a Democrat, a Republican: "I think there are increasing concerns about the secretary's leadership of the war, the repeated failures to predict the strengths of the insurgency, the lack of essential safety equipment for our troops, the reluctance to expand the number of troops." I want to talk -- we've talked about insurgency. I want to bring you back to the whole debate about the use of essential safety equipment for our troops, and take you back to December -- we haven't seen you since then -- when Thomas Wilson stood up and asked you a question. I want to show you that exchange and come back and talk about it.
Q Now, why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for
pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to up-armor our vehicles and
why don't we have those resources readily available to us?
SEC. RUMSFELD: As you know, you go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time. And if you think about it, you can have all the armor in the world on a tank and a tank can be blown up. And you can have an up-armored humvee and it can be blown up.
MR. RUSSERT: Now, Specialist Wilson did acknowledge he worked with a
journalist in crafting that question.
SEC. RUMSFELD: Yeah, but wait a minute. Let me get into this a little
bit.
MR. RUSSERT: Sure.
SEC. RUMSFELD: That was unfair and it was selectively taking out two
sentences from a long exchange -- there it is -- that took place. And when you
suggested that that's how I answered that question, that is factually wrong. That
is not how I answered that question.
MR. RUSSERT: But, Mr. Secretary, it clearly represents the exchange
between --
SEC. RUMSFELD: It does not.
MR. RUSSERT: All right,what is missing?
SEC. RUMSFELD: You want to hear the exchange? There is it. It's
right here. I'll read it to you. If you're going to quote pieces of it, I'll give
you the exchange. He asked that question, and I said, "I talked to the general
coming out here about the pace at which the vehicles are being armored. They have been brought from all over the world, wherever they're not needed, to places where they are needed. I'm told they are being -- the Army is -- I think it's something like 400 a month are being done now. And it's essentially a matter of physics. It's not a matter of money. It isn't a matter on the part of the Army's desire. It's a matter of production and capability of doing it. As you know, you go to the war with the Army you have. They're not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time.
"Since the Iraq conflict began, the Army has been pressing ahead to
produce armor necessary at a rate that they believe -- it's a greatly expanded rate
from what existed previously but a rate that they believe is the rate that can be
accomplished. I can assure you that General Schoomaker and the leadership of the Army and certainly General Whitcomb are sensitive to the fact that not every
vehicle has the degree of armor that would be desirable to have, but that they're
working at it at a good clip. It's interesting. I've talked a great deal about
this with a team of people who've been working hard at the Pentagon. And if you
think about it, you can have all the armor in the world on a tank and the tank
could still be blown up. And you can have an up-armored humvee and it can be blown up. And you can go down and the vehicle -- the goal we have is to have many of those vehicles as is humanly possible with the appropriate level of armor available for the troops. And that's what the Army's been working on. And, General Whitcomb, is there anything you want to add?" And then he spoke.
Now, that answer is totally different from picking out two lines. And
I think it's an unfair representative -- and it's exactly what some of the
newspapers around the country did.
Now, let's go back to Susan Collins' comment, Senator Collins --
MR. RUSSERT: Well, let me just finish on the humvees because --
SEC. RUMSFELD: You bet. I'll tell you right now where we are. By
February 15th, nine days from now, there will not be a vehicle moving around in
Iraq outside of a protected compound with American soldiers in it that does not
have an appropriate level of armor.
MR. RUSSERT: Which is a pretty dramatic change, because Newsweek had said that of the 19,000 humvees in the Iraqi theater, according to the Army's
latest numbers, only a quarter were fully armored. So the fact is that Specialist
Wilson's question in front of his troops in which he was cheered was helpful in
getting people to truly focus and respond to this. Fair?
SEC. RUMSFELD: I didn't criticize his question. I thanked him for his
question.
MR. RUSSERT: No, but is that a fair statement?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Well, you saw my answer. We'd already been focusing on it -- hard. I mean, I answered it by saying we had teams of people in Washington working on it, General Whitcomb was working on it.
Let's go back to Senator Collins. You said that she was critical
because we couldn't predict the size of the insurgency. That is the job for the
intelligence community. And it is unfortunate that we don't have perfect
visibility into that. It is also unfortunate that it's changing and evolving, and
therefore easy to say, Well, you don't know what the size is because the size is
changing, but the fact of the matter is it's a difficult thing to do. And I
suppose someone can sit back in an air-conditioned room and be critical of it, but
the fact is the intelligence community is working as hard as they know how to try
to manage those serious questions about what the size is.
Second, to say that I've resisted increasing the size of the Army is
factually incorrect. We've increased the size of the Army. We've been doing it
under the emergency authority. The Congress -- some of the people in the Congress have wanted to increase the end strength by statute. And we don't need that done because under the emergency authority we can increase it and we have already increased it by tens of thousands -- 20,000.
MR. RUSSERT: There was a large debate at the Pentagon. General
Shinseki -- we've talked about this before -- others saying we needed 200,000
troops on the ground.
SEC. RUMSFELD: That's a separate issue from the size of the Army --
quite different.
MR. RUSSERT: Exactly. But there were also comments made that you were going to transform the Army and have a light, more mobile force and not have as many additional members of the armed forces as some were suggesting.
SEC. RUMSFELD: Not true. Not true.
MR. RUSSERT: At all?
SEC. RUMSFELD: No. We -- the size of the Army is quite a different
thing from whether it's light and agile and mobile and able to go someplace fast.
That's the nature of the Army, not the size of the Army.
MR. RUSSERT: In hindsight, do you wish we had sent more troops on the
ground in Iraq initially?
SEC. RUMSFELD: I wish that we could have gotten the 4th Infantry
Division in from the north, so that it would have been able to put more pressure on
the Ba'athist regime and probably capture more of the Ba'athists that today are
part of the insurgency. But in terms of the total numbers of troops that went in,
we finally got the 4th ID in, but it had to come in from the south. So it was not
as effective as had it come in through Turkey.
The answer to your other question is no. I think that General Franks
and General Abizaid have been correct in calculating the number of troops that we
need on the ground in Iraq.
MR. RUSSERT: Bob Woodward said General Franks --
SEC. RUMSFELD: Just a minute. Just a minute.
MR. RUSSERT: Bob Woodward had said that General Franks had recommended 300,000 troops.
SEC. RUMSFELD: At any given moment, General Franks might have had some number in his mind. So what we did was I agreed with his recommendation, which was that we put in line up to 500,000 that could go in were they needed, and that at any moment where they were not needed he would pull the stopper and stop it, and he did. And that's where it stopped. And I think he was right because the balance he faced in both Afghanistan and Iraq is you do not want to become a heavy footprint, occupying force that causes more of an irritant to the population than a benefit. And who knows what's perfect? It's not for me to judge. But when General Myers, General Pace, General Franks, General Abizaid, General Sanchez and now General Casey tell me that they believe we have the right number on the ground, that's good enough for me.
MR. RUSSERT: You said to CNN on Thursday that you tendered your
resignation twice to the president of the United States.
SEC. RUMSFELD: I was asked.
MR. RUSSERT: Why?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Why? First of all, an unfortunate thing happened on my
watch, and I was secretary.
MR. RUSSERT: Abu Ghraib?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Abu Ghraib. And people were not treated the way they
should have been treated. And that's wrong. And it seemed to me that a president ought to have that choice. I had to make a decision if I thought I should leave. And I decided that I would leave if I thought I could not be effective. And I
decided I thought I could be effective. But I also know that the president
deserved a chance to make that decision himself. So I sat down with him and handed him a written resignation and urged him to think very carefully about it from his standpoint, from the country's standpoint. And that's why.
MR. RUSSERT: Why twice?
SEC. RUMSFELD: I did it first in the Oval Office. And about 10 days
later, he was at the Pentagon. And I had migrated in my thinking that from his
standpoint -- it might be wiser from his standpoint if he were able to step off
fresh, and so I tried to persuade him that that was the case, and I failed.
MR. RUSSERT: Did you think you had done something wrong?
SEC. RUMSFELD: No. Obviously the country has to be deeply concerned
that people were not treated right. And I was secretary of defense when that
happened. And we've had eight or 10 investigations. We have had dozens of
criminal trials, and people have pled guilty to doing things they shouldn't do.
And obviously you just feel terrible about that. That is not the way our country
behaves. And it was a most unfortunate thing that it happened. And I was
secretary of Defense.
MR. RUSSERT: When John Kerry calls for your resignation and says he
has 800,000 signatures on his Internet, John McCain says he has no confidence,
Trent Lott says he's not a fan -- what does that do to your ability to be secretary
of defense?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Well, you know, we were in a political campaign, and
there are people always running for president, and that goes with the territory.
We've never had a war in this country where there haven't been critics. They were
calling for George Washington's resignation. In the Civil War they were constantly
calling for resignations. In World War I, in World War II, in Korea. There's
never been a war or a war president or a war secretary of State who has not been
criticized by critics, and particularly during a political campaign or by political
people who are running for president. So that's life.
MR. RUSSERT: Would you have done anything differently?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Oh, my goodness, sure. I don't know, maybe there was a way to get the -- you mean the 4th Infantry Division, that type of thing?
MR. RUSSERT: Or Abu Ghraib?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Well, I mean, in retrospect we've taken probably 15 or
20 administrative steps to require that people go in -- if it's the midnight shift
half a world away, and we know in history people who guard people have done things wrong with respect to the people. It happens in prisons all over the United States and in other countries. So you don't want that to happen. So maybe you have to do senior officer checks at the midnight shift because apparently a lot of it happened during a relatively brief period of months -- weeks, months.
MR. RUSSERT: You're confident it cannot happen again?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Of course not. Human beings are human beings. People do things they shouldn't do. All I'm confident of is that the Army, which is the executive agent for detainees, is seized with this problem. They recognize it's
their responsibility. They've worked hard to undertake a whole series of steps to
try to see that it doesn't happen again. And I pray it doesn't happen again,
because it's wrong.
MR. RUSSERT: And you will be secretary of defense and see this war
through as long as --?
SEC. RUMSFELD: We serve at the pleasure of the president.
MR. RUSSERT: But you have every expectation of staying for how long?
SEC. RUMSFELD: I serve at the pleasure of the president.
MR. RUSSERT: You don't want to see Iraq all the way through until the
American troops are home?
SEC. RUMSFELD: It's not for me to tie his hands. I look at what's
happened in Afghanistan, and I think of the people who've -- our soldiers who've
died there and the wounded, that I -- your heart breaks when you see limbs off --
and how proud they are of what they've accomplished, of liberating 25 million
people who, for the first time in 5,000 years, have a popularly elected president,
a constitution, they're going to have parliamentary elections later this spring or
summer. It's a thrilling thing. It shows how important their sacrifice has been,
and you see what's happening in Iraq and that election. And people who've been --decades they've been frightened to come out of their homes, to put their heads up, to do something that the regime might not like, because they filled tens of
thousands of people in mass graves. And they came out. I'm told that they
wandered around in front of the election polling place and finally some woman in
her 60s or 70s said, "I've waited my whole life to do this," walked in, and
everyone walked in.
Now, those folks who've been killed there, those folks who were wounded
there, their families and their loved ones have to feel that their sacrifice was
worth it, that the effect that can have on that region and the world can just be so
important. It's an amazing thing that's happening in our world.
MR. RUSSERT: Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, as always we thank you for your views.
SEC. RUMSFELD: Thank you.
20005, USA. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
[Web Version: http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/200...secdef2102.html]
-- News Transcripts: http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/
-- DoD News: http://www.defenselink.mil/news/dodnews.html
-- Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://www.defenselink.mil/news/dodnews.html#e-mail
-- Today in DoD: http://www.defenselink.mil/today/
-- U.S. Department of Defense Official Website - http://www.defenselink.mil
-- U.S. Department of Defense News About the War on Terrorism -
http://www.defendamerica.mil
DoD News Briefing
Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld
Sunday, February 6, 2005 - 9:00 a.m. EST
MR. RUSSERT: First, joining us now on "Meet the Press" is the
secretary of defense, Donald Rumsfeld. Welcome back.
SEC. RUMSFELD: Thank you, sir.
MR. RUSSERT: The elections have been held, as we well know. The early
counting seems to indicate the Shi'ites have done very, very well in the election.
The headline in the Sunday New York Times, Mr. Secretary, "Top Iraq Shi'ites
Pushing Religion in Constitution" -- that they want to use Islam as the guiding
principle in drafting the constitution. How do you feel about that?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Well, a lot of states that have a predominantly Muslim
population have a way of including that without having it dominate. And certainly
if you would look at Afghanistan, that's the case there. I think that of all the
headlines I've seen, that's not the one I would have cited. I would have cited the
ones that point out that all of the people who were involved in the election are
reaching out to the Sunnis, are in fact engaged in political discussions and
negotiations. Think of it -- in Iraq, after 35 years of a repressive dictatorship,
what we're hearing is political debate and discussion and who should be prime
minister and who should be president and deputy president, and how should this work and how should we sort that out and who's going to fashion the constitution.
That's thrilling. That is absolutely thrilling.
I would say this: The Shi'ia in Iraq are Iraqis. They're not
Iranians. And the idea that they're going to end up with a government like Iran,
with a handful of mullahs controlling much of the country I think is unlikely.
MR. RUSSERT: But when they say that they would like to have a
constitution which says that daughters would get half the inheritance of sons, do
you find that troubling for all the bloodshed we have spilled for Iraq?
SEC. RUMSFELD: The first thing we have to begin with is that Iraq
belongs to the Iraqis. And the Iraqis are going to have a solution for Iraq that's
an Iraqi solution. They're not going to have an American solution or an Afghan
solution. And the wonderful thing that's taking place is that the great sweep of
human history is for freedom. And we're seeing it in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in the
Palestinian Liberation Authority, in the Ukraine, in Indonesia. And what's
happening is healthy. It's good.
Look at our Constitution when it was first fashioned. Look what it did
with respect to women not voting. Look what it did with respect to blacks and the
way they were counted in the population. So you don't get from where they were to where they're going "on a feather bed," as Thomas Jefferson said. You get there through tough discussion, trials, error, mistakes, good things. And they're on
that path, and I think people ought to step back and say, Isn't that amazing?
Isn't that a wonderful thing for that region?
MR. RUSSERT: If they decide that they do not want Prime Minister
Allawi to remain as prime minister, we would accept that?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Well, it isn't a matter of accepting it or not
accepting it. The Iraqis had a vote. They're going to decide who the president
and the deputy presidents are going to be. They're going to decide who the prime
minister is going to be. They're going to decide who the ministers of these
various ministries are going to be. That's what that's about.
MR. RUSSERT: One of the Iraqis said this -- he's the head of the
Constitutional Monarchy Party: "Americans are in for a shock," adding that one day they would realize, quote, "We've got 150,000 troops here protecting a country
that's extremely friendly to Iran."
SEC. RUMSFELD: You know, I could go to the press, and I could pull out
a quote on almost any side of every issue. And your question is what do I think
about that particular quote. First of all, I don't think it's representative.
Second, I'm always amazed at the things that can happen in the world, and I don't
doubt for a minute that there are going to be some surprises for everybody. Third,
let's face it, Afghanistan has Iran as a neighbor, and they talk to each other.
Most countries do talk to their neighbors. And that's a very different thing from
suggesting that the model that Iran has is necessarily going to be the model for
Iraq. I don't believe it is. I think the Shi'ia in Iraq are Iraqis first and
Shi'ia second. And just as in Afghanistan, you don't see Mr. Karzai fashioning a
government that's a replica of one of his neighbors. He's got an Afghan solution
to his problems.
MR. RUSSERT: So you're confident that we will not have an Islamic
fundamentalist state in Iraq?
SEC. RUMSFELD: I think it would be just an enormous mistake for that
country to think that it could succeed with all of its opportunity, with its oil,
its water, its intelligent population -- to deny half of their population, women,
the opportunity to participate fully, I think, just would be a terrible mistake.
MR. RUSSERT: Our next guest, Senator Kennedy, has said now that the
elections are over, we should have a specific timetable for the withdrawal of
American troops. The president said that would embolden the terrorists. Why?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Well, first of all, let's point out the truth. The
president and I and anyone would dearly love to be smart enough and wise enough to know precisely when our troops could leave. It would be such a relief for people to know that. It's not knowable. The important thing to do is to see that we do not create a dependency, that we encourage them to take over that responsibility. And our forces are doing that. We're helping to train and equip the Iraqi security forces. And the president believes, and I agree with him, that we don't want to be there any longer than we have to, but we want to be there as long as we're needed. And it seems to me that the answer as to when our troops can come out is dependent upon the conditions on the ground and whether or not the Iraqis are capable of managing the security situation there. We're working very hard to see that they can.
MR. RUSSERT: RUSSERT: Why not give the Iraqis benchmarks that in six
months, we're going to withdraw 50,000 troops -- you better have 50,000 troops
ready to replace them?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Because we've been -- our country has invested a lot of
lives, a lot of heartbreak. The courage of our troops and the sacrifice of those
that have fallen and were wounded is important. And the idea that you should just
arbitrarily say this is going to happen on that date -- think of it, the last
administration did that in Bosnia. They said we'd be out by Christmas. Six,
eight, 10 years later, not out. It is misleading people to think that you know
something you don't know. And we know we don't know.
MR. RUSSERT: Did you believe two years ago that at this stage of the
war we would have 135,000 Americans on the ground, 1,400 dead, 10,000 wounded or injured?
SEC. RUMSFELD: We were asked, and at that time we told the truth. And
the truth was you can't know how long it'll last, you can't know how many troops
it'll take, and you can't know how many dead and wounded there would be. No one in any war has ever been able to predict that. People who do predict it make a terrible mistake, because they set expectations based on nothing but hope.
MR. RUSSERT: One area that has created a lot of debate is the number
of Iraqi forces that are now ready and trained and available. The chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, Richard Myers, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that only about a third of Iraq's 136,000 trained security forces have enough training to engage in combat with insurgents. As he says, quote, "40,000 who can go anywhere in the country and take on any threat. He used the figure 136,000 security forces, big umbrella. This is what Donald Rumsfeld said in February of last year, a year ago: "I would say there's not been a slowness in forming the Iraqi security forces. Indeed, if you think about it, last June or July there were no Iraqi security forces, and today, in February of 2004, there are over 210,000 Iraqis
serving in the security forces. That's an amazing accomplishment." How did we get from 210,000 a year ago --
SEC. RUMSFELD: Very simply. There are people that are trying to make
this more complex, for whatever reason, than it is. It's not complex. It's
simple. We did start with zero, and we ended up over 200,000, and that included
74,000 site protection people. Those people did not report to the Ministry of
Interior or to the Ministry of Defense. When we took that number out of the 200
(thousand), it went down, obviously, and we no longer include them. Every paper we put out has a footnote stating exactly why that's the case.
Now, let's go to Dick Myers' comment. We have 136,000 Iraqi security
forces, excluding the 70,000-plus in the site protection, and they are in the
Ministry of Interior, the Ministry of Defense, and there's a lot of different
types. Some are policemen and they walk a beat. Some are border patrol and they sit on a border in a patrol place. Others are in commando units and they operate in a region and go in on special assignments. Still others are in the regular army, and they're being trained for that type of function. A small number of them -- as Dick Myers said, something like 40,000 -- are highly mobile, can move anywhere in the country and be sustained.
Now, would you -- he answered the question perfectly honestly. We have
136,000. The implication that the rest are not useful is silly. It's nonsense.
The policeman on the beat outside your office doesn't need to be mobile and
sustainable and go into Los Angeles.
MR. RUSSERT: Senator Joe Biden says 40,000 is not an honest number,
that it's more like 4,000 truly trained Iraqi forces that can take on the
insurgents. Is he right?
SEC. RUMSFELD: He's wrong, obviously. I mean, General Petraeus put
this out very clearly in a press briefing and laid it out. When I say Senator
Biden is wrong, what I mean is this: When you train some people to be policemen,
they're very good policemen, and that's part of the Iraqi security forces. If you
train them to go after the -- do a counterterrorism job, then that's a very
different function, and we have a certain number of those. And we announce and
release the number of those. But that's true of our military. We have people who
are -- whose job is military police. We have people whose job is to be part of a
special operations team that can go in and do counterterrorism-type activities. We
have people who do entirely different things. And that, to suggest that therefore
the numbers are wrong is incorrect.
The other thing I should say is talking numbers is not terribly useful
always, because if a person comes out of training the first day, they're not a
battle-hardened veteran. They are trained and they are equipped. You compare them with somebody who's been out a year, who's been in Fallujah and had a success there, or been involved in the election, where the Iraqi security forces
successfully secured 5,000 election sites. The inner perimeter and the outer
perimeter were all Iraqis doing that at 5,000 sites. Now, that was a major
accomplishment. And I think to belittle them or to question the numbers because
some do police work and some do counterterrorism work is a misunderstanding of the situation.
MR. RUSSERT: How many Iraqi security forces do we need fully trained
and capable of fighting insurgents?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Well, the answer to that question is not complicated.
We need as many as are needed. If you have an insurgency that's this level, you'll need X. If you have an insurgency that's that level, you'll need X-plus. And if you have an insurgency that's quite low, you'll need X-minus. And to think that
you can sit here today and -- I mean, no one predicted the level of the insurgency
as it is today. Partly it's a function of money. Partly it's a function of what
the Syrians and the Iranians are doing. Partly it's a function of how many
criminals they can hire to participate. Partly it's a function of how much money
Zarqawi gets to hire suicide bombers. And that goes up and down.
MR. RUSSERT: But right now, knowing what you know about the
insurgency, how many fully trained Iraqi troops do you think we need in order for
the United States to withdraw?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Okay, what we've done is we made an initial assessment when the major combat operations ended. Six months later we sent in General Eichenberry and he made an assessment. General Casey then went in last June and made an assessment. We just sent in General Luck, and what we do is keep looking at the changing circumstance on the ground and reevaluating what that ought to be. You've got to remember the enemy has a brain. It isn't as though the enemy's an inanimate object and that you can then measure what you need to deal with that inanimate object. He watches what we do and adjusts to it, just as we watch what they do and adjust to it. And, therefore, it's a moving target. It's not static.
MR. RUSSERT: The Iraqi intelligence services director said that the
insurgency is larger than the U.S. Army -- it is more than 200,000 people. Is he
right?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Who said that?
MR. RUSSERT: Mohammad Abdul Sussami, the Iraqi Intelligence Service
director, on January 3rd, 2005. He's a general.
SEC. RUMSFELD: I've never seen that number, and I don't know where it
came from.
MR. RUSSERT: It's a lot larger than the dead-enders that you had
talked about some time ago.
SEC. RUMSFELD: I talked about it?
MR. RUSSERT: Yes.
SEC. RUMSFELD: I think I've always characterized it as a mix of
people. There are some Ba'athists who are dead-enders, that's true. There are
some jihadists who've come in from other countries, and Zarqawi and that team of
people who are particularly lethal. There are criminals. There are always -- I've
always included --
MR. RUSSERT: But in June of 2003, we were talking about small
elements, 10 to 20 people, no large network.
SEC. RUMSFELD: That's what they were functioning as during that period
immediately after the major combat operations. That's right. And the insurgency
has --
MR. RUSSERT: And it's changed?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Absolutely. That's why we keep sending in assessment
teams.
MR. RUSSERT: Let me turn to what we need on the ground right now.
About 40 to 45 percent of our troops are National Guard and Army Reserve. The head of the Army Reserve said that we are rapidly degenerating, quote, "into a broken force." He's worried about retention, recruitment. The National Guard has reached only half its goal in January in terms of retention and recruitment. The Marine Corps for the first time in a decade has not reached its recruiting goal. Will it be necessary to say to the National Guard, You may have to serve another 24 months -- not just the original 24 months that we sent you, but we may break you and have to send you back again?
SEC. RUMSFELD: We have no plans to do -- to change the rulings and the
methods that we're operating on at the present time. For the first time we've
begun to see some goals and targets not being fulfilled. And but generally
recruiting and retention has been on track and is today generally on track.
One of the reasons that the National Guard and the Reserves are
slightly down is because we're enlarging the size of the Army and in that process
more people are staying in. And one of the pools that you draw on to build the
Guard and Reserve is people coming off active duty, as you know. So there's fewer people coming off active duty. Therefore, we've increased the number of
recruiters, we've increased the incentives, and we just simply have to recognize
that the stress on the force is real, and take the kinds of steps that we've taken
to anticipate that and see that we're able to attract and retain the people we
need. We have still only used about 40 percent of the Guard and Reserve that's
available in this country, since the beginning of the Afghan operation.
MR. RUSSERT: So you have no plans to change the rules in terms of
extending tours?
SEC. RUMSFELD: No, the rules -- there's been a debate in the press
about whether you wanted to change 24 months to cumulative or consecutive, and it's being left at consecutive, not cumulative.
MR. RUSSERT: Let me show you some comments that some have made --
SEC. RUMSFELD: Or cumulative. I misspoke.
MR. RUSSERT: Yeah, I understand. Some things that members of Congress has said. This is Susan Collins, a Republican -- not a Democrat, a Republican: "I think there are increasing concerns about the secretary's leadership of the war, the repeated failures to predict the strengths of the insurgency, the lack of essential safety equipment for our troops, the reluctance to expand the number of troops." I want to talk -- we've talked about insurgency. I want to bring you back to the whole debate about the use of essential safety equipment for our troops, and take you back to December -- we haven't seen you since then -- when Thomas Wilson stood up and asked you a question. I want to show you that exchange and come back and talk about it.
Q Now, why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for
pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to up-armor our vehicles and
why don't we have those resources readily available to us?
SEC. RUMSFELD: As you know, you go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time. And if you think about it, you can have all the armor in the world on a tank and a tank can be blown up. And you can have an up-armored humvee and it can be blown up.
MR. RUSSERT: Now, Specialist Wilson did acknowledge he worked with a
journalist in crafting that question.
SEC. RUMSFELD: Yeah, but wait a minute. Let me get into this a little
bit.
MR. RUSSERT: Sure.
SEC. RUMSFELD: That was unfair and it was selectively taking out two
sentences from a long exchange -- there it is -- that took place. And when you
suggested that that's how I answered that question, that is factually wrong. That
is not how I answered that question.
MR. RUSSERT: But, Mr. Secretary, it clearly represents the exchange
between --
SEC. RUMSFELD: It does not.
MR. RUSSERT: All right,what is missing?
SEC. RUMSFELD: You want to hear the exchange? There is it. It's
right here. I'll read it to you. If you're going to quote pieces of it, I'll give
you the exchange. He asked that question, and I said, "I talked to the general
coming out here about the pace at which the vehicles are being armored. They have been brought from all over the world, wherever they're not needed, to places where they are needed. I'm told they are being -- the Army is -- I think it's something like 400 a month are being done now. And it's essentially a matter of physics. It's not a matter of money. It isn't a matter on the part of the Army's desire. It's a matter of production and capability of doing it. As you know, you go to the war with the Army you have. They're not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time.
"Since the Iraq conflict began, the Army has been pressing ahead to
produce armor necessary at a rate that they believe -- it's a greatly expanded rate
from what existed previously but a rate that they believe is the rate that can be
accomplished. I can assure you that General Schoomaker and the leadership of the Army and certainly General Whitcomb are sensitive to the fact that not every
vehicle has the degree of armor that would be desirable to have, but that they're
working at it at a good clip. It's interesting. I've talked a great deal about
this with a team of people who've been working hard at the Pentagon. And if you
think about it, you can have all the armor in the world on a tank and the tank
could still be blown up. And you can have an up-armored humvee and it can be blown up. And you can go down and the vehicle -- the goal we have is to have many of those vehicles as is humanly possible with the appropriate level of armor available for the troops. And that's what the Army's been working on. And, General Whitcomb, is there anything you want to add?" And then he spoke.
Now, that answer is totally different from picking out two lines. And
I think it's an unfair representative -- and it's exactly what some of the
newspapers around the country did.
Now, let's go back to Susan Collins' comment, Senator Collins --
MR. RUSSERT: Well, let me just finish on the humvees because --
SEC. RUMSFELD: You bet. I'll tell you right now where we are. By
February 15th, nine days from now, there will not be a vehicle moving around in
Iraq outside of a protected compound with American soldiers in it that does not
have an appropriate level of armor.
MR. RUSSERT: Which is a pretty dramatic change, because Newsweek had said that of the 19,000 humvees in the Iraqi theater, according to the Army's
latest numbers, only a quarter were fully armored. So the fact is that Specialist
Wilson's question in front of his troops in which he was cheered was helpful in
getting people to truly focus and respond to this. Fair?
SEC. RUMSFELD: I didn't criticize his question. I thanked him for his
question.
MR. RUSSERT: No, but is that a fair statement?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Well, you saw my answer. We'd already been focusing on it -- hard. I mean, I answered it by saying we had teams of people in Washington working on it, General Whitcomb was working on it.
Let's go back to Senator Collins. You said that she was critical
because we couldn't predict the size of the insurgency. That is the job for the
intelligence community. And it is unfortunate that we don't have perfect
visibility into that. It is also unfortunate that it's changing and evolving, and
therefore easy to say, Well, you don't know what the size is because the size is
changing, but the fact of the matter is it's a difficult thing to do. And I
suppose someone can sit back in an air-conditioned room and be critical of it, but
the fact is the intelligence community is working as hard as they know how to try
to manage those serious questions about what the size is.
Second, to say that I've resisted increasing the size of the Army is
factually incorrect. We've increased the size of the Army. We've been doing it
under the emergency authority. The Congress -- some of the people in the Congress have wanted to increase the end strength by statute. And we don't need that done because under the emergency authority we can increase it and we have already increased it by tens of thousands -- 20,000.
MR. RUSSERT: There was a large debate at the Pentagon. General
Shinseki -- we've talked about this before -- others saying we needed 200,000
troops on the ground.
SEC. RUMSFELD: That's a separate issue from the size of the Army --
quite different.
MR. RUSSERT: Exactly. But there were also comments made that you were going to transform the Army and have a light, more mobile force and not have as many additional members of the armed forces as some were suggesting.
SEC. RUMSFELD: Not true. Not true.
MR. RUSSERT: At all?
SEC. RUMSFELD: No. We -- the size of the Army is quite a different
thing from whether it's light and agile and mobile and able to go someplace fast.
That's the nature of the Army, not the size of the Army.
MR. RUSSERT: In hindsight, do you wish we had sent more troops on the
ground in Iraq initially?
SEC. RUMSFELD: I wish that we could have gotten the 4th Infantry
Division in from the north, so that it would have been able to put more pressure on
the Ba'athist regime and probably capture more of the Ba'athists that today are
part of the insurgency. But in terms of the total numbers of troops that went in,
we finally got the 4th ID in, but it had to come in from the south. So it was not
as effective as had it come in through Turkey.
The answer to your other question is no. I think that General Franks
and General Abizaid have been correct in calculating the number of troops that we
need on the ground in Iraq.
MR. RUSSERT: Bob Woodward said General Franks --
SEC. RUMSFELD: Just a minute. Just a minute.
MR. RUSSERT: Bob Woodward had said that General Franks had recommended 300,000 troops.
SEC. RUMSFELD: At any given moment, General Franks might have had some number in his mind. So what we did was I agreed with his recommendation, which was that we put in line up to 500,000 that could go in were they needed, and that at any moment where they were not needed he would pull the stopper and stop it, and he did. And that's where it stopped. And I think he was right because the balance he faced in both Afghanistan and Iraq is you do not want to become a heavy footprint, occupying force that causes more of an irritant to the population than a benefit. And who knows what's perfect? It's not for me to judge. But when General Myers, General Pace, General Franks, General Abizaid, General Sanchez and now General Casey tell me that they believe we have the right number on the ground, that's good enough for me.
MR. RUSSERT: You said to CNN on Thursday that you tendered your
resignation twice to the president of the United States.
SEC. RUMSFELD: I was asked.
MR. RUSSERT: Why?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Why? First of all, an unfortunate thing happened on my
watch, and I was secretary.
MR. RUSSERT: Abu Ghraib?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Abu Ghraib. And people were not treated the way they
should have been treated. And that's wrong. And it seemed to me that a president ought to have that choice. I had to make a decision if I thought I should leave. And I decided that I would leave if I thought I could not be effective. And I
decided I thought I could be effective. But I also know that the president
deserved a chance to make that decision himself. So I sat down with him and handed him a written resignation and urged him to think very carefully about it from his standpoint, from the country's standpoint. And that's why.
MR. RUSSERT: Why twice?
SEC. RUMSFELD: I did it first in the Oval Office. And about 10 days
later, he was at the Pentagon. And I had migrated in my thinking that from his
standpoint -- it might be wiser from his standpoint if he were able to step off
fresh, and so I tried to persuade him that that was the case, and I failed.
MR. RUSSERT: Did you think you had done something wrong?
SEC. RUMSFELD: No. Obviously the country has to be deeply concerned
that people were not treated right. And I was secretary of defense when that
happened. And we've had eight or 10 investigations. We have had dozens of
criminal trials, and people have pled guilty to doing things they shouldn't do.
And obviously you just feel terrible about that. That is not the way our country
behaves. And it was a most unfortunate thing that it happened. And I was
secretary of Defense.
MR. RUSSERT: When John Kerry calls for your resignation and says he
has 800,000 signatures on his Internet, John McCain says he has no confidence,
Trent Lott says he's not a fan -- what does that do to your ability to be secretary
of defense?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Well, you know, we were in a political campaign, and
there are people always running for president, and that goes with the territory.
We've never had a war in this country where there haven't been critics. They were
calling for George Washington's resignation. In the Civil War they were constantly
calling for resignations. In World War I, in World War II, in Korea. There's
never been a war or a war president or a war secretary of State who has not been
criticized by critics, and particularly during a political campaign or by political
people who are running for president. So that's life.
MR. RUSSERT: Would you have done anything differently?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Oh, my goodness, sure. I don't know, maybe there was a way to get the -- you mean the 4th Infantry Division, that type of thing?
MR. RUSSERT: Or Abu Ghraib?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Well, I mean, in retrospect we've taken probably 15 or
20 administrative steps to require that people go in -- if it's the midnight shift
half a world away, and we know in history people who guard people have done things wrong with respect to the people. It happens in prisons all over the United States and in other countries. So you don't want that to happen. So maybe you have to do senior officer checks at the midnight shift because apparently a lot of it happened during a relatively brief period of months -- weeks, months.
MR. RUSSERT: You're confident it cannot happen again?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Of course not. Human beings are human beings. People do things they shouldn't do. All I'm confident of is that the Army, which is the executive agent for detainees, is seized with this problem. They recognize it's
their responsibility. They've worked hard to undertake a whole series of steps to
try to see that it doesn't happen again. And I pray it doesn't happen again,
because it's wrong.
MR. RUSSERT: And you will be secretary of defense and see this war
through as long as --?
SEC. RUMSFELD: We serve at the pleasure of the president.
MR. RUSSERT: But you have every expectation of staying for how long?
SEC. RUMSFELD: I serve at the pleasure of the president.
MR. RUSSERT: You don't want to see Iraq all the way through until the
American troops are home?
SEC. RUMSFELD: It's not for me to tie his hands. I look at what's
happened in Afghanistan, and I think of the people who've -- our soldiers who've
died there and the wounded, that I -- your heart breaks when you see limbs off --
and how proud they are of what they've accomplished, of liberating 25 million
people who, for the first time in 5,000 years, have a popularly elected president,
a constitution, they're going to have parliamentary elections later this spring or
summer. It's a thrilling thing. It shows how important their sacrifice has been,
and you see what's happening in Iraq and that election. And people who've been --decades they've been frightened to come out of their homes, to put their heads up, to do something that the regime might not like, because they filled tens of
thousands of people in mass graves. And they came out. I'm told that they
wandered around in front of the election polling place and finally some woman in
her 60s or 70s said, "I've waited my whole life to do this," walked in, and
everyone walked in.
Now, those folks who've been killed there, those folks who were wounded
there, their families and their loved ones have to feel that their sacrifice was
worth it, that the effect that can have on that region and the world can just be so
important. It's an amazing thing that's happening in our world.
MR. RUSSERT: Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, as always we thank you for your views.
SEC. RUMSFELD: Thank you.
20005, USA. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
[Web Version: http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/200...secdef2102.html]
-- News Transcripts: http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/
-- DoD News: http://www.defenselink.mil/news/dodnews.html
-- Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://www.defenselink.mil/news/dodnews.html#e-mail
-- Today in DoD: http://www.defenselink.mil/today/
-- U.S. Department of Defense Official Website - http://www.defenselink.mil
-- U.S. Department of Defense News About the War on Terrorism -
http://www.defendamerica.mil
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/a...aq_050207223934
Kurdish Ticket Makes Gains in Iraq Voting
Kurdish Ticket Makes Gains in Iraq Voting
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/a...an_050207211735
Rumsfeld to press NATO allies for more help in Iraq
Rumsfeld to press NATO allies for more help in Iraq
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/a...ispanics_iraq_1
Poll: Hispanics Back US Pullout in Iraq
Poll: Hispanics Back US Pullout in Iraq
Fallujans welcome security, await electricity
The former insurgent stronghold had one of the best voter turnouts in
the Sunni triangle. By Scott Peterson
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0208/p01s02-woiq.html?s=hns
The former insurgent stronghold had one of the best voter turnouts in
the Sunni triangle. By Scott Peterson
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0208/p01s02-woiq.html?s=hns
Iraq: spinning off Arab terrorists?
Counterterror experts from 50 countries met in Saudi Arabia to discuss
how to combat emerging threats. By Faiza Saleh Ambah
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0208/p06s01-wome.html?s=hns
Counterterror experts from 50 countries met in Saudi Arabia to discuss
how to combat emerging threats. By Faiza Saleh Ambah
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0208/p06s01-wome.html?s=hns
Sop to Iraqi Clerics?
Women may lose out in the struggle over religious influence in the new
Iraq. The Monitor's View
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0208/p08s03-comv.html?s=hns
Women may lose out in the struggle over religious influence in the new
Iraq. The Monitor's View
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0208/p08s03-comv.html?s=hns
Suicide Bomber Kills at Least 21 at Iraqi Army Recruiting Center
http://enews.voanews.com/t?ctl=B78851:2F72C9D
Officials say the blast was likely caused by a suicide bomber who had
mingled with people waiting at the center's entrance The terrorist
network headed by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi has claimed responsibility for
a suicide bombing Tuesday at an Iraqi army recruitment center in
Baghdad that killed at least 21 people.
Hospital workers bring a body into the al-Yarmouk hospital after a
blast shook an Iraqi army recruiting center in Baghdad
In an Internet statement, al-Qaida in Iraq said one of its members
penetrated the line of recruits outside the center and detonated
explosives he was carrying.
Most of those killed or injured were members of Iraq's fledgling
military or those hoping to join.
On Monday, Zarqawi loyalists also claimed responsibility for two
suicide bombings in Mosul and Baquba that killed at least 27 people --
mostly policemen.
AlsoTuesday, gunmen in Baghdad ambushed the car of an Iraqi
politician, killing his two sons and a bodyguard. The politician,
Mithal al-Alusi, escaped unhurt.
Some information for this report provided by AFP, AP and Reuters.
http://enews.voanews.com/t?ctl=B78851:2F72C9D
Officials say the blast was likely caused by a suicide bomber who had
mingled with people waiting at the center's entrance The terrorist
network headed by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi has claimed responsibility for
a suicide bombing Tuesday at an Iraqi army recruitment center in
Baghdad that killed at least 21 people.
Hospital workers bring a body into the al-Yarmouk hospital after a
blast shook an Iraqi army recruiting center in Baghdad
In an Internet statement, al-Qaida in Iraq said one of its members
penetrated the line of recruits outside the center and detonated
explosives he was carrying.
Most of those killed or injured were members of Iraq's fledgling
military or those hoping to join.
On Monday, Zarqawi loyalists also claimed responsibility for two
suicide bombings in Mosul and Baquba that killed at least 27 people --
mostly policemen.
AlsoTuesday, gunmen in Baghdad ambushed the car of an Iraqi
politician, killing his two sons and a bodyguard. The politician,
Mithal al-Alusi, escaped unhurt.
Some information for this report provided by AFP, AP and Reuters.
--------------------
Law of Unintended Consequences
--------------------
Careful what you wish for in Iraq.
Robert Scheer
February 8 2005
In a heightened display of saber rattling, President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice have been saying nasty things about Iran's "unelected mullahs."
The complete article can be viewed at:
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-...,6627228.column
Law of Unintended Consequences
--------------------
Careful what you wish for in Iraq.
Robert Scheer
February 8 2005
In a heightened display of saber rattling, President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice have been saying nasty things about Iran's "unelected mullahs."
The complete article can be viewed at:
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-...,6627228.column
Authorities say 22 dead from Baghdad bombing :
The US military says 21 people were killed in addition to a suicide bomber who set off explosives outside an Iraqi army recruitment center. Today's blast is considered the deadliest since last week's election violence.
http://tinyurl.com/5bst4
The US military says 21 people were killed in addition to a suicide bomber who set off explosives outside an Iraqi army recruitment center. Today's blast is considered the deadliest since last week's election violence.
http://tinyurl.com/5bst4
Militants Kill Iraqi Reporter for US-Funded Al Hurra TV
http://enews.voanews.com/t?ctl=B7F337:2F72C9D
Police say Abdul Hussein Khazal was gunned down outside his home in a
Basra neighborhood Wednesday Iraqi police say gunmen in the southern
city of Basra have killed an Iraqi journalist working for the
U.S.-funded television station Al Hurra.
Police say Abdul Hussein Khazal was gunned down outside his home in a
Basra neighborhood Wednesday.
In Baghdad, kidnappers abducted a senior Iraqi Interior Ministry
official - Colonel Riad Allawi - after dragging him out of his car.
Separately, the U.S. military reported today the death of an American
soldier killed in action Sunday in Mosul. There was no explanation for
the delay in reporting.
Meanwhile, the terrorist network headed by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
claimed responsibility for Tuesday's suicide bombing at an Iraqi army
recruitment center in Baghdad that killed 21 people.
Some information for this report provided by AP, AFP and Reuters.
http://enews.voanews.com/t?ctl=B7F337:2F72C9D
Police say Abdul Hussein Khazal was gunned down outside his home in a
Basra neighborhood Wednesday Iraqi police say gunmen in the southern
city of Basra have killed an Iraqi journalist working for the
U.S.-funded television station Al Hurra.
Police say Abdul Hussein Khazal was gunned down outside his home in a
Basra neighborhood Wednesday.
In Baghdad, kidnappers abducted a senior Iraqi Interior Ministry
official - Colonel Riad Allawi - after dragging him out of his car.
Separately, the U.S. military reported today the death of an American
soldier killed in action Sunday in Mosul. There was no explanation for
the delay in reporting.
Meanwhile, the terrorist network headed by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
claimed responsibility for Tuesday's suicide bombing at an Iraqi army
recruitment center in Baghdad that killed 21 people.
Some information for this report provided by AP, AFP and Reuters.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/stor...4789278,00.html
Rumsfeld: NATO Nations Offer Aid to Iraq
Rumsfeld: NATO Nations Offer Aid to Iraq
12, including two US troops, die in Iraq attacks
http://www.albawaba.com/en/news/179904
Four Iraqi police killed in Samarra:
Four Iraqi policemen were killed in a roadside bombing early Wednesday
http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=12643
http://www.albawaba.com/en/news/179904
Four Iraqi police killed in Samarra:
Four Iraqi policemen were killed in a roadside bombing early Wednesday
http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=12643
Senior Housing Ministry Official Killed in Baghdad:
Earlier on Wednesday, gunmen killed an Iraqi journalist working for a U.S.-funded television network in Basra and kidnapped a senior Interior Ministry official in Baghdad.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=484535
U.S. general says he believes British plane was downed by hostile act, not accident
http://www.boston.com/dailynews/040/wash/U...lieves_B:.shtml
http://tinyurl.com/3tx2b
Earlier on Wednesday, gunmen killed an Iraqi journalist working for a U.S.-funded television network in Basra and kidnapped a senior Interior Ministry official in Baghdad.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=484535
U.S. general says he believes British plane was downed by hostile act, not accident
http://www.boston.com/dailynews/040/wash/U...lieves_B:.shtml
http://tinyurl.com/3tx2b
Iraq Election Results Delayed on Recount :
Iraqi officials Wednesday delayed the announcement of final results from landmark national elections because they said the election commission must recount votes from about 300 ballot boxes
http://www.cumberlink.com/articles/2005/02...s/d8853id00.txt
http://tinyurl.com/62v8u
Iraqi officials Wednesday delayed the announcement of final results from landmark national elections because they said the election commission must recount votes from about 300 ballot boxes
http://www.cumberlink.com/articles/2005/02...s/d8853id00.txt
http://tinyurl.com/62v8u
Stories from Fallujah:
American soldiers entered his house and woke them all up. They drug them into the main room of the house, and executed my cousin in front of his family. Then they simply left.”
http://207.44.245.159/article8008.htm
American soldiers entered his house and woke them all up. They drug them into the main room of the house, and executed my cousin in front of his family. Then they simply left.”
http://207.44.245.159/article8008.htm
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/a...sh_050210004744
Bomb 'likely cause' of British plane crash in Iraq
Bomb 'likely cause' of British plane crash in Iraq
Trials of Some of Hussein's Aides to Start Within Weeks;
His Is Expected in 2006
By JOHN F. BURNS
One of the first men to be tried will be Chemical Ali,
known for his role in poison-gas attacks on Iraqi Kurds in
the 1980's.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/10/internat...0saddam.html?th
His Is Expected in 2006
By JOHN F. BURNS
One of the first men to be tried will be Chemical Ali,
known for his role in poison-gas attacks on Iraqi Kurds in
the 1980's.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/10/internat...0saddam.html?th
Since election, Shiites build bridges to Iraq's minorities
High-ranking Shiite officials say accommodating Sunnis is key to
curbing the insurgency. By Dan Murphy
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0210/p07s01-woiq.html?s=hns
High-ranking Shiite officials say accommodating Sunnis is key to
curbing the insurgency. By Dan Murphy
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0210/p07s01-woiq.html?s=hns
Car Bomb Blast in Baghdad Kills At Least 2
http://enews.voanews.com/t?ctl=B82E8D:2F72C9D
Officials say the bomb, detonated by remote control, went off just
after a US military patrol vehicle passed by A car bomb exploded in
central Baghdad Thursday, killing at least two people and wounding
several others as insurgents continued their campaign of post-election
violence.
Police and firemen attend the scene of an early morning car bomb which
exploded in Tahrir Square in central BaghdadOfficials say the bomb,
detonated by remote control, went off just after a U.S. military
patrol vehicle passed by.
South of Baghdad, Iraqi police found the bodies of 20 truck drivers
who had been shot dead.
Meanwhile, Iraq's interim government said the country's borders will
be closed for five days from February 17 - apparently to boost
security during the major Shi'ite Muslim religious observance of
Ashura.
Wednesday, Iraq's election commission said 300 ballot boxes from the
January 30th vote need to be recounted and that it is not ready to
announce the final results, which were expected today.
Some information for this report provided by AP and Reuters.
http://enews.voanews.com/t?ctl=B82E8D:2F72C9D
Officials say the bomb, detonated by remote control, went off just
after a US military patrol vehicle passed by A car bomb exploded in
central Baghdad Thursday, killing at least two people and wounding
several others as insurgents continued their campaign of post-election
violence.
Police and firemen attend the scene of an early morning car bomb which
exploded in Tahrir Square in central BaghdadOfficials say the bomb,
detonated by remote control, went off just after a U.S. military
patrol vehicle passed by.
South of Baghdad, Iraqi police found the bodies of 20 truck drivers
who had been shot dead.
Meanwhile, Iraq's interim government said the country's borders will
be closed for five days from February 17 - apparently to boost
security during the major Shi'ite Muslim religious observance of
Ashura.
Wednesday, Iraq's election commission said 300 ballot boxes from the
January 30th vote need to be recounted and that it is not ready to
announce the final results, which were expected today.
Some information for this report provided by AP and Reuters.
More NATO Countries Offer to Help Train Iraq Forces
http://enews.voanews.com/t?ctl=B82E88:2F72C9D
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice says her meeting with fellow NATO
foreign ministers in Brussels Thursday was the most harmonious to date
on Iraq
Senior Bush administration officials say more NATO countries are
coming forward with offers to join an alliance program to train Iraqi
security forces.
A number of NATO member states had been reluctant to join in the
training program. But U.S. officials say attitudes appear to be
changing in the wake of the massive turnout for Iraqi elections
January 30.
Secretary of State Rice, after a working lunch with fellow NATO
foreign ministers, described the meeting as the best discussion of
Iraq the alliance has had since the ouster of Saddam Hussein.
Condoleezza Rice left and NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer
walk together at NATO headquarters in BrusselsAt a news conference
with NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, Ms. Rice said
several thus far uncommitted alliance members came forward with offers
to join the training effort. "I can say with gratitude to colleagues
around the table that there were a number of countries that
immediately agreed to contribute, and a number of others said that
they would intend to contribute because everyone understands the
importance of training the Iraqi security forces so that the Iraqis
are capable of taking on their own security tasks, something that
they're not yet capable of doing," she said.
A senior State Department official said six or seven NATO countries
offered to provide direct assistance in training Iraqi security forces
to fight the insurgency.
He said another six said they were considering making a contribution,
either to train soldiers in Iraq or outside that country, or to
contribute to a special trust fund set up to finance such projects.
Mr. de Hoop Scheffer said he thinks the 26-member alliance had turned
the corner on the Iraq issue since the watershed elections for an
Iraqi national assembly.
He said his goal is to have all 26 NATO countries contributing to the
training mission by the time President Bush visits alliance
headquarters in Brussels for a summit meeting February 22.
The NATO chief said the current goal is to turn out one thousand
NATO-trained Iraqi security officers a year but indicated that target
might be increased.
NATO has to date deployed about 80 of a planned staff of 300 officers
to a training center being set up near Baghdad.
Secretary of State Rice is expected to discuss Iraq again when she
meets the European Union's top leaders here Thursday as she wraps up
an eight-day mission to Europe and the Middle East.
http://enews.voanews.com/t?ctl=B82E88:2F72C9D
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice says her meeting with fellow NATO
foreign ministers in Brussels Thursday was the most harmonious to date
on Iraq
Senior Bush administration officials say more NATO countries are
coming forward with offers to join an alliance program to train Iraqi
security forces.
A number of NATO member states had been reluctant to join in the
training program. But U.S. officials say attitudes appear to be
changing in the wake of the massive turnout for Iraqi elections
January 30.
Secretary of State Rice, after a working lunch with fellow NATO
foreign ministers, described the meeting as the best discussion of
Iraq the alliance has had since the ouster of Saddam Hussein.
Condoleezza Rice left and NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer
walk together at NATO headquarters in BrusselsAt a news conference
with NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, Ms. Rice said
several thus far uncommitted alliance members came forward with offers
to join the training effort. "I can say with gratitude to colleagues
around the table that there were a number of countries that
immediately agreed to contribute, and a number of others said that
they would intend to contribute because everyone understands the
importance of training the Iraqi security forces so that the Iraqis
are capable of taking on their own security tasks, something that
they're not yet capable of doing," she said.
A senior State Department official said six or seven NATO countries
offered to provide direct assistance in training Iraqi security forces
to fight the insurgency.
He said another six said they were considering making a contribution,
either to train soldiers in Iraq or outside that country, or to
contribute to a special trust fund set up to finance such projects.
Mr. de Hoop Scheffer said he thinks the 26-member alliance had turned
the corner on the Iraq issue since the watershed elections for an
Iraqi national assembly.
He said his goal is to have all 26 NATO countries contributing to the
training mission by the time President Bush visits alliance
headquarters in Brussels for a summit meeting February 22.
The NATO chief said the current goal is to turn out one thousand
NATO-trained Iraqi security officers a year but indicated that target
might be increased.
NATO has to date deployed about 80 of a planned staff of 300 officers
to a training center being set up near Baghdad.
Secretary of State Rice is expected to discuss Iraq again when she
meets the European Union's top leaders here Thursday as she wraps up
an eight-day mission to Europe and the Middle East.
Decision made to protect pilgrims as experts debate staying power of insurgency.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0210/dailyUpdate.html
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0210/dailyUpdate.html
Hans Blix: 'We told them we could not find evidence':
Almost two years after the invasion of Iraq, Hans Blix denounced the US for opting for military intervention over inspection.
http://207.44.245.159/article8027.htm
===
Almost two years after the invasion of Iraq, Hans Blix denounced the US for opting for military intervention over inspection.
http://207.44.245.159/article8027.htm
===
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.