[Mb-civic] Bush?s Grand Plan: Incite Civil War

[ean at sbcglobal.net]

ZNet - Jan 15, 2005
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=7030
Bush’s Grand Plan: Incite Civil War
 
by Mike Whitney; January 15, 2005  

The Bush Administration is intentionally steering Iraq towards civil war. 
The elections are merely the catalyst for igniting, what could be, a 
massive social upheaval. This explains the bizarre insistence on voting 
when security is nearly nonexistent and where a mere 7% of the 
people can even identify the candidates. (This figure gleaned from 
Allawi’s Baghdad newspaper, Al-Sabah) Rumsfeld is using the 
elections as a springboard for aggravating tensions between Sunnis 
and Shiites and for diverting attention away from the troops. It’s a 
foolhardy move that only magnifies the desperation of the present 
situation. The Pentagon brass expected a “cakewalk” and, instead, 
they’ve found themselves mired in a guerilla war. 

Everyone from Brent Scowcroft to Tom Friedman has speculated on 
the likelihood of civil war. Their comments are more reflective of the 
hopes of American elites than they are of realities on the ground. Sure, 
Friedman would like to see Muslims killing Muslims, but it won’t 
happen. Tom hasn’t guessed right on the war yet, and that’s not about 
to change. The same could be said for Rumsfeld. For a Sec-Def who 
regards “information as power”, Rumsfeld seems woefully blinkered by 
the true nature of the fighting. He seems incapable of grasping even 
the most basic elements of the conflict or the psychology that fuels it. 
Whatever happened to the military mantra, “Know your enemy”? 

When you destroy a man’s home and kill and disgrace his friends, he’ll 
fight back. And, when you rob a man of everything he has, including 
his dignity, you leave him with one, solitary passion
 rage. This rage 
is now animating the resistance in ways that no one had previously 
anticipated. The world’s lone superpower is roped to the ground like 
Gulliver and the Pentagon high-command is getting increasingly 
agitated. 

Civil war can be messy. Inciting religious and sectarian hatreds tends 
to disrupt the smooth execution of business; like the purging of 
potential enemies and the extracting of vital resources. Never the less, 
Rumsfeld is nearly out of options; “divide and conquer” may be all 
that’s left. If we glance at the last 3 imperial projects; Kosovo, Haiti and 
Afghanistan, the very same strategy was applied. All three nations 
have been effectively carved up, delivered to US multi-national 
corporations, and reduced to warlordism or anarchy. Their outcome 
sets the precedent for similar results in Iraq. Will Iraq be Balkenized 
along ethnic and religious lines? 

That’s what the Generals are hoping, and their plan is already in full 
swing. The Marines deployed Shiite National Guards during the siege 
of Falluja with the obvious intention of exacerbating tensions between 
the two factions. The Kurdish Peshmerga was utilized in Mosul for the 
very same purpose. Also, there have been a number of suspicious 
bombings (particularly the attacks on Sunni clerics in Najaf and 
Kerbala) that are not at all consistent with the insurgent pattern, but 
suggest a clandestine (CIA?) operation to incite hostilities. Add to this 
the projected election results, which will tilt heavily towards the Shiites, 
and there’s a real potential for internecine violence. It’s easy to see 
how Pentagon planners might think that these provocations could 
auger a massive internal struggle. It won’t happen, though. 

Whatever we may think of the Iraqis at this point, one thing is certain; 
they know who their enemy is. The element of surprise or deception 
has evaporated like the plumes of smoke dispersing over Falluja. They 
know who we are, and they know they want us out. Deteriorating 
Security 

Rumsfeld finally seems to be grasping the seriousness of the 
predicament. The security situation has deteriorated so dramatically 
that even his support among elites is eroding. Last week foreign policy 
Gurus, Brent Scowcroft and Zbigniew Brzezinski, fired off a salvo of 
criticism directed at the mishandling of the occupation. The normally 
circumspect Brzezinski was particularly savage, slamming the war as a 
sign of “moral decay”; a euphemism that will undoubtedly send shock 
waves through America’s boardrooms and think-tanks. 

James Dobbins of the conservative Rand Corporation was equally 
ferocious, stating bluntly that “The beginning of wisdom is to realize 
that the United States can’t win.” “Can’t win?” 

Dobbins probably should have added, “Can’t win, but won’t leave,” as 
the appropriate adjunct to his first observation. American elites may 
disparage the conduct of the occupation, but they’ve tied the nation’s 
future to its success and won’t give up easily. 

Rumsfeld Shifts Gears 

There are signs that the recalcitrant Rumsfeld is beginning to get the 
message. Last week he dispatched retired General Gary Luck to Iraq 
to produce a detailed breakdown of force strength and vulnerabilities. 
When Luck returns he will appear before Congress and make an 
energetic appeal for more troops and stiffer resolve. He can be 
expected to draw a dismal picture of a failed state that threatens to 
destabilize the entire region unless America makes a greater 
commitment. Both the Congress and the media will play a role in 
calling on the American people for steadfastness in the face of a very 
long and bloody occupation. Many believe that Luck’s assessment will 
determine whether Bush will approach Congress to reinstate the draft. 

Enlisting the skills of General Luck is an indication that Rumsfeld is 
giving ground to his critics; that he is no longer elevating his judgment 
above all others. His bungling of every aspect of the war has limited his 
ability to act unilaterally. He will either have to demonstrate some level 
of cooperation or step down. The war’s two main debacles so far can 
be directly pinned on Rumsfeld. First, he went in “too light” (without 
sufficient manpower to secure the peace) and second, he dismissed 
the 400,000 strong Iraqi military, the majority of whom now comprise 
the resistance. The final outcome in Iraq will certainly rest heavily on 
those two foolish choices. Leveling Falluja 

The siege of a Falluja was a crossroads for the American occupation. 
The right-wing punditocracy insisted that the resistance in Falluja be 
crushed by any means possible; preferably overwhelming force. The 
Baghdad enclave of 250,000 was decimated by the relentless 
pounding of US aerial bombardment and a full-fledged ground assault 
that left over 700 civilians dead; 70% of whom were women and 
children. 

In the first attack on Falluja Lt. Col. B. P. McCoy noted that, “We don’t 
want to ‘rubblize’ the city. That will give the enemy more places to 
hide.” McCoy’s injunction was ignored during the second (Nov 8) siege. 
The city has been both “rubblized” and rendered “uninhabitable”. 
(according to the Red Crescent) 

The Bush administration applied the “nuclear option” to Falluja; leveling 
the city to send a message that future resistance would be dealt with 
accordingly. The message was faithfully rejected. 

If anything, Falluja has only strengthened the resolve of the anti-
American forces and increased recruitment for the resistance. The 
violence has spread and intensified throughout the Sunni Triangle, with 
the number of attacks skyrocketing to 75 per day. Falluja has removed 
any doubt from the minds of young Iraqi men that a nonviolent 
settlement is possible. The flattening of a city of 250,000 confirms, in 
stark terms, that the war will be decided by force of arms. Falluja has 
removed whatever “gray area” there may have been before. 

The numbers of insurgents are steadily on the rise since the siege. The 
strength of the current rebellion was estimated last week by Iraq’s 
Intelligence Chief, General Mohammed Shahwani. Shahwani told a 
Saudi newspaper that the “US was facing 40,000 hard-core fighters” 
and a support group of as “many as 150,000 to 200,000”. 

Predictably, the story was buried in the western press, but the 
implications are clear. The Pentagon has been intentionally misleading 
the American people about the size and strength of the insurgency. 
(previous estimates were between 5,000 to 20,000) These new figures, 
which are now supported by many independent defense analysts, point 
to an insurgency which is numerically larger than the occupation and 
fully prepared to fight a long and gory guerilla war. This brings us back 
to James Dobbins observation “The beginning of wisdom is to realize 
that the United States can’t win.” 

Indeed. 

Falluja’s failure means that the prospect of destroying the rest of Iraq’s 
cities is more remote. Rather, success will depend on increasing the 
number of US troops and developing a long term strategy for 
“incrementally” establishing security. The only other option is to deflect 
attention from the occupation forces by inciting widespread instability. 
A civil war may serve the short term interests of the administration, but 
it could also provoke region-wide turmoil. It’s a risk that no sane person 
would consider. The determination to carry out the Jan 30 elections 
further proves that the administration has not veered from the reckless 
and delusional strategies that have thrust the mission to the brink of 
disaster. 

Months ago, Baghdad correspondent, Andrew Cockburn warned that 
the United States was “in danger of losing the war” in Iraq. Since then 
the security situation has steadily worsened and vast swaths of the 
country have come under rebel control. Every promotional device the 
administration has used (the forming of the Coalition Provisional 
Authority; the transfer of sovereignty and, now, the elections) has 
backfired; bringing on larger attacks and stiffer resistance. Rumsfeld’s 
“high-tech” warfare has degenerated into death squads and torture 
chambers; a pitiable return to medieval combat. The civilian 
leadership, drunk with hubris and greed, never noticed the wave of 
insurgency looming in the distance. Now, they’re facing daily trauma 
and death without a clear plan for success. The Iraq mission is like a 
21st century Striker-vehicle buried up to its axels and lolling in the 
dessert sand. As the Jan 30 deadline approaches, there’s little sign 
that things will improve. 

----------


The Sydney Morning Herald - January 19, 2005
http://www.smh.com.au/news/After-Saddam/US-official-confirms-Allawi-
shot-s
ix-dead/2005/01/18/1105810916006.html?oneclick=true


US official confirms Allawi shot six dead

A former Jordanian government minister has told The New Yorker that
an American official confirmed to him that the Iraqi interim Prime
Minister, Iyad Allawi, executed six suspected insurgents at a Baghdad
police station last year.

The claim is in an extensive profile of Dr Allawi written for this
week's issue of the magazine by an American journalist, Jon Lee
Anderson, the author of The Fall of Baghdad and a regular Baghdad
correspondent for The New Yorker.

Writing about his research in Jordan in December, Anderson says: "A
well-known former government minister told me that an American official
had confirmed that the killings took place, saying to him, 'What a mess
we're in - we got rid of one son of a bitch only to get another one'."

The New Yorker also revealed that Anderson was present during an
interview conducted by the Herald's chief correspondent, Paul McGeough, in
late June, with a man who said he witnessed the executions by Dr Allawi.

Dr Allawi denied the allegations when they were published in the Herald
last July.

Anderson writes: "The man ... described how Allawi had been taken to
seven suspects, who were made to stand against a wall in a courtyard
of the police station, their faces covered. After being told of their
alleged crimes by a police official, Allawi had asked for a pistol, and
then shot each prisoner in the head. [One of the men survived.] Afterward,
the witness said, Allawi had declared to those present, 'This is how we
must deal with the terrorists.' The witness said he approved of Allawi's
act, adding that, in any case, the terrorists were better off dead, for
they had been tortured for days."

The archives of South News can be found at
http://southmovement.alphalink.com.au/southnews/

----


-- 
You are currently on Mha Atma's Earth Action Network email list, 
option D (up to 3 emails/day).  To be removed, or to switch options 
(option A - 1x/week, option B - 3/wk, option C - up to 1x/day, option D - 
up to 3x/day) please reply and let us know!  If someone forwarded you 
this email and you want to be on our list, send an email to 
ean at sbcglobal.net and tell us which option you'd like.


"In times of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act."
   ---   George Orwell


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20050119/c0eb2c35/attachment.html