|
|
 |
In
depth I
Iraq: the war and occupation
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 1 May 2003, 20 days after Baghdad was taken in an offensive by the allied troops of the United States and Great Britain, with the support of the Spanish Government headed by José María Aznar, US President George W Bush proclaimed the “end to hostilities” in Iraqi territory. However, the truth was that the conflict in Iraq was far from over.
The humanitarian crisis was growing daily, the shortages suffered by the population were ever greater, and the civilian victims of the war that had begun on 23 March numbered almost 10,000 (although the count was inexact due to the chaos affecting health services). What was even more serious was that the level of insecurity did not diminish after the conflict officially came to an end. In a country where the authorities had either vanished or been captured by the occupying forces, chaos and uncertainty was growing daily.
After President Bush’s announcement, the debate broadened to encompass various issues: where were the weapons of mass destruction, the elimination of which had provided Bush and his principal ally, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, with the justification for the war; what role would the United Nations play in the reconstruction of Iraq, after the international body had seen its attempts to find a diplomatic solution to the conflict steamrollered; who would rule the country; and, above all, what would the Middle East situation look like in the context of the war on terror launched following the events of 11 September 2001.
The weapons of mass destruction never appeared, but Bush and Blair did not repent of their actions because they felt it was their duty to “free Iraq from the tyranny of Saddam Hussein”, whom they finally captured on the outskirts of Tikrit, where he had been born, on 13 December 2003. Meanwhile, from 23-24 October Madrid hosted the International Donors’ Conference for the Reconstruction of Iraq, which it was estimated was going to cost some 100,000 million dollars. However, in spite of the destruction caused by the invasion, it was not repairing and reconstructing the country’s infrastructure that was costing the most in Iraq, but maintaining the US forces there. Washington is paying 51,000 million dollars a year for the upkeep of its 140,000 troops.
During the year following the declaration of the end of the war, twice as many US soldiers had died in Iraq as died during the “official” war period. Moreover, it is clear that the world is not a safer place without Saddam Hussein in power, and the people have began to make their goverments pay the price for using facile arguments to justify going to war. In Spain, the shock of the attacks committed on 11 March 2004 in Madrid, in reprisal for the Government’s support for Bush and Blair’s war, led the electorate withdrew its support from Aznar, in favour of the opposition Socialist Party; as soon as he had taken office, President elect José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero ordered the Spanish troops out of Iraq.
But there was more to come. On 28 April 2004, CBS TV published the first in a series of photos showing US soldiers committing all kinds of abuses against Iraqi prisoners. Following this, the US and British media began to show the public the abuses that were committed in Iraqi prisons run by the occupying forces, mainly in Abu Ghraib prison, which has been notorious since the time of Saddam Hussein. The ensuing scandal – the ultimate consequences of which cannot yet be foreseen – forced not only the Pentagon, but also Bush and Blair to express their ignorance and to apologise, while enquiries were launched to identify those responsible.
In spite of the fact that both the US and British authorities insisted that this was not how the majority of their troops generally behaved, the testimonies and documentary evidence that began to surface showed that these were in fact “systematic practices” that violated the Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War. On 8 May, hours after Tony Blair’s public apology, the British Government acknowledged that in February it had been sent a report by the International Committee of the Red Cross documenting alleged torture of Iraqi prisoners by British and US soldiers.
The selection of links, reports and articles below aim to serve to complement the news reports available from different sources, with a special emphasis on independent information from civil society organizations and alternative media.
Versión
en español
|
|
|
| |
 |
 |
News |
| Up-to-date current affairs information. |
Tue Sep 18 2007
Iraq death toll rivals Rwanda genocide, Cambodian killing fields
Fri May 19 2006
UN report acuses US over torture
|
 |
In-depth
reports |
| Detailed
reports on key issues |
Disarmament
Every day, millions of men, women and children are living in fear of armed violence.
Israeli-Palestinian conflict
More than fifty years on, a problem still awaiting a solution.
Oil fueling conflicts
Many wars have been waged and are still being fought all over the world to ensure corporate control over oil.
International Criminal Court
The globalization of justice strengthens, despite US efforts to undermine it.
The landmine problem
Mines recognize no cease-fire and, after the fight, they continue to maim or kill innocent people.
|
 |
Campaigns |
| NGO-organised
actions |
Urgent appeal to save Iraq's Academics
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
About Iraq |
 |
|
The occupation fiasco |
 |
|
Post-war? |
 |
-
Post-War Iraq
Source: Global Policy
Debates rage over post-war Iraq, both inside the Bush administration and between Washington and other governments. Will Washington rule Iraq directly through a military occupation government or will a UN-sponsored authority take over sooner or later? If the UN is involved, will it be subordinate to US priorities or relatively independent? Will US companies seize the oil and reconstruction contracts? How strong will Iraqi opposition to the occupation be? This section looks at these and other aspects of Iraq in the aftermath of the US-UK war.
-
Who´ll be the next U.S. target in the Middle East?
Source: Third World Network - TWN
Reem Haddad
Questions over the evidence behind the US and UK governments' dossiers listing the reasons for the Iraq war find a resonance around the world - including in the Middle East. The following article gauges the reactions of ordinary Syrians and Lebanese who fear evidence matters little when powerful nations decide to go to war.
-
Open fire and open markets: strategy of an empire
Source: Third World Network
Anuradha Mittal
The United States is focused on securing its power globally, through both military and market interventions. Its 'war for freedom' or 'war on terrorism' is at one with its expansionary goals for the market: open invasion in some places, and open markets everywhere.
-
The changing face of occupation - what numbers cannot tell
Source: Occupation Watch
Eman Ahmed Khammas
The last six months in Baghdad have been too long, an age. For a nation that has been patient for decades and has undergone three wars, 13 years of sanctions, political repression, and continual outside threats, 6 months have been too long to wait for relief, to wait for positive changes.
-
Dying and lying
Source: Porto Alegre 2003
Tariq Ali
And one day, when the children of dead Iraqis and Americans ask why their parents died, the answer will come: because the politicians lied.
-
Building a new security structure
Source: International Crisis Group
The Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) needs to rethink its strategy for a new Iraqi security structure. Facing insurgency and many political pressures, the temptation to respond to today’s requirements with expedient moves is strong. But eventually the CPA will depart, leaving Iraq to deal with the consequences.
-
The vulnerabilities of the Bush Iraq policies
Source: Transnational Institute
Phyllis Bennis
The US drive towards empire faces new and serious challenges, the most important being the widening military confrontation now facing US troops in cities across Iraq. But there is a further challenge internationally. The "second super-power" is on the rise, and it now has broadened to include a new assortment of governments prepared to defy US pressures, inter-governmental organizations and groups, and new developments may point to a potential to reclaim the United Nations itself as part of the global resistance to US war.
-
Iraq: a mercenary's paradise
Source: Corporate Watch
Armed to the teeth and controlled by no-one, private security firms are on a rampage in Iraq. Mercenaries who have been involved with atrocities in Sierra Leon, Chile, Papua New Guinea and South Africa protect VIPs and installations. Now, the US government has awarded a UK firm, Aegis, with a generous contract to coordinate them all into one big army. June 2004.
-
The Iraq impasse
Source: Middle East Report
Regime-changing war in Iraq was supposed to usher in democracy, prosperity and Middle East peace -- remember? Well over a year into the troubled US-dominated occupation of the country, George W. Bush has finally admitted to "miscalculation of what the conditions would be." "The Iraq Impasse," the fall 2004 issue of Middle East Report, analyzes the multiple miscalculations of Bush's war in detail. September 2004.
-
Nowhere to flee: the perilous situation of Palestinians in Iraq
Source: Human Rights Watch
Amid widespread sectarian violence in Iraq, Palestinian refugees in Iraq face particularly grave security threats, including targeted killings by mostly Shi`a militant groups and harassment by the Iraqi government, Human Rights Watch said in this report. September 2006.
-
The Iraq Study Group Report
Source: Global Policy Forum
This report warns that Iraq will “slide toward chaos” unless the US changes course and seeks more diplomatic and political solutions to providing security and stability in Iraq. The 160-page document, known as the Baker/Hamilton report, advises that the US involve Iraq’s neighbors in brokering a peaceful resolution, but criticizes regional countries for “not doing enough to help Iraq achieve stability.” The report does little to indicate that the US military presence in Iraq will decrease. While it does recommend a drawing down of some combat troops, the Study Group recommends that the Iraq government meet certain conditions before any troops withdraw, and refuses to set specific timeframes for departure. December 2006 (pdf version).
-
Can't stay the course, can't end the war, but we'll call it bipartisan
Source: Foreign Policy In Focus
Phyllis Bennis and Erik Leaver
Despite the breathless hype, the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group (ISG) report did not include any dramatic new ideas for ending the war in Iraq. In fact, it did not include a call to end the war at all. Rather, the report's recommendations focus on transforming the U.S. occupation of Iraq into a long-term, sustainable, off-the-front-page occupation with a lower rate of U.S. casualties. Despite its title, it does not provide "A New Approach: A Way Forward." December 2006.
-
The Iraq effect: war has increased terrorism sevenfold worldwide
Source: Mother Jones
Peter Bergen and Paul Cruickshank
A new study, by terrorism experts Peter Bergen and Paul Cruickshank, uses data from the RAND Corporation to produce the first public report that measures the "Iraq effect" on jihadist terrorism. It documents that since the invasion of Iraq in 2003, incidents of jihadist violence in the world have increased by 607 percent, and the number of people killed in those attacks has risen by 237 percent. February 2007.
-
Iraq: civilians without protection
Source: International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)
The humanitarian situation is steadily worsening and it is affecting, directly or indirectly, all Iraqis. Protecting Iraq’s civilian population must be a priority, and the ICRC urgently calls for better respect for international humanitarian law. It appeals to all those with military or political influence on the ground to act now to ensure that the lives of ordinary Iraqis are spared and protected. This is an obligation under international humanitarian law for both States and non-State actors. April 2007.
-
The politics of naming: genocide, civil war, insurgency
Source: London Review of Books
Mahmood Mamdani
The similarities between Iraq and Darfur are remarkable. The estimate of the number of civilians killed over the past three years is roughly similar. The killers are mostly paramilitaries, closely linked to the official military, which is said to be their main source of arms. The victims too are by and large identified as members of groups, rather than targeted as individuals. But the violence in the two places is named differently. In Iraq, it is said to be a cycle of insurgency and counter-insurgency; in Darfur, it is called genocide. Why the difference? Who does the naming? Who is being named? What difference does it make? March 2007.
|
The human rights situation |
 |
|
World Tribunal on Iraq |
 |
|
The reconstruction of Iraq |
 |
| | | | | | |