My dream diary has over 12,000 pages of important information - If you would like to bookmark me please click here

Follow me on Twitter   Subscribe in a reader

Jill Carroll Still Kidnapped, Civil War Imminent, Resistance/AlQaeda Split…

Let’s start with the last item in the title there. Why is it that the western media or the MSM if you will, is so surprised by “recent” conflicts between Iraqi Resistance groups and Al Qaeda terrorists/insurgents?

Could it be that the media still has no clue about Iraq, that their failure to learn effectively about the culture, traditions, and history of Iraq make them completely incapable of understanding the situation at hand?

While I disagree with Yahia Said’s use of “insurgent” as a catch-all term for the incredibly nuanced and varied opposition to both the United States and Coalition forces and the Iraqi government, I understand his usage. The MSM and the Bush Administration are certainly the most to blame for the unfortunate introduction of this term into our lexicon as a catch-all for the military wing of Iraq’s opposition.

Let’s also keep in mind that we haven’t “won” the “war in Iraq.” Thus every action we take to “fight insurgents” is in fact part of an ongoing battle to “win the war in Iraq” and “defeat Saddam’s Baathist regime.” There is really a huge threat to international law happening in Iraq. More than just the complete neglect of treaties and international law, we are setting new precedents by circumventing international law. Because no one in the UN or other nations has taken a hard stance against whats happening in Iraq, defying the 1907 Hague Convention IV and the later convention updating Hague, the fourth Geneva Convention. The fourth Geneva Convention was signed after World War II and in large part was created to prevent the installment of a new government by a foreign occupying power, in the manner of the Vichy Government in France by the Nazis.

But to continue with the matter at hand, why is it that the media has failed to recognize the ongoing conflicts between Al Qaeda and nationalists?

The Guardian, one of the few papers with strong reporting by Iraqi correspondents, ran a story by one of its Iraqi staff members in October of last year, regarding the conflict between local “resistance fighters” and the “terrorists” of Al Qaeda, under the heading, “We Don’t Need al-Qaida.”

The Christian Science Monitor, the paper whose reporter, Jill Carroll, was recently kidnapped, reported a nuanced view of what was then Iraq’s nascent resistance, in the fall of 2003.

Understanding the nature of Iraq’s resistance is the first step to understanding why there would be conflict between this segment of opposition and that of Al Qaeda and related foreign militants.

While I was in Iraq, in October and November, every single Iraqi I spoke to expressed opposition to Al Qaeda and Zarqawi (granted some of them denied Zarqawii ever existed and many believed him to be dead).

In fact, Anthony Cordesman, in the Washington Post, describes the Coalition’s attempts to label Iraq’s resistance as foreign this way; “It makes the government’s counterinsurgency efforts seem more legitimate, and it links what’s going on in Iraq to the war on terrorism,” he continued. “When people go out into battle, they often characterize enemies in the most negative way possible. Obviously there are all kinds of interacting political prejudices they can bring out by blaming outsiders.”

Now, just two days ago the New York Times deigned to report on the conflicts between Al Qaeda and the Iraqi Resistance. This comes at the same time the United States and its Coalition allies are attempting to broker agreements with the Resistance to help in the fight against Al Qaeda. It certainly seems questionable to think this is just a coincidence. I’m not meaning to imply that the NYT is collaborating with the United States military so much as I am trying to demonstrate how little knowledge and access the western media has to Iraqis on the ground.

The failure of the western media to create a strong network of Iraqi journalists and to push its correspondents to do in-depth reporting and investigating of the situation in Iraq has worked hand-in-glove by default with the needs of the Bush Administration to keep the United States public generally ignorant about the ongoing problems in Iraq and the deeply entrenched conflict.

Which leads right into the next major issue in this post, “Will there be a civil war?” The idea of Iraq’s looming civil war is of course one of the major elements of the conflict that everyone in the media, and the government, like to tout. It is even presented by many folks who opposed the war, but now say we can’t leave because Iraq will “descend into chaos.”

Arianna Huffington has this succinct analysis of what the mainstream feels is the direction Iraq is taking towards a civil war. I found it via Juan Cole’s Informed Comment blog.

Arianna asks, “Will yesterday’s in-your-face decision by Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, Iraq’s most influential Shiite leader, to renege on his pledge to amend the new Constitution in a manner acceptable to Sunnis be the shove in the back that sends Iraq over the brink into all-out civil war?”

Unfortunately, what would otherwise be a strong analysis is colored by this statement; “Now it is clear that the Shiites were just saying what the Bush administration wanted to hear, never meant it, and never intended to follow through. “We will stop anyone who tries to change the Constitution,” said al-Hakim yesterday.”

The ongoing collection of “the Shiites” into a single homogenous group by Arianna and the rest of the western media and most of its critics, is at least as egregious as the discussion of the “Iraqi insurgency” as one monolithic force. The idea of a civil war in Iraq between Shiites and Sunnis continues to belie the deep entrenchment of inter-marriage and the diverse nature of Iraq. In fact, the New York Times article quoted above even quotes a Sunni fighter who opposed Al Qaeda when their “sectarian war against Shiites clashed with his loyalty to a Shiite relative of his the group had kidnapped and tortured.”

I met few Iraqis who couldn’t tell me about their relatives from an opposing sect, whether it was a Sunni woman married to a Shi’a husband, or vice versa, or a shi’a whose cousin was a Kurdish Sunni, this is a common refrain in Iraq. The division along religious and tribal lines was certainly beginning in the more desperate final years of the twentieth century in Iraq, however they were deeply exascerbated by the complete destruction of Iraq’s social fabric during the United States occupation and the ongoing war in Iraq.

By parroting the line that Iraq has deep-rooted “ethnic and religious tensions” the media works to absolve the United States of guilt as Iraq apparently spirals toward a civil war. Just because Hakim says something, doesn’t make it true. Just as politicians in the United States and all over the world make arrogant assertions that don’t pan out, Hakim’s words should be taken with a grain of salt.
(For those of you who need to catch up, here are two stories in English about the situation: NYT and WaPo)

Certainly Sistani will never support this bald-faced sectarianism and politicking , neither will Muqtada al Sadr’s people, and these two groups form a solid block of Iraqi Shiites. Thankfully, someone else out there is encouraging a similar questioning of Hakim’s actual power; read Helena Cobban’s comments about Hakim. If the United States and the rest of the Coalition and the international community fail to take a hard line on the political machinations of a few elites in what is essentially an illegal government formed under an occupation, which over-emphasizes the occupation’s allies in power-sharing, then there certainly will be a strengthening of ties with Iran and the horrible things we have seen already happen in Iraq will only increase.

However, if you want to talk about the rising tide of civil war between Kurdistan and the rest of Iraq, or Kurds and Sunni Arab Iraqis, or Kurds and other ethnic minorities in the north such as the Turkmen or Turkomen, certainly there appears to be a fair amount of evidence for this.

You only have to look as far as Tal Afar to find a strong example. The Washington Post, in the fall of 2004 quoted Brigadier General Carter F. Ham this way: Ham said the Americans’ efforts have been complicated by the way Iraq’s ethnic, tribal and religious groups are woven into Tall Afar’s population. Though Iraq is predominantly an Arab country, the majority of Tall Afar’s residents are ethnic Turkmen. And although northern Iraq is largely Sunni-populated, the city is mostly Shiite.

Last year, when we revisited Tal Afar, approximately one year later, this report came from Dahr Jamail about what transpired.

Furthermore, just before the end of 2005, Knight-Ridder correspondent, Tom Lasseter, via the Seattle Times, reports about the quiet steps being taken by Kurdish officials to prepare for secession.

Lastly, a brief question about Jill Carroll’s abduction. Why has no one considered the possibility that some element of the many roge factions in Iraq’s interim government kidnapped Ms. Carroll? I visited Adnan Dulaimi while I was in Iraq, and before meeting him, I was given his personal cellphone number and my translator spoke with him directly. This is a pretty significant detail when you consider his current position as the head of one of Iraq’s major Sunni opposition parties. I would expect Jill, who appears to be an incredibly dedicated and enthusiastic reporter and supporter of the Iraqi people, would have mentioned this to her driver. He has already implied that the assault and kidnapping appeared to be a setup of some kind.

Riverbend, the Iraqi blogger of Baghdad Burning says this about Allan Enwiyah, Jill Carroll’s translator, who was the proprietor of a popular music shop prior to the invasion:

After the war, the area he had his shop in deteriorated. There were car bombs and shootings and the Badir people took over some of the houses there. People went to A’arasat less and less because it was too dangerous. His shop was closed up more than it was open. He shut it up permanently after getting death threats and a hand grenade through his shop window. His car was carjacked at some point and he was shot at so he started driving around in his fathers beaten-up old Toyota Cressida with a picture of Sistani on his back window, “To ward off the fanatics…” He winked and grinned.

Given these two pieces of information, it seems even more reasonable to consider the possibility that Ms. Carroll was either the unfortunate victim of an attack meant for Mr. Enwiyah, or that they at least were both under the observation of the Badr militia or other rogue elements in Iraq’s interim government. It is certainly possible as well that she was kidnapped by one of Iraq’s many Sunni resistance groups, although in the past, these groups have always released a video or some kind of statement by this time. Even the Christian Peacemakers, whose kidnapping was bizarre due to the initial lack of word about their abduction were heard from within a few days in a statement from the Swords of Righteousness Brigade. It could also be possible that she has been kidnapped by a criminal gang intent on selling her to the highest bidder amongst one of the Resistance groups.

But as always, I feel that the most important question is, “What questions are we not asking ourselves, and why?”

As a follow up to Micah’s comment: The coordinates you give are a couple of miles directly south of the Tehran Nuclear Research Center in Tehran.

 -Ben

reply

Thanks Ben