FRFI 198 August / September 2007
At the end of May, President Bush warned the US people to ‘prepare for a bloody summer of heavy fighting and loss of life’. In the three months to mid-July 2007 331 US soldiers were killed and 2,029 wounded in Iraq, the bloodiest three months for the US since it and Britain invaded the country in March 2003. From early June to mid-July 13 British soldiers were killed in Iraq. The so-called troop ‘surge’ was reaping its predicted toll on US and British soldiers and taking thousands of Iraqi lives. JIM CRAVEN and TREVOR RAYNE report.
On 19 July The Guardian reported the formation of the Political Office for the Iraqi Resistance by seven Sunni-led, non-Ba’athist organisations. The new front said it will fight until all foreign troops leave Iraq and that it seeks to ally with other resistance organisations in preparation for negotiating US withdrawal from Iraq. The Political Office stressed the importance of working with Shia groups but rejected an alliance with the Shia militias because of their participation in imperialism established institutions and sectarian killings. The new front denounced Al Qaeda for its indiscriminate killing and contribution to sectarian strife between the Sunni and Shia peoples. A spokesperson said, ‘Peaceful resistance will not end the occupation. The US made it clear it intended to stay for many decades. Now it is a common view in the resistance that they will start to withdraw within a year.’ (The Guardian, 19 July 2007). At terrible cost to themselves, with over 660,000 people killed and two million refugees, the Iraqi people are delivering telling blows to the imperialist invaders.
The occupation armies’ violence is unrelenting: on 18 June British warplanes attacked homes in Amara where people were sleeping on roofs. Sixteen people, including children, were killed. Latif Al Tamani of the Maysan Provincial Council described the attack as a ‘catastrophe’, saying the British fired at random. The Los Angeles Times reported 18 known incidents since mid-February in which occupying troops opened fire wildly or in crowded areas. At least 22 civilians were killed. US military statistics state that US soldiers killed 429 civilians in the past year for getting too close to US checkpoints and patrols or approaching them too quickly. People are routinely shot in their cars by trigger-happy occupation soldiers.
In the first few months of 2007 the imperialists dropped more bombs and launched more missiles than in the whole of 2006. Iraqi deaths from air strikes rose ten-fold: satellite-guided missiles, jet fighters and helicopter-gunships rain down death and destruction on densely populated areas. The US and British governments and the commanders of their armed forces are guilty of war crimes; they slaughter with impunity; they wear suits and ties and are always well groomed but they are morally degenerate savages worthy of the disgust of the majority of humanity.
Since March, 30,000 extra ‘surge’ troops brought the total number of US soldiers deployed to 160,000. Yet a Pentagon report revealed that the surge has ‘failed on most fronts’ and ‘failed to reduce the overall level of violence’. President Bush himself agreed in July that progress had been limited and that satisfactory progress had been made towards less than half the ‘benchmarks’ (targets) set for the Iraqi government. He admitted the country was suffering from war fatigue – the US, that is, not Iraq! General Petraeus, US commander in Iraq, is due to report on the success of the ‘surge’ in September. In June, he claimed ‘astonishing signs of normalcy in two-thirds of Baghdad’, for which he cited, among other things, the existence of professional football teams. Yet, at the same time, the US military was admitting they only had control of 146 out of 457 neighbourhoods in the city and even then only in the sense that ‘we have our security forces there and we’re denying that space to enemy forces’.
These assessments of the surge have a sense of unreality. They are made against the publicly projected purpose of a short sharp dash towards stability and security that would end in major troop reductions. Few, if any, of the imperialist warmongers seriously thought the surge would achieve this. Rather, it was an opportunity to divert growing anti-war sentiments in the US and mounting political pressures on the presidency. The benchmarks set for the puppet government indicate what the imperialists want: sufficient stability for the exploitation of Iraqi oil and establishment of major and permanent military bases in Iraq.
Oil theft
On 3 July, Prime Minister Nouri Al Maliki announced that the Iraqi cabinet had unanimously approved the draft oil legislation. In fact, Sadrist ministers and those from the Sunni Iraqi Accordance Front had already withdrawn in protest at the continuing imperialist occupation, so no more than 24 out of 37 ministers could have been present. The US has been pushing to get the oil law passed before the September assessment of the surge. It is the main benchmark by which the US ruling class will judge progress in Iraq. The legislation, formulated in the US among representatives of the oil multinationals, would permit Production Sharing Agreements enabling foreign oil companies to control 65 out of 80 undeveloped fields in Iraq with an estimated potential of six million barrels a day, giving annual revenues of $130 billion and profits of at least 20%. The US has insisted that the new legislation should render void all previous contracts, including those with French, Russian and Chinese companies, and that the power of regional governments such as that in Kurdistan should be restricted.
There is widespread opposition among Iraqi oil workers. In May, the Iraqi Federation of Oil Unions began a strike for better pay and working conditions, and for participation in formulating oil legislation. The puppet government sent troops to break the strike but the colonel in charge refused to arrest strike leaders. The government was forced to negotiate a settlement. The oil unions have pledged to fight any privatisation of their industry. The Political Office for the Iraqi Resistance says that all decisions taken by the occupying states and their client government will be declared null and void.
US people’s opposition sidelined by ruling class
A CBS/New York Times poll in the US found half the population thought the ‘surge’ was having no impact and a quarter felt it was making matters worse. 72% disapproved of Bush’s handling of the war and 60% believed the US should never have gone to war in the first place. Bush’s overall approval rating has slumped to 30%. A CNN poll at the end of June found two-thirds of the population wanted troop withdrawals to start immediately.
The presidential campaign of one-time Republican front-runner Senator John McCain, consistently a war supporter, is floundering. It was left to another long-time Bush backer, Republican Senator Richard Lugar to break ranks and voice the concerns of a growing section of the US ruling class. Lugar warned that, ‘Our course in Iraq has lost contact with our vital national security interests in the Middle East and beyond. Our continuing absorption with military activities in Iraq is limiting our diplomatic assertiveness there and elsewhere in the world.’ He said ‘the fatigue of our military’ meant they were unable to respond to other national security interests, which included securing access to Gulf oil, blocking Iranian regional dominance and limiting the loss of US credibility in the region and the rest of the world. Lugar’s speech was praised by Democrats, who, whilst posing as opponents of the war, voice the same ruling class concerns and propose the same alternative policy: a reduced mission in Iraq with the remaining troops withdrawn to defensible bases where they would concentrate on counter-terrorism operations, training Iraqi puppet forces and protecting US interests, including the oil fields.
In May, Defence Secretary Robert Gates said the US is looking for ‘a long and enduring presence…The Korean model is one, the security relationship we have with Japan is another’. Ex-President Jimmy Carter pointed out last year that: ‘The reason we went into Iraq was to establish a permanent military base in the Gulf region.’ Such a base would make up for the loss of US bases in Saudi Arabia. Work on building those bases and the US embassy in Baghdad continues. From there the US plans to retain control of energy resources, especially with regard to rising competitors such as China, Russia and the EU. They will use the bases to project US power over the whole region as part of a network of bases from Central Asia to East Africa. The bases in Iraq will be valuable in confronting Iran and Syria and protecting Israel.
The US has no intention of abandoning its strategy of global domination through the use or threat of overwhelming military power. On the contrary, Lugar warned that: ‘In this era the US cannot afford to be on the defensive indefinitely.’ All the Republican presidential candidates have endorsed the use of nuclear weapons against Iran. Vice-President Dick Cheney, former ambassador to the UN John Bolton and their Zionist supporters demand that the US attacks Iran and Syria and targets Hizbullah. The potential for a wider conflagration is so serious that China has put Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles (ICBM) on movable platforms and Russia has threatened to commission multi-warhead ICBMs that can penetrate any missile defence system and to target Cruise missiles at Europe unless the US stops trying to encircle Russia.
US domination weakened
For the moment, however, the US is ill-prepared for such an escalation, both militarily and diplomatically. Assistant Defence Secretary John Hamer admitted what he called ‘the nation’s spirit’ had been transformed from ‘confident and proud to paranoid and angry’. They have mounting military recruitment problems. A survey found only one in ten US youths had ‘a propensity to serve’ and anyhow only three in ten met basic physical, behavioural and academic requirements. The original Iraq coalition of 40 countries has dwindled to 23. Only the US, Britain, Australia and Denmark provide fighting troops.
Sections of the British ruling class have expressed similar concerns to those of Senator Lugar. In July, a cross-party Iraq Commission made recommendations to reduce troop numbers, concentrate on training and supporting Iraqi forces and make wider diplomatic efforts, engaging Iraq’s neighbours through the UN. British forces in Iraq have already been reduced to 5,500. They are being withdrawn from the Basra Palace complex earlier than planned so the only remaining British base will be at Basra airport. Resistance fighters increasingly attack the base and British troops come under fire whenever they emerge. The British explain the retreat as part of the programme to hand over security to Iraqi forces, but local people regard it as an ignominious defeat for Britain. 29 British soldiers were killed in the first half of this year, as many as in the whole of 2006.
The US loss of political control of events in the region is underlined by Turkey’s threat to invade Northern Iraq unless the US and Iraqi forces dislodge PKK (Kurdish guerrilla) fighters based there. There are 250,000 Turkish troops deployed close to Iraq. Any Turkish intervention could provoke an Iranian intervention. The Turkish state views the Kurdish Regional Government in Iraq with alarm, identifying it as an inspiration to Turkey’s own Kurdish population to fight for independence.
Class focus for imperialist attacks
The US surge has targeted the Mehdi Army, followers of Shia cleric Moqtada Al Sadr. Al Sadr has consistently opposed the occupation and called for unity among the Iraqi people. The Mehdi fought against the imperialist forces in 2004. When the surge began Al Sadr ordered the Mehdi not to confront the US forces in order to avoid unnecessary bloodshed for the people. Al Sadr himself went underground. At the end of May, however, Al Sadr addressed a huge crowd in Kufa, demanding an end to the occupation and reconciliation and co-operation with Sunnis ‘on all issues’. He rejected talks with the US saying, ‘The Americans are occupiers and thieves. We must know they are leaving the country and we must know when. If the occupation and oppression continues we will fight. Hizbullah and the Mehdi Army are two sides of the same coin. We are together in the same trench against the forces of evil.’ Both the Sadrists and Hizbullah in Lebanon, like Hamas in Palestine, have a class base among the poor, which is why they are primary targets for the imperialists.
On 25 May, British forces assassinated Wassam Abu Qadar, a leading member of the Mehdi Army. In retaliation the Mehdi kidnapped five Britons (an economist working on oil legislation and four mercenary security contactors) from the Iraqi Finance Ministry. The manner by which they did so highlighted imperialism’s problems in developing a puppet security force: the kidnappers gained access to the ministry by posing as police officers, members of the integrity commission investigating the infiltration of Iraqi security forces by the militias. In fact, they probably were! Subsequently, British soldiers raided houses in Sadr City, destroying homes and beating the residents, in search of those kidnapped.
Torture and misery
Major-General Antonio Maguba, who led the first inquiry into torture at Abu Ghraib prison, recently stated that there was far more evidence available than was ever made public, including further videos of sexual humiliation and abuse. He insisted that President Bush and former Defence Secretary Rumsfeld must have known about what was going on. General Maguba was himself taunted and humiliated by Rumsfeld because of his revelations and forced to retire early. Former US Air Force Captain Dorothy Mackey claimed there is widespread rape and sexual abuse at all levels both within the US armed forces and against civilians, which is routinely ignored, with the victims often being the ones to be punished. She said, ‘It is my belief the US military and government has an unwritten policy of rape, torture and criminal misconduct that is used to further US global interests.’
In Britain it was revealed that former Labour Attorney-General Lord Goldsmith had advised the British Army that Iraqi detainees were not protected by the Human Rights Act and that senior officers had been told that ‘hooding and stressing’ was lawful. Goldsmith was overruled by the Law Lords in June (see below). More than 60 civil cases against the British Army are now being prepared, including that of hotel receptionist Baha Mousa who was beaten to death in September 2003. Baha suffered 93 separate injuries.
The UN says that nearly half the 2.2 million Iraqis forced from their homes within the country do not have access to state rations. Another two million have fled abroad, including, according to the Brookings Institute, 40% of the country’s professionals. It is estimated that 50,000 refugees have been forced into prostitution in order to survive. UNICEF needs $42 million over six months for emergency relief for Iraqi refugees and children. The US spends this amount on the war every three hours. Baghdad often has only one hour of electricity a day. Oil production has fallen by over 30% and production generally by 80% since the invasion. Unemployment is estimated at 60%. Nine million Iraqis live below the poverty line. Dr Abdul Al Obaidi of the Iraqi Association for Child Mental Health has warned of a desperate situation with children suffering unbearable traumas leading to delinquency, emotional damage and spiralling violence in the future. Barely 30% of primary school children attend classes. Only 35% are fully immunised. Over 20% of Iraqi children are severely or moderately stunted due to malnutrition. In May, Iraqi President Jalal Talabani was flown to the Mayer Clinic in the US to be treated for obesity.
