A Poem for New Years Eve

This is from Mohammed at Iraq the Model

And a happy new year to all our readers’ from Labour Friends of Iraq

Happy New Year.

I couldn't decorate my tree with lights
Because I don't have enough electricity to do that
I decorated it with candles…….and it looks more romantic this way

Yes, we still celebrate the arrival of a new year
And we still exchange hugs and wishes
And we still dream of a better new year
Sorry, pessimists, we didn't lose hope in Iraq yet
And we didn't decide to surrender
The churches still ring their bells and the car bombs couldn't stop my people from going there and hold their prayers
We just placed a block on the street
To stop the terrorists, not the visitors

A lady from New York asked me.
Do kids go to school in Iraq?
Yes ma'am; millions of them and every day
We still read and learn and we still hunger for knowledge

Yes we have our fears and who doesn't have fears
But our love for life is stronger
Yes we still hope that the coming year will be a better and a safer one
Yes we still care for others' pains and sufferings
And we feel sad for the world's disaster
Our concerns didn't stop us from praying for all the people of the world
Our coming year will be better, trust me
I see this crystal clear

We've placed signs of challenge in the streets instead of the New Year's decorations;

"DON'T WORRY ABOUT IRAQ….WE ARE THE SONS OF IRAQ AND WE WILL PROTECT IT"
"I WILL VOTE FOR A BETTER TOMORROW FOR MY CHILDREN"

We still dream of a democratic Iraq ruled by the law
And this is something we deserve…this is the land of the first law in history
I still find my home in Iraq… it's still the best place in the world in my eyes
I will not waste a minute listening to the pessimists
Instead, I will add a brick to the house we're building
And I will write a word….and pray

I will pray for the ones who fought for the Iraqi freedom
I will pray for the hundreds of thousands who won't spend the night with their families, staying awake on the front line to keep me safe
I will pray for the ones who gave their lives for the sake of others' wellbeing
I will pray for those who went through all the pains
And never lost hope
I will pray for a free and democratic Iraq
I will pray for the world's peace

(AJ)

IFTU Condemns Wave of Terror Against Iraqi Workers

In recent days terrorists have stepped up their attacks on IFTU members. The IFTU have released this statement.

“On 25 December 2004, a freight train travelling from Basra to An-Nasiriyyah was subjected to a terrorist attack, which led to the kidnapping of the two train drivers, their names are; Salah Mehdi Taher and Salih Chiyehchan Harbi. The other five workers on the train were severely beaten and left in a life-threatening condition, their names are, Abd’ al-Emir Abd’al-Malik, Mustapha Kamel Mehdi, Amer Shamaan Amer, Ali Abd’al-Radh and Basil Abd’ Ouwd.” (..) “These continuing terrorist attacks by extremists and criminal gangs indicate that workers are their prime targets. “On the night of the 26/27 December 2004 the headquarters of the Transport & Communication Workers’ Union was subjected to a cowardly and violent attack by terrorists when they shelled the building with rocket-propelled grenades and mortars which caused a large whole in the wall of the building and a crater in the ground. Luckily there were no fatal casualties.”

Trade Unionists and all democrats can rush messages of support and donations to the IFTU at Iraqi Federation of Trade Unions (IFTU): International Representative, Abdullah Muhsin, c/o UNISON, 1 Mabledon Place, London WC1H 9AJ.
email: abdullahmuhsin@iraqitradeunions.org (AJ)

IFTU Statement and Press Release in full:

Iraqi Federation of Trade Unions (IFTU):
News Release:
DATE: Thursday, 30 December 2004
SUBJECT: IFTU CONDEMNS WAVE OF TERROR AGAINST IRAQI WORKERS.

‘The Iraqi Federation of Trade Unions (IFTU) denounced yesterday further attacks on its members on the railway line between Basra and al-Nasiriyyah and on union premises in Baghdad. These criminal acts designed to intimidate workers and trade unionists follow a well-established pattern of targeted campaigns of assassination and terror which have been waged by those loyal to the former fascist-type, dictatorial regime of Saddam Hussein against individual IFTU activists and ordinary workers in recent months. In particular, as a recent report from a joint delegation of the IFTU and the British Fire Brigades Union (FBU) highlighted, there have been two attempts on the life of Mr. Nuzad Ismaiel, President of the IFTU in the Kirkuk Region.’

‘In the first incident on 25 December 2004, a freight train travelling from Basra to Al-Nasiriyyah was subjected to a terrorist attack, which led to the kidnapping of two train drivers (Salah Mehdi Taher and Salih Chiyehchan Harbi); the other five workers on the train were severely beaten and left in a life-threatening condition. The IFTU Executive has demanded that the Iraqi Interim Government; the immediate release of the two kidnapped railway workers and proper compensation for all workers who are victims of cowardly terrorist attacks in the course of their working duties. [See full text of IFTU Executive Committee statement dated 29 December 2004, attached.]’

‘In a separate incident the IFTU reported: “On the night of the 26/27 December 2004 the headquarters of the Transport & Communication Workers’ Union was subjected to a cowardly and violent attack by terrorists when they shelled the building with rocket-propelled grenades and mortars which caused a large whole in the wall of the building and a crater in the ground. Luckily there were no fatal casualties.”

In December 2003, the same union building was attacked by US occupation military forces and 8 leading members of the IFTU’s Transport & Communication Workers’ Union (including its President, Mr. Turki al-Lehaby) were arrested and subsequently released unharmed following a worldwide appeal from labour movement bodies. The union offices were sealed for 7 months by the US forces who told the IFTU: “You have no right to organise workers while under military occupation.”

The building was subsequently re-opened by a decision of the first Congress of the Transport & Communication Workers’ Union after the fall of the dictatorial regime of Saddam Hussein in June 2004. The building has been used as the temporary headquarters of the IFTU from May 2003 until December 2003 and currently acts as important organising premises for the Transport & Communication Workers’ Union and other IFTU-affiliated trade unions.

The IFTU Executive Committee condemned the attack on the trade union offices, declaring: “Disgrace and shame on the terrorists! Glory to the Iraqi working class!” and resolved to ensure that the offices continue to be used to organise Iraqi workers.

- Statement ends -

IFTU Executive Statement – 29 December 2004

“On 25 December 2004, a freight train travelling from Basra to An-Nasiriyyah was subjected to a terrorist attack, which led to the kidnapping of the two train drivers, their names are; Salah Mehdi Taher and Salih Chiyehchan Harbi. The other five workers on the train were severely beaten and left in a life-threatening condition, their names are, Abd’ al-Emir Abd’al-Malik, Mustapha Kamel Mehdi, Amer Shamaan Amer, Ali Abd’al-Radh and Basil Abd’ Ouwd.”

“These continuing terrorist attacks by extremists and criminal gangs indicate that workers are their prime targets. In October 2004 four railway workers were arbitrarily murdered (whilst working their train between Mosul and Baghdad), as previously several drivers of oil and gas tankers have been kidnapped and murdered across many provinces of Iraq and as many factories have been destroyed or had their production paralysed as a result of these terrorist acts.”

“Our working people are paying with their blood and lives for participating in the re-building of their country to end the foreign occupation.”

“The responsibility of protecting the public infrastructure (the transportation of goods and oil) falls on the state, but the state also has the responsibility to protect the lives of workers as they carry out their jobs.”

“The lives of our workers are not cheap and therefore we demand that the government and its responsible agencies do the following;

1. obtain the immediate release of the two kidnapped railway workers and ensure their safe return to their families and their jobs;
2. provide sufficient protection to working people to carry out their jobs (without threat to life);
3. implement permanent security measures on all land-based transportation (railways and road freight transport);
4. award proper compensation for all workers who are victims of cowardly terrorist attacks in the course of their working duties.

“The IFTU stands shoulder to shoulder with our working people and supports their demands and their legitimate rights (under the conventions of the International Labour Organisation to work in safety free from terror). Therefore, we are calling on all responsible agencies to implement forthwith proper procedures to prevent acts such as the above against Iraqi people who by working to rebuild their country are taking a stand against terrorism and the perpetrators of terrorism. We call on the Iraqi Interim Government and its agencies to bring to justice those criminals and terrorists who carry out attacks on working people.

“Glory to the martyrs of the working class!

“Long live the Iraqi working class!”
Executive Committee of the IFTU, 29 December 2004

Christopher Hitchens on the dangerous assumption of the pro-tyrant Left

Interviewed here Christopher Hitchens tries to fathom the support of many left-wingers for the fascistic ‘resistance’.

‘A very large element of the Left and of the isolationist Right is openly sympathetic to the other side in this war, and wants it to win. This was made very plain by the leadership of the "anti-war" movement, and also by Michael Moore when he shamefully compared the Iraqi fascist "insurgency" to the American Founding Fathers. To many of these people, any "anti-globalization" movement is better than none (…) it's a bit harder to explain an alliance with woman-stoning, gay-burning, Jew-hating medieval theocrats. However, it can be done, once you assume that American imperialism is the main enemy. Even for those who won't go quite that far, the admission that the US Marine Corps might be doing the right thing is a little further than they are prepared to go - because what would then be left of their opposition credentials, which are so dear to them?’ (AJ, hat tip to Norm and SIAW)

Bush Does Not Get It (Part 2): The Assault on the Geneva Convention undermines the War on Terror

In the New York Times (December 30) Andrew Rosenthal claims that ‘the Bush administration's assault on the Geneva Conventions’ has led not only to ‘the brutal treatment of prisoners at American military jails’ but has also ‘caused collateral damage…to the legal offices of the executive branch and the military’. Rosenthal argues that ‘To get around the inconvenience of the Geneva Conventions, the administration twisted the roles of the legal counsels of the White House, the Pentagon and the Justice Department beyond recognition. Once charged with giving unvarnished advice about whether political policies remained within the law, the Bush administration's legal counsels have been turned into the sort of cynical corporate lawyers who figure out how to make something illegal seem kosher - or at least how to minimize the danger of being held to account'.

Rosenthal might have added that it has also been a propaganda victory on a quite spectacular scale for the terrorists and Ba’athists. Before he retires Colin Powell might remind President Bush of something he, Powell, said in 2001 about the collapse of the Soviet empire ‘We beat them on the field of ideas; we contained them on the field of battle but we beat them on the field of ideas…Even in places like Iraq and Iran and elsewhere, I believe these forces are irresistible’. Democracy’s wars with Totalitarianism are never won any other way. When that is remembered, the war on terror will turn. (AJ)

LFIQ appeal for Nozad Ismail winning support from around the world

All the messages of support will be passed to Nozad Ismail and will be used in our continuing campaign to avert his assassination.

Here is an initial selection of messages received from Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the USA.

The spread of such support indicates that there are many in the international labour movement have read about the campaign via LabourStart (for which we give thanks) and wish to give solidarity to Iraqi democrats but this is just the start. Please join our campaign and pass the information (scroll down the site) to your networks.

Denise McGuire, President of Connect, representing 20,000 managers and professionals in the communications industry, sends her support
Anna Ardin, Students Union, Union for hotel and restaurant workers, Sweden says “there will never be democracy in Iraq if people can not feel fully free to express their opinions and struggle for their rights.”

Joe Kelly will attempt to get this motion passed at his Union Council and branch of the Australian Labor Party.

Larry Elder, Minnesota State Duty Officer, Department of Public Safety Homeland Security and Emergency Management, sends his support.

Sandi Jones of the MUSAA - Maritime Unionist Socialist Activities Association (Australia) – says “we support this initiative and have made considerable effort through our own networks, to email this information to our members and associates and encourage them to support and forward the information through their own networks.”

Support has been given by Derek Blackadder, Equality Representative of Canada’s largest union, the Canadian Union of Public Employees in the Ontario Regional Office. Jim Lamb, the British Columbia Assistant Regional Director, CUPE adds his voice to this call of solidarity with Brother Ismail.

Support comes too from Macedonia: “In the name of Solidarity, We hope that the Union Justice will win! Journalists from "Union Life", the newspaper from Macedonian Federation of Trade Unions PS: We are also calling for support because our leaders will soon close the newspaper, and the journalists will become unemployed!”

Alastair Duncan, national bargaining co-ordinator Service and Food Workers Union, Wellington, New Zealand sends solidarity on behalf of the members of the Service and Food Workers Union of New Zealand in your campaign to protect the life of Nozad Ismail and all those Iraq workers and union supporters fighting to build a free and independent union movement in your nation.

Vanessa Yardley Australian Services Union Delegate says “I note that Nozad Ismail, the President of the Iraqi Federation of Trade Unions in Kirkuk has twice survived assassination attempts by the so-called resistance and is subject to daily death threats. I call upon the international labour movement to extend solidarity to Nozad in the hope that these acts of solidarity and resulting publicity may make the cost of murdering him too high. We believe that increased solidarity with Iraqi democrats like Nozad will also contribute to the success of the forthcoming elections which can secure a sovereign and democratic Iraqi government, which can best tackle the so-called resistance, from which these threats emanate.”

Carita Kazakoff. Industrial Officer Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Union (Western Australia) writes “To whom it may concern, I believe that the treatment of trade unionists and the labour movement generally since the Iraq war 'began' with the American invasion has been appalling. It seems apparent that groups on all sides of the conflict have seen fit to demonise unions, and I have watched with horror the appalling attempts to threaten and vilify those involved with the union movement. I send my warmest regards to Nozad for his courage in the face of such opposition and hope that his attempts to rekindle the union movement in Iraq be successful. I hope that he and his family may soon live without the constant threat of violence and death.”

Bob Parker – Organiser Queensland Nurses Union – says: “I note that Nozad Ismail, the President of the Iraqi Federation of Trade Unions in Kirkuk is reported to have twice survived assassination attempts by the so-called resistance and is subject to daily death threats. As a Trade Union Organiser representing the Nurses of Queensland, Australia, I call upon the international labour movement to extend solidarity to Nozad in the hope that these acts of solidarity and resulting publicity may make the cost of murdering him too high. I believe that increased solidarity with Iraqi democrats like Nozad will also contribute to the success of the forthcoming elections which can secure a sovereign and democratic Iraqi government, which can best tackle the so-called resistance, from which these threats emanate.”

Terrorists Attack the Transport and Communication Workers Union

The Iraqi Federation of Trade Unions has posted the following story. We urge all our readers to do something practical in response. Visit the IFTU website - here - and donate money.

“TERRORISTS FAIL TO INTIMIDATE TRANSPORT & COMMUNICATION WORKERS' UNION “On the night of the 26/27 December 2004 the headquarters of the Transport & Communication Workers’ Union was subjected to a cowardly and violent attack by terrorists when they shelled the building with rocket-propelled grenades and mortars which caused a large whole in the wall of the building and a crater in the ground. Luckily there were no fatal casualties.” “Disgrace and shame on the terrorists! “Glory to the Iraqi working class!”

Why We Need a Marshall Plan for Iraq (Part 1): Malnutrition is Up

After World War Two the Marshall Plan, a massive programme of US economic aid, helped the war-torn countries of Europe to recover and establish democracies from the ashes of totalitarianism. In his 1999 Chicago Speech, ‘Doctrine of the International Community’ Tony Blair argued ‘We will need a new Marshall plan for Kosovo, Montenegro, Macedonia, Albania and Serbia too if it turns to democracy’. But the actually existing ‘international community’ did not deliver in the Balkans and it is failing to deliver in Iraq. There is no new Marshal Plan for Iraq. Instead, according to a shocking article in USA Today, there is a rise in child malnutrition.

‘A study by a Norwegian institute says the percentage of Iraqi children ages 6 months to 5 years suffering from malnutrition has nearly doubled to 7.7% from 4% in March 2003…"It's on the level of some African countries," Jon Pederson, deputy managing director of the Fafo Institute for Applied International Studies, told the Associated Press. "Of course, no child should be malnourished, but when we're getting to levels of 7%-8%, it's a clear sign of concern."
The USA Today reporters point out that these statistics are disputed by Khalil Muhsin, director of Iraq's Nutrition Research Institute. "I think the data is suspect, and the figure as such is completely exaggerated," says "The recent intervention of the Ministry of Health and improvement of salary scales and the infrastructure have all contributed to reducing malnutrition in Iraq this year," Muhsin says. The Health Ministry says its findings show 4.4% of children 6 months to 5 years old suffer from acute malnutrition’. But even if Muhsin is right, there has been an increase in child malnutrition from 4% to 4.4 %.
Iraq is the hinge of our time. Upon the outcome of the struggle in Iraq to establish a functioning democracy hangs the course of world politics for the next generation. Economic development and social justice will dry up the swamps in which terrorism and support for baathist violence breeds. A step-change in the level of economic aid sent to Iraq by the international community would not be merely altruistic, though altruism would be a good enough reason in itself. It would also be in direct self-interest of every country on the planet. (AJ)

For the full article by Jim Michaels, Melanie Eversley and Sabah al-Anbaki go here

They Shall Not Pass! The Democrats Answer to the Fascistic 'Resistance'

December 28 was another day of terrible violence perpetrated by the 'resistance'. 17 Iraqi policemen were massacred north of Baghdad. Five people were killed and 22 wounded, mostly National Guards, by a homicide bomber in Baquba. Bin Laden and Al-Zarqawi have declared war on the elections.

How should the left respond? Howar Ziad, the Kurdish representative to
the United Nations from 1999 to 2004, and now Iraq's new ambassador to
Canada, argues that the fight against the 'resistance' is an anti-fascist fight. 'They must not win!' he cries. This is the fighting faith we need. Armed with this faith a previous generation of the left fought fascism. The recapture of those anti-fascist traditions today means opposing the 'resistance' and supporting the Iraqi democrats. (AJ)

‘The Thing That Really Gets Me’: an Iraqi responds to Uncle Usama

An Iraqi democrat, Husayn Uthman, has begun blogging here

His blog is titled Democracy in Iraq. “I have given it this title because I am a supporter of democracy in Iraq, and I am writing in a time of great excitement and importance in the history of Iraq, one where a new Iraq is being built with a functioning democracy leading it into the future”.

On December 28 Husayn Uthman responded to Usama Bin Laden’s call to boycott the Iraqi elections.

Return of Uncle Usama

Uncle Usama has appeared on television again, just like last time, he is concerned about elections. This time he is telling us Iraqis not to vote. This is nothing more than desperation on his part. Whatever support he may have had has slowly eroded. People are realizing that there is no real benefit to supporting or even working with Usama and his minions. I mean what will the end be if a person was to align themselves with Usama? Death, living in a cave, living in a Saudi state, or God knows what else.

I think that this news is really not that big, people in Iraq are shrugging this off, its not really on our minds. All we take from this video is that Usama will definately stick his fingers into our elections in some way. I assume there will be bombings or some attacks like the ones that have already happened on election workers during the election. But we will not waver. Only by going forward with this plan of building a new Iraq will we be able to squelch Usama and his supporters. He knows that in the next few months his support base will be eroded further here in Iraq, and he is afraid. This is why he made this tape.

There was also an assasination attempt here against a major Shia leader. He is very popular, and he was not hurt, but I would bet that this attack was carried out by someone affiliated with Usama in order to scare people away from elections, scare leaders from running, and to scare Shias in general. The thing that really gets me about Usama and his ilk, these Wahhabis or whatever you want to call them is that they always talk about Muslim brotherhood and the like for their own causes, but they have no problems attacking and killing other Muslims who do not agree with them. They even say some Muslims are not Muslims, like they do with Shias. It stinks of hypocracy and the use of religion for jealous means.

I am not even a religious person, but these people who use religion for their own goals really irk me. Such rhetoric is especially dangerous nowadays in Iraq as it is being used in attempts to polarize Shias and Sunnis. The one ironic thing is that in my childhood, I remember Shia and Sunni were rarely heard words. But Saddam began making differentiation during the Iran Iraq War, and later when the Shias started rebelling. Al-Qaeda and the Wahhabis are only continuing Saddam's program in an effort to fracture Iraqis. We always read about how imperial forces used the tactic of divide and conquer in different lands, well Saddam and the terrorists are doing something similar in Iraq, but its more like divide and destroy.

I hope Iraqis see through this, and we do not fall into the trap of secterianism. More importantly, we must keep religion a private matter, in a nation like Iraq where there is a diversity of religion it is only in the best interest of all. I should end this by saying that I am from a Sunni family, but I hold no real allegiance to Sunnis, or to Shias, only to my nation which I desire to be strong, unified, and free. (AJ)

‘I hope he rots away in jail and gets eaten by worms’: Halbjans on Chemical Ali

The Institute for War & Peace Reporting (a London-based independent non-profit organisation supporting regional media and democratic change, see here, has posted two articles on Halbjans reactions to the upcoming trial of Ali Hasan Majeed, or Chemical Ali.

Talar Nadir reports on Halbjans reaction to the trial. ‘A large majority of Halabjans are adamant that Majeed's trial must take place in the town itself, not Baghdad. Salar Mahmood, a member of the National Guard, voiced the opinion of many, saying, "He needs to be prosecuted before the eyes of the people of Halabja."’. Chia Hama-Saeed, a civil servant at Halabja's Martyrs Hospital, shares Maliha's view. Both Hama-Saeed and her brother were half-blinded by the poisonous gas attack, and their mother died of a cancer they relate directly too the chemical doses they received. Chemical Ali should be kept in a jail where he can see the graveyard and the destroyed streets of our town," she said. "He and Saddam should not be killed, they should be made to die a little every day."

Amanj Khalil reports on the December 6 arrest of 62-year-old Frans Van Anraat, a Dutch citizen taken into custody in the Netherlands to answer allegations that he supplied Saddam Hussein with the means to make chemical weapons. ‘In a bid to strengthen the prosecution's case, a group of Halabja victims are now trying to record the names of all the people who died in the attack. Another committee has been formed to visit towns across the border in Iran in an attempt to gather more evidence of chemical attacks. "The Iranians have better records than the Iraqis, as they were able to film in Halabja a few days after the chemical attacks," explained Ibrahim Hawrami, manager of the Halabja Memorial Directorate, and the man responsible for maintaining records of the attack. "Left wing political parties in Holland have promised to cooperate with us on this." (AJ)

Urgent Global Labour Alert issued by Labour Friends of Iraq

We are appealing to the international labour movement to help avert the assassination of a trade union leader, 40 year old Nozad Ismail who is the President of the Iraqi Federation of Trade Unions in Kirkuk.

Photo: Nozad Ismail (centre) with Brian Joyce of the Fire Brigades Union and the IFTU's Abdullah Muhsin in Kirkuk.

Nozad has already survived two assassination attempts this year at the hands of the so-called 'resistance'. He receives daily death threats.

The only weapon we have to help Nozad is publicity. We aim to make the cost of murdering him too high by publicising his case and demanding the resistance stop intimidating him and threatening his life.

There is no single authority upon which we can place demands or focus pressure. The people who wish to kill Nozad don't organise openly. This appeal is, therefore, different from cases where someone has been imprisoned but is no less urgent.

What you can do:

• Pass this motion in your party or union branch and tell the local newspapers.

This (union branch/party branch/CLP) notes that Nozad Ismail, the President of the Iraqi Federation of Trade Unions in Kirkuk has twice survived assassination attempts by the so-called resistance and is subject to daily death threats. We call upon the international labour movement to extend solidarity to Nozad in the hope that these acts of solidarity and resulting publicity may make the cost of murdering him too high. We believe that increased solidarity with Iraqi democrats like Nozad will also contribute to the success of the forthcoming elections which can secure a sovereign and democratic Iraqi government, which can best tackle the so-called resistance, from which these threats emanate.
• Tell us that you support this initiative – email us - and we will collate the lists and use it to focus maximum international attention. We will pass all motions and expressions of support to Nozad
Posted by garykent at 09:22 PM

'Stand Alongside the Democrats': Blair in Baghdad

On a surprise trip to Baghdad (21 December) Tony Blair make a statement and took questions at a Press Conference, alongside Interim Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi.

"I'd just like to say this very strongly to the outside world, whatever people's feelings or beliefs about the removal of Saddam Hussein and the wisdom of that, there surely is only one side to be on in what is now very clearly a battle between democracy and terror. On the one side you have people who desperately want to make the democratic process work, and want to have the same type of democratic freedoms other parts of the world enjoy, and on the other side people who are killing and intimidating and trying to destroy a better future for Iraq".

"There are people dying in Iraq but the reason people are dying is because of the terrorism and the intimidation and the people who are deliberately killing anyone trying to make this country better. Now what should our response be as an international community? Our response should be to stand alongside the democrats - the people who've got the courage to see this thing through - and help them see it through. (…) what is interesting to me was talking to the United Nations officials here who were first of all absolutely committed to the electoral process and secondly said to me in the strongest terms that all the work they were doing in every part of the Iraqi community indicated people actually do want to participate. There is intimidation in certain areas but no shortage whatever of people's desire to participate in democratic elections. And as actually we saw in Afghanistan, once those elections take place, they have their own momentum." (AJ)

For the full transcript go here

Straight-talking Labour MP Mikes Gapes says more help is needed for Iraq

This honest view from a veteran MP of the realities on the ground in the south of Iraq should be heeded by all friends of Iraq. Mike was speaking in the Commons on 21st December. (GK)

I wish to talk about the situation in Iraq. The Prime Minister is currently in Baghdad and has spoken about the situation there today. He said: "I'm sure that there are parts of Iraq that are very much calmer but here in Baghdad you feel the sense of the challenge and the difficulty that there is."

I was in one of the calmer parts of Iraq with the Defence Committee 10 days ago. It was my second visit to Basra in the past seven months, and I shall give the House my impressions of what I saw in Basra, Umm Qasr and Shaiba, at the al-Basra oil terminal and on HMS Marlborough, which is protecting it. I do so having strongly supported military action in 2003, having campaigned for regime change in Iraq for 25 years, and having one of my best Iraqi friends, Barham Salih, as Deputy Prime Minister. I knew him when he was in exile in this country. As the representative of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, he spoke at a meeting I organised in Ilford in 1990.

I have a long commitment to political change in Iraq, but the events since the liberation have not gone as I predicted. I have to be honest and say that the situation is far more difficult than I thought it would be a year or more after we acted. Before anyone who was against the action jumps to any conclusion, I want to clarify that I would still support that action today, because the situation is infinitely better for the Iraqi people than it would have been under a continuation of Saddam's regime.

When we were in Iraq 10 days ago, the Committee met a large number of Iraqis. We also spent a great deal of time with the British forces serving there. We met members of the Prince of Wales's Regiment, the Black Watch and many others from all three services. My admiration for members of our armed forces increases every time I meet them and see what they are doing and the circumstances under which they serve. I also want to mention their allies. I was driven around by a Danish captain of the DanBat—the Danish Battalion. Its personnel are doing an excellent job alongside our people in Iraq. It is important to recognise that: not only the British are serving in Iraq.

Economically, the situation in Basra is probably no better than it was in May. We could still see the legacy of 35 years of neglect, under-investment and decay. I have been to the west bank and Gaza. In 1989 to 1990, I visited parts of the former Soviet Union, including the Baltic states, where there was
a sense that nothing had been painted, invested in or improved for many years. Southern Iraq is like that. It is not a direct consequence of the war against Iran or of the two wars of 1991 and 2003. It is part of a systematic sustained policy of under-investment and suffering of the people in the south.

However, because the Committee had the opportunity, which we did not have in May, to leave the military vehicles and walk around Basra, we saw a huge amount of goods on sale in the markets and shops. There is a massive increase in imports. Nothing is manufactured in Iraq; everything is imported, from Kuwait or Jordan. Lorries move goods all the time from neighbouring states. We were told that demand for electricity has doubled since 2003 because of the white goods that have been bought. The tragedy is that although the electricity supply has increased, the impact of terrorism means that the availability of electricity has been cut in the south.

There was a period in which people had up to 17 hours of electricity a day, which was much better than they got under Saddam. Electricity in Basra province is now available for about four hours on, 20 hours off. That is not because of the impact of terrorist and insurgent actions in the south, but because of the national grid system. Electricity is diverted from the south to Baghdad and other places because important power lines, in particular those near Falluja, were blown up. It takes weeks to replace them because of the steel and the skilled workers that are needed to put them back.

Oil production has increased. It is up to about 1.8 million barrels a day. That is quite a lot, but Iraq hopes to get to 3.7 million by 2007. Some 93 per cent. of the Iraqi Government's revenue comes from oil. Iraq has the potential not to be a poor country. It could be very wealthy, but its people do not work in the way that we understand it, because the system was built on a form of state control. Food, electricity and water—everything, in fact—was controlled. The legacy of a Stalinist, fascist, Ba'athist system was total control. The private sector was almost non-existent and all the goods on sale were imported, except fruit and other things that could be grown in the country. It will take years—possibly decades—to transform the country so that it becomes a modern dynamic economy.

We are doing important work in the south. The quick impact projects of the British Army are making a big difference, but there are problems. The American Congress voted more than $18 billion to fund reconstruction in Iraq. About 10 to 20 per cent. of that is spent on security. Huge amounts are going to consultancies. About $3 billion has been diverted from water and electricity projects to security sector reform because of the impact of the internal opposition combined with the insurrectionists from outside.

Iraq's borders are porous. No armed forces or police service existed following the collapse of Ba'athism. We have to start from scratch. The Committee saw the excellent work by our people from the Police Service of Northern Ireland and from forces based in Sussex and elsewhere who were seconded there. Those serving policemen and women are doing a great job. I hope that their police authorities will not take short-sighted decisions to withdraw them, which is the case in some parts of the country, when their job is so vital over the next few months. A number of police forces are asking people not to renew their contracts and are bringing them back from Iraq at exactly the moment when their work is so vital. We also saw the training of the Iraqi national guard and the way in which its personnel are being prepared for the future.

The elections will be on 30 January—or at least it is hoped that they will be held then; there could be technical arguments about a possible delay. The overwhelming view in the south is that the elections must go ahead. People are enthusiastic about them and want greater control of their affairs. I met the governor of Basra province. Elected members and others from the Basra provincial council were also present. No one believes that the international community should leave immediately after the January elections. On the contrary, those elections are for a constitutional assembly and provincial government, but the final election that will determine the democracy of the
country is scheduled for December 2005. After that, there will, we hope, be a fulfilment of total democratic control within Iraq.

The Iraqis need support for security, infrastructure and training. My assessment—this is my message to Ministers—is that, just as in Bosnia and in Kosovo, we are talking about a commitment not of one or two years but of several years. We need to be honest and say that we started this process and we have to see it through.

We and our allies in the international community have to do far more. There is not enough support from our Government going into the south of Iraq; we need to do more through the Department for International Development, which, I understand, has hardly any presence in the south, being mainly based in Kuwait and Jordan. The United Nations currently has only three people in Basra; we need far more support from the UN. As was emphasised to us throughout our visit, Basra and the south are not Baghdad. The BBC does not have any journalists in the area, so we do not get the truth: the south of Iraq is doing well and it needs further support.

Vote for the IFTU web site

The Labour Website of the Year, an annual competition sponsored by LabourStart, is a chance for trade union members to vote online for their favourite union websites. In last year's competition, over 5,500 trade unionists voted for more than 460 sites. This year, one of the 100 officially nominated sites belongs to the Iraqi Federation of Trade Unions (IFTU). A large number of votes for the IFTU site would significantly raise the profile of the organization and its online presence. Labour Friends of Iraq encourages its members and supporters to vote for the IFTU site today by clicking here

'Maybe Now We Have a Future'

Ghaith Abdul-Ahad writes in the Guardian on the spirit at the Iraqi Communist Party election rally in Baghdad. "Hundreds of women, men and children, poured from all over Baghdad into a big indoor basketball court. All were waving little red flags, singing and chanting old communist slogans. But the funny thing was, they were happy. The whole atmosphere was entirely unlike any other rally, especially a march I had witnessed two days earlier to commemorate the father of Moqtada al-Sadr, at which thousands of men dressed in black happily whipped themselves with metal chains, while others bashed their skulls with large nasty swords, in front of dozens of chest-beating women shrouded in black from head to toe. Even the armed guards searching people in the entrance to the communist rally were smiling and asking politely: "Comrade, do you mind if I search you?"

In fact, they broke every one of the golden rules of Iraqi political rallies, not only by being merry and having a good time, but by actually allowing women - who made up almost half the audience - to participate.

The atmosphere felt more like a family gathering than a political rally. And in fact it was. Apart from a dozen or so young artists with wavy hair and long leather jackets and red scarves, everyone else was either an old communist in his 60s, or a direct family member.

The jolly atmosphere faded away only when an old communist poet read a poem he wrote in the 60s for a revolutionary who was killed after a failed uprising. Old men started to weep - some for the old comrade, others for the decades they had spent in the dungeons.

"I was 25 when I first heard this poem," a man in his 60s wearing an old Lenin cap told me. "We used to dream of changing the world. Maybe now we have a future."

For the full report go to here

Gary Kent looks at the topsy-turvy world of Glenda Jackson and Llew Smith

The Guardian's David Hencke reported on Saturday 17th December that the defence secretary "has been blocked from sending a Christmas gift of weapons and ammunition on behalf of the British taxpayer to re-equip the Iraqi army and police" by two left-wing Labour MPs, Glenda Jackson and Llew Smith.

They had tabled an Early Day Motion which argued: "That this House while welcoming the gifting of equipment for training purposes to the Iraqi Interim Government, as detailed in the Ministry of Defence minute dated 15th December, deplores the inclusion of this gift of live ammunition, grenade launchers and pistols; and calls upon the Government to withdraw such military hardware, which will do nothing to reduce violence and intimidation in a country awash with such weapons."

Hencke says that the MOD has confirmed that "delivery of the equipment - part of a £17.5m package - will have to be halted until the MPs' objections are examined" and that "the move means at the minimum that no equipment is likely to reach Iraq until after the elections."

The MOD told him that "Our objective is to hasten the capability and capacity of the Iraqi police, national guard and department of border enforcement. This will help reduce the burden on our own forces, enhance wider conflict resolution and facilitate our ultimate withdrawal."

Llew Smith, on the other hand, says that "While we all want the conflict to end in Iraq as a soon as possible, pouring guns into a country already stacked with weapons is not the way to resolve the conflict. To sell the idea that by making this Christmas gift of arms to the unelected Iraqi regime will speed up the withdrawal of the occupying forces is disingenuous. The British troops should be withdrawn because they were part of an illegal invasion force, as the UN secretary-general has confirmed."

My comment

The interim government hasn't been elected. Careful observers will have noticed that Iraq was under one-party rule for several decades until recently.

The point is that the interim government and its national assembly have been drawn from various groups to be as representative as possible and to arrange elections. So this comment by Llew Smith is just so much cant.

The result, however, is far more serious: Iraqi security forces are less able to defend the election process, which is under vicious attack from the so-called resistance and has actually been sanctioned by the UN Security Council.

Who wasn't moved by the terrible picture of an election worker being shot in the head whilst his colleagues waited for their turn? These men were brave patriots and their murder was intended to sicken public opinion and scare others from protecting the election process. Those who murdered them must not pass.

Labour MP Harry Barnes, who is also a Joint President of LFIQ raised this issue directly with the Prime Minister in the Commons on 20th December.

He said: “On Iraq, the Prime Minister said that the European Council has confirmed its full backing for, and financing of, United Nations protection. Is not part of such action this Government's supplying of weapons to the fledgling Iraqi security forces, police and army? Words are not enough, and such action is surely necessary in order to contain terrorist forces in Iraq.”

The Prime Minister agreed that “we must ensure that we not only train the Iraqi forces but equip them properly, so that they can defend themselves against terrorists who are often very well financed and well armed.”

Harry Barnes also tabled an amendment to the Commons motion from Jackson and Smith (see above) in line with these comments.

Guest columnist Norman Geras says that every picture tells a story

And
this picture tells the story of the battle for Iraq. (The report is here.)

There are those battling to initiate a transition to democratic self-rule in Iraq, and there are others doing all they can - including the murder of election workers - to prevent it. Some people in the West know which side they're on in this battle and others don't.

Norman Geras’ widely regarded blog can be found here.)

Women for a Free Iraq

The Women for a Free Iraq website brings together the stories of Iraqi
women who have overcome huge challenges and are now fighting for what
they believe in – a free and democratic Iraq.

Women for a Free Iraq was formed in early 2003 to speak up about the
suffering of the Iraqi people under Saddam's rule and rally support
for the liberation of Iraq.

It is made up of a diverse group of over fifty women who argue for a
free, pluralistic Iraq that is based on equal rights, the rule of law
and representative democracy.

They want to build support for a new Iraq where women have the same
rights and opportunities as men, and where they can raise their
children without fear.

LFIQ does not necessarily endorse everything on this site but it
contains stories of women who escaped Saddam's rule and are now living
as exiles.

You can read examples of these remarkable stories
here

Katie Martin

Iraq's Communists Enter election race

Iraq's communists have joined the election race. 257 candidates, including the Culture Minister of the Interim Government, Mufid al-Jazairi, will contest January's elections on a 'Union of the People' List. December 17 some 2,000 communists gathered in a Baghdad sports hall for the first rally of Iraq's election campaign. For full report and wonderful photograph of red flags and male and female progressives on the move see here

Scroll down to “Sectarianism likely to dominate Iraq poll.”

The English language page of the Iraqi Communist Party is at
here

(AJ/GK)

Guest Columnist Peter Tatchell examines the left's retreat from universal human rights

The first guest columnist on the LFIQ web site is the human rights campaigner, Peter Tatchell. We feel that he makes some very powerful points on how parts of the left have sold the pass on universal values.

We strongly share his opinions on how parts of the left have behaved shamefully on Iraq. In this important assessment he writes that “Motivated more by hatred of the US and British governments than by love for the Iraqi people, many so-called leftists support a "resistance" that, if victorious, would bring to power Baathists, Islamic fundamentalists and pro-al-Qaeda militants. Is that what the left now stands for? Neo-fascism, so long as it is anti-western?”

The left’s retreat from universal human rights
Peter Tatchell

Liberal humanitarian values are under threat. Much of this threat comes not from the far right but from the left's moral equivocation and compromises. Sections of progressive opinion are wavering in their defence of universal human rights. In this era of post-modernism and live-and-let-live multiculturalism, moral relativism is gaining ground.

This holds that every community is different, and there are no eternal humanitarian values. In the name of "cultural sensitivity", we are expected to respect other people's religious beliefs and ethnic traditions. But sometimes this means colluding with religious-inspired barbarisms like female genital mutilation.

Over 100 million young girls in Africa and the Middle East have had their clitorises excised and / or their vaginas sown up. We would not tolerate this patriarchal abuse in Britain. Why should we tolerate it in other countries? Female genital mutilation is a crime against humanity. Don’t we have a duty of international solidarity with the victims?

Fearful of accusations of "racism", much of the left is reluctant to speak out against human rights violations perpetrated by people who happen to be non-white. This silence is killing black people the world over. President Mugabe of Zimbabwe has murdered more black Africans than apartheid; massacring 20,000 in Matabeleland in the 1980s alone. Where were the left-wing mass protests? Even today, as black Zimbabwean democrats, trade unionists, students, journalists, and socialists are being arrested, tortured, raped and murdered, the left says nothing and does nothing.

The same curious morality applies to Iraq. The Stop The War Coalition was right to oppose the US – UK led invasion, but utterly wrong to ignore Sadaam’s terrorization of the Kurds and Shias, and of socialists, democrats and trade unionists. The STWC’s failure to support the democratic and left opposition to Saddam ranks as one of the great moral failures of our era. It’s “do nothing” and “take no sides” policy failed to challenge Sadaam’s tyranny. Proposals for a campaign of international solidarity to help the Iraqi people topple the dictatorship and liberate themselves were decisively rejected by the STWC.

Right now, the STWC supports “the resistance” in Iraq by any means necessary – a tacit endorsement of the suicide bombing, hostage-taking and execution of innocent civilians, including brave, selfless aid workers, election supervisors and ordinary Iraqis on their way to school and work. The STWC justifies this carnage in the name of “national liberation” (sic).

Motivated more by hatred of the US and British governments than by love for the Iraqi people, many so-called leftists support a “resistance” that, if victorious, would bring to power Baathists, Islamic fundamentalists and pro-al-Qaeda militants. Is that what the left now stands for? Neo-fascism, so long as it is anti-western?

The left’s political somersaults and ethical acrobatics are most striking on the issue of Islamic fundamentalism. Muslims should be defended against prejudice and discrimination. But that does not mean that human rights violations by Muslims (or anyone else) should be ignored.

The threat of being labeled "Islamophobic" is inducing a new wave of moral paralysis, as evidenced by the way most leftists ignore the role of fundamentalist Islam in the genocide in the Darfur region of Sudan, where racist Islamists are exterminating the black African population.

We see similar double standards in Britain when many left-wingers fail to speak out against the sexism and homophobia of organisations like the Muslim Council of Britain, the Islamic Human Rights Commission and the Muslim Association of Britain.

Sections of the left now openly tolerate – and even seek to excuse - attacks on human rights by Muslim fundamentalists, when they would never tolerate similar attacks by fundamentalist Christians or Jews. This is a patronizing inverse racism. It judges Muslims by different standards than it judges others.

Where are the left campaigns in solidarity with liberal, progressive Muslims? The victims of the fundamentalists get little sympathy from many who claim to leftists. Indeed, the Socialist Worker’s Party, Respect and the Stop The War Coalition seem to be forging a strategic alliance with right-wing Islamists like Dr Yusuf al-Qaradawi and the MAB – against left-wing, feminist and gay Muslims.

Whatever happened to the principles of universal human rights and international solidarity? Is it really Islamophobic to condemn the stoning of adulteresses in northern Nigeria and the arrest and torture of gay people by the PLO and the Palestinian Authority? Can we remain silent when Muslims are suffering persecution at the hands of fellow Muslims? Is Muslim-on-Muslim oppression any less worthy of our concern?

The queer rights group OutRage! has experienced the left’s ethical retreat from humanitarian values first hand. We are campaigning against the murder of gay Jamaicans, and against eight reggae singers who encourage these homophobic killings. Some black and left activists accuse us of "cultural imperialism". These armchair critics never lifted a finger to help gay Jamaicans, but they readily attack our solidarity campaign.

How can it be cultural imperialism to ask the Jamaican government to honour the international human rights agreements it has signed and pledged to uphold? What is neo-colonial about backing the struggle of Jamaican human rights campaigners who want an end to the killing of their gay Jamaican brothers and sisters? Why are we being pilloried for supporting the black victims of homophobia and for opposing violent homophobes in the music industry? The real racism is not our Stop Murder Music campaign, but the left's indifference to the persecution of lesbian and gay Jamaicans.

PETER TATCHELL HUMAN RIGHTS FUND

Donations are requested to help fund Peter Tatchell's human rights
work, including his future campaigns to use international human rights
law to challenge tyrants and torturers. Peter is unpaid and receives
no grants. To continue his human rights work, he depends on donations
from friends and supporters.

Please make cheques payable to: "Peter Tatchell Human Rights Fund".

Send to: Peter Tatchell Human Rights Fund, PO Box.35253, London E1 4YF

Go here

Email: info@tatchellrightsfund.org

Thank you. Richard Kirker, Treasurer PTHRF

Women’s Rights and Iraq

Steven Vincent, an American artist, has spent four months travelling through Iraq, embedding himself not with the US Army but ordinary Iraqis. He has written a book 'In the Red Zone: A journey into the Soul of Iraq’. He is interviewed by the blogger Chrenkoff at here (scroll down)

LFIQ do not endorse all of the viewpoints of Steve Vincent but we draw the attention of our readers to his thoughts on three topics: women’s rights and democracy in Iraq, the ‘people of the slogans’, and the mistakes of the US in Iraq.

WOMEN’S RIGHTS

“Nour [Vincent’s guide and translator] had a deep hunger for democracy that made me feel ashamed for taking my own liberties for granted. She would ask me endless questions about the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the First Amendment, and so on. To her, democracy and moderate Islam was her path to freedom - both from the religious fundamentalists, and the "ignorant tribal men," as she put it, who made women's lives such hell. (…) Where we can help - aside from eradicating the paramilitary death-squads - is work to liberate women. Women's rights is the Achilles heel of Islamofascism. Liberated women, contributing their energies to Iraqi culture and society will do much to bring the nation into the modern world, as well as heal the anguish that lurks in its soul. (…) There are many, many women like Nour who possess the intelligence, spirit and desperation that compels any revolutionary to act. Opposed to them, however, are patriarchal interests entrenched in tribal traditions and religious law. The Nours of Iraq can't fight these interests head-on, direct combat only causes these regressive forces to entrench themselves deeper. (Already we hear the mullahs cry that "feminism" is a "neo-conservative plot to undermine Islam.") The women's revolution has to gather force indirectly - through law, the media (including bloggers!), public opinion, human rights observers, civil libertarians and - perhaps most importantly--an improving economy.”

THE PEOPLE OF THE SLOGANS

“That's what my Iraqi friends called the anti-war and anti-Coalition activists they met in Baghdad. "I always feel like they are talking in slogans," my poet friend Naseer told me. (…) But the worst, the absolute worst, were the "humanitarians" who claimed that the U.S. was as bad as Saddam. This deeply pained my friends, not because they particularly loved America, but because the activists had no conception of Iraq's suffering under the dictator. "They should examine their moral consciences," Naseer would grumble.
US MISTAKES

“The Bush Administration made some terrible mistakes. Not enough troops, to begin with - and not enough military police to do the kind of constabulary work hunter-killer Marines are now doing. More troops and more MPs would have helped stop the looting. I can't stress how disastrous and demoralizing the pillaging of Baghdad was to Iraq. Not only did it damage the country's infrastructure and destroy many buildings, it weakened Iraqi faith in the U.S. Imagine if your police department suddenly stopped pursuing criminals - how much respect would you have for them? I remember an Iraqi man clutching my arm and pleading, "If you're going to occupy our country, occupy it!" (AJ)

Bush Does Not Get It and Friedman Weeps

Thomas L. Friedman’s column in today’s New York Times reminds me of that great scene in the movie about the Cuban Missile Crisis, Thirteen Days. At the height of the crisis, with the world holding its breath, a four-star Navy General orders a warning shot be fired across the bows of the Russian ship steaming toward Cuba. A Kennedy aide rushes to stop him shouting ‘You just don’t get it!’ He points out to the General that every military ‘move’ is really a political move. This is not a conventional war he says. ‘This is President Kennedy communicating with Prime Minister Khrushchev’.

Today, every ‘move’ (for instance, the failure to stop the sack of Baghdad, setting up Quantanamo Bay, flouting the rule of law, the dilatory prosecution of the guilty of Abu Ghraib) is the democratic world communicating to the combatants in a civil war taking place within the Muslim world, for the future of Islam, between the modernising moderate Muslims and the Jihadi-fundamentalists.

Not ‘getting it’, President Bush is holding up the publication of the Third UN Human Development Report on the Arab World. Why this is such a bad 'move' is explained by Friedman:

‘In 2002, the U.N. Development Program sponsored a group of courageous Arab economists, social scientists and other scholars to do four reports on human development in the Arab world. The first one, in 2002, caused a real stir in this region - showing, among other things, that the Arabs were falling so far behind that Spain's G.D.P. was greater than that of the entire Arab League combined. That first report, published in Arabic and English, was downloaded off the Internet one million times. It was a truly incisive diagnosis of the deficits of freedom, education and women's empowerment retarding the Arab world. In 2003, the same group produced a second Arab Human Development Report, about the Arab knowledge deficit - even tackling the supersensitive issue of how Islam and its current spiritual leaders may be holding back modern education. This was stuff no U.S. diplomat could ever raise, but the Arab authors of these reports could and did. So I eagerly awaited the third Arab Human Development Report, due in October. It was going to be pure TNT, because it was going to tackle the issue of governance and misgovernance in the Arab world, and the legal, institutional and religious impediments to political reform. These are the guts of the issue out here. I waited. And I waited. But nothing.”

President Bush is ‘apparently insisting that language critical of America and Israel be changed - as if language 10 times worse can't be heard on Arab satellite TV every day. And until it's changed, the Bush folks are apparently ready to see the report delayed or killed altogether. And they have an ally. The government of Egypt, which is criticized in the report, also doesn't want it out - along with some other Arab regimes’.

As Friedman comments ‘It makes you weep’. It should make us weep because we do ‘get it’. The doctrine of ‘international community’ set out by Tony Blair in his Chicago speech of 1999, was lauded by Robin Cook recently (December 3 Guardian) as in line with the latest UN strategic thinking. Maybe they should join forces to demand President Bush release the UN Report (AJ).

Debating Iraq: The Two Souls of the Left and those BBC Presenters

On BBC Radio 4's Today programme (15 December) Liberal Democrat Foreign Affairs spokesman Sir Menzies Campbell gave his point of view on Iraq and Ann Clwyd (the Prime Minister Special Envoy on Human Rights to Iraq, and Joint President of Labour Friends of Iraq) responded. The exchanges are worth listening to. They reveal the two souls of the left on Iraq.

Menzies Campbell was very pessimistic and offered no ideas on moving forward. He did a good impression of an erudite version of Sgt. Fraser from Dad's Army ('We're All Doomed! We're All Doomed, I tell yee!'). He saw nothing positive in post-Saddam Iraq. He called political life in Saddam's Iraq 'organised' and 'dangerous' while political life in post-Saddam Iraq 'disorganised' and 'dangerous', quite as if there had been no real change.

And this on the day election campaigning begins officially and the day after the discovery of another mass grave at Sulaimaniya. He claimed that 'not one serious Sunni party has registered for the elections', a claim contradicted by the very reports carried on the Today programme only minutes before. Menzies Campbell finished by saying 'Its a brave man who says that Iraqis are better off' post-Saddam.

Ann Clwyd pointed out that the Foreign Affairs spokesman of the Liberal Democrats, who pronounces on Iraq on a daily basis, has never been to Iraq since Saddam fell (Clwyd has been eight times). She spoke of the real problems in Iraq but also of the 'strengthening of civil society' and the 'enthusiasm for elections'.

The Today Presenter, James Naughtie, acted like an attorney for Menzies-Campbell, restated his arguments, doubted the number of mass graves that have been discovered in Iraq, and directed his remaining question to...the abuse of prisoners by the Americans. Anne Clwyd dealt with each question in turn, spelling out the terrible realities of the 'killing fields' of Saddam and of the need for all prisoners to receive ’the proper treatment to which they are entitled'. But Naughtie had done what the BBC presenters routinely do: direct all discussion to the perfidy of the Americans and doubts about whether the whole effort is worth it.

To hear the clip scroll down to 08.42 (Alan Johnson)

here

Ann Clwyd Reports from Iraq

Ann Clwyd MP, The Prime Minister's Special Envoy for Human Rights in Iraq (and Joint President of Labour Friends of Iraq) has been reporting from Iraq for BBC Radio 4's 'Today' Programme. To listen to yesterday's clip, from Kirkuk, (14 December) go here and scroll down to 08.46 on the Running Order. (Alan Johnson)

Socialist Worker Backs Ba’athist Tariq Aziz and the Terrorists

In the Winter Review of Bookmarks (a bookshop associated with the Socialist Workers Party) Martin Smith reviews Christian Parenti’s new book The Freedom: Shadows and Hallucinations in Occupied Iraq (The New Press, 2004).

Smith begins his review with a quote from Tariq Aziz, (Saddam’s Number 2): 'People say to me, you are not Vietnamese. You have no jungles and swamps to hide in. I reply, let our cities be our swamps and our buildings be our jungles’. Smith comments, ‘How true’. Smith passes over in silence the record of Tariq Aziz as a fascistic murderer, No. 2 in a regime of mass graves and ethnic cleansing. Instead, Smith treats Tariq Aziz as a freedom fighter, comparable to Ho Chi Minh.

Smith’s review ends on this note: ‘Go buy yourself a copy of The Freedom it’ll grab your attention like an RPG hitting a Humvee’. But Smith and the SWP know the RPG’s also hit the reopened Water Treatment Plant at al-Ummal on 30 September 2004 killing at least 41 people, among them 34 children. Smith and the SWP know the RPG’s also hit the car of an Iraqi Communist Party leader Comrade Wadhah Hassan Abdul Amir (Saadoun), a member of the Interim National Assembly, and killed him on 13th November 2004, along with two of his comrades, while travelling from Baghdad to Kirkuk. Smith and the SWP know the RPG’s also hit the train on the railway line between Mosel and Baghdad murdering the IFTU members aboard, an atack that moved Tony Woodley, General Secretary of the TGWU to write to Abdullah Muhsin, ‘It is horrifying to learn that four of your members have been killed and mutilated by terrorists while driving and working on a freight train carrying consumer goods’ (http://www.iraqitradeunions.org/archives/000111.html)

The question is why the SWP don’t care anymore about those kids, those socialists or those trade unionists. And the other question is why so many are still prepared to follow their lead. Time to move on. (Alan Johnson).

Alan Johnson examines a new constitution for a new Iraq: a view from the KDP

The website of the Kurdish Democratic Party carries an interesting article by Dr. Munther Al-Fadhal on ‘The Basic Principles of the Permanent Constitution of the New Iraq’. The January Elections will elect a National Assembly tasked with drawing up a new constitution for Iraq. This constitution will be endorsed or rejected by the Iraqi people in a national referendum in October 2005. If it is passed fresh elections will be held under its rules in December 2005.

What should the new constitution look like? Dr Munther Al-Fadhal sets out his vision of “a pluralistic and democratic Iraq that enjoys stability and peace based on the principle of freely chosen federation, which respects the Basic Law, operative laws, human rights, and the international commitments. An Iraq which is free from discrimination due to sex, colour, ethnicity, nationality, religion, and thought. An Iraq in which women play a role that corresponds with the human values in life. For the sake of a neutral Iraq away from the wars. An Iraq in which constitutional institutions, civil society, and the integrity of law, are established. This is to be away from the idol-worship and the military and totalitarian rules that are totally at odds with the principles of democratic rule. For the sake of an Iraq in which all the nationalities enjoy freedom, stability, and security; in which every party recognizes the others’ rights, respects the peoples’ rights of self-determination and consolidates principles of peaceful succession; there should exist a permanent constitution for the country."

Alan Johnson looks at the Friends of Democracy

The blogger Iraq the Model http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/ reports on the 'Friends of Democracy' Project. His report on a packed meeting at the College of Physical Education for Girls captures an Iraq we rarely hear about from the BBC. He comments, 'The seats were not enough for the students. Moreover some of them engaged the lecturers in questions and discussions and most of them were eager to participate in the elections but they knew little about elections, democracy and constitution, etc and were so pleased to find someone willing to teach them'. Alan Johnson

Tuesday, November 16, 2004

The reason why we weren’t posting regularly in the last week or so is because we were outside Iraq, having meetings with our friends who are running “Spirit of America”.

In the last meeting we put the final touches for the “friends of democracy” project; a project that is dedicated to spread the concepts of democracy among Iraqis through the internet by helping students’ groups and NGOs create their own blogs (in Arabic) and introduce these groups to each other in a way that enables them to exchange their thoughts and spread the news about their activities as well as by arranging for lectures and discussions to inform the Iraqi voters (through interactive discussions) about the nature and importance of the coming elections. This will be done without any interference with the choices they will make because our ultimate goal is to help our people choose what they believe is good for them.

The project will not be limited to the coming elections only; we’re looking forward to extend this project for the time following the elections.

We’ve already carried out some activities that are related to this project including lectures like this one (see photograph at http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/lecture%201.jpg ) at the college of physical education for girls. We were worried about the way students would react to a lecture like this one but amazingly the hall was full (see photograph at http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/lecture%202.jpg) and the seats were not enough for the students. Moreover some of them engaged the lecturers in questions and discussions and most of them were eager to participate in the elections but they knew little about elections, democracy and constitution, etc and were so pleased to find someone willing to teach them. The way we see it is that the most important thing is to educate as many Iraqis as possible about the upcoming elections, their significance and how important each vote is.

We’re trying to tell them that each one of them has a significant role in deciding his/her country’s future. This is more important than encouraging them just to vote as we’re positive that the vast majority of Iraqis will vote but they need to know why they’re voting and what for.

For example some Iraqis still think that the elections are presidential ones! And many of them don’t realize that the main job of the national assembly is to prepare for writing the constitution and this is not their mistake it is the government’s and the higher commission for elections’ responsibility and till now they’re not doing a great job on this.

This may be because of the huge responsibilities they have and the risks they’re taking and that’s why we want to help them in their mission.

Anyway, the coming week or two will witness more frequent and more focused activities and there will also be a website in both Arabic and English to keep the readers inside and outside Iraq updated as often as possible.

If anyone is interested in supporting this project, visit the website of “Spirit of America”.

We were planning to stay in Jordan for only 4 days but with the airport being closed, we had to stay there for a longer time.

Being out of the events’ field for a week and having the media as the only source of information made me understand more why many people have a blurred vision about the situation in Iraq, I mean watching Al- Jazeera and the CNN for a relatively long time made Iraq- at certain moments-look like “hell on earth”. Fortunately I lived my whole life in Iraq and when it comes to events taking place over there I can distinguish between the truth and the lies to a certain degree but my concern is about people who have never been there because the media twist facts and exaggerate things in an unbelievable manner.

As a matter of fact, from the news I got from the media I expected to find Baghdad in a terrible condition when I return; no gasoline, no electricity, fighting at every corner and dead bodies everywhere but of course I didn’t find it this way when I returned. Actually I haven’t seen any significant difference except for losing some hours of electricity!

Jane Ashworth examines the potential role of football in the new Iraq

Its not just the brand-mangers at the Premiership who scream about the
power of football. And football is not just a tool used by ruling
elites to whip up nationalism or to bond to them an otherwise
potentially rebellious working class. Football can be a negative
political tool but it can also be a force for strengthening community
networks and inter-communal ties.

This may prove to be especially true in Iraq which has a strong
football history. Even this year they made the Olympic Semi Final
without the type of pre-tournament training which most of the other
teams would take for granted. It is likely that investment in
community football in Iraq could be a source of unity from which more
overtly political relationships can develop.

Unable to work in Iraq because of the security situation, the Football
Association visited Jordan to deliver coach education to Iraq's top
players, many of whom were national team veterans who played under
Saddam Hussein's notoriously sadistic son Uday.

The FA's International Dept specialises in coach education across the
world. Laurie McMenemie lead a delegation to Afghanistan not long
after the Taliban fell. They played some games and showed a few
Afghanis how to organise themselves as coaches. The papers said it was
well received.

The security situation is making organising football a hard task. The
Times reports (11/12/04) that even the Iraqi national league has its
problems: 'After three rounds of matches it was suspended because
teams struggled to get to fixtures on time past US and British forces'
checkpoints.'

'Salman Hussein Hashim, 26, a former Olympic and national team player,
who now plays for Najaf is only too aware of the difficulties. "We
couldn't play or train for quite a long time," Hashim, a striker for
the national league side, Najaf, who plans to coach under-15 players,
said. "Now things are much better, though really we're still only able
to play within Najaf itself."

In many countries working class sport is organised through the labour
movement. The Iraqi Federation of Trade Unions could do far worse than
think about taking on that role themselves.

Grassroots testimony

The Guardian’s Rory McCarthy in Baghdad gives a fascinating insight into real-life debates about the occupation and resistance in Iraq.

In his report on December 10, 2004, he quotes from a discussion between Najwa al-Bayati and her uncle.

"We want America to be a powerful friend that can defend us, but we don't want him to rule us," he said. "Getting rid of Saddam was good, but they didn't keep their promises. They broke their word. They only came for the oil."

Mrs Bayati, 50, shouted back: "But they took away Saddam. Without them Saddam would never have left Iraq in 200 years. We would have been ruled by his children and his children's children."

It continues: “Over the course of several conversations in spring this year Mrs Bayati, a strong-minded, middle-class woman and moderate Shia, had described her life. She spoke of her heartbreak at the death of her daughter Samar in an accident five years ago, the death of her husband a few months later, not long after he was released from four years in Saddam's jails, her joy at watching the fall of Saddam, her frustration at the failures of the US occupation and her struggle to get back her job as a vet at the agriculture ministry.”

She had joined as a young veterinary student in Baghdad in 1971 and is a Communist party candidate in the January elections.

Several friends have been murdered by the so-called resistance, including Waddah Hassan Abdel-Amir, a senior official at the Communist party.

IRAQIS CALL FOR END TO DIVISIVE POLICIES AND GREATER EU INVOLVEMENT

We post this for information and discussion.

Ending ethnically divisive policies and increasing EU involvement are crucial to building a secure and viable democracy in Iraq, a group of prominent Iraqis told an international conference convened in the UK by the Foreign Policy Centre.

The17 Iraqi participants, who included lawyers, judges, journalists, leaders
of NGO and women's groups and two Ministers in the Interim government,
emphasised the need to engage with local groups. The conference was a unique effort to identify the views of local Iraqi groups and NGOs, whose voice has been conspicuously absent, on security, the rule of law and institutional reform.

Its official recommendations call on the international community to stop analysing issues according to ethnic and religious divisions – an approach that has unnecessarily exacerbated tensions between Iraq's different groups.

Coalition forces must be replaced with Iraqi troops in major cities at the earliest opportunity, and the US should adopt "softer" policing methods, along the model of the British in Basra. Initiatives such as cash-for-guns and dialogue with local groups are deemed essential to making Iraqis feel safe.

"Ordinary Iraqis have not been listened to enough on matters that affect them dramatically," Rouzbeh Pirouz, chairman of the Foreign Policy Centre's Civility programme on Middle East reform, commented. "The international community must pay heed to the conference findings to begin winning hearts and minds."

Bringing the EU on board in Iraq's reconstruction was a recurrent and popular theme in the discussions. This would increase the coalition's legitimacy, and make use of Europe's strong expertise in post-conflict work.

"European and American leaders must stop using Iraq as a pawn in transatlantic politics," Mr Pirouz added. "They must work together to build a safe and viable democratic Iraq."

OFFICIAL RECOMMENDATIONS:

(1) Increasing security and justice by emphasising dialogue over force, as
in Najaf; using senior Shi'a at front lines of negotiation; adopting
"softer" policing methods; disarming the population with cash-for-guns

(2) Greater EU involvement in political, economic and humanitarian
affairs; allaying Iraqi fears about meddling by regional neighbours

(3) Promoting awareness of elections through school programmes, the media, and partnerships with local Iraqi NGOs

(4) Developing an independent Iraqi media with a "BBC-style" charter

(5) Increasing accountability of process for awarding reconstruction
contracts

NOTES TO EDITORS:

1. The Iraq Retreat organised by the Civility Programme at the Foreign
Policy Centre was held at Ditchley Park, Oxfordshire, from 22-24 October
2004, under the Chatham House rule. Seventeen prominent Iraqi nationals
attended, including the Minister of State for Civil Society, HE Dr. Mamou F
Othman, the Minister for Human Rights, HE Mr. Bikhtiyar Amin, and
representatives of 15 civil society organisations. British, European and
American officials also attended.

2. The Civility Programme is a programme of research, events and
publications aimed at informing Western strategies for political reform in
the Greater Middle East. Underpinning its activities is the belief that
meaningful reform in the region can only come from a functioning civil
society supported by the values of the rule of law and essential freedoms of
speech, information, publication and association. Rouzbeh Pirouz is its
founder and chairman.

3. The Foreign Policy Centre is an independent think-tank on international
issues set up under the patronage of British Prime Minister Tony Blair in
1998.

A new exchange of letters between Mick Rix, ex-General Secretary of ASLEF and Andrew Murray, Chair of the Stop the War Coalition

(LFIQ found these documents posted on the website of the journal What
Next? http://www.whatnextjournal.co.uk and as such in the public
domain)

LFIQ invites readers to study these letters very carefully. We would
draw our readers attention to just two points before encouraging them
to read the entire exchange.

First, Rix objects first to the StWC's expressed support for 'any
means necessary' used by the Resistance. Rix writes to Murray 'If you
think I am going to sit back and agree with beheadings, kidnappings,
torture and brutality, and out right terrorization of ordinary Iraqi
and others, then you can forget it'.

Second, Rix points out that Murray, and the StWC, have fingered the
IFTU. "I don't think you also realise the danger that your actions and
those of the Respect colleagues in the StTW have placed [the Foreign
Representative of the IFTU] against attacks from extremists. Some
people talk about life and death situations, some unfortunately have
to live it and so do their families in Iraq and I don't see why you,
Respect or the coalition have a right to think you can place them in
that situation, when they are living daily with those consequences,
because they are not the "new" friends of yourself, George, StTW or
Respect such as extreme nationalists, or religious fundamentalists. It
is you who have attacked the IFTU and Abdullah".

'A new exchange of letters between Mick Rix, ex-General Secretary of ASLEF and Andrew Murray, Chair of the StWC, on the subject of Rix's resignation from the StWC'

Mick Rix to the Stop the War Coalition, 19 October 2004

Subject: Re: Steering Committee Meeting

Please could you send my apologies, also I wish to resign my position
on the steering committee. There are two reasons, one I am not able to
make the meetings due to work pressures, secondly I do not agree with
assertions made over the conduct of union delegations at the Labour
party in the recent statement, and indeed the attacks made on
Abdullah. I think in these difficult times, the recent outbursts that
have been made, and the personalisation has vastly reduced our
influence and support, in the movement. I thought it would have been
better and more democratic, before these statements were made, they
should have been discussed, and wider views sought. There is nothing
wrong with criticism, and people from time to time will have and hold
different views, but there are better ways of making this critique,
and there were better ways of inviting views on this critique, before
it was published.

I wish you all future success, but I believe at the moment damage has
been done that is long lasting, I also feel that Abdullah should
receive an apology for some of the stupid and wild accusations made
about him. I also believe that the vast majority of union delegates at
the Labour Party who hold strong views on the war, and the vast
majority are anti-war, should also receive an apology for the vitriol
that has been whipped up against them. At least they debated and
discussed the position before doing what they did, likewise the
statements that have been made, by representatives and close
associates of STW, have not been debated prior to their publication,
nor were their views sought as well.

Mick Rix

Andrew Murray to Mick Rix, 20 October 2004

Dear Mick

I am writing to you because I have been unable to reach you by phone
since our conversation 24 hours ago. It now seems clear that as well
as simply resigning from the Coalition Steering Committee you have,
simultaneously, circulated your resignation letter with a lengthy and
critical covering note to a variety of people in the movement (I have
no idea how many) who you feel may be interested in your action.
Unsurprisingly, this has already reached hostile media and is being
picked up and used against the Coalition.

I must say that I cannot regard this as anything other than a
betrayal. If you wish to resign from the Committee (which, as you
note, you have never attended anyway) then that is ultimately your
affair. But to publicise the fact as you have done is either a
deliberate attempt to damage the Coalition within the trade unions or
simply very naive. I also note that you neither tried to discuss this
with me, in spite of our very close political relationship over recent
years, nor even had the courtesy to copy me in on your round-robin
e-mail.

Your resignation is now a public political act. As I said to you
yesterday, before I was aware that you had already broadcast your
decision far and wide, your reasons simply do not hold water. The StWC
statement re. the IFTU does not attack any trade union in Britain, nor
has any union affiliated to the Coalition asserted that it does. You
were given the same opportunity to comment on the IFTU statement prior
to its publication as other Steering Committee members, yet you chose
not to do so, at a time when your input might well have been very
helpful. And you agree that comment by the Coalition on the
pro-occupation vote at the Labour Party conference (a decision which
you yourself say you disagree with) was unavoidable. Since your
resignation has been made public by yourself, I will have to consult
with colleagues in the Coalition as to whether we wish to publicly
respond to your charges. Should we do so, I guarantee I will advise
you of any statement in advance.

I had hoped that you would reconsider your resignation, mostly because

I believe that it will damage your own standing on the left. As we
speak, the US is preparing a bloody assault on Fallujah, and British
politics is in uproar over the redeployment of British troops to
facilitate this. The occupation of Iraq remains the central question
in world politics, far more important than the bruised feelings of
particular trade union delegates to the Labour Party. The government
is on the ropes once again and, as part of its crisis, is
co-ordinating the heaviest attacks on the anti-war movement since
March-April of last year. Under these circumstances, resignation will
inevitably seem self-indulgent at best, or desertion at worst. It
will, I fear, be remembered by your comrades long after the row re the
IFTU is forgotten.

You will appreciate it gives me not the slightest pleasure to write to
you in these terms, since I have greatly valued your comradeship and
will always remain grateful for your support (and Debbie's) during the
productive years we shared at ASLEF. Indeed, I have always
acknowledged that without your support, it would scarcely have been
possible for me to play the role within the StWC that I have done.
However, just as you would always have put the interests of ASLEF
above any personal considerations, so I have to do now in respect of
my obligations to the Stop the War Coalition.

Yours

Andrew

Mick Rix to Andrew Murray, 21 October 2004

Dear Andrew

Firstly I am at a loss to understand why as a comrade you have taken
it upon yourself to write to me in the way that you have. When any
message that I may have sent to anyone in the movement who are friends
and comrades, was in defence of socialists and trades unionists, and
was not overtly critical, nasty or personalised as your letter appears
to be.

I would invite you to read again the comments I made, also the
comments made to John Haylett. Are you saying my comments to John are
phrased like yours? Yet I am astounded that I should receive the
written abuse that I have from you.

My resignation to the coalition was polite, accurate, and comradely.

Firstly I have already sent you a message, giving you a reason why I
was unable to return your call. I now discover when I arrived home
this evening you have sent me this unwarranted, political and personal
assault. The language that you use and the way they have been phrased,
tends in part to be very similar to the StTW statements put out
without any consultation. In fact the language you are using, to be
frank, shows that some of you in the coalition are on the verge of
losing the plot.

Firstly let's get a few things straight and let's stick to the facts
as they are. I am and always will be a committed vociferous opponent
and activist against the illegal invasion, occupation and bloodshed
that has been caused in Iraq. Secondly I really do not require a
lecture from you, over what has taken place, or what is about to take
place in Iraq.

I do not know where you think you have the right to threaten me as you
so did, with the remarks in your letter, thus "under these
circumstances, resignation will inevitably seem self-indulgent at
best, or desertion at worst. It will, I fear, be remembered by your
comrades long after the row re the IFTU is forgotten".

I am not aware that you have now been elected the official
spokesperson for the left, after all comrade, it was myself that
fought for an anti war policy in the left of the TUC, and who
persuaded the left in the TUC to take the actions that they did, when
some had very grave personal reservations about doing so, and who they
were joining forces with!! Also remember this comrade, unlike some, I
personally lost an election due to my personal and political support
for the anti war position, and I don't remember too much, the real
practical support from some comrades, in helping the left in my union
to fight the reactionary right wing stance, that eventually won.

Mainly because some had a blind naivety, in thinking that I and the
left could just stroll it, and because others were just too busy,
doing other things for other people, despite the fact of the very
practical help and support we in the left in ASLEF needed at that
time, and which we readily gave others, including yourself.

So yes as a casualty, and so too my comrades in the left in my former
union, I think I have demonstrated more than others that I put my neck
on line for this cause, and many other working class causes. I not
only think your remarks are silly and totally unwarranted, but at best
reflect a statement, which you have no standing in the movement to
make, and at best reflect an over indulgence in your own self opinion.

Again with respect you have no right to say that I should not inform
comrades in the movement of my decision, when you think you have the
right to send out a statement, in "my name" as a member of the
steering committee, may I add without any consultation. If you believe
you have the unilateral right to write and publicise a statement, and
send it out to all and sundry, inside and outside our movement,
attacking working class trade unionists and socialists, and the Iraqi
trade union movement, and the Iraqi representative of the IFTU, then I
think I have the very same right to send my tame letter of resignation
to comrades and friends in the movement.

If you think my actions were a betrayal, I will be quite honest, I
think your public statement, without consultation, is a worse act of
betrayal, for I have made a tame critique over the StTW statement, you
made a public and unwarranted attack on working class, trade unionists
and socialists, also the Iraqi trade union movement and their
representative. I have resigned because I do not agree with your right
to attack socialists, trade unionists and anti-war supporters, and our
Iraqi comrades. I think betrayal is at your door.

The movement that I was brought up in, comrade, allows constructive
criticism, yourself, StTW and Respect crossed the line, in terms of
human decency, and was an all out assault. The language that was used
was deliberate, archaic, violent, and plain downright stupid and
dangerous if you happen to be an Iraqi at this present time. Then
again you are not.

If you wish to stick by your terrible statement, that is personalised
and a character assassination, then so be it. I think when you are
wrong, you should apologise, not make excuses, or avoid apologising,
which you are doing. I also think it high time you got back to
observing some decent movement traditions, instead of aping certain
traditions that some of your colleagues are famous for in StTW and
Respect.

I don't think you also realise the danger that your actions and those
of the Respect colleagues in the StTW have placed Abdullah and perhaps
others in the IFTU against attacks from extremists. Some people talk
about life and death situations, some unfortunately have to live it
and so do their families in Iraq and I don't see why you, Respect or
the coalition have a right to think you can place them in that
situation, when they are living daily with those consequences, because
they are not the "new" friends of yourself, George, StTW or Respect
such as extreme nationalists, or religious fundamentalists. It is you
who have attacked the IFTU and Abdullah. So much for the bold
statement the StTW will not interfere in Iraqi internal politics, your
statement, and that of the StTW at worst, did, the statement has
probably placed these good trade unionists and socialists at a
terrible risk. I also find it hard to believe you as a communist,
would place a fellow communist in that position deliberately, however
you, George, Respect and StTW may have done so.

I also passionately disagree with your assertion that consultation was
afforded on the StTW statement, did you ring up the affiliated trade
unions, prior to making the statement? Did you consult with the broad
lefts of those unions, prior to the statement being issued? You also
made the point on the telephone when we spoke that the email sent from
yourself and Lindsay was unfortunate and not clear. However you have
omitted to mention that in your letter.

May I also print what was actually sent to me in the email, I think
you will agree, there is no misunderstanding, and there never was any
intention of consultation:

"FROM Stop the War Coalition 8th October 2004 12.04PM

Dear Friends

The attached statement is to be issued on Monday by the Coalition in
response to the pressing political questions for the anti-war movement
which have arisen from the Labour Party conference. It has been
endorsed by the officers and will of course be on the agenda for
discussion at the Steering Committee meeting to be held later this
month.

Kind regards

Andrew Murray and Lindsey German"

I am sorry comrade, your email with the attachment of the statement
was not a consultation, and was only to be "discussed by the steering
committee later this month" on the 19th October 2004. Do you call that
an invitation to consult? That is my whole point, I was never
consulted and in "my name", a statement is put out, that attacks trade
unionists, socialists, and Iraqi comrades and their organization.

Was this act, not really in response, due to the unfortunate public
and personal assault by George Galloway printed in the Morning Star,
and the deserved outrage of reaction, that the said (article)
received. In so doing, in trying to prop up support for Respect, you
all then rush to put out another statement, this time in the name of
the StTW, which virtually does the same thing, to take away some of
the heat generated by that vicious, incorrect and unwarranted rant by
George. A total knee jerk reaction, but with the same dangerous, and
familiar hallmarks of ultra-leftist impatience and stupidity. When a
mistake is committed, people with an ounce of common sense usually do
not try to repeat it!!

However in this case, the mistake by supporters of Respect and
yourself in StTW gets worse, in not distancing themselves from the
George rant, you then put in the statement some of the most
politically motivated and contradictory points that I have seen for
some time, that have probably caused the most massive rift, and the
most dangerous attack on an individual, you all may as well have
loaded the gun for the extremists.

I totally disagree with the statements that this was indeed the object
of Abdullah, in fact in talking to Rob Griffiths GS CPB yesterday,
over what you said to me, that Abdullah had overstepped the remit of
the IFTU, Rob confirmed to me, that indeed the IFTU now deny saying
this. If Abdullah has done something incorrect, as an Iraqi trade
unionist, and socialist, I think that is for the Iraqi movement to say
so, that is now not the case, according to Rob, who made it clear to
me, that indeed the IFTU representatives, some days later withdrew
those remarks. It also proves the point about a knee jerk response,
and impatience shown, and the lack of clarity in terms of evidence
that indeed Abdullah personally acted above and beyond his remit, on
behalf of the IFTU.

The IFTU is now officially supported by a number of trade unions, and
the TUC. Which has a pretty good policy in relation to the situation
in Iraq. Let's also remember comrade when you were at ASLEF, after an
approach from the CPB, which you knew and were aware of, that I was
asked to approach and encourage the TUC, to recognize the IFTU, a
socialist and CP Iraqi TU Federation. They are a legitimate Trade
Union federation the same as our TUC, what rights have the coalition
to place these people in danger with the language used in the StTW
statement? It took some time to get support for the IFTU through the
TUC, but it has been embraced after a battle with the ICFTU. You now
want to throw all that away, by wild statements and an attack on
fellow socialists and communists who happen to be Iraqi? Your
statement, again without any consultation, is deliberately aimed at
Abdullah, and makes the assertion he supported the original invasion.

The StTW statement did not name him, but your statement may as well
have done, and is equally abhorrent as George's article a few weeks
ago. Which is now an all too familiar approach of Respect and StTW,
and it now seems, surprisingly, the same approach used by you.

Your assertion that there was no attack on trade unions is not read in
the same way as myself or others. I suppose you have to make the
statement, even though you know it's not really the reality of the
situation, because of the position you hold!! I suppose we will have
to disagree. I also think your name calling of good comrades in trade
unions, whose support we seek, for our anti-war position, in your
email/letter to me, when you assert the notion of their "bruised
feelings", is at best showing scant regard to the very same trade
unionists, that actually put the notion of opposition to war on the
front pages of newspapers and helped develop the mass movement that we
now have. Prior to [that], it was really only some of us, as the
so-called usual suspects, that did this. These so-called bruised
people are central to winning our demands, and it now clearly shows a
lack of foresight on the bigger picture demands.

It is time that instead of name calling, being belligerent to others
in our movement, and worse, being arrogant and personal, was stopped,
it is not winning people over, it's driving them away. It is creating
a split amongst all sections of the left. That was my original point,
ultra-leftist posturing and name calling never won anything, except
disrespect and avid followers of sectarianism. It is also the same
behaviour used often by the Blairtes. In fact one could assert your
actions are giving credence to the Blair war agenda, because you have
concentrated too much effort on the personalization and attacks on
good people, outwith your and the StTW's remit. Instead of
concentrating on keeping a fragile coalition of left unity that is
united against the position of invasion, occupation and possible
further massacres that may happen in Fallujah and elsewhere, you are
creating a sectarian diversion that is weakening our opposition to
war, and further changing the foreign policy of the government.

The StTW statement and the other Respect articles that have been
written have lead to interference being made in unions, in a negative
way, and in one union in particular an attack on their General
Secretary in the run up to an election. However I have not heard a
denunciation of this, by you. I think it important to remind you of
the personal role that Dave played, in assisting me and others, in
pursuing the position we managed to achieve at the TUC, on war. His
was a crucial intervention, and helped pave the way for the position
we reached. He was also very supportive all the way through. Please
don't tell me this has nothing to do with people in StTW or Respect
behind it, when we all know the reality of what really takes place in
life, and the reality of what is taking place in that union.

I also take exception that you think my actions are akin to splitting
the anti-war movement, from the trade unions (a similar charge you
made of Abdullah in you StTW statement). I suppose that is less
dangerous for me, than what it is for Abdullah, however, you and
others, undemocratically put out a statement, without any
consultation. You then expect it to be discussed some weeks after it
was sent out, and it contains some of the worst political vitriol, and
personalized character assassination, that would make an
ultra-leftie/new labour lovie pleased to sign up to. Please do not
accuse me for creating a split, by your own actions, you have not
consulted anyone, and you think no one then has the right to reproach
you, for your blatant disregard for decent movement principles. If
your politic has changed to accommodate the worst tendencies, by some
of the people you are working with, that have a reputation for
entering into at will this despicable and downright dangerous type of
dialogue, please do not expect me to follow you down that road, nor
support what you are saying, or even consult with you also.

Again I repeat the trade unions, after democratic and open debate in
their delegations, did what they did. Their delegations contained
decent socialists and trade unionists. They acted in a decent and
democratic fashion. Yes I may not agree, but I will not attack them
for the way they conducted themselves, with fairness, openness and
dialogue. What openness? What dialogue did you give to Abdullah in
your statement? What consultation, openness and dialogue did you give
to me in your statement? I also think it is rich, comrade, that you
are someone who has made a living out of the trade union and socialist
movement in Britain, you then think it correct for you to support an
attack on those same people.

I will always consider you a friend, I may disagree with your recent
shift in political analysis, and perhaps movement in your personal
politics too. I hope you understand where I am coming from, I have no
reason to harm the coalition or yourself, I think your own actions are
doing that. It is also harming the Morning Star. I just do not want to
be associated with the StTW, Respect Party political direction, of
repeated personalization and character assassination. Rather than
concentrating on the issues at hand, and fighting for peace and end to
the occupation and the establishment of free and democratic Iraq
state. Those are issues that unite us and the movement, however you
want to divide those issues, the issues that really matter, because of
you and your supporter's journey into areas and territory that are not
the business of the StTW, but of the Iraqi people themselves. You are
indeed doing Blair's job, better than what he could have ever
expected. The old saying comes to mind, snatching defeat from the jaws
of victory!!!

You and your comrades can make what ever statement you care to like
about me, I am not so sure that people will really be that interested.

I think you all have totally alienated people, with the myths and
falsehoods, and character assassinations that you are peddling. I also
could not care less, whether I am notified in advance, or have prior
sight of any statement, that is made about me, by the StWC/Respect/SWP
alliance. I have had enough personal attacks and statements written
about me that could be used to wallpaper our flat, that one more
incorrect, rant will not make any difference at all. I feel the whole
event of the StWC statement, the sneaky and untruthful way that it has
been peddled, and your subsequent letter to me, are very much in the
same realms of fantasy and in the same journalistic category that one
expects from a Jimmy Barnes diatribe. I just feel totally saddened and
disgusted that someone of your calibre can descend into this type of
ya boo politic, you are indeed usually smarter than that, and I think
you have allowed anger and poor judgment, and poor allegiance, to
cloud your usual good thinking.

I would also assert that if you wish to support the aims of
Respect/SWP whose real intention was to support the aims of the StWC
statement that promotes "an end to the occupation and withdrawal of
troops by any means possible" is bordering on the lunatic. I am sorry
if you think I am going to sit back and agree with beheadings,
kidnappings, torture and brutality, and out right terrorization of
ordinary Iraqi and others, then you can forget it, I will not be
involved whatsoever, to me it is akin to supporting the same brutality
and oppression inflicted on Iraq by Saddam, and the invading and
occupying forces of the USA.

It gives me no great satisfaction in replying to you in these lengthy
terms. I have always had a high regard for you as a friend and
comrade, however I understand your position, and what you have to do
to protect the StWC/George/Respect/SWP alliance. So be it. I just hope
that you understand I will not stand by and say or do nothing, when
decent trade unionists and socialists in the UK and good committed
socialists and trade unionists in Iraq or elsewhere are being
attacked, by people who politically have made alliances with and are
supporting religious fanatics and people who are basically against
everything that our movement really stands for.

I still repeat my original assertions, Abdullah should receive an
apology for the attack that has been made. You should stand by the
same demands, that you make of Blair, when you are wrong, there is
nothing wrong with admitting it and saying you are sorry,
unfortunately I think you may all be a little similar in this matter.
You say the door is always open, comrade, the same olive branch from
me to you, also applies, always will.

Yours

Mick

Lest we forget

Saddam's Mass Graves

Saddam's mass graves are being uncovered. There are 62 pages of powerful and moving photographs of the mass graves at http://massgraves.info

Strikes, organising, negotiation: the reality of unions in Grassroots Iraq

Alex Gordon conducted interviews with IFTU members in Britain as part
of an exchange with Unison. They outline how they defeated anti-women
proposals and took back their headquarters from US troops. The full
text can be found at the IFTU web site by clicking above.

A view from Grassroots Iraq on why terrorism is losing the battle

Securing the death road

Ten days ago, and just before I was heading to my work station in Samawa, I got a phone call from my colleagues warning me from taking the road the passes through Latifriyah and at that time the news coming from that spot was indicating a close military operation to put an end for the domination of the criminals over that segment of the road to the south.

The significant piece of news at that day was blowing up a small bridge over a small canal near Latifiyah, the small town that turned into a junk yard for burnt vehicles and a slaughter house for Iraqis; officials, IP and ING members and even civilians. Not to mention that all governmental offices were destroyed there.

So, I decided to take the other road that passes along the Tigris River and it wasn't surprising to find that most taxis and buses have switched to that longer but safer road (takes two extra hours) and of course doubled the fees for each passenger but we were all satisfied and we didn't mind paying more money to have a safer ride.

During the days I spent in Samawa I was following the news closely and they were kind of encouraging after the news came telling stories about busting a number of terrorists' networks there.

Finally we heard that the "road is now clear and secure" and yesterday I had the chance to check this statement myself, as I decided to go back to Baghdad using this particular road. At the town garage I talked to some cab drivers who confirmed that the road is safe enough. So the trip began and I was still having some worries and I could see the same on the faces of the other passengers who were with me in the same car. They were telling each other some horrible stories that took place on this road and the closer we were getting to Latifiyah the more disturbed and worried we became. Cell phones rang many times with calls from families trying to check on their sons, brothers or fathers and to see if they passed the danger zone or not.

We reached the segment that is called "the death road" and the bus got wrapped in a heavy silence. The 1st checkpoint was for the IP; they were scanning the coming vehicles and ordering some of them to stop, checking Id's and making sure that no one is carrying guns.

We went through this checkpoint and after several kilometres we reached an ING checkpoint. The soldiers were all wearing black masks to avoid exposing their identities. Anyway, we found that the road was blocked by this checkpoint and we had to go for several kilometres off-road in the farms to by pass this block and to get to the main road again.

Here, our fears reached a peak because we all knew that similar paths are the ones used by the terrorists as they're hidden by dense orchards.

I became even more anxious when the guy sitting next to me took out his Id (which says that he works for one of the ministries) and passed it to the driver without saying a word and in what looked like an undeclared agreement, all the other passengers did the same adding their cell phones in some cases (the terrorists think that anyone carrying a cell phone in this area is a spy collecting intelligence for the government or the MNF).

The driver calmly took the Id's and phones and started hiding them in a small secret drawer underneath his seat. The guy next to me looked at me with a question in his eyes "and you?"

I took out my Id and handed it over to the driver because I didn't want to violate this silent security agreement and I felt hurt because I had to hide what should be an honor of being a dentist serving the people, because the "resistance" consider serving the people a crime.

One of the passengers said whispering "where are the Americans? Where are the ING?"
One replied saying "and who dares to enter these territories?!"
We were overwhelmed with fear and anxiety until the guy sitting next to me said "look there" and pointed with his finger to the right.

We all turned to see what he was pointing to, and we regained some of our confidence as we saw a convoy of several Hummer vehicles patrolling the area.

"They're not as cautious and afraid as we thought they would be. Here are they moving confidently" the driver said. "I don't think they'll stay here after sunset. The terrorists will take over the area at night" another passenger added.

I smiled and thought "we fear our countrymen while we feel safe when the foreigners are moving around! Who's the occupier? Who are the bad guys here?"

We were done moving in the farms and we got back to the main road to find ourselves in the center of Latifiyah. I saw something very different from what I saw last time I was there; endless patrols for the MNF and the ING, yet the place was so quiet.

We were ordered to stop at an ING checkpoint and the soldier who dealt with us seemed different from the others I met before; he was very confident and acting in a highly professional way using only signals without the usual verbal communication that is still being used in many checkpoints in Iraq which is a waste of time and fruitless.

He searched the passengers and checked the registration papers of the car and he talked for the first time when he finished his job saying "sorry to disturb you, you can move on".

We moved forward to the bridge that got recently repaired as the news told and there we found a checkpoint for the US Marines and the ING working side by side.

We were also surprised to see that they took positions over the roofs of the near by buildings which made me say "they don't seem to be leaving after sunset, these are fixed stations". It was relieving also to see all the death slogans of the terrorists have been erased and replaced with the slogans of the real heroes, I saw slogans like:

"The terrorists destroyed the bridge and we have rebuilt it""
"Death to terrorism…long live the peace"
"Long live the heroes of the ING, the loyal sons of Iraq"

There was a traffic jam near the bridge and there were some posts arranged in the form of a fence to control the entrance to the bridge by two lanes only but our traditions and our natural hate for awaiting made some of the drivers try to move around the fence to form a 3rd lane and there came a single round from an ING machine gun in the air and this was enough to make everyone there realize how order is important in critical situations like this one where the terrorists use all means to kill people. Some passengers began to shout condemning the lack of discipline of those drivers and I could hear one say "yes, they've got to be tough because these heroes are risking their lives here and we all have to obey the law and not give a chance for the terrorists to take advantage on us".

We passed Latifiyah safely and driver returned our Id's and phones back and we were back to our boring chats. We finally entered Baghdad by sunset to find the city walls covered with signs and posters calling the people to do their role in building the democratic Iraq that will be an oasis for peace in the region.

Terrorism is losing the battle and in spite of tough times we're facing in this battle and in spite of the fear and worries that we carry in our minds I felt a great joy when I saw a sign on the road saying:

"Your voice is as precious as gold. No, it's more than that!"

-By Mohammed.

Wednesday, December 01, 2004
http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/

Iraq's two top Kurdish parties to run jointly in January election (AFP)

Iraq’'s two main Kurdish political parties will run for the country's landmark general elections in January on the same list, the leader of one of the groups revealed. The Kurdish political powers have reached an agreement to present a j