A Worse Record than Saddam’s
WHISTLEBLOWING - SURVEILLANCE, 1 Nov 2010
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown – The Independent
It could fuel terrorism, recruitment into jihadi cells, suicide bombers and ugly attitudes towards the West. But keeping the stories hidden was always wrong.
Bad boy Julian Assange, the pretty, blondish founder of the whistle-blowing website Wikileaks was hugely admired when he uncovered oppressors and political chicanery in places like China and Kenya, but now he takes on Western duplicity and crimes. Can’t have that. This spawn of Beelzebub, say our masters, a traitor whose insolence is a crime against the secretive states of the US and UK. Disregard the pique and dyspepsia of officialdom. It is a distraction, smoke from fires deliberately started to stop us seeing what lies before us.
The audacious website first released confidential and candid material on the hellish war in Afghanistan and now opens up a new front, more than 400,000 classified US files documenting the previously untold horrors of the Iraq war. Revealed are countless atrocities and the deaths of 66,000 Iraqi civilians at the hands of US and British soldiers and Iraqi personnel who had joined the allies. Men were burnt, some had parts removed, others were killed slowly; women were shot, children too, killed before they grew. Anything goes, it seems, during a military conflict and no questions are asked. As an Israeli army trainer said, when asked about the death of Rachel Corrie, the young, pro-Palestinian activist mown down by an Israeli tank: “During war there are no civilians”.
The authorities in Iraq did not investigate reports of abuse and killings. An Iraqi friend tells me the rape of girls, women, boys and men was widespread, a tool used both to intimidate and punish. Apparently, there are images from Abu Ghraib prison of these sadistic “punishments”; they were never released because of the feelings they could arouse in Muslim countries. So morally deformed are these men of war that they care more about inconvenient outrage than they do about crimes against the people they supposedly went to save. They should have heeded the words of Martin Van Creveld, an erudite Israeli war historian who compared the disastrous American Vietnam War with the Iraq adventure: “He who fights the weak – and the rag-tag Iraqi militias are very weak indeed – and loses, loses. He who fights against the weak and wins, also loses. To kill an opponent who is much weaker than yourself is unnecessary and therefore cruel.” By this reasoning, to fight the weak who are not in any sense your enemy is extreme brutishness and totally self-defeating.
Key figures in the British Army and Government must have been privy to this information. They held their tongues and presumably sidestepped any ethical niggles. The Americans were in command and you don’t get to lick the arse of the world’s only superpower and then turn round and kick it. That, you understand, is the pact, the unbreakable deal behind our special relationship.
Manfred Novak, the UN special rapporteur on torture, says Obama’s administration must investigate and come clean – after all, this President vowed to change the image and behaviour of the US which, for too long, has co-operated with tyrants and violated human rights across the world, including in Guantanamo Bay, which is still open and where captured, lost boys became broken men.
Fewer and fewer global citizens now believe the rapturous anthems and sombre panegyrics of God’s own America. After this week, the number will have tumbled further, which, in some ways, is a pity. There is much to praise about the US, its history of perpetual resistance to unacceptable state power, its energy, creativity, business, intellectual and cultural buzz. When such a great nation does great wrong, its mirror is shattered and even if the shards are stuck back together again, the cracks will always remain. And when the custodian of the free world behaves so appallingly, how do we liberal Muslims promote democratic values across the Muslim world?
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (sounding like a clone of Condi Rice) slammed the Wikileaks exposé and warned that lives of US civilians and forces and their allies were now in serious danger. At one level, I fear she is right. The internet traffic over the past two days has been so fast, furious and volatile, it could indeed fuel terrorism, recruitment into jihadi cells, even more violence in unstable Iraq, suicide bombers in Afghanistan and ugly attitudes towards the West, home to millions of Muslims. But keeping the stories hidden was always wrong. Innocent Iraqi people should never have been made to suffer by the allies and even the guilty should have faced due process to prove commitment to justice and decent values. When there was evidence of liberators behaving monstrously, action should have been taken and in the public eye. Clinton must know this, as a lawyer. It is a primary principle of her profession.
I wonder if some staunch supporters of the Iraq war will now think again about the purpose and execution of that illegal and vainglorious expedition. The sanctions and war killed, maimed and destroyed more civilians than Saddam did, even during the most diabolical periods of his rule. Blair, Bush and their armies have never had to face proper, international judicial interrogations. Now imagine good Muslims worldwide, who know all about universal rights, but can see that there is no universal accountability, that Third World despots are made to pay while others earn millions writing autobiographies and lecturing the world on good leadership and governance. Hundreds of savvy, smart, keenly aware young people email me from various Muslim states asking: “What’s the point? They say one thing and do the opposite. They say they want to help us and kill our people. Why should we trust the British and Americans?”
What do our army commanders and American leaders advise me to tell these disenchanted Muslims? And Mr Blair, I wonder if he has some wise thoughts? He is, they tell me, still one of the greatest prime ministers this country has had. And his wife, the hot human rights lawyer, does she think these abuses her husband just might have known about should be investigated? No answers will be forthcoming. Those who took us into this war are not obliged to explain themselves, not liable. In that they are worse than the dictator they toppled. Not comfortable that thought, but true.
Go to Original – The Independent
DISCLAIMER: The statements, views and opinions expressed in pieces republished here are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of TMS. In accordance with title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. TMS has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is TMS endorsed or sponsored by the originator. “GO TO ORIGINAL” links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the “GO TO ORIGINAL” links. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
One Response to “A Worse Record than Saddam’s”
Read more
Click here to go to the current weekly digest or pick another article:
WHISTLEBLOWING - SURVEILLANCE:
Dear Yasmin Alibhai-Brown,
I am really surprised you don’t know what to reply to the “disenchanted Muslims” who write to you. I’ll try to give you a little help.
To begin with, you say “….Mr Blair, I wonder if he has some wise thoughts? He is, they tell me, still one of the greatest prime ministers this country has had.” and do you just believe like that, what you are told? I thought you would have the wisdom to know what Blair is. OK, he may be your friend, but this doesn’t mean that you should stop thinking. Blair is one of the worse Prime Ministers Britain has ever had. Think of Disraeli, who died with personal debts of £67,000, the equivalent of a few million today. All in pursuit of obtaining and keeping the top job. By contrast, Tony Blair left office MANY millions richer. This, thanks to his inhuman treatment of humanity, including his own countrymen, thousands of whom died and are still dying, for him to remain rich. As his ambition is limitless, he converted to Catholicism to ensure a new “money making – and murderer’s” job: his appointment as War Enjoy (Peace Envoy to the gullible masses) to the Middle East, job paid by war financiers JP Morgan, who give him half a million a year, to organise wars in the region. Russia,UN, EU and USA are all very happy with Blair, as in a relatively short time he has already organised two very lucrative Games of War, one between Israel and Lebanon, the other between Israel and Palestine (Hamas). During the wars, Blair enjoys staying at a 5 star hotel in Jerusalem, to be close to the action, all very exciting to him. Like Churchill, clearly described in the recent biography of Sir Winston by Max Hastings, Blair seems to be very attracted by, thrives on the noise of exploding bombs, the approaching of tanks, etc.
You continue, like an innocent little girl, to wonder “And his wife, the hot human rights lawyer, does she think these abuses her husband just might have known about should be investigated?” why should she? Cherie Booth-Blair makes/made far more millions as wife of Tony Blair, not as a Human Rights lawyer.
You say “Those who took us into this war are not obliged to explain themselves, not liable.” This is always the case. Wars make money for politicians, but they are not personally liable for bankrupting their country.
You say “In that they are worse than the dictator they toppled.”, but to me, they are not better or worse. They are equal. The Game of War was carefully planned and arranged by both sides.
You ask “What do our army commanders and American leaders advise me to tell these disenchanted Muslims?” well tell them the truth, that everything is going according to plan. All the weapon, security, spying, building, oil companies, Banks, etc, who supported the war, are all doing great business. Even several Iraqi politicians as well as influential Muslim in the area have benefitted from the misery and devastation caused by war.
You say “I wonder if some staunch supporters of the Iraq war will now think again about the purpose and execution of that illegal and vainglorious expedition.” if you refer to the masses, what they think is neither her nor there, as Democracy doesn’t exist. As to our politicians,they are happy that we managed to fulfill our plan, mission or purpose: we occupyied the country and got our hands on their oil.
You write: “The ……war killed, maimed and destroyed more civilians than Saddam did,…..” but you don’t ask yourself “what are wars made for?” “what are weapons, mortars, landmine, air-fighters,etc, made for?” do you expect countries to spend fortunes buying weapons, war vehicles, military uniforms, torture equipment, train millions of soldiers, etc, and then send those soldiers to play soccer or bingo?
You write “Blair, Bush and their armies have never had to face proper, international judicial interrogations.” well, why don’t you interrogate them?
You say “Now imagine good Muslims worldwide, who know all about universal rights,…..” this is wishful thinking. Not only very few Muslims, but also very few Christians, Hindus and Jews know about “universal rights”.
You write “….Third World despots are made to pay….” but this is not the case. Military dictator Augusto Pinochet, was “given” the Presidency of Chile, after helping him murder democratically elected President Salvador Allende, and was kept in power for 18 years, greatly supported by USA and Britain.
You say “Hundreds of savvy, smart, keenly aware young people email me from various Muslim states asking:“What’s the point?” much of what I wrote above can guide you as to “what’s the pont” in making wars.
“They say one thing and do the opposite.” you could easily explain this is how it is in politics or diplomacy; you always say something different from what you really mean.
“They say they want to help us”. You must explain to the Iraqi people that American politicians work for America and not foir any other country. Same with Britain.
“…..and kill our people”. You can also explain how thousands of American and several hundreds of English soldiers have also died, with millions of Americanand English people left bereft, orphan, families destroyed, etc. Explain that this is so, because Governments use weapon research, development, manufacturing and trade as a great money-making activity, which also helps keep millions in jobs, and without organising and promoting wars, this lucrative business wouldn’t work.
They ask “Why should we trust the British and Americans?” you can tell them they can trust the people, the ordinary citizens, but NEVER any foreign Government. You could enlighten them even further, explaining that the same applies to their own country. Had they distrusted Saddam Hussein in the early 80s, things would have been very different today.
Alberto Portugheis