Watching the Warmakers is based in Brighton, England.
Our aim is to support activists in educating themselves in the issues
which confront those struggling for peace and justice.

News archives for the week ending 6th August 2010

US isn't leaving Iraq it's rebranding the occupation

The US isn't withdrawing from Iraq at all – it's rebranding the occupation. Just as George Bush's war on terror was retitled "overseas contingency operations" when Obama became president, US "combat operations" will be rebadged from next month as "stability operations".

But as Major General Stephen Lanza, the US military spokesman in Iraq, told the New York Times: "In practical terms, nothing will change". After this month's withdrawal, there will still be 50,000 US troops in 94 military bases, "advising" and training the Iraqi army, "providing security" and carrying out "counter-terrorism" missions. In US military speak, that covers pretty well everything they might want to do.

Granted, 50,000 is a major reduction on the numbers in Iraq a year ago. But what Obama once called "the dumb war" goes remorselessly on. In fact, violence has been increasing as the Iraqi political factions remain deadlocked for the fifth month in a row in the Green Zone. More civilians are being killed in Iraq than Afghanistan: 535 last month alone, according to the Iraqi government – the worst figure for two years.

What is abundantly clear is that the US, whose embassy in Baghdad is now the size of Vatican City, has no intention of letting go of Iraq any time soon. One reason for that can be found in the dozen 20-year contracts to run Iraq's biggest oil fields that were handed out last year to foreign companies, including three of the Anglo-American oil majors that exploited Iraqi oil under British control before 1958.

Guardian, 4/8/10

Petraeus loosens the rules...

On Wednesday General Petraeus revised the Afghanistan rules of engagement, which are guidelines for when and how the US and other NATO troops under his command can shoot to kill.

At the time of his confirmation that a rethink of the strict rules put in place by his predecessor Gen. Stanley McChrystal – which many combat troops complained put protecting Afghan civilians ahead of protecting them – was likely.

The nuanced shift in the rules is no surprise. Some officers privately said that under McChrystal the priority on protecting Afghan civilian lives had become too doctrinaire and that, in practice, officers were reluctant to return fire or use artillery against attacking insurgents because of the presence – or possible presence – of Afghan civilians among them.

"We must remember that it is a moral imperative both to protect Afghan civilians and to bring all assets to bear to protect our men and women in uniform and the Afghan security forces with whom we are fighting shoulder-to-shoulder when they are in a touch spot," Petraeus writes [Emphasis in original].

Christian Science Monitor, 5/8/10

...and up to thirty civilians die

On Thursday, local officials said between 20 to 30 civilians were killed during a clash between NATO-led troops and Taliban militants in Nangarhar province Wednesday night.

Afghan Presidential Palace in a statement issued Thursday afternoon said President Hamid Karzai instructed Interior Ministry as well as provincial administration in Jalalabad to initiate a probe into the subject.

Xinhua, China, 6/8/10

US claims al-Qaida in Pakistan is greatest threat

The Obama administration said Thursday that al-Qaida's core membership in Pakistan, along with affiliates in Africa and Yemen, poses the most dangerous terrorist threat to the United States and its interests abroad.

In its annual report on global terrorism, the State Department said that although al-Qaida suffered some setbacks in Pakistan last year, it is "adaptable and resilient" and has expanded its reach through proxy groups. The report for 2009 also said the terrorist network remains "actively engaged in operational plotting" of attacks against U.S. and Western targets around the world.

As in previous years, the report identified Iran as the most active "state sponsor of terrorism" and said its backing of militant groups in the Middle East and Central Asia played a highly destabilizing role in those regions.

The report also left unchanged "state sponsor" designations for Cuba, Sudan and Syria.

Associated Press, 5/8/10

Arab world disappointed in Obama

Arab approval of U.S. President Barack Obama has dropped dramatically since last year, despite what many had mistakenly viewed as his popularity in the region, according to a poll released on Thursday.

The study, entitled "The View from the Middle East: The 2010 Public Opinion Poll," found a significant shift in Arabs' perception of Obama, whose disapproval ratings jumped from 23 percent last year to 62 percent this year.

While Afghanistan stands as an important issue, the University of Maryland/Zogby International poll found that disappointment over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict resonates deepest in the Arab world and influences Arabs' evaluation of Obama.

Xinhua, China, 5/8/10

British troops could move to Kandahar

British troops in Afghanistan could still be moved to Kandahar province "in the longer term", a briefing document for MPs has stated.

Defence Secretary Liam Fox said in June it was "highly unlikely" that the UK's 8,000 troops in Helmand province would be redeployed to neighbouring Kandahar. But a briefing paper on the Parliament website said the pull-out of the Dutch and Canadian contingents in southern Afghanistan would require a "re-division of forces" unless other countries provided more troops.

"On that basis, the proposal to relocate British forces to Kandahar in the longer term cannot be completely disregarded," it said.

The Netherlands began withdrawing its 1,950 troops in Uruzgan province, which borders Kandahar and Helmand, at the start of this month and Canada will bring home its 2,830-strong contingent in Kandahar next year.

Press Association, 4/8/10

Obama sinks in polls over Afghanistan war

Americans rank President Obama's handling of the Afghan war even lower than his stewardship of the economy, new poll says. Only 36% backed Obama's war policies, down from 48% in February, compared with his 39% rating on the economy, according to a USA Today/Gallup poll released Tuesday.

The poll attributed the loss of support for the war to the rising U.S. death toll and last week's massive document dump of classified material by WikiLeaks, which highlighted internal disputes on strategy.

New York Daily News, 4/8/10

43% of Americans think invading Afghanistan was a mistake

After Wikileaks released the leaked classified documents on the Afghan war, 43 per cent of Americans now feel that the US made a mistake by sending troops to the war-torn country, according to a latest poll.

This is slightly up from just before the release of the leaked documents last week, which was 38 per cent, Gallup said in its latest poll.

Times of India, 3/8/10

Zardari: NATO losing war in Afghanistan

The president of Pakistan claimed Tuesday that Coalition forces in Afghanistan were "losing the war against the Taliban".

Asif Ali Zardari said Coalition forces had "underestimated the situation on the ground" in Afghanistan, adding: "The international community, to which Pakistan belongs, is losing the war against the Taliban. This is above all because we have lost the battle to win hearts and minds."

He said the Taliban had "no chance of regaining power, but their grip is strengthening".

Montreal Gazette, 3/8/10

To US, encircling China is more important than human rights

A decision by the US last month to resume military co-operation with Kopassus, the shadowy Indonesian special forces unit blamed for past killings and abuses in East Timor, Papua and Aceh, provoked condemnation by human rights activists.

But Washington's move was less an acceptance of claims that Kopassus has reformed itself than recognition of Indonesia's growing strategic importance in the face of China's inexorable rise.

Regional analysts suggest the relaxation may quickly lead to the resumption of full-scale, military-to-military co-operation, including combat training of Indonesian forces (suspended in 1998 during the East Timor crisis) and increased financial aid and weapons sales.

Such moves would mirror recently enhanced US security collaboration with other regional countries with questionable human rights records, including Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Laos, as well as with long-standing allies such as Japan, South Korea and Australia.

Guardian, 3/8/10

Kandahar feels a lot like Baghdad

Kandahar is starting to feel a lot like Baghdad. Tall concrete blast walls, like those that surround the Green Zone, are seemingly everywhere. Checkpoints supervised by U.S. soldiers have been erected on all major roads leading into the city. Residents are being urged to apply for new identification cards that require them to have their retinas scanned and their fingerprints recorded.

As U.S. and NATO commanders mount a major effort to counter the Taliban's influence in Kandahar, they are turning to population-control tactics employed in the Iraqi capital during the 2007 troop surge to separate warring Sunnis and Shiites. They are betting that such measures can help separate insurgents here from the rest of the population, an essential first step in the U.S.-led campaign to improve security in and around Afghanistan's second-largest city.

"If you don't have control of the population, you can't secure the population," said Brig. Gen. Frederick Hodges, director of operations for the NATO regional command in southern Afghanistan.

Washington Post, 3/8/10

Maliki's position weakens

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's chances of keeping his job suffered a setback Sunday when a coalition of Shiite parties that appeared to represent his best hope of staying in office broke off talks with his slate.

The move did not resolve a dispute among Iraqi politicians over who among the members of parliament elected March 7 will lead the next government. But it appeared to leave Maliki in a weaker position as his former political allies renewed negotiations with the Sunni-backed coalition led by former prime minister Ayad Allawi.

Both Maliki and Allawi claim the right to form the new government, citing conflicting interpretations of the constitution. Neither has found enough allies in parliament to secure the simple majority required to appoint the next prime minister.

Officials from the Iraqi National Alliance, the coalition of religious Shiite parties that suspended talks with Maliki, said they wanted to pick someone else for the top job.

"We found that our negotiations with State of Law weren't serious," said Bahaa al-Aaraji, a member of parliament, referring to Maliki's slate.

Washington Post, 2/8/10

Iraq to sweeten terms for gas bidders

Iraq is set to sweeten contract terms for its third bidding round for its three prized natural gas fields, in an attempt to entice international companies to enter the auction, according to a company executive.

Unlike oil deals for the first and second bidding rounds that were held last year, winning companies won't need to pay the Iraqi government signature bonuses for the three natural gas fields on offer, the company executive said on the sidelines of two-day roadshow held by the Iraqi oil ministry in Istanbul.

Fifteen international companies have so far shown interest in taking part in the third bidding round, a senior Iraqi oil official said.

Wall Street Journal, 1/8/10

More die in Kashmir's 'Bloody Sunday'

In what the Indian media are calling Bloody Sunday, 10 people died yesterday in protests across Indian-controlled Kashmir.

Police forces shot and killed at least five during street protests. Another succumbed to wounds after being hit Saturday with a tear gas shell. The remainder died when protesters lit a police camp on fire, triggering a blast from explosive material kept inside. All who died were civilians, taking the total to 33 civilians and zero police killed in the current cycle of protest and deadly crackdown that began June 11.

The protests are part of a popular uprising against Indian rule and heavy-handed police tactics in Kashmir. Both India and Pakistan claim the Himalayan region in its entirety. In the 1990s, Pakistan supported a violent insurgency that was eventually put down by India. But the massive security apparatus – estimated to be as high as 700,000 security forces – remained.

The recent uprising appears to have no links to Pakistan. Instead, it is led by Kashmiri youth ranging from six to 30 who are using a mix of nonviolent defiance of curfews and rock throwing at security forces in a bid to win independence for Kashmir.

Christian Science Monitor, 2/8/10

US is holding up formation of Iraqi government

Washington is holding up the formation of a new Iraqi government by insisting the two main election winners form a coalition, allowing Iraq's neighbours to meddle in its affairs, a top Shi'ite politician told Reuters.

Hadi al-Amiri, a parliamentarian who heads the Badr Organisation, the former armed wing of the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council's (ISCI), said the United States was pressuring Iraqi leaders to form a government of the two main electoral blocs led by Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki and former Premier Iyad Allawi.

He said Washington wanted to exclude others, including the Badr group, which won 11 seats in parliament.

"The Americans think that the best coalition is between Maliki and Allawi ... and in this way they exclude (people who they view as) extremists such as the Sadrists, Badrists and others," Amiri told Reuters in an interview on Friday.

"The insistence of the Americans on their project is what is delaying forming the government," he said at the ISCI's compound in Baghdad, which is guarded by uniformed Badr guards.

"Today, it's the Americans who are standing against (Iraq's government formation) project, not the Saudis, not the Syrians and not the Iranians. Regional interference comes when there is persistence by the Americans."

Reuters, 31/7/10

'If the Taliban want to come, they will'

In the north, the Americans are sometimes welcomed, but with a distinct undercurrent that the people believe the fight could go either way.

A week ago, troops based in Kunduz went on patrol in the district of Aliabad, fanning out in a village they were visiting for the first time. Trailed by a gaggle of giggling children, they spent two hours walking dusty lanes, meeting with the most important village elder, asking residents what kind of help they needed: wells dug, or seed for crops.

But the Afghan commander of a police checkpoint at the village's entrance sounded a note of caution.

"The Taliban are right over there, just across the river," he said pointing with his chin toward a line of trees a few hundred yards away.

"We are five police in this checkpoint, and they are 50. They have enough munitions, but we do not. And if they want to come, they will."

Los Angeles Times, 1/8/10

July is deadliest month for US forces in Afghanistan

Six American soldiers have been killed in separate attacks in southern Afghanistan, making July the deadliest month for U.S. forces in the nine-year war.

NATO says one service member died in an insurgent attack Friday, while a roadside bombing killed two others. Three other troops were killed Thursday in two separate bombings in the south.

The casualties bring the number of U.S. soldiers killed this month to 66, surpassing June's record as the deadliest month for American troops since 2001.

Voice of America, 30/7/10

US takes tougher line on China

Faced with a Chinese government increasingly intent on testing U.S. strength and capabilities, the United States unveiled a new policy that rejected China's claims to sovereignty over the whole South China Sea. It rebuffed Chinese demands that the U.S. military end its longtime policy of conducting military exercises in the Yellow Sea. And it is putting new pressure on Beijing not to increase its energy investments in Iran as Western firms leave.

The U.S. maneuvers have prompted a backlash among Chinese officialdom and its state-run press, which has accused the United States of trying to contain China. Yang Jiechi, the minister of foreign affairs, issued a highly unusual statement Monday charging that the United States was ganging up with other countries against China. One prominent academic, Shen Dingli of Fudan University, compared the planned U.S. exercises in international waters of the Yellow Sea to the 1962 Russian deployment of nuclear-armed missiles in Cuba.

U.S. officials explained the moves as part of a broader strategy to acknowledge China's emergence as a world power but to also lay down markers when China's behavior infringes on U.S. interests. So at the same time that the administration has welcomed China into the Group of 20 major economies, held the biggest meeting ever between U.S. and Chinese officials, and backed China's push to increase its influence in the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, it is also seeking to limit what it thinks are China's expansionist impulses.

To this end, the Obama administration has also intensified its diplomacy and outreach to other Asian and Oceanic nations, ending a 12-year ban on ties with Indonesia's special forces and strengthening its alliances from Tokyo and Seoul to Canberra, Australia.

Washington Post, 30/7/10

Biden bets on no explosion of violence in Iraq

Vice President Joe Biden said in an interview aired Thursday he would bet "everything" that there would be no explosion of sectarian violence when US combat troops leave Iraq next month.

Biden, in an interview recorded Wednesday as he welcomed home one of America's most combat-tested brigades from Baghdad, said he could not "guarantee" anything but believed that serious violence was unlikely.

"I'm willing to bet everything that there will be no such explosion," Biden said in an interview with the NBC "Today" show. "We'll still have 50,000 battle-tested combat troops in Iraq... going from leading in combat to supporting the Iraqi combat capability."

"I think neither I nor (US commander) General (Ray) Odierno nor the Pentagon nor the people who have been on the ground so many times think that is likely to happen."

AFP, 29/7/10

Republicans challenge Obama on START

Senate Republicans voiced objections on Thursday to the new START nuclear arms treaty with Russia, raising concerns that could delay efforts to hand President Barack Obama a foreign policy victory ahead of the November elections.

At a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, Republicans said the accord could impede U.S. plans for an anti-missile defense system and pressed the Obama administration to release the full treaty negotiating record to answer their questions.

With U.S. mid-term congressional campaigns heating up ahead of the November 2 vote, some Republicans groups have moved to put the START treaty on the broader national agenda, hoping to use the issue along with healthcare to fire up voters against Obama's Democrats.

Mitt Romney, a potential 2012 Republican presidential contender, called the treaty Obama's "worst foreign policy mistake yet" in a Washington Post opinion piece. Heritage Action for America, a conservative group, is rallying opposition to the treaty with an online petition.

Reuters, 29/7/10

US not in Afghanistan to 'nation build'

U.S. Vice President Joe Biden said on Thursday the United States was not in Afghanistan to "nation-build" but for the sole purpose of defeating al Qaeda in the border areas with Pakistan.

Under growing pressure over the unpopular and costly nine-year war, the Obama administration is grappling with how to measure success in Afghanistan for a review due in December of how President Barack Obama's new strategy is working.

Reuters, 29/7/10

Most Pakistanis see US as enemy

Pakistanis are less afraid the country will be taken over by extremists and feel less threatened by the Taliban than last year, research suggests.

The Pew Global Attitudes Project poll suggests that in 2009, 69% were very or somewhat worried about extremist groups taking control of Pakistan. In 2010, just 51% of Pakistanis expressed such concerns, Pew found.

Meanwhile, nearly six in 10 Pakistanis polled described the US as an enemy and only one in 10 called it a partner. By contrast, more than eight in 10 Pakistanis view China favourably and as a partner.

BBC News, 29/7/10