American mistakes

[salim]

Sadok wrote

It is very clear that Salafee Jihadists and Sadamees are trying their best to stop the new governemnt from taking over by creating such an instability ..They are afriad of it's agenda of rooting out the collaborators that the American short sighted tactics has allowed to pentrate in the new security police.. They know that the new governemnt with all the popular support would make the terrorist life so difficult..

 

 

Some one asks

"What short sighted tactics Sadok?

How would you have stopped them from penetrating the new forces?"

 

I found the above interesting, here is my intake

 

 

In brief, the Americans had listened to some Arab alies whose point was that bringing Iraqis sooner on board would be very dangrous to the American interests. They thought that relying on some "clean" Sadamist would make the American life much easier. What this tactic is missing are two things

 

-There is no clean Sadamists, they would rather prefere to return back to old regime soon as the current interest of bringing Democracy by the Americans to Iraq, comes to a dead lock. Some one who accepted to work for Nazis would never be a democracy builder!

 

- Real Democracy isn't a suit that you design as per customer size, trim what you don't like and choose color. It is a whole nation building package, something that you can't stop once the wheel start rolling.

 

Because of the above fears , some Americans tried to control the process. After liberation, they blocked the mass people who have real interest in the change,from taking the responsibility. A policy of hesitation that brave young Americans and Iraqis had paid the price for.

And now after all the sacrifices, we keep hear people talking of same policy!

 

I think Americans should ether fully support going to the end and take the risk or go back to the old regime dynamics immediately.There is no middel way magic solution to this.. Iraqis are suffering and they already paid a huge price for their love "The dream of Democracy"..

 

One might think that this is a recipie for having Shia Islamist taking over.. My reply would be very simple, look at the current free election results . There are no more than 20% of Shia moderate Islamists. There are no more than 0.5 % of Sadrees..

 

President Bush was absolutely right when he chose to take the risk and let democracy roll! We need the middle excutives in the American adminstartion to be as brave as this great leader!

[omward]

Most of iraqis agree with you (there is no clean Saddamist) the iraqis are suffering and they want Democracy right now.

 

Om Ward

[Guest Guest_guest]

I am waiting to see the first demonstration against the new Iraqi government. When that happens, the people will truly realize that the government is meant to be their slave.

[salim]

Below is a very serious and interesting article from Alwatan Suadi news paper

Talking about the current process already led BY Ms Rice , of reevaluating the stands of US policy toward the Islamic groups who has influatial popular base and who believe in democracy..

If it is true then I would admitte that there is a lot that we don't know about what is going on .. Need to wait and see how this Great Iraqi liberation mission will end up as one of the most important historical change in ME dynamics since the appearance of Islam.!

 

 

 

 

أجراء حوار غير مباشر مع السيستاني ولقاءات مع ممثلين عن حماس وحزب الله

 

في بيروت

أمريكا تقترح حوارا مع 17 منظمة إسلامية وعربية معتدلة

 

واشنطن: أحمد عبدالهادي

تجري إدارة الرئيس بوش منذ بعض الوقت مراجعة شاملة لسياستها إزاء الأحزاب والمنظمات الإسلامية المعتدلة في الشرق الأوسط بداية من تصنيف تلك المنظمات على أساس موقفها من الديمقراطية ومبدأ تداول السلطة ونظرتها إلى العنف السياسي.

وقالت مصادر مطلعة في واشنطن إن مجلس الأمن القومي بدأ هذه المراجعة في عام 2002 بتعليمات من كونداليزا رايس حين كانت على رأس المجلس وإن نائبها آنذاك الذي يشغل الآن موقع مستشار الأمن القومي ستيفان هاري يوشك أن ينتهي من وضع تقرير مفصل عن مواقف هذه الجماعات ومدى اتساع القاعدة الشعبية التي تستند إليها في كل حالة وسياستها تجاه المجموعات الراديكالية المتشددة، وذلك لوضع توصية حول احتمال تعديل اتجاه سياسة الولايات المتحدة نحو تلك المنظمات، إلا أن تلك المصادر نفت أن يكون أي قرار قد اتخذ بعد بهذا الشأن.

وقالت تلك المصادر إن القائمة انتهت إلى 17 منظمة في الدول العربية تعتقد الولايات المتحدة أن لها وزنا شعبيا لا يمكن إغفاله، وأن واشنطن أدارت بالفعل حوارا مع ممثلين لكل هذه المنظمات على الرغم من أن بعض القياديين رفضوا الإقرار بذلك بدعوى أنهم "لم يلتقوا بصورة مباشرة مع أمريكيين"، إذ كان من التقى بالأمريكيين مساعدين لهذه القيادات.

وكانت الولايات المتحدة تشهد تيارا يدعو إلى الحوار مع المنظمات الإسلامية منذ بداية التسعينات على إثر فوز الإسلاميين في انتخابات الجزائر وما أعقب ذلك من أزمة. وكان لأجهزة أمريكية آنذاك قنوات مفتوحة مع الحركة الإسلامية في الجزائر وفي تونس وهو أمر أثار حفيظة الفرنسيين آنذاك، إلا أن تدفق الأحداث بعد ذلك جعل من ذلك الحوار غير ذي معنى، ثم ما لبثت الفكرة بأكملها أن وضعت في "الثلاجة".

وكان يقود ذلك التيار آنذاك ضابط المخابرات المركزية السابق جرام فولر الذي يعمل الآن باحثا في مركز "راند" للدراسات. وما لبثت أحداث 11 سبتمبر أن أعادت نظرية فولر التي فصلها في مسلسل من المقالات نشره عام 1991 وأثار ضجة كبيرة آنذاك من "الثلاجة إلى الفرن" كما يقول الأمريكيون.

وتبع الحوار الأمريكي غير المباشر مع تيار آية الله السيستاني في العراق زخم ملموس في واشنطن يطالب باستكشاف آفاق ما يمكن أن يحدث إذا ما تبنت واشنطن سياسة الاعتراف بوجود هذه المنظمات وربما وصولها إلى السلطة، ثم تبع ذلك توجه فاولر وآخرين في وفد من نحو 15 شخصا إلى بيروت حيث التقوا بممثلين عن حماس وعن حزب الله بصورة مباشرة.

وفي خط مواز التقى مبعوثون أمريكيون منذ مرحلة ما بعد حرب العراق بممثلين عن المنظمات الـ17 التي تتباين في حجمها ووزنها وإن كانت تشترك جميعا في أنها تتواجد بقدر أو آخر على الساحة السياسية لبلدانها بصورة ملموسة. ومع نضج هذه الاتصالات وتقدم دراسة مجلس الأمن القومي بدأ "تيار فاولر" يضغط لإخراج هذه القضية من الكواليس ومناقشتها بصورة علنية.

وكان هذا ما حدث قبل أيام حين عقدت لجنة العلاقات الدولية بمجلس النواب الأمريكي برئاسة عضو الكونجرس هنري هايد جلسة استماع لبحث موقع المنظمات الإسلامية المعتدلة في خريطة شرق أوسط ديمقراطي. وتحدث في الجلسة عدد من المختصين من بينهم آميي هادثورن الباحثة في معهد "كازيجي إنداومنت" وعمر حمزاوي الباحث المصري الزائر في نفس المعهد وآخرون.

وخلال الحوار بين أعضاء اللجنة والخبراء ظهرت المشكلة التي يحاول هؤلاء الأعضاء وضع حل لها. أي مشكلة التوفيق بين الدعوة إلى الديمقراطية مع إغفال وجود هذه المنظمات ذات القواعد الشعبية الملموسة. وقال الخبيران المذكوران إنه يتعين على الولايات المتحدة أن تفتح حوارا مع تلك المنظمات "لا سيما حركة الإخوان المسلمين في مصر" كما قال حمزاوي.

إلا أن الهدف الأساسي من الجلسة لم يكن مناقشة هذه الآراء التي يعرفها الجميع تقريبا بحكم نقاشات واشنطن الداخلية، ولكن الهدف كان على وجه الحق وضع هذه القضية في السياق الأساسي للحوار حول ديمقراطية الشرق الأوسط الذي يكاد أن يصبح "موضة الموسم" في العاصمة الأمريكية.

ويدور هذا الحوار بين جماعة فاولر التي تضم عددا من خبراء المخابرات المركزية والأساتذة الجامعيين والديبلوماسيين والباحثين وتقول هذه الجماعة إن برامج هذه المنظمات قد لا تروق كلها لواشنطن ولكن بوسع الولايات المتحدة عبر الحوار النشط من أن "تطور هذه البرامج" حسب قول فاولر لتجعلها أكثر اعتدالا وذلك بافتراض أن تلك المنظمات لا تتخذ مواقف تدافع عن العنف أو ترفض الرأي الآخر.

أما الرأي المقابل وهو ذلك الذي يحمله معسكر مشابه للأول وإن كان أكثر تأثيرا ونفوذا فإنه يذهب إلى أن المتطرفين انحدروا جميعا من "سلالة" تلك المنظمات "المعتدلة"، وأن الخلافات بين المعتدلين الذين يدعو فاولر إلى الحوار معهم والمتطرفين الذين يستخدمون العنف والتكفير هو فارق تفصيلي وتكتيكي وأن الأسس في الحالتين واحدة.

وبينما يقول فاولر إن الحوار مع المعتدلين والقبول بهم يقدم سبيلا إلى قطع الطريق على نمو الجماعات المتطرفة إذ إن المعتدلين سيكونون قابلين لاستيعاب الشباب المتدين البسيط قبل أن يتمكن المتطرفون من استقطابه فإن خصوم تلك النظرية يقولون إن الرئيس المصري الراحل أنور السادات أفرج عن قيادات الإخوان ودعمهم وفتح حوارا معهم وإن ذلك أدى إلى عكس ما يقوله فاولر تماما إذ إنه أسفر عن صعود موجة كبيرة من العنف والتطرف ما لبثت أن أودت بحياة الرئيس السادات نفسه. وبينما لم يكن الإخوان المسلمون مسؤولين عن ذلك بصورة مباشرة فإن تأثيرهم خاصة في الجامعات أدى إلى خلق الجماعة الإسلامية وإلى الدفع بالآلاف ممن جذبتهم دعوة الإخوان إلى التمرد على الإخوان أنفسهم بدعوى أنهم مهادنون للحكومة وغير قادرين على اتخاذ أفعال حاسمة.

وواقع الأمر أن ذلك الحوار كان مستمرا منذ سنوات، يخفت أحيانا ويعلو أحيانا أخرى، فيما كانت الإدارات المتعاقبة تفضل الإبقاء على السياسة القديمة بتجاهل وجود هذه المنظمات، أو بتقليل الصلة بها إلا فيما ندر وعند وجود مبررات استراتيجية لذلك كما حدث في شمال إفريقيا في مطلع التسعينات، إلا أن الأمر قد اختلف الآن إذ إن الإدارة الحالية تراجع سياستها بهذا الشأن على الرغم من تأكيد الجميع - خصومها وأنصارها على حد سواء - بأنها لم تتخذ قرارا بهذا الشأن بعد.

 

الوطن السعودية

[Airedale]

I am waiting to see the first demonstration against the new Iraqi government.  When that happens, the people will truly realize that the government is meant to be their slave.

You may not have to wait to long .

This is an article on what must be a breaking point of frustration for the Iraqi police and army;

 

Under attack, Iraq police still itching to take over security role

Published: 4/24/2005

 

BAGHDAD - At least four policemen died and 22 were wounded when insurgents bombed a police academy on Sunday, the latest victims in a campaign to cripple US-backed efforts to set up new Iraqi security forces.

 

But as the death toll from almost daily attacks on Iraq's fledgling forces continues to mount, those who have the daunting task of facing down insurgents remain resolute.

"Give us the weapons the American troops have, and we'll do better than them," said Baghdad police officer Ayad Abed Mehdi, 45. "We are stronger than the terrorists. We have to fight them face to face."

....

......

But despite the risk, new recruit Mohammed Jazel, 22, likes the generous 175-dollar monthly salary which allows him to buy pricey items such as fruit and soft drinks.

 

"I have my eyes open 24 hours in case there's an attack," said Jazel, who joined Baghdad's police force in March 2004.

 

"I want to help make the country peaceful, and I like the salary," he added.

 

"We feel we are strong now, but the government needs to trust us," said Haidar Sendan, 32, another new police recruit who served in the army under former president Saddam Hussein.

 

"Saddam remained in power for 35 years because he had a strong security force," he said.

 

"It's dangerous when we leave our jobs at night to go home," said Saad Hamid, 34, another Baghdad officer.

 

"We are suffering. Our friends have been kidnapped or killed. But now we have an opportunity to work as police."

......

....

US Government Accounting Office has warned that Iraqi security forces remain crippled by poor discipline, questionable loyalties and absenteeism possibly in the tens of thousands.

 

Iraq's interior ministry spokesman Sabah Kadim was more specific, saying that as many as 35,000 police who have been trained and put on the police payroll "aren't working for a variety of reasons".

 

"Of the 135,000, about 100,000 are working," Kadim said, adding that he felt the estimate of 155,000 security forces was not accurate. "There are problems with the numbers. They have never been realistic."

 

A senior US defense official acknowledged the capabilities of Iraqi police and other security forces "vary from unit to unit."

 

But the official pointed out that between 1,500 and 3,000 soldiers and police were joining the country's forces every week and "the trend is clearly positive."

 

........

http://www.turkishpress.com/news.asp?id=40861

 

The US military and US government doesn't know the Iraqi people,customs and loyalities like actual Iraqi's do.

Tomorrow the interim government attempts to take a "baby step" forward. But the frustration seems to need results, not more delays.

An excerpt from an article;

 

......Ibrahim Jaafari will present a list of ministers to parliament Monday, taking Iraq a step closer to a government three months after elections, lawmakers said.

 

The list will not include anyone from caretaker prime minister Iyad Allawi's party after the Shi'ite alliance that won the January election rejected his demands for at least four ministries in the new government.

 

"It is more than 75 percent likely that a list of cabinet names will be presented to the National Assembly tomorrow," Hussain al-Shahristani, a senior member of the Shi'ite alliance, told Reuters Sunday.

 

"We will meet to sign off on the names tomorrow morning, and then the National Assembly will meet later to vote on the list. However, I cannot say how long it will take the assembly to approve the cabinet."

 

Under Iraq's interim constitution, the 275-seat assembly must approve the prime minister and his cabinet by a simple majority. Judging by the recent performance of the parliament, that could take some time.

.........

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?t...storyID=8274239

 

The national assembly needs to "take charge" and accept thier democratic role of speaking for the people and prepare to provide for the common defense of the people.

 

 

Om Ward wrote;

 

Most of iraqis agree with you (there is no clean Saddamist) the iraqis are suffering and they want Democracy right now.

 

Om Ward

 

I agree.

A mistake was made by America to allow the Iraqi interim government to drag their feet for almost three months and make no decisions. The US needs to stress the need to act on behalf of the will of the majority is now.

 

It's up to the Iraqi people to demand action from those in the assembly not taking responsibility for inaction.

 

Good luck comming to a decision in this last week of April.

[salim]

Seems the US officials finally agreed with the Iraq new government plans of taking a frimer action on the security cleaning . After three days of serious talk with Dr Abdul Mehdi, vice president and important figure in Coalition list, Dr. Rice called Mr, Barazani asking him to submitte the Kurds nomination to Dr. Jaafree as soon as possible.. A spokes man of Kurds list confirmed that the names were already submitted. Mr. Hamoodi, of coalition, also confirmed it.

Hope that the talk of Dr. AbdulMehdi in Washongton had cleared the way of any concerns by the US toward the plans of the Coalition list in dealing with the security file.

 

 

I think the governemnt will be announced soon. As the real cause of delaying it is cleard !!

[Texas Gentleman]

some Americans in Iraq on the security situation and thier concerns:

 

Civil Society or Civil War? TUESDAY, APRIL 05, 2005

 

I do, honestly, believe we have come a long way in the last two years. Iraq has had elections and its new government is forming. Fallujah is a safe city, and its markets are opening. Iraqi Security Forces are making arrests and chasing down terrorists. The national electricity and water grids are slowly coming to life. These are all huge achievements.

 

And yet, we are not out of the woods yet. While it is unlikely that things will seriously go 'pear shaped' for as long as Coalition forces remain in the country, it is still not possible to discount the chances of civil war after they leave – and nor are we out of the woods in terms of the insurgency.

 

The past six weeks or so have been the quietest since before the fighting of April '04. So it's only natural to see a downward trend – particularly set against the various operational successes of the Marines' 'River Blitz' up the Euphrates and the large engagements by Coalition and Iraqi Forces against insurgent groups at, for example, Thar and North Babil.

 

But I'm still uneasy.

 

Part of my unease comes from the formation of the new government.

 

It was always inevitable that Shia groups would gain power with a free election. And I have no immediate problem with that. The problem is that Shia organized political parties emerged as opposition to Saddam, and were nurtured by Iran. I'm not saying that the Shia are a front from Iran – of course they're not – but their political parties may have significant pro-Iranian elements.

 

Moreover, there will be an inevitable struggle on the part of the long-repressed Shia to oust those they see as opposed to their cause, or not of their ilk. This, generally unremarked by the Western media, has already begun. Throughout the South of Iraq newly elected Governorate Councils have been pulling the rug out from under Allawi-appointed officials like Chiefs of Police, and trying to jam their own people in place. see Other develoments – albeit from a particularly complicated situation - and it's happening elsewhere too, you're just not hearing about it.

 

It's very hard to judge how concerned we should be about this. I mean, it's the democratic will of the people, right? They elected these provincial councils, they elected this new government. And, moreover, how bad can it really be? The Iraqi Shia – with Sistani in the lead – are most certainly not the same as the the Iranian Shia. They don't see the role of religion in government in the same way. So there is hope for moderation.

 

Never the less, many Sunni I know are very worried. "We can't trust them," they whisper, peering around as if a Shia might be listening in the backseat of my car. And if the majority of the Sunni feel that the Shia are mounting a takeover of the state, we can expect a major backlash from the Sunni/Baathist insurgency. Alternatively, if the extremist Shia elements like Moqtada Sadr feel that the government is being too accommodating to the Sunni, they, too, could start to throw their weight around.

 

As always, it will be an interesting time. Suffice to repeat – we are not yet out of the woods. The crisis in Iraq will last a long, long time. The coming weeks – including the 2 year anniversary of the fall of Saddam – will be an important barometer of what is to come.

posted by TJ @ 7:04 PM

 

The Silent Revolution SUNDAY, APRIL 10, 2005

 

Any one hour in the last few days would make a long post. But this time I'm going to stick to politics. Hence the title of this post.

 

It's one of those potentially massive stories that, yet again, the press has overlooked. But in the entire country south of Baghdad it is evident that a sea-change is ongoing. Provincial Councils recently elected are now taking their seats and they are, with few if any exceptions, overridingly controlled by the Shia religious parties. The South is rife with talk of foreign influence, and appointees of the Allawi government are finding themselves being hounded out of office. This is most visibly – and most aggressively- happening in the security sector. The replacement candidates are of a decidedly religious and/or foreign background. Frankly, it’s scary. The entire political leadership in the South has taken on a new complexion, and while it does not have to be anti-Coalition or anti-Sunni by nature, there are clear signs that it will be.

 

The only hedge I can see against this sectarianism and foreign influence is the power of the central government; it is the central Iraqi government that still maintains legal power over the security sector. So it will be absolutely critical in the coming days to watch how the new cabinet shakes out, and which parties gain control of the Ministries of Defense and Interior, the Office of the National Security Advisor, and the Iraqi National Intelligence Service.

 

For now things remain in flux, as the new Government is not entirely formed. If some kind of balance and powersharing can be worked out, things may just hold; if the Shia parties strongarm their way into those slots there is a good chance – if not an absolute certainty – that the impact on the political and security situation in the South will be shaped for a long time to come in a way detrimental to the interests of a democratic Iraq and the USA. Another important factor in the long term will be the Constitution. I would expect to see a push by the Shia parties for greater provincial control – since it is in the provinces where they have the most influence.

 

I honestly don't think the people of Iraq – even the people of the South – want this new religious and foreign influence in their governance. But the Shia parties were the best organized – better organized than the obvious alternative of tribal alliances – and Sistani's fatwa also had a strong influence, as did some other factors. But this is a critical time for Iraq, and what I am increasingly realizing is that the path to democracy – and, for that matter, strategic victory for Operation Iraqi Freedom – far from being accomplished is only just beginning.

TJ

I should have stayed home

[Guest Guest_tajer]

The replacement candidates are of a decidedly religious and/or foreign background. Frankly, it’s scary

 

In Arabic.. Majority of Aljezera viewers are against the bringing of the kurd Beshmerka and bader organization personall into the armed forces to fight the terrorists..

 

Is that telling any thing? they know the best way to snak!! that is why they are against it.. A message to the writer of the above articles

 

أظهر استطلاع أجرته الجزيرة نت أن غالبية بلغت نسبتها 67.3% من المشاركين تعارض مقترح الرئيس العراقي جلال الطالباني بإنشاء مليشيات كردية وشيعية للقضاء على من أسماهم الإرهابيين.

 

غير أن الاستفتاء -الذي شمل على امتداد الأيام الثلاثة الماضية 23774 شخصا- أظهر كذلك أن نسبة التأييد لدعوة الطالباني معتبرة وتبلغ 23,7%.

 

وقد وجه الطالباني دعوته قبل أسبوع تقريبا التي عبر أثير هيئة الإذاعة البريطانية وطالب بأن تشمل المليشيات قوات البشمركة الكردية ومنظمة بدر الشيعية والقوات المسلحة التابعة للأحزاب المعارضة.

 

وقد جاءت الدعوة قبل أيام قليلة مما عرف بأزمة الرهائن بالمدائن, حين ترددت أخبار عن احتجاز رهائن شيعة على يد مسلحين سنة, إلا أن القوات العراقية المدعومة من القوات الأميركية لم تجد أثرا لا للرهائن ولا للمحتجزين.

 

المصدر: الجزيرة

 

[salim]

The NYTimes editorial emphasising some Americans fears that, I think , is a reflection of some Arab allies fears!

 

Mixing Sunni with Sadamists is a dirty game that Sunni's are refusing before Shia

 

The young Americans and Iraqis didn't pay their lifes to end up having Sadamees back again in power as per some Arab leaders wish!!

 

Losing Ground in Iraq

 

Published: April 27, 2005

 

 

The millions of brave Iraqis who risked their lives to vote in January didn't expect that nearly three months later, their squabbling politicians would still be struggling to form a government. As a result, precious momentum has been lost, and a briefly improving security situation has again started deteriorating. The Sunni-based insurgency seems to have drawn fresh encouragement from the inability of the victorious Shiite and Kurdish parties to put the future of their country ahead of their narrow political agendas.

 

The Bush administration has, understandably, stopped trying to disguise its frustration and concern. Granted, Iraq's politicians are new to the challenges of parliamentary give-and-take. But if they manage to squander the aura of democratic legitimacy conferred on them by January's election, it will become radically harder to bridge ethnic and religious divides, build a national army and police force, and repair a still shattered infrastructure.

 

Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice have personally intervened with Iraqi political leaders in hopes of ending the damaging stalemate, and an announcement of at least a partial cabinet list is now reported to be imminent. Washington's influence is considerable, but must be used wisely. Getting directly involved in negotiations over cabinet posts or imposing some kind of arbitrary timetable would be a serious mistake. Instead, the United States needs to put its full weight behind the basic democratic values President Bush has embraced for a new, freer Middle East.

 

In Iraq, among the most crucial of these values are the principles of ethnic and religious inclusiveness, and the protection of women's rights and individual freedoms. As it happens, the administration's newly nominated ambassador to Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad, had useful experience with these issues in his previous role as ambassador to Afghanistan. But promoting democratic values ought not to be an exclusively American franchise. This would be a good time for other democratic countries to station similarly qualified envoys in Baghdad and for the United Nations to reinforce its feeble political presence.

 

The biggest danger now comes from militant religious leaders of Iraq's long-oppressed Shiite majority who seek to impose their own intolerant rule on Sunni Arabs, Kurds and secular Shiites. There have been particularly disturbing calls in recent weeks from leaders of the main Shiite political bloc for a far-reaching purge of former members of Saddam Hussein's Baath Party from all government, military and intelligence posts. That would be an injustice for the many Iraqis who joined the party just to keep their jobs, and would further estrange an already deeply alienated Sunni community. Even worse, many Iraqis suspect the real purpose is to open top jobs in the army, police and intelligence services for militia leaders allied with victorious Shiite religious parties. More than 1,500 American soldiers didn't give their lives to replace Saddam Hussein's secular thugs with Shiite religious thugs.

Concern about this militant religious agenda is one reason Kurdish parties have had second thoughts about backing Ibrahim al-Jaafari, the Shiite who has been designated prime minister and is trying to put together a government. A more basic reason has been Dr. Jaafari's lack of enthusiasm for the Kurds' desire for political autonomy. One problem created by the ill-advised Sunni Arab boycott of the January election was that it not only left Sunnis underrepresented, but also left Shiites and Kurds overrepresented. It is now largely up to the Kurds to keep Iraq's government and constitution from conceding too much to Shiite fundamentalism. But the Kurds have their own agenda, which does not necessarily focus as much on the future welfare of Iraq as on the future independence of the Kurds. The ties between Washington and the Kurdish minority are particularly strong, and stiffening Kurdish resolve to consider the needs of the whole country is an area where America can be influential.

 

Sunni underrepresentation needs to be directly addressed as well. Only by bringing genuinely representative Sunnis into the new government will there be any chance of damping down the Sunni insurgency to the point where serious reconstruction can begin. Credible Sunnis need to be appointed not just to significant posts in the new cabinet, but also to key committees drafting the new constitution. They should also be given a fair share of jobs at all levels in the new security forces.

 

The only plausible reason for keeping American troops in Iraq is to protect the democratic transformation that President Bush seized upon as a rationale for the invasion after his claims about weapons of mass destruction turned out to be fictitious. If that transformation is now allowed to run off the rails, the new rationale could prove to be as hollow as the original one.

[salim]

Finally the government was formed .. There was finall marathon racing with Sunni Arab who finally succeeded to come up with a small commitee of five reprentative from diffrent groups and regions.. Wasn't better if they participated in the ellection and come up with legal ellected representatives as other groups did? Any how there was another smaller issue of minister of Oil. For some reason this was assigned to Alfadela party.. And seems that the nomanees to this position were not up to the satisfaction of PM Aljaafree.. He refused the three.. We don't know if the new candidate is belonging to the same party.. The party was upset with decision

 

For those who don't know that party.. It is a defected moderate Alsadrees who chose to follow the moderate Ayatoula Alyaqoubee.. Alyaqoube is late fourtees Engineer graduted in the Eightees from university of technology -Baghdad and chose to enroll himself in Alhaouza religous studies under his master Ayatoula Alsader, the ceased father of Mouqtada who was killed by Saddam security police in 1998.. Before the fall of the old regime , most Alsadrees were considering Alyaqoubee as the successor to their master but under supervision of Alyatoula Alhairi. Surprisingly after the fall , and with unexplained support of some Arab Media such as Alarabia and aaaljezera and with some financial support by some sunni anti lebration, the unexperienced Moqtada was driven to lead the group. Alyaqoubee was not in synch with Moqtada and didn't believe in the armed solution to "occupation".. He established the Alfadela party.. Which is attracting today most intellectuals of the Alsadree group..Today Alfadela is very strong in the south specially in Basra and Emara, the oil richest region in Iraq! Some friend who knew Aluyaqoubee personally told me that he is a very hoset respectfull and intellegent person, he got his dgree As Ayatoulla in very short period.. I am not sure if this is a real or just a propegenda.. We need to wait and see how his group will act in supporting the new Iraq.

[Texas Gentleman]

The replacement candidates are of a decidedly religious and/or foreign background. Frankly, it’s scary

 

In Arabic.. Majority of Aljezera viewers are against the bringing of the kurd Beshmerka and bader organization personall into the armed forces to fight the terrorists..

 

Is that telling any thing? they know the best way to snak!! that is why they are against it.. A message to the writer of the above articles

 

أظهر استطلاع أجرته الجزيرة نت أن غالبية بلغت نسبتها 67.3% من المشاركين تعارض مقترح الرئيس العراقي جلال الطالباني بإنشاء مليشيات كردية وشيعية للقضاء على من أسماهم الإرهابيين.

 

غير أن الاستفتاء -الذي شمل على امتداد الأيام الثلاثة الماضية 23774 شخصا- أظهر كذلك أن نسبة التأييد لدعوة الطالباني معتبرة وتبلغ 23,7%.

 

وقد وجه الطالباني دعوته قبل أسبوع تقريبا التي عبر أثير هيئة الإذاعة البريطانية وطالب بأن تشمل المليشيات قوات البشمركة الكردية ومنظمة بدر الشيعية والقوات المسلحة التابعة للأحزاب المعارضة.

 

وقد جاءت الدعوة قبل أيام قليلة مما عرف بأزمة الرهائن بالمدائن, حين ترددت أخبار عن احتجاز رهائن شيعة على يد مسلحين سنة, إلا أن القوات العراقية المدعومة من القوات الأميركية لم تجد أثرا لا للرهائن ولا للمحتجزين.

 

المصدر: الجزيرة

 

Tajer

 

thanks for your reply

 

 

Would you please give a brief English translation of the "message to the writer"

 

 

thanks

[Guest Guest_tajer]

Tex,

The text is from Aljezera web site about the pool that showed that most of it's viewers are against the involvment by Kurds and Shia in fighting the terrorists.

[salim]

Will comment of this later..Have a look to the red lines

The NY times editor , a newspaper that was anti Bush re ellection

 

Have a look to an Aljezera style American analysis.. Thanks god, Bush was re ellected..

 

EDITORIAL

Iraq's New Cabinet

 

Published: April 29, 2005

 

 

 

Three months of jockeying among Iraq's victorious Shiite and Kurdish parties have finally produced a cabinet that won quick ratification from a legislature where those same parties dominate. The January election that began this process was inspiring. The months of petty haggling that followed were not, and while the formation of an elected Iraqi government is a historic moment, its makeup is far from ideal. Crucial choices have been needlessly delayed, and an incomparable opportunity for drawing patriotic Sunni Arabs away from the insurgency was largely squandered. Many Iraqis, particularly supporters of secularism, women's rights and national unity, will greet this government warily.

 

What will matter most is whether Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari can summon the vision and the strength to master his unruly coalition and start living up to voters' expectations. His initial broadcast to the Iraqi people was promising, but he faces a lot of obstacles.

 

The most critical is finding ways to widen Sunni representation in the government, including in the security forces. That representation will have to include Sunnis who served in Saddam Hussein's army, police and intelligence services and former Baath Party members. This is painful for Shiite and Kurdish victims of the old regime to accept. But excluding all Baathists is a prescription for endless civil war and endlessly postponed recovery. Only the Baathist leaders and security officials personally responsible for the worst crimes of the former dictatorship should be automatically excluded.

Mr. Jaafari had intended to make an important symbolic gesture by appointing a Sunni defense minister. But at the last minute, Shiite party leaders vetoed his choice, and Mr. Jaafari has temporarily assumed the defense post himself. That is a serious loss, one that Mr. Jaafari must quickly remedy.

 

Another damaging setback was the failure to find some way to include the interim prime minister, Ayad Allawi, and his party in the new cabinet. Mr. Allawi made plenty of mistakes during his tenure. But in recent weeks he emerged as a vital Shiite voice for secular rights and for making overtures to elements of the dangerously estranged Sunni Arab community. Excluding Mr. Allawi will increase the leverage of militantly religious Shiites who want to include harsh elements of Koranic law in the forthcoming constitution, and of Kurdish parties, which are more interested in securing autonomy for their region than in protecting secular and minority rights in all of Iraq.

While Mr. Allawi will not be in the new cabinet, one of his least appealing rivals, Ahmad Chalabi, will, as a deputy prime minister and the acting oil minister. Apart from his double-crossing of the Bush administration, his dodgy financial reputation and his shady dealings with Iran, Mr. Chalabi is openly determined to sabotage any attempt to integrate former Baathists into Iraqi political and economic life.

 

Mr. Jaafari must recognize that he is the prime minister of all Iraqis, including women, Sunnis and secularists, and assert his authority over the scheming politicians and Shiite clerics who have not been shy about instructing him what to do. He needs to insist on appointing credible Sunnis to positions of authority, starting with the Defense Ministry. He has to see to it that intolerant religious zealots do not dominate the writing of Iraq's new constitution. And he must assert control over reconstruction contracts in order to combat corruption and direct as much of the work as possible into Iraqi hands.

 

History will look back on this as the moment when Iraqi democracy had its best chance to preserve a unified country and make good on the promise of human rights and economic well-being. We hope Mr. Jaafari rises to this momentous challenge.

[salim]

Reading through the above article , I would trace a tone of uncertainty among the main ideas that the writer is trying to set the reader through.. This uncertainty is getting it's ground from what I call the huge lack of accurate info by some western writers.

 

The calls by the writer who is trying to make it as an advice to the new elected Pm, mostly were the plan already set by Coalition and their representative Mr. Jaafree.. Trying to make otherwise is nothing but to fool a non well informed reader.

The call to include the Sadamists and call them Sunni, is a nother trap the editor is trying to put him self or his readers in. Today the moderate Arab Sunni who were blocked by terrorists from electing their representatives , are the majority.. Those who are most outspoken Sunnis are mainly those who have good relations to terrorists, and working closely and in sych with.They are minority and isolated from the main Sunni Arab community. I have many Arab Sunni friends and they feel a shame of having some Saddam former security or republican guards personals or some Sunni security police clerics as their representatives.. The moderate Sunni Arab , represented today by Alyawer and some other figures, are under great pressure and even the Islamic party who changed his position toward the political process lately because of threats by terrorists.. The excluding of Sadamists "both Shia and Sunni" is not a demand by Shia and kurds, as the writer put, it is a demand by most Iraqis who blamed these figures of collaboration with terrorists. The writer might have the right to risk the lifes of his fellow young American soldiers, but Iraqis would not tolerate more on this issue after all killings and suffer. We tried the American soft stand toward Sadamists , and we are no longer be able to see Iraq run into a sectarian war because of this stupid policy. A policy that had proven to be a complete failure.

 

In the current new system there is a sunni as the head of assembly, there is a veto sunni power in the presidency committe, there are six ministers including a minister of defense , as nominated by Sunni Arabs representatives, in the new government. That is all because of the firm stand of Coalition and Kurds to include Sunni Arab. What else you want to represent Sunni.. Only to bring Sadamees in charge of security, is the one.. This is a demand by those who want the terrorists to be fed and grow, it is an encouriging policy for continue their terror not giving it up.. We know these people character , we call it the character of gangs. They believe only in hard stick policy.. To encourage them is use it while pointing to the carrot.. Not give them the stick.

 

The writer also claimed that civil right and women right activates might not be pleased by this government.. My question is wether they will have chance to breath if these sadamees are allowed to rule again as they do today..? Security is a critical issue and only popular support would assure it.

 

Another point , the writer suggested to PM Aljaafree to write a constitution that is far from reach of religious powers. Does the writer know that he is talking about PM of Iraq and not Egypt.. The Pm has nothing to do with this.. It is Iraqis who will write it freely. A constitution that need the approval of all governats, any three can veto it.. So , why the editor is trying to make himself so clever in warring against some thing that is impossible to happen, I mean an Islamic Koranic Shria "only" based constitution.. To get wide base government , Iraqis needed three months. How long they would be in need to get such type of state or constitution.

 

As for his remarks about Dr. Chalabee, I thought a main stream US newspaper editor to be more subjective.. Even Aljezera is fed up with such fool accusations!! Dr. Chalabee today is one of the most popular figures.. Wake up!

[Guest IR Forever]

US is being led by the zionists to shed their blood for the safety & security of the zionist entity is the main mistake. Secondly, by the greed of ZOG and the UN as well as traiterous puppets who proved their cowardly actions by selling their soles to the devil for a few dinars.