Beyond Impeachment

moghrabi
Avatar
#1
Beyond Impeachment: The Bush Administration as War Criminals

-25-05, 9:14 am

In the wake of the Downing Street Memo and other leaked British documents created before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, many have begun to question the legality of the Bush administration's actions. In particular, families of soldiers, a few Democratic senators, and hundreds of thousands of outraged Americans, are calling for an independent investigation of the Bush administration's manipulation and outright fabrication of intelligence to justify the invasion of Iraq. The word "impeachment" is even being bandied about.

While it is certainly appropriate to demand an independent investigation of the Bush administration's pre-invasion shenanigans, as well as to pursue bringing articles of impeachment against the President for his official misconduct, there is something larger at stake. There is the matter of the Bush administration's post-invasion atrocities.

Pursuant to U.N. Security Council Resolution 1483, adopted on May 22, 2003, the U.S. and the United Kingdom identified themselves and were recognized as the occupying powers of Iraq. As an occupying power, the U.S. accepted duties that were coextensive with its area of occupation. That is, the greater its degree of control, the greater its degree of responsibility.

With the creation of the Coalition Provisional Authority, headed by men hand-picked by the Bush administration, the U.S. clearly and undeniably took control over every aspect of what remained of Iraq. Likewise, the CPA, by and through the U.S. military, provided the security (such that it was), created and enforced the laws (such as they were), and provided any semblance of infrastructure following the ouster of Saddam. In short, the U.S., and its coalition of the willing, assumed total control of post-Saddam Iraq.

The so-called handover of "authority" to the Iraqi transitional government did not change the status of the U.S. as an occupying force. The transitional government has no authority over the U.S. military or its civilian contractors. Indeed, without the presence of the U.S. military, there would be no transitional government. Furthermore, the transitional government operates under laws and regulations created and promulgated by the CPA. Therefore, the Iraqi transitional government is itself governed by the law of the occupying force, rendering it little more than a facade.

Having assumed control as an occupying power, the U.S. also assumed responsibility for what occurred during its occupation of Iraq. Among its responsibilities to the people of Iraq is the duty to ensure against violence to life and person, including cruel treatment and torture, as required under Article 3 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Article 3 establishes a minimum set of rights for all persons under occupation, regardless of their status as civilian, unprivileged belligerent, terrorist, or war criminal. (The United States is not only a signatory to the Fourth Convention, but also expressly recognizes the requirements of Article 3 via the War Crimes Act of 1996.) Furthermore, under Article 31 of the Fourth Convention, "No physical or moral coercion shall be exercised against protected persons [those subject to occupation], in particular to obtain information from them or from third parties." Article 147 expressly eliminates the defense of military necessity.

In his report regarding the investigation of prisoner abuse by and interrogation techniques of the U.S. military at Abu Ghraib, Major General Antonio M. Taguba found "numerous incidents of sadistic, blatant, and wanton criminal abuses," which were "systemic" and "intentionally perpetrated." Aside from the acts of "physical and moral" coercion graphically depicted in the notorious Abu Ghraib photographs, Gen. Taguba found credible evidence of "breaking chemical lights and pouring the phosphoric liquid on detainees," as well as "sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick."

The interrogation tactics were imported from Guantanamo Bay where they were already known to be in violation of the Geneva Conventions and international law. Such tactics included the use of dogs, stripping prisoners naked, causing physical pain, exploiting Islamic concerns for modesty, sleep deprivation, isolated confinement, and chaining detainees to the floor for extended periods of time. All of these techniques were approved by the Bush administration, developed at Guantanamo, exported to Abu Ghraib, and known to be in violation of the Geneva Conventions.

Indeed, the interrogation techniques developed at Guantanamo and subsequently employed at Abu Ghraib were created pursuant to President Bush's declaration in February 2002 that those detained at Guantanamo were outside the protections of the Geneva Conventions. At the same time that the Bush administration was openly declaring the Geneva Conventions inapplicable to its war on terror, it was requesting legal justification from the Departments of Justice and Defense for interrogation involving physical abuse. Therefore, while the Bush administration might not have expressly authorized the more barbaric abuses which occurred at Abu Ghraib, by so radically changing and rejecting the laws of war, the Bush administration most certainly knew that the systemic sadism at Abu Ghraib was likely, if not certain.

As recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court in the decision In re Yama****a, "the law of war presupposes that its violation is to be avoided through the control of the operations of war by commanders who are to some extent responsible for their subordinates." It is clear from another decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, Madsen v. Kinsella, that President Bush, as Commander-in-Chief of the military, is the commander of the military force by which the occupation of Iraq is held. Thus, Bush is responsible for the criminal acts of his subordinates in Iraq. Furthermore, based upon the "torture memos" commissioned by the White House, Bush certainly should have known that torture and abuse would be perpetrated at Abu Ghraib. For the White House to claim otherwise strains credulity.

As the occupying power, the U.S. is also obligated under Article 3 of the Fourth Convention to ensure that "the wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for." Thus, the intentional failure to provide adequate medical treatment, or a policy of denial and neglect involving foreseeable consequences, would be a clear violation of this duty.

Nevertheless, as repeatedly reported by Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, as well as by the BBC and the New York Times, and as recently documented by journalist Dahr Jamail in his report, "Iraqi Hospitals Ailing Under Occupation," the U.S. is in gross violation of Article 3.

For instance, on November 6, 2004, as a prelude to its invasion of Fallujah, the U.S. military razed Nazal Emergency Hospital, the city's only healthcare facility for trauma victims. U.S. forces also detained doctors and patients, and prevented any surgeons from entering the besieged city. At Fallujah General Hospital, U.S. forces closed off all access roads and surrounded the hospital with troops and vehicles, preventing patients from getting medical care. Additionally, U.S. snipers targeted civilian ambulances and medical clinics, and intentionally prevented physicians from entering hospitals to treat patients. U.S. troops also prohibited the delivery of necessary medicines or supplies into Fallujah. Similar incidences occurred during the U.S. military's recent offensive in Al Qa'im.
Not only do these actions constitute gross violations of the Fourth Geneva Convention, they also constitute war crimes under Article 8 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Under the Rome Statute, it is a war crime to attack personnel or objects (i.e., ambulances and hospitals) involved in humanitarian assistance. It is also a war crime to attack "protected objects," including "hospitals or placed where the sick and wounded are collected."

As Commander-in-Chief of the military, Bush is liable for the acts of his subordinates in Fallujah and Al Qa'im. Bush meets regularly with the Joint Chiefs of Staff and is fully briefed on military operations in Iraq. He authorizes military operations (or at least acquiesces to them) and knows or should know something about what they entail. As such, he cannot reasonably plead ignorance of the consequences of his orders and decisions.

Moreover, Bush and his administration knowingly and deliberately created a climate in which it is presumed that the Geneva Conventions and international law are inapplicable to the crusade against terror. Not only did Bush issue his presidential memorandum declaring the Geneva Conventions inapplicable to terrorists (or alleged terrorists, as is more often the case), but his administration has been openly hostile to international bodies and laws which could hold him and his administration accountable.

For instance, aside from its obsessive denigration of the United Nations, the Bush administration is zealously opposed to the International Criminal Court and has even gone so far as to withhold aid from nations who refuse to sign agreements immunizing suspected U.S. war criminals from ICC prosecution. In some cases, the immunity agreements are reciprocal and the U.S. has agreed not to turn over to the ICC accused war criminals from Georgia, Sierra Leon, Tajikistan, Uganda, Israel, and Nicaragua, among others. Not exactly a group that staunchly protects and respects human rights and international law.

In such a climate, is it any wonder U.S. forces in Iraq torture prisoners, shoot at ambulances, and reduce hospitals to rubble? It certainly shouldn't be to Bush and his partners in crime.

--
 
Ocean Breeze
Free Thinker
#2
Quote:

Senator Kerry (D - MA) sends letter to Senate Intelligence Committee pressing for answers on the Downing Street Memo
Larisa Alexandrovna - Raw Story Staff


DOWNING STREET UPDATE
Larisa Alexandrovna - Raw Story Staff

Senator Kerry (D - MA) sends letter to Senate Intelligence Committee pressing for answers on the Downing Street Memo and other Downing documents. The letter leaked to Raw Story, is also signed by Senators Johnson, Corzine, Reed, Lautenberg, Boxer, Kennedy, Harkin, Bingaman, and Durbin. The text of the letter is below.

###


June 22, 2005

The Honorable Pat Roberts, Chairman
The Honorable John D. Rockefeller, IV, Vice Chairman United States Senate
Select Committee on Intelligence
SH-211
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator Roberts and Senator Rockefeller:

We write concerning your committee's vital examination of pre-war Iraq intelligence failures. In particular, we urge you to accelerate to completion the work of the so-called "Phase II" effort to assess how policy makers used the intelligence they received.

Last year your committee completed the first phase of a two-phased effort to review the pre-war intelligence on Iraq. Phase I-begun in the summer of 2003 and completed in the summer of 2004-examined the performance of the American intelligence community in the collection and analysis of intelligence prior to the war, including an examination of the quantity and quality of U.S. intelligence on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and the intelligence on ties between Saddam Hussein's regime and terrorist groups. At the conclusion of Phase I, your committee issued an unclassified report that made an important contribution to the American public's understanding of the issues involved.

In February 2004-well over a year ago-the committee agreed to expand the scope of inquiry to include a second phase which would examine the use of intelligence by policy makers, the comparison of pre-war assessments and post-war findings, the activities of the Policy Counterterrorism Evaluation Group (PCTEG) and the Office of Special Plans in the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, and the use of information provided by the Iraqi National Congress.

The committee's efforts have taken on renewed urgency given recent revelations in the United Kingdom regarding the apparent minutes of a July 23, 2002, meeting between Prime Minister Tony Blair and his senior national security advisors. These minutes-known as the "Downing Street Memo"-raise troubling questions about the use of intelligence by American policy makers-questions that your committee is uniquely situated to address.

The memo indicates that in the summer of 2002, at a time the White House was promising Congress and the American people that war would be their last resort, that they believed military action against Iraq was "inevitable."

The minutes reveal that President "Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."

The American people took the warnings that the administration sounded seriously-warnings that were echoed at the United Nations and here in Congress as we voted to give the president the authority to go to war. For the sake of our democracy and our future national security, the public must know whether such warnings were driven by facts and responsible intelligence, or by political calculation.

These issues need to be addressed with urgency. This remains a dangerous world, with American forces engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan, and other challenges looming in Iran and North Korea. In this environment, the American public should have the highest confidence that policy makers are using intelligence objectively-never manipulating it to justify war, but always to protect the United States. The contents of the Downing Street Memo undermine this faith and only rigorous Congressional oversight can determine the truth.

We urge the committee to complete the second phase of its investigation with the maximum speed and transparency possible, producing, as it did at the end of Phase I, a comprehensive, unclassified report from which the American people can benefit directly.

###



(good article, mog)
 
PoisonPete2
#3
impressive material.
 
moghrabi
Avatar
#4
Thank you. i am doing my best to have enough material to impeach Bush and his cronies.
 
Ocean Breeze
Free Thinker
Avatar
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by moghrabi

Thank you. i am doing my best to have enough material to impeach Bush and his cronies.


presenting the material is excellent. Now, if the international community could start impeachment process........that would be just grand. But reality is that it is up to the Americans. Let's see how they handle this. In this case, we have input .....but are the observers in front row seats.

It could get very interesting. The pressure is building.....
 
moghrabi
Avatar
#6
I hope we have enough American posters here that are open minded regarding this issue. We can debate these issues and present it in a very civil manner. All we need is open eyes and listening ears.
 
Ocean Breeze
Free Thinker
Avatar
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by moghrabi

I hope we have enough American posters here that are open minded regarding this issue. We can debate these issues and present it in a very civil manner. All we need is open eyes and listening ears.

Americans have a big responsibility now. Somehow, they must address so many serious issues , that the bush G. has brought upon them.......along with taking care of daily business.

Instead of dealing with the "terrorist " issue exclusively and running the nation effectively/progressively ......the regime has created the potential for more terrorism and had damaged the US reputation to the point it will take a very long time to salvage.

some serious damage control is in order now.......not more bush simplistic repetative platitudes.

He keeps repeating (as if to brainwash a population) that the world is a very dangerous place...... yet is contributing to making it more dangerous. How many must die before "they" really awaken to the reality of this. How many more nations will bush antagonize before someone really gets dissed off at the US and we all have a major problem on our hands. He is even telling Blair that blair must build the British military. Leave well enough alone ......and mind your own business for once....let the dust settle from this mess . His meddling (opinions ) are NOT welcome. Does he and his gang need diagrams to comprehend this??

If the international community wants the US opinion/help it will ask for it. There is far too much hardship on this planet without creating more.
 
moghrabi
Avatar
#8
Even with diagrams he won't get it. He is a killer and a killer is thirsty for blood. Americans have the responsibility now more than ever to bring him down and try him in the Hague. nothing less is accepted.
 
dan_c22
#9
[quote="Ocean Breeze"]
Quote: Originally Posted by moghrabi

Now, if the international community could start impeachment process

How the hell does the International Community impeach a head of government?
 
Ocean Breeze
Free Thinker
#10
 
moghrabi
Avatar
#11
[quote="dan_c22"]
Quote: Originally Posted by Ocean Breeze

Quote: Originally Posted by moghrabi

Now, if the international community could start impeachment process

How the hell does the International Community impeach a head of government?

First of all, the quote is not mine.

second, OceanBreeze answered before I could.
 
dan_c22
#12
EDIT: Deleted Inflammatory remark
 
moghrabi
Avatar
#13
EDIT: Quoted Inflammatory remarks

NOTE: The rest of this post will be for Moghrabi to decide whether he wants to edit.

Where is my love for the terrorsits. Where did i post my love for terrorits. I think you should stay away from personal attacks. If you are disgusted then find another place to cool off.
 
dan_c22
#14
Peronal attacks? It is quite obvious from any of your posts, the position you take on the matter.
 
Ocean Breeze
Free Thinker
#15
 
moghrabi
Avatar
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by dan_c22

Peronal attacks? It is quite obvious from any of your posts, the position you take on the matter.

Yes it is obvious that I am against the ugly war. But nowhere I posted any love or encourgement for the terrorists. Watch what you say, read before you post or you are toast.
 
moghrabi
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by moghrabi

EDIT: Quoted Inflammatory remarks

NOTE: The rest of this post will be for Moghrabi to decide whether he wants to edit.

Where is my love for the terrorsits. Where did i post my love for terrorits. I think you should stay away from personal attacks.

Thanks Vanni.
 
dan_c22
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by moghrabi

Watch what you say, read before you post or you are toast.

So you are countering my perceived insult with a threat? I think the mods should deal with that.
 
moghrabi
Avatar
#19
What was meant is you will be toast by the Mods if you continue to attack personally. I have no need to threaten you.
 
Vanni Fucci
Free Thinker
Avatar
#20
Have you read the PM I sent you Dan?

If you haven't, you should, as it will explain quite clearly what Moghrabi meant.
 
dan_c22
#21
I have read your PM Vanni, thanks. I will keep what you said in mind.
 
Jo Canadian
Avatar
#22
 
Ocean Breeze
Free Thinker
Avatar
#23
--


war or impeachment??

Americans have a major challenge on their hands now. Some tough decisions to make.
 
Ocean Breeze
Free Thinker
Avatar
#24
--

bush's trillion dollar war...

Quote:

27 June 2005
EXCLUSIVE: BUSH'S TRILLION DOLLAR WAR
Cheaper 'to pay Saddam to quit Iraq'
By Oonagh Blackman and Chris Hughes
IRAQ and its aftermath will cost $1trillion - a million million dollars - it was claimed last night.

The huge sum, equivalent to £548,000,000,000, was revealed as the US held secret meetings with rebels to end the fighting.

The cost of the war, post-war efforts and the loss of world output due to rising oil prices will hit $1.25trillion by 2010, it has been estimated.

Prof Keith Hartley, director of the University of York's Centre for Defence Economics, believes it would have been cheaper to pay off Saddam Hussein to achieve regime change.


Advertisement

He said: "If at the outset the Americans anticipated the Iraq operation would cost $100 billion, they could have given Saddam and his family $20billion to go, $50billion to Iraq and still have had $30billion left over.


"The UK would not have been involved, no-one would have died and no buildings would have been destroyed."


Economic expert Prof Hartley says the cost to Britain could top £5billion by the end of next year - over £1billion more than forecast.


Meanwhile details were revealed yesterday of a secret meeting between rebels, US Army officials and secret agents on June 3 in Balad, 40 miles north of Baghdad.


One of the few groups in Iraq not to attend was Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's gang which killed British engineer Ken Bigley. It is the first sign the US is prepared to enter talks with terrorists to end the killings.


Yesterday US defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld admitted the insurgency in Iraq could go on for another 12 years.


Addressing a question about whether US troops levels are adequate to vanquish the increasingly violent resistance, he said: "We're not going to win against the insurgency. The Iraqi people are going to win against the insurgency. That insurgency could go on for any number of years. Insurgencies tend to go on five, six, eight, 10, 12 years."


An upsurge in suicide bombs in Iraq has forced Britain and America to pledge not to suddenly pull out of Iraq.


More than 30 Iraqis died yesterday - half of them police officers - in three separate suicide bomb raids around the northern city of Mosul.


Today Tony Blair holds talks with Iraq's interim President Ayad Allawi at No10.


 
jimmoyer
Avatar
#25
Let's have an equal opportunity indictment that includes the whole world while we're at it.

It seems even selective sin is just another fashion statement.

The sin now is not for the world to help the 8.5 million Iraqis who had the guts enough to spit over a dead clown to vote.

The world is too gutless and busy with its fashion statement on sin.
 
mrmom2
Avatar
#26
You spit that number out like ts gospel Jim. Who's number is that really' where did it come from? Who generated it the US goverment maybe We all know how trustworthy they have been of late :P
 
Ocean Breeze
Free Thinker
Avatar
#27
Beyond impeachment. Straight to international tribunal for war crimes. Do not pass go.

*******

jim: after tonight's LIES aka speech.........not in the mood for metaphorical analysis.
 
gopher
No Party Affiliation
Avatar
#28
The sin now is not for the world to help the 8.5 million Iraqis who had the guts enough to spit over a dead clown to vote.


Yeah, and look who they voted into office: a member of the TERRORIST al-Daawa party that invented suicide bombings and has killed numerous Americans over the years:


--


Hezb al-Daawa al-Islamiyya
Islamic Call Party

by Mahan Abedin

Mahan Abedin is an analyst of Iranian politics, educated at the London School of Economics and Political Science.
The downfall of Saddam Hussein has led to a proliferation of Shiite activism all over the southern and central regions of Iraq. While the Western media has focused a great deal of attention on the Iranian-backed Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI) and the amorphous radical movement coalescing around the young Muqtada al-Sadr, the oldest organized Shiite political force in Iraq, Hezb al-Daawa al-Islamiyya (Islamic Call Party), has been largely ignored. If comparatively little is known about Al-Daawa in the West, this is in part because its leadership wants it that way. The organization's secretive structure made it Saddam Hussein's most fearsome opponent - its remarkable list of accomplishments includes at least seven attempts to assassinate the former Iraqi president and the near-fatal shooting of his son, Uday. The organization pioneered the use of suicide bombings and simultaneous terror attacks in the Middle East. US officials thought the movement had been largely eradicated inside Iraq - until it organized the first major anti-American demonstration in April.

For the United States, al-Daawa represents both peril and promise. During the early 1980s, when the United States backed Iraq's Baathist regime, the organization carried out deadly terror attacks on American targets overseas. On the other hand, in contrast to SCIRI, it has never advocated direct clerical control of the state and ostensibly advocates a pluralist democratic system. While the movement has refused to endorse American intervention in Iraq, it has also refused to subordinate itself to Iran.

Origins


Al-Daawa emerged in the aftermath of Iraq's 1958 "revolution," a tumultuous event that witnessed the execution of the royal family and the rise of a military junta headed by Abd al-Karim Qasim. In order to consolidate his authority within the new regime, Qasim reached out to the Iraqi Communist Party (ICP), the best-organized political group in the country. The ICP, which repeatedly proved its worth to Qasim in bloody outbreaks of street fighting following the coup, was given a voice in the new regime and allowed to disseminate propaganda, which portrayed the Shiite religious establishment as a reactionary obstacle to modernization and economic progress.

Although the Shiite religious leadership (marja'iyya) had been politically quiescent since its revolt against the British in 1920, a group of religious figures in the southwestern city of Najaf, Jamaat al-Ulama (Association of Scholars), organized a campaign to counter the influence of atheist political forces. Qasim initially allowed Jamaat al-Ulama to freely publish leaflets and announcements, as well as a monthly political journal, al-Awa' (the Lights), so long as they restricted their attacks to the Communists. By the end of the decade, however, relations with the government had become strained and Jamaat al-Ulama sanctioned the establishment of an underground group, Hezb al-Daawa al-Islamiyya (the Islamic Call Party).

The spiritual leader of al-Daawa was the legendary Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr, a prodigy (then in his early twenties) who had been writing and lecturing on Islamic history and doctrinal matters since the age of ten. In two highly influential works, Falsafatuna (Our Philosophy, 195 and Iqtisaduna (Our Economics, 1961), Sadr refuted the argument that Islam lacked solutions to modern problems and introduced an Islamic theory of political economy. Grand Ayatollah Muhsin al-Hakim and other senior clergymen also influenced the party, though the religious establishment was careful to avoid taking overtly political stances. The operational leader of the party was Sheikh Arif al-Basri. It is important to draw some distinction between Daawa as an ideological movement and as an activist organization. The movement was marked by its progressive and inclusive ideology, which inevitably rendered it vulnerable to schisms and differentiation. The activist organization, meanwhile, was renowned for its tight discipline and fierce courage. It was this fierce activism that secured al-Daawa's reputation as the Baathist regime's most serious enemy. There is some evidence that al-Daawa as an activist organization learnt its skills and techniques from the Fadayeean-e-Eslam, a small Iranian Shiite extremist group that carried out a string of prominent assassinations in the 1950s and 1960s.[1] The distinction between the movement and the activist party was consolidated over time, as al-Daawa deployed increasingly violent methods against the Baath and its supporters.

Sadr envisioned al-Daawa indoctrinating a generation of revolutionaries who would one day seize power and establish a state that would implement Islamic law. While arguing the case for an Islamic polity aligned to the clergy, however, Sadr did not sanction clerical control of the state - the ulama's role in the Islamic state would be to oversee legislation and ensure their conformity with Islamic norms. Although this agenda was squarely unacceptable to secular political groups, it left room for collaboration with non-Shiites. Indeed, al-Daawa coordinated closely with Sunni Islamist organizations and boasted a modest Sunni membership (around 10% in 1980, according to al-Daawa's own claims). Al-Daawa activists did not confine their activities to Iraq only, but secretly formed branches in the Persian Gulf states and Lebanon; where Shiite minorities (and majorities in the case of Bahrain and Lebanon) endured varying degrees of oppression.

Al-Daawa grew rapidly in the mid-1960s, a tumultuous period of violent struggle among various secular political movements. The regime of Abd al-Salam Arif that took power in late 1963 enjoyed good relations with the Shiite religious establishment, which strongly backed the ouster of Qasim and supported Arif's crackdown on the Communists. As the government turned a blind eye toward Shiite political activities, al-Daawa organized clandestine study circles, primarily in the cities of Nasiriyah, Najaf and Karbala, which attracted a growing number of adherents. According to al-Daawa sources, the party distributed more than 1,500 copies of its underground journal at the University of Baghdad alone. A combination of clandestine techniques and the absence of a vigilant security/intelligence system in early 1960s Iraq ensured the party evaded censure and surveillance.

This "golden era" of modern Iraqi Shiite politics ended in 1968, when the Baath party took power. The new Iraqi regime shut down Risalat al-Islam, the only openly-published Shiite religious journal; closed a number of religious educational institutions, such as the Usul al-Din college in Baghdad; and issued a law requiring students at Shiite religious academies to join the armed forces.

In addition, the authorities began demanding that senior Shiite clergymen issue statements supporting government policies. When Grand Ayatollah Hakim refused to condemn the Shah of Iran over the Shatt al-Arab (Arvand Rood) dispute, the authorities arrested and tortured one of hs sons. Efforts by al-Daawa to organize protests resulted in increasingly harsh government crackdowns. Many suspected members of al-Daawa were arrested in 1972 and sentenced to short prison terms. In 1973, the organizer of a student procession in Karbala, Sahib Dakhiyl, died under torture. In 1974, the security forces detained around seventy-five al-Daawa party members and five leaders of the group (including Basri) were sentenced to death by the Revolutionary Court.

In early 1977, the Iraqi government took the bold step of banning the annual procession of Shiite worshipers from Najaf to Karbala that commemorates the martyrdom of Imam Hussein, a four-day pilgrimage that traditionally draws tens of thousands of participants. When thirty thousand marchers defied the ban, Iraqi security forces arrested hundreds of people. Scores of party activists, including Muhammad Baqir al-Hakim (who would later found the SCIRI in 1982) were subsequently rounded up on suspicion of having organized the riots.

The Transformation

It is unclear at what specific point in time the party decided to engage in violence. True to its secretive and hermetic nature Hezb al-Daawa has not produced any definitive guide to its own history. Although it is believed to have been responsible for assassinations against low-ranking Baathist officials and minor acts of sabotage during the mid-1970s and was accused in official quarters of smuggling arms into the country, al-Daawa did not embark wholeheartedly on the path of armed struggle until after the 1979 Iranian revolution. The overthrow of the Shah demonstrated to Iraqi Shiites that even the most oppressive regime, backed by a powerful security apparatus, could be defeated if Islamic ideology was employed to mobilize the masses.

Emboldened by the events next door, Sadr made repeated statements of support for the Iranian revolution and issued a fatwa prohibiting Iraqi Shiites from joining the Baath party. The Iraqi government arrested hundreds of al-Daawa members in hopes of pressuring him to denounce the revolution and retract this fatwa, but to no avail. Sadr himself was put under house arrest.

Meanwhile, Iranian financial and military assistance enabled the party to resume sabotage operations against the regime - and on a much more lethal scale. In August 1979, al-Daawa scored a major success in killing the Baathist ideologue, Dr. Ghazi al-Hariri, by bombing Baghdad's Karama hospital. After assassinating a number of other senior, but low profile, Baathists, al-Daawa carried out a failed attempt to assassinate Tariq Aziz in April 1980. Within days, the regime executed Sadr and his sister, Bint al-Huda. After his murder, Sadr assumed a posthumously legendary reputation amongst Shiites all over the world.

Al-Daawa's military wing, now named Shahid al-Sadr (The Martyr al-Sadr), steadily increased the frequency and lethality of its assassinations and sabotage operations throughout the 1980s - both inside and outside Iraq. It staged a suicide bomb attack against the Iraqi embassy in Beirut in December 1981 that claimed the lives of 27 people. This attack has been described as the first major modern suicide bombing. In July 1982, it carried out a daring attempt to kill Saddam Hussein near the town of Dujayl, resulting in fierce gun battles between Baathist security personnel and al-Daawa fighters that left 150 dead. The following month, al-Daawa bombed the Ministry of Planning, causing extensive damage and casualties. In November 1983, al-Daawa suicide bombers struck the Defense Ministry and the headquarters of the Mukhaberat (secret police) in the Mansour district of Baghdad. In April 1987, scores of al-Daawa gunmen ambushed Saddam's motorcade in Mosul, claiming the lives of several senior bodyguards of the former Iraqi leader. In December 1996, al-Daawa assassins nearly succeeded in killing Saddam's eldest son, Uday.

Iraqi government officials and buildings were not the only targets of al-Daawa operatives. Encouraged by Iranian intelligence, al-Daawa struck at Iraq's Western and Arab allies in the war against Iran. In December 1983, al-Daawa bombed the French and US embassies in Kuwait, resulting in six deaths. In May 1985, an al-Daawa suicide bomber struck the motorcade of the Kuwaiti emir in a failed assassination attempt. The party would later claim that the perpetrators of these attacks were agents who had been "hijacked" by the intelligence directorate of Iran's revolutionary guards. In any case al-Daawa and its sympathizers make great efforts in distancing their movement and party from these violent acts against Western interests and traditional Arab oligarchies allied to Washington.

The Iraqi regime seized on the increasing levels of violence, complicated by the external war against Iran, to cripple the party. Membership of al-Daawa had been made punishable by death in March 1980. In that month alone some 96 members were executed by the regime. It is known that dozens of senior activists were executed between 1982-1984. This was a devastating blow to a party that boasted no more than a thousand activists inside the country. Iraqi Intelligence services also took the war against the party outside of Iraq's borders. Prominent activists in Iran were subject to regular assassination attempts. Moreover the Iraqi security establishment scored a major coup by assassinating Mahdi al-Hakim (son of the late Grand Ayatollah Muhsin al-Hakim) in Khartoum, in January 1988. The effective security measures help explain the gradual fizzling out of the armed campaign in the late 1980s.

Al-Daawa was also active on the political front throughout the 1980s. It joined the Damascus based National Democratic Front (NDF) shortly after its formation on 28 November 1980.[2] The party used its clout to rename the NDF as the Islamic National Front (INF), but its unwillingness to work closely with the ICP and other secular groups ensured the INF's early demise.

As of the late 1980s al-Daawa has made some efforts in boosting its political activism - as opposed to its secretive militarism. Apart from its modest Tehran office, the party maintained offices and personnel in some European capitals. With the exception of Syria and Lebanon, the party mostly shunned the Arab world.[3] The party is not known to have initiated any serious lobbying activities in the West, and its offices performed primarily logistical and spiritual tasks.

SCIRI

In 1982, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI) was established in Tehran by Ayatollah Baqir al-Hakim, the son of the late Grand Ayatollah Muhsin al-Hakim. Hakim was known to have been a leading member of al-Daawa and was imprisoned for his clandestine activities in 1972, 1977 and 1979. Upon his release from prison in 1980, he fled to Iran and established an organization called Mojahedin fil Iraq, comprised mainly of former al-Daawa cadres. In 1981, the Mojahedin fil Iraq metamorphosed into the Office for the Islamic revolution in Iraq, which in turn became the SCIRI in November 1982. Unlike Sadr and most al-Daawa leaders, Hakim explicitly endorsed the concept of Velayat-e-Faghih (Guardianship of the Jursiconsult), which underpins the theocratic component of the Islamic Republic.

Unlike SCIRI, al-Daawa remained independent of the Iranian clerical establishment. In January 2000, Muhammad Mahdi Asefi was forced to resign as secretary-general of al-Daawa as a result of his attempts to fully subordinate the party to the Iranian leadership. Nonetheless, Asefi remains an influential figure in al-Daawa and, alongside Muhammad Ali Taskhiri and Kazem Haeri, represents a pro-Iranian triumvirate within al-Daawa's spiritual leadership.[4] However, it is unlikely that any of these men exert direct influence over the party's activists.

Despite its opposition to the principle of Velayat-e-Faghih, al-Daawa has historically maintained a close alliance with the much larger SCIRI. Many of SCIRI's present leaders received their political-ideological schooling in the clandestine study centers of Hezb al-Daawa. While there have been persistent reports of tensions between al-Daawa and SCIRI,[5] their close political and military co-operation continued during the 1990s, in part because Iran's mediating role has prevented the escalation of doctrinal and political disputes into open conflict.

The party has made some attempts to integrate itself with the wider opposition movement. It took a leading role in the Damascus based coordinating forum, the Joint Action Committee (JAC), and had one of its senior members, Jawad al-Maliki installed as the chairman of the JAC. The March 1991 conference of the JAC held in Beirut laid the foundation for the creation of the Iraqi National Congress in 1992. The party did not participate in the June 1992 Vienna conference that inaugurated the INC. However it did take part in the October 1992 Salahedin assembly. This ground breaking assembly held in Iraqi Kurdistan appointed a known al-Daawa sympathizer (if not a full member) Sayed Muhammad Bahr-ol-Oloom to a three man presidential council.[6] Al-Daawa withdrew from the INC in May 1995, citing its opposition to plans for a federal Iraq as the main reason behind its decision.

Although the organizational structure of the party is difficult to sketch, there have been three quasi-autonomous poles to its leadership. The Tehran branch, led by the head of the party's political bureau, Abu Bilal al-Adib, is naturally the most pro-Iranian and its elements are more sympathetic to the doctrine of Velayat-e-Faghih. The UK branch, headed by Ibrahim al-Jaafari (until his recent return to Iraq) is viewed as the most pragmatic, having maintained contacts with secular opposition forces and (unofficially) with Western governments. The Iraq branch, in which the organization's lay membership exercised more influence, has remained secretive and hermetic.

Al-Daawa and the Iraq War

Al-Daawa was officially opposed to the invasion of Iraq by American led coalition forces. It joined the Coalition of Iraqi National Forces (CINF) upon its launch in June 2002. The CINF effectively obligated its member organizations to support the overthrow of the Baathist regime without "foreign interference". The party did not participate in the December 2002 London conference, though a leader of the Ahlul Bayt World Assembly (ABWA) considered to be sympathetic to al-Daawa was appointed to the 65 member Follow up and Arrangement Committee.[7]

American led efforts to prepare the groundwork for the invasion of Iraq compelled the party to establish contact with US officials for the first time in its history. Ibrahim al-Jaafari traveled to the United States and met with Zalmay Khalilzad in January 2003.[8] Khalilzad is alleged to have offered the party 5 seats on the follow up and arrangement committee, but this was flatly rejected.[9]

The toppling of the Baathist regime enabled al-Daawa to establish itself openly in the southern and central regions of the country. It was al-Daawa that organized the first demonstrations against the US presence in Nasiriyah. The meticulous planning that had underpinned those demonstrations indicates the party had maintained an active presence in certain regions of Shiite Iraq throughout the rule of Saddam Hussein. Several key al-Daawa leaders have since returned to Iraq, most notably Ibrahim al-Jaafari and Muhammad Baqir al-Nasiri, an influential ideologue previously based in Tehran.

Although the party has not been willing to officially cooperate with the American authorities, its leaders appear intent on avoiding actions that might sabotage the delicate transition to some form of representative government in Iraq. A member of its political bureau recently told Al-Hayat that his organization "does not see any interest in a US withdrawal from Iraq at this moment."[10] Nasiri has openly criticized those who have attempted to impose strict Islamic dress codes in Shiite areas.[11] There are also some indications that the party may be cooperating with the United States in rooting out armed resistance. A recent statement by an anti-American Iraqi nationalist group accused al-Daawa of treason for "informing the occupation forces about the resistance forces."[12]

Hezb al-Daawa has proved itself to be an adaptable and resilient ideological movement and activist network. Its main challenge will be transforming itself from a secretive cell-based organization into a popular political party.

Notes

[1] The Fadayeean-e-Eslam, led by Mostafa Mir-Lowhee (Navab-e-Safavi), assassinated two of the late Shah's premiers, namely General Razm'ara in March 1951 and Hassan Ali Mansur in January 1965.
[2] The main force behind the NDF, was the Iraqi Communist Party. The NDF also included the Kurdish Democratic Party (KDP) and Kurdistan Socialist Party of Iraq (KSPI).
[3] Al-Daawa maintained an office and an extensive support network in Syria, led by Jawad al-Maliki.
[4] Muhammad Ali Taskhiri, former head of the ABWA, currently leads the influential Organization of Islamic culture and Communication (OICC). Kazem Haeri is also affiliated to both the ABWA and OCIC.
[5] The Intelligence Newsletter, 8 April 1999, reports on the arrest of senior members of al-Daawa by Iranian authorities on suspicion of involvement in a failed attempt to assassinate SCIRI leader Baqir al-Hakim.
[6] Sayed Muhammad Bahr al-Oloom was officially affiliated to the Ahlul Bayt World Assembly.
[7] The Ahlul Bayt World Assembly has its origins in Mahdi al-Hakim's Ahlul-Bayt charitable society. This organization was co-opted by the religious and propaganda organs of the Islamic Republic in the early 1980s. The ABWA is effectively a Shiite missionary organization tasked with propagating the Jaafari religion across the world.
[8] Reuters, 10 January 2003.
[9] The Los Angeles Times-Washington Post News Service, 29 January 2001.
[10] Al-Hayat (London) , 24 June 2003.
[11] Al-Zaman (London), 28 May 2003.
[12] Al-Majd (Amman), 23 June 2003.

© 2003 Middle East Intelligence Bulletin. All rights reserved.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MEIB Main Page
 
Ocean Breeze
Free Thinker
Avatar
#29
--

impeachment is lurking . Bush speech did nothing to dispell the public's qualms. More in favor of impeaching him if he lied about the reasons for the Iraq invasion. How much more proof do they need???
 
jimmoyer
Avatar
#30
8.5 million people voted in Iraq, Mrmom2. I thought you saw the links in another thread, even with Vanni having seen the same number, and posted in liberal and conservative news outlets.

8.5 million people don't really care for all the world's insistence on "understanding" the car bombers and the vest bomb clowns coming from neighboring muslim countries.

They love to watch the Justice shows depicting the catching and interrogating of these terrorist clowns. They found it necessary to spit on clown terrorist's scattered body parts.

The world doesn't find that sentiment worth spit.

But the Iraqis who voted do.

Yeah they'll be glad to see the Americans leave, but not just yet.
 

Similar Threads

95
impeachment will be heard Friday
by quandary121 | Aug 7th, 2008
16
Impeachment !! Bush jr.
by Ocean Breeze | Dec 29th, 2005
57
THE IMPEACHMENT OF PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH
by moghrabi | Nov 21st, 2005
4
Impeachment is the talk of town
by Reverend Blair | Oct 27th, 2005
no new posts