|
Tuesday, January 17, 2012. Chaos and violence continue, Iraqiya talks
withdrawing support for the current government, Nouri gears up to air a second
series of 'confessions' about Tareq al-Hashemi on TV, the Turkish government is
not please with Nouri's attacks on their leadership, and more.
If you see someone shot dead in front of you on a city block and you turn
that into "Person falls," you're stupid, you're useless and you should probably
limit your social contacts because you have nothing to offer to anyone. Meet
Reuters and AFP. They're wire services, supposely reporting
news. But you wouldn't know that when they fail to cover what happens
accurately.
Nouri al-Maliki has yet again claimed power he doesn't have. That's the
story unless you're being willfully stupid. If you're being willfully stupid --
like Reuters and AFP -- you instead 'report' that the
Cabinet has decided to bar three Iraqiya ministers.
There is no such power in the Constitution. If you want to get rid of
minister, you have to go through Parliament. There is no power to put a
minister on suspension or to block them or to penalize them. They are a
minister or they are not one.
Saddam Hussein wouldn't have risen to power if the press had done their
watchdog role. But they don't do it. And they waste everyone's time with
nonsense and garbage while at the same time allowing Nouri to break the laws.
Again.
Nouri's position allows him to nominate people to head ministries and they
become ministers if Parliament then agrees with the nomination and votes in
favor of it. Then they are ministers and remain ministers unless/until (a) they
die while serving, (b) they choose to resign or (c) the prime minister asks
Parliament to remove them and Parliament agrees to. That process was not
followed. Nouri has yet again refused to follow the law.
The Minister of Finance Rafie al-Esawi, the Minister of Science and
Technology Abdul Karim Ali Yasin al-Samarrai and the Minister of Education Dr.
Mohammed Ali Mohammed Tamim Jubouri. Reuters identifies al-Esawi but fails to
identify the other two. Were the posts barred? No, the people were. So your
job, pay attention, requires that you name the three. Those are the three (if
Reuters identified the offices correctly -- big if judging by their
other work today). [ Reuters is capable of much stronger reporting --
see this piece on the drone war by former New
York Times correspondent David Rohde.]
When Nouri breaks the law and/or circumvents the Constitution, if the press
doesn't call him out, a message is sent. And it's the same little pieces of
encouragement that helped create Saddam Hussein. That's not to let the US
government off the hook (Saddam Hussein was a US ally for years) but it is
noting that the press has tremendous power -- or rather the potential for
tremendous power -- which is repeatedly fails to use. There's a reason for the
current crawl across al-Samarrai's website but the press can't tell you that
because the press can't even tell you his name.
Today Nouri manages to break the Constitution
again. Khalid Al Ansary and Nayla
Razzouk (Bloomberg News) report that he placed "all eight
government ministers from the Sunni Muslim-backed al-Iraqiya alliance on leave"
according to his spokesperon Ali al-Musawi. Where in the country's constitution
does that power exist?
Oh, right, it doesn't. Those eight ministers were
confirmed in their posts by Parliament (in other words they're not 'acting'
anything, they are the ministers, per the Constitution). His only power after a
minister is confirmed by Parliament? Outlined in Article 75:
The Prime Minister is
the direct executive authority responsible for the general policy of the State
and the commander in chief of the armed forces. He directs the Council of
Ministers, and presides over its meetings and has the right to dismiss the
Ministers on the consent of the Council of Representatives.
He is not allowed to strip a minister of their
post without the consent of Parliament. Iraqiya has been boycotting the Cabinet
and Parliament -- this started last month over the failure of Nouri to live up
to the Erbil Agreement that ended the eight month political stalemate following
the March 2010 elections. If Nouri now wants the ministers dismissed -- for any
reason -- he needs to go to Parliament.
He has no right to put them on "leave." There is
nothing in the Constitution that gives him this right. Per the Constitution, a
Minister can only be stripped of their post (which would include their duties)
if the Parliament agrees to it. The Parliament still hasn't set a date on
hearing Nouri's demand from last month (December 17th) that Deputy Prime
Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq be stripped of his post. They certainly haven't agreed
to strip eight ministers of their post.
Since then, Al Mada has quoted Nouri's advisor Adel Berwari
admitting that Nouri doesn't have the power to replace ministers. Nor does he
have the power to suspend or bar them. If Baghdad had a functioning and
independent court, the smartest thing for any of the three would be to file
charges against Nouri on this issue and a real court would rule that "barring" a
minister is the same as "firing" one, that the Constitution outlines how you
remove a minister and that the process has not been followed. Martin Chulov (Guardian)
offers this analysis of the political crisis: The move by the prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, in
mid-December against the country's Sunni vice-president, Tariq al-Hashemi, was
always going to be provocative. Maliki, who in a recent interview said his
primary identity was Shia, insists Hashemi was directing hit squads. He said he
had known about the vice-president's "terror activities" for years, but had
waited for the right time to go after him. The moment he chose could not have
been more potent – the US army had hardly shut the gate into Kuwait behind them.
The remaining strongman in town was marking his patch. The rest of Iraq would
have to live with it.Maliki would surely have expected a backlash. He has
never been popular with the country's disenfranchised Sunnis and has had a
workable, though strained, relationship with the increasingly disengaged Kurds.
Yet he doesn't seem to have factored in the strength of the resentment -- and
its capacity to seriously undermine the power base he seems intent on building
for himself.Iraq now finds itself at a juncture that in many ways
is more dangerous and instructive than the darkest days of 2006, when all
remnants of state control crumbled as sectarian war took hold. Back then there
was no expectation the state could lead Iraq to a better place. Six years on,
and with violence much lower, Iraqis have even less faith in the state, despite
it being much better placed -- at face value -- to provide for its
citizens.
A political crisis is a serious issue and it does matter whether or not the
law is followed. Reporters do no one any favors by refusing to note when
someone attempts a power-grab.
AP doesn't give a number of ministers
'suspended' but their report indicates it was more than three and they quote
Iraqiya spokesperson Maysoun Damluji stating, "It's an escalation by al-Maliki
to push Iraqiya away."
Nouri kicked off the political crisis last month by demanding that Deputy
Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq be stripped of his post and that al-Hashemi be
charged with terrorism. Both al-Mutlaq and al-Hashemi are members of Iraqiya,
Nouri's political rivals and the political slate that came in first place in the
March 2010 elections. Gavriel Queenann (Israel National News) reports that
Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq is calling for Nouri to step down
and quotes him stating, "The longer Al Maliki stays in power, the higher the
possibility of a divided Iraq."
Al Mannarah's Talk interviews Iraqi Vice
President Tareqq al-Hashemi and the first question is, if you're innocent why
did you flee arrest? al-Hashemi explains he did not run away (he went to the KRG
for meetings, after he was in the KRG, the arrest warrant was issued, he's
remained in the KRG since). On holding a trial in Baghdad, he states he doesn't
trust the Baghdad judiciary. He is asked why the call for transferring the
hearing to Erbil switched to Kirkuk and he explains that Baghdad and Kirkuk are
part of the same legal system while the KRG is an independent judiciary
(apparently meaning, Kirkuk would just require a transfer of locations; whereas
Erbil couldn't execute a trial based on charges from Baghdad). But if Baghdad
and Kirkuk are under the same umbrella, why not the same concerns about Kirkuk
that he has regarding Baghdad? He replies that Kirkuk (and the judiciary in
Kirkuk) has its own security operations and is not dependent upon Nouri for
security. He states he doesn't trust the government, meaning Nouri al-Maliki,
and that Nouri cannot tolerate opposition voices, Nouri can't stomach criticism
of his failed administration. He notes the human rights violations that take
place in Iraq under Nouri's leadership. He does not call Nouri a dictator when
asked, saying that they would have to agree on the definition first.
Aswat al-Iraq notes that some of
al-Hashemi's bodyguards are supposed to testify (on TV) against him. If that
happens, Nouri will again be in violation of the Constitution. Though US outlets
ignored it, Nouri tried to lie and claim that he never wanted Tareq charged with
terrorism and that he (Nouri) was at the mercy of the Iraqi courts. As he made
the rounds with that lie, Nouri was confronted with a number of issues including
the airing of 'confessions' and how that did not jibe with the Constiutiton's
presumption of innocence clause. Nouri played dumb. Is he now going to try to
pretend yet again that he had no idea confessions were airing? This Alsumaria TV report on the same rumors (televised
confessions) is of interest solely for establishing a timeline. (As we have
repeatedly noted, there was no arrest warrant issued when Tareq al-Hashemi went
to the KRG. This has the warrant issued on December 19th -- same as past
timelines -- but adds that the first 'confessions' were made on the 19th --
that's new to the story -- and it was based upon these confessions that an
arrest warrant was issued that day. Alsumaria TV's source is Baghdad Operations
Command Brig Gen Qassim Atta.) Among other questions this should raise is why
these 'unforced' confessions backed up claims being made by Nouri and others
before the 'confessions' were made? Why was Tareq al-Hashemi's home surrounded
by tanks starting December 16th?
Not content with starting a political crisis in Iraq, Nouri apparently
wants to spread it throughout the region. As noted Friday, step one was unleashing the
crazy on Turkey. Saturday Al
Mada noted that Nouri was declaring that the remarks of
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan would cause a catastrophe.
Hyperbole's always been a part of Nouri's make up. Kitabat also noted Nouri's attack
on Erdogan and how he accuses Erdogan's call for Iraq to resolve the political
crisis as Turkey interfering in Iraq's domestic affairs. You've heard of a pep
squad? Well Nouri has a thug squad. And Al
Mada reported various State of Law MPs, on Saturday,
joined Nouri in attacking Edrogan and the country of Turkey. Today's Zaman observed Sunday, "Iraqi
Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's harsh criticism of Turkey for what he
considered interference in the domestic realm of Iraq is sure to draw the ire of
Turkey, as observers have already labeled Maliki's reaction 'a regrettable move'
that will undermine his capacity to cooperate with neighbors that are hoping for
stability in Iraq." Today Joe Parkinson and Sam Dagher
(Wall St. Journal) offer that
"analysts say the rapid deterioration of relations between Ankara and Baghdad
also reflects the wider conflicting interests of Sunni Turkey and Shiite Iran in
the wake of the U.S. drawdown from Iraq and of the Arab Spring, now lapping at
the borders of both Iraq and Turkey, in Syria." But do analysts point out why
Nouri should real it in?
Forget the destrucitve nature his attacks cause within the region, he
should at least be interested in the fact that the US sold Turkey drones that
were intended to be used for spying on northern Iraq. That's not a secret. It
was reported in December, widely reported. Is it really in your interest to
launch an attack on leaders of a country that have the equipment to spy on you?
In addition, Turkey's been bombing northern Iraq for years. It is really in
Nouri or Iraq's interest to try to tick off the leadership in Turkey right
now?
When Nouri pulls out the crazy, he apparently doesn't think too well. Monday Iraq's Ministry of Foreign
Affairs issued the following: Foreign Ministry Undersecretary Muhammad Jawad al
Dorki Summoned the Turkish Ambassador in Baghdad, Younis Demirar
.Mr. al Dorki transferred the Iraqi
government's concern of the recent statements made by the Turks officials
related to the internal affairs of Iraq which would impact negatively on
relations between the two countries, and requested him to convey that to his
government and the need to avoid anything that might disturb the good bilateral
relations.For his part, the Turkish
Ambassador stressed that the Turks officials' statements were in good intention,
adding that he will inform his government in Ankara with the Iraqi side
position.The two sides confirmed
their countries' keenness to sustain their relationship .The meeting was attended by Dr. Walid Sheltagh, Head
of the Neighboring Countries Department .
Reuters noted, "Iraqi officials did
not specify what Turkish remarks they were angry about, but the complaint
appeared to stem from comments earlier this month by Turkish Prime Minister
Tayyip Erdogan, who said a Sunni-Shi'ite conflict in Iraq, if unleashed, could
engulf the entire Islamic world." Yes, it seems Nouri is determined to expand
the political crisis beyond Iraq. Aswat al-Iraq added Iraqiya MP
Hamid al-Mutlaq states that "Nouri al-Maliki [has] the responsibility for
security deterioration in his capacity as Commander in Chief of the armed forces
and the first responsible authority for the security ministries." Today Sevil Kucukkosum (Hurriyet Daily News) notes the
reactions of some Turkish officials including this: In a separate reaction, Omer Celik, deputy leader of
the Justice and Development Party (AKP), slammed al-Maliki through his Twitter
account. Describing al-Maliki as the
leader of an organization rather than a state and his statements as imprudent,
Celik said, "Words targeting Turkey are not compatible with the responsibility
of the 'Iraqi Prime Minister.' He is fulfilling 'other
responsibilities.'"Accusing al-Maliki
of aiming to run a Shiite-dominated country, Celik warned that Iraq might be a
satellite country in the future under his rule. "From now on Iraq has a serious al-Maliki problem.
Turkey has no problem with Iraq and fully supports Iraq's unity," Celik
said.And Daniel Dombey (Financial Times of London)
quotes an unnamed Turkish official stating, "What they [Iraq] need is a
sense of national unity rather than political factionalism. . . . The Iraqis
will have to work together on this but of course those who are in a position of
power have a greater responsibility." Idrees Mohammed (Middle East Online)
notes: The rift rises between
Iraq and Turkey as Iraq summons Turkish ambassador to call on his government to
consider the "necessity of avoiding anything that might disturb" the ties. The
move comes amid the already chilly atmosphere between Ankara and Baghdad due to
the former's attitude to the latter's Shiite-led government's action to arrest
Iraq's Vice President. Turkish Prime Minister warned his Iraqi counterpart over
the action, warning that his action will hurt the country's democracy and urging
him to reduce the tension. His calls were harshly slammed by Iraqi Prime
Minister who expressed surprise of Turkey's "interference" in his country's
internal affairs, declaring his determination not to "allow that
absolutely."Iraq passes through a
dangerous period as the "big mosaic rock" between Shiite and Sunni ultimately
exploded, causing an unprecedented political turmoil and uproar in "new Iraq."
The Kurds found themselves automatically involved in the game which as well
attracted several countries including the United States, Turkey and Iran
primarily. Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Syria are reckoned sides to the turmoil.
Unless a compromise is reached, the domestic, regional and even international
risks are high.
In Iraq, Aswat al-Iraq reports that MP Khalid
al-Alwani states that Iraqiya is prepared to call for a withdrawal of confidence
in Nouri al-Maliki if a national conference fails to solve the current crisis
and issues.
Such an action should take place for a number of reasons. Politically,
there's Nouri's failure to honor the Erbil Agreement (other than honoring that
it made him prime minister-designate). There's also the security issues. First
and foremost, over a year after he became prime minister, he's still been
unable/unwilling to name a Minister of Defense, a Minister of Interior or a
Minister of National Security. Those are the three security posts. Iraq's
seeing horrific violence of late and some of that may be a result of having no
one to head those ministries for over a full year. Security also includes
inadequate planning. From Friday's snapshot:
And Press TV
reports this morning that 35,000 security forces are
now being deployed to protect the pilgrims. The question is, since Arbaeen ends
tomorrow, and since the pilgrims have been attacked since last weekend, why,
only now, are these 35,000 being deployed? Sam Dagher and Ali A.
Nabhan (Wall St. Journal) report, "Iraq's
Shiite-led government took unprecedented security measures Friday to protect
Shiite Muslim pilgrims observing the high point of a religious occasion from
attacks by extremists. Meanwhile, car bombs targeted officials in the polarized
and volatile northern city of Kirkuk."
Why only then? A question that became more pertinent Saturday when
southern Iraq was slammed with a major bombing on the last day of Arbaeen. Anne Barker (Australia's ABC
News) reported it was a suicide bomber, in a police uniform, who
detonated in Basra, taking his own life and over fifty others with over one
hundred people left injured. The Telegraph of London noted, "The
attack happened on the last of the 40 days of Arbain, when hundreds of thousands
of Shi'ite pilgrims from Iraq and abroad visit the Iraqi city of Kerbala, as
well as other holy sites. Saturday's blast occurred near the town of Zubeir as
pilgrims marched toward the Shi'ite Imam Ali shrine on the outskirts of the
town, said Ayad al-Emarah, a spokesman for the governor of Basra province." Alsumaria TV
explained, "Al Khotwa Mosque, situated near Al Basra city on the
eastern entrance of Al Zubair District center, was the second mosque built
following Al Masjid Al Nabawi in the city of Medina, and the first one to be
built outside KSA. Imam Ali Bin Abi Taleb prayed, during Al Jamal battle in 36
AH, at Al Khotwa mosque which bears a significant importance for Shiites who
mass up by thousands in the mosque on religious occasions." Michael S. Schmidt and Duraid (New York
Times) reported 64 dead from the attack.
And the violence continues. Today Reuters reports 1 person was shot dead
in front of his Tuz Khurmato home, a Mosul bombing which claimed the lives of 3
police officers (three more were injured), a Baquba sticky bombing which claimed
the life of 1 Sahwa, a Falluja roadside bombing which left two Iraqi soldiers
injured and an attack on a Rutba police checkpoint which left 5 police officers
dead.
Another reason Nouri should be challenged is his inability to stick to the
budget he proposes. Abbas Zaidi (Al Mada) reports that, in 2011, the
government spent $7 billion more than they budgeted for -- in Iraq this is
illegal.
In the United States, Senator Patty Murray is the Chair of the Senate
Veterans Affairs Committee and her Committee has just announced their winter
hearings schedule:
Committee on Veterans' Affairs
United States Senate
112th Congress, Second Session
Hearing Schedule
Update: January 17, 2012
Wednesday, February 8th, 2012 10 am SR-418
Hearing: The Fiscaly Year 2012 Budget for Veterans'
Programs
Tuesday, February 28th, 2012 2:30 pm 345 Cannon
HOB
Joint Hearing: Legislative Presentation of the Disabled American
Veterans (DAV)
Wednesday, February 29th, 2012 10 am SR-418
Hearing: Ending Homelessness Among Veternas: VA's Progress on its 5
Year Plan
Wednesday, March 7th, 2012 10 am SDG-50
Joint Hearing: Legislative Presentation of the Veterans of Foreign
Wars (VFW)
Wednesday, March 21st, 2012 10 am SDG-50
Joint Hearing: Legislative Presentation of the Military Order of
the Purple Heart, IAVA, Non Commissioned Officers Association, American
Ex-Prisoners of War, VietnamVeterans of America, Wounded Warrior Project,
National Association of State Directors of Veternas Affairs, and the Retired
Enlisted Association
Thursday, March 22nd, 2012 10 am 345 Cannon
HOB
Joint Hearing: Legislative Presenation of the Paralyzed Veterans of
America, Air Force Sergeants Association, Blinded Veterans Association, AMVETS,
Gold Star Wives, Fleet Reserve Association, Miltiary Officers Association of
America and the Jewish War Veterans.
Matthew T. Lawrence
Chief Clerk/System Administrator
Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs
202-224-9126
| 
No comments:
Post a Comment