Pakistani military operations in the Swat Valley, which the government claims are coming to an end, have produced one of the most significant humanitarian crises in recent memory – and one that is going largely unnoticed.

After just the second week of the offensive, some 95% of the region’s 3 million inhabitants were displaced. During the first week of operations, 1 million people were displaced, a figure that is roughly equal to one fourth of those displaced during the entire Iraq war.

The Pakistani government isn’t known for its forethought with regards to the displacement of civilians, as was demonstrated during last year’s much smaller offensive in the Bajaur Agency during which it carried out operations against a very small insurgent force. Those Bajauri that fled the fighting ended up in many of the same refugee camps that are now populated by Swatis that have fled.

To put the immensity of the crisis into context, it is the worst of its kind since the Rwandan crisis in the 90’s. But unlike Rwanda, the speed at which it has occurred is unprecedented.

The United Nations has issued a warning that those displaced are facing a situation that could result in significant deaths if the international community does not begin to take the situation seriously. At present, only 35% of the funding requested by the United Nations to deal with the problem has been met.

Not to be a skeptic, but I wouldn’t hold your breath. We are, after all, talking about The War on Terror. As far as the West is concerned, the specter of 9/11 still casts a pall over almost everything to do with it, which is most likely why the crisis in Pakistan has been so overlooked.

The Pakistani military is currently gearing up for another offensive in South Waziristan, which many believe will rival the scope of the Swat Valley operation. That said, thousands have already begun to flee the region fearing what is to come, most into areas that are completely unable to deal with an influx of refugees.

Unfortunately, it looks as though the problem is likely to get much worse.

June 23, 2009

There’s a war on, remember? As far as Canadians are concerned, it’s the war in Afghanistan. As far was the world should be concerned, the occupation of Iraq is quickly approaching its sixth year – that’s longer than the Second World War for those of you playing along at home.

Over the last week, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have been lost in the back pages – not that they haven’t been sliding into them for some time now. But it shouldn’t be overlooked that as soon as a conflict erupts that involves Caucasians, much of the Western world’s attention immediately shifts and the degree to which gasps of concern can be heard is considerably amplified.

Let’s face it – insurgents in Iraq (and by that I am referring to guerrilla forces opposed to foreign occupation, not what is painted as al-Qaeda in Iraq by the Western media) are popularly thought of as terrorists. South Ossetian separatists aren’t, despite the fact that there is a significant Muslim minority in South Ossetia. It doesn’t matter that actual parallels can be drawn between the goals of South Ossetian separatists and Iraqi insurgents fighting to oppose a foreign power occupying their country. What does matter is the racial and religious context involved and the massive stereotyping of those of the Islamic faith since 9/11.

If you think that such an assertion ridiculous, look no further than what is currently atop the New York Times best sellers list – The Obama Nation, by Jerome R. Corsi [1]. In it, Corsi, who was also a co-author of 2004’s Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry, spends time criticizing Obama’s supposed past links with the Muslim faith, attempting to make a case that it renders him unfit for the Presidency. The book has already been widely assailed as misleading and replete with falsehoods…

“The Times further noted that while Obama is a Christian, the book contains statements indicating he has “extensive connections to Islam”. One of Corsi’s statements is that Obama’s childhood friend, Zulfin Adi, had stated that Obama was a practicing Muslim; this claim has been refuted by multiple newspapers and people close to Obama.”

The question is, what would it matter if Obama had, as a child, been a practicing Muslim, or even simply been exposed to the faith and then converted to Christianity? Even though it’s a baseless accusation, why is it something that would have to be politically denounced with regards to securing the White House? When, exactly, did Islam come to represent such a negative that a Presidential candidate has to defend himself against such literary detritus? Which leads to the inevitable question – why has Islam been denigrated in the West to the point of being viewed as universally dangerous and how, exactly, did that happen?

Well, wars need opposing ideologies to be fought, and to complicate matters only leads to the diminishment of public support. Therefore a blanket enemy ideology is something that must be promoted. To claim that 2 billion people are bent on global dominance through the employment of violence is, of course, ignorant beyond reckoning. And yet that is precisely the image that has been constructed over the last seven years and, to a significant extent, swallowed whole. That is certainly not to say that there aren’t radical elements within the Islamic world that are troublesome, but to paint an entire faith with a single brush to support an aggressive foreign policy agenda is another matter altogether – one that is mired in an evil all its own, and one that ensures that through the employment of such propaganda paints Islamic moderates into a corner.

How many innocent Iraqis and Afghans have perished since 2001 and 2003? Every time a report is released that attempts to address the realities of the civilian costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan they are immediately challenged or dismissed as overblown. And yet it is somehow perfectly reasonable to decry the loss of civilian life in Georgia as monstrous and entirely criminal in just seven days.

The United Nations is reporting that some 100,000 people have been displaced because of the recent conflict in Georgia. In comparison, as of May of this year, some 1 million Somalis were internally displaced as fighting between ICU insurgents and US backed Ethiopian forces, bolstering the forces of Somalia’s new government, continued to clash. According to Oxfam, at least 4 million Iraqis have been displaced since the 2003 invasion, some fleeing the country altogether, some relocating to other parts of it.

That’s 5 million or more people whose plight has gone largely overlooked in the West. And that’s not even counting those displaced in Darfur, the Western cause du jour.

While it might sound callous, Caucasian refugees tend to get more press, especially when it suits the political ends of Western governments. That’s just reality.

1. In the case of the sales figures of Corsi’s book it should not be overlooked that it is very common for right-wing organizations to buy such publications in bulk and then distribute them for free, rendering the actual sales figures misrepresentative.

August 15, 2008 10 Comments

In a surprising move after reports that Turkey’s offensive in northern Iraq would be sustained for the foreseeable future, Turkish forces began withdrawing yesterday in force. It shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone that the withdrawal occurred just after President Bush called on the Turkish government to end the offensive and a day after US Defense Secretary Robert Gates visited the Turkish capital to deliver Washington’s message that the incursion must not be open ended. Of course, the Turkish government and military is claiming that the withdrawal was preplanned and that it had nothing to do with US pressure, but that’s obviously transparent given the fact that the withdrawal itself began before any official Turkish statements were made regarding it.

Were I to venture a guess, I would say that behind closed doors Washington rubber stamped the Turkish invasion and then used condemnation of it to remove suspicions of complicity. And, of course, the Turks played along and got what they wanted out of it.

That would be my guess anyway.

Gaza

Here’s the back story via the BBC…

I want to state, for the record, that the use of violence by both sides in this matter is, in my opinion, unforgivable given the toll that it has taken on civilians, both at present and in years past.

That said; when one looks at this in a very hard, cold light, there are a few realities that must be addressed, though many of you might disagree.

The governing issue of Israel and Palestine as entities and the decades old arguments about how that region has found itself where it is now aside, there are a few truths that we should be willing to admit as members of a society that is primarily pro-Israeli.

The first is that Hamas is a terrorist organization, one that is supported by numerous benefactors throughout the Middle East. They fire homemade rockets into Israel from the slums of one of the world’s foremost ghettos where millions rely on international humanitarian aid to simply survive. That aid, by the way, is also one of the most outstanding examples of international blackmail in modern history.

Israel, on the other hand, is supported by the world’s foremost military super power and is the recipient of immense military aid. They possess a state of the art air force, replete with US made fighters, bombers, and attack helicopters. They possess state of the art armour and boast one of the best-trained and equipped armed forces in the world. They also possess a nuclear arsenal, a navy, and one of the world’s most feared covert intelligence outfits.

Were Palestinian militants to possess the same military capabilities as the Israelis, the need to lob homemade rockets and employ suicide bombers wouldn’t be required. In short, they would possess the same ‘honourable’ weapons of war as the Israelis and be in the position to employ them in the exact same fashion that the IDF does. That is, of course, not something that Israel, nor those that support it, would ever stand for. Thus, those who believe in the ridiculous use of violence as a measure with which to lash out against Israel wouldn’t be lobbing homemade rockets into Israel from Gaza and, in the process, endangering the lives of innocents that end up paying the price when Israeli forces retaliate – not to mention killing Israeli civilians.

That is, if you actually believe that a fair brawl between conventional forces doesn’t produce civilian deaths, which is, of course, a fallacy. In truth, they produce far more.

In this neck of the woods, the math is simple. A single Israeli life is equal to that of maybe 100 Palestinians. Let’s face it, they’re terrorists and extremists, or at least that’s what they’re painted as being by our media. The Israelis, on the other hand, are simply trying to defend themselves. Never mind the massive economic disparities between the two, never mind that Gaza is little more than a massive prison camp for all intents and purposes, which provides the sort of atmosphere in which those desperate enough are willing to focus their anger in ways that are unconscionable. If you cage an animal long enough it’s going to do one of two things. Wither away to nothing or start taking swipes through the bars at those on the other side.

Gaza is not internationally recognized as being a part of any sovereign entity, nor is it claimed by any, though it’s currency remains the Israeli Sheqel. After Hamas’ victory in Parliamentary elections in 2006, Israel, The United States, Canada, and the EU froze all funds to the Palestinian government, economically crippling it. Due to the fact that Hamas is considered a terrorist organization, it is not viewed as a legitimate governing body, even within the tenuous confines of a government that never really had any international recognition beyond that required to placate those responsible for providing it economic aid. Thus, as long as Hamas remains in power, their presence will be used as an excuse to continue to punish the people as a whole, despite the fact that it was democratically elected – a process that those who refuse to recognize it claim to champion the world over (that is, as long as it conforms to their ideology).

Now, let me state for the record that I am not defending Hamas. Obviously, the recognition of Israeli’s right to exist is something that must occur. After decades of the same tired argument, the time has come to consider the welfare of the Palestinian people as a whole, which, for some, is a bitter pill to swallow. That said; there is certainly a reason why Hamas was successful in the elections in 2006.

Gaza is 41 kilometers long and 12 kilometers wide; that’s 360 square kilometers. In that space there are 1.4 million people, 1 million of which are officially recognized by the United Nations as refugees. Some 18% of children in Gaza between the ages of 6 months and 5 years old suffer from chronic malnutrition. 53% of women of reproductive age and children are anemic. Given such facts, one can begin to see why support for an organization that undertakes initiatives within the community to secure popular support, not to mention striking at those they view as their oppressors, might attract the support of the suffering and the disenfranchised. In truth, it’s not a phenomenon that is, by any stretch of the imagination, limited to that area of the world. It is a phenomenon that has been quintessential in the birth of Western democracies and, if we’re going to be completely honest, Israel itself.

Now, you can rush out and get a copy of The National Post and succumb to the bias that we’re exposed to on a daily basis regarding this issue, or you can spend some time trying to look at it from the other side of the fence (literally). I’ll not condone the use of violence as a method with which to enact change, but I will also not condemn those that feel they have no way out of a situation that is, in truth, entirely comparable to an existence in prison. There are better ways to go about it, I will admit that freely, and also not hesitate to suggest that such methods be embraced, but I do not live in Gaza, nor do I have to endure its realities, so that position remains one of a lofty Western idealist.

The Iranian Laptop Nuke Data

Gareth Porter provides some valuable insight regarding this issue…

“The George W. Bush administration has long pushed the “laptop documents” – 1,000 pages of technical documents supposedly from a stolen Iranian laptop – as hard evidence of Iranian intentions to build a nuclear weapon. Now charges based on those documents pose the only remaining obstacles to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) declaring that Iran has resolved all unanswered questions about its nuclear program.

But those documents have long been regarded with great suspicion by US and foreign analysts. German officials have identified the source of the laptop documents in November 2004 as the Mujahideen e Khalq (MEK), which along with its political arm, the National Council of Resistance in Iran (NCRI), is listed by the US State Department as a terrorist organization.

There are some indications, moreover, that the MEK obtained the documents not from an Iranian source but from Israel’s Mossad.

In its latest report on Iran, circulated Feb. 22, the IAEA, under strong pressure from the Bush administration, included descriptions of plans for a facility to produce “green salt,” technical specifications for high explosives testing and the schematic layout of a missile reentry vehicle that appears capable of holding a nuclear weapon. Iran has been asked to provide full explanations for these alleged activities.

Tehran has denounced the documents on which the charges are based as fabrications provided by the MEK, and has demanded copies of the documents to analyze, but the United States had refused to do so.

The Iranian assertion is supported by statements by German officials. A few days after then-Secretary of State Colin Powell announced the laptop documents, Karsten Voight, the coordinator for German-American relations in the German Foreign Ministry, was reported by the Wall Street Journal Nov. 22, 2004 as saying that the information had been provided by “an Iranian dissident group.”

A German official familiar with the issue confirmed to this writer that the NCRI had been the source of the laptop documents. “I can assure you that the documents came from the Iranian resistance organization.,” the source said.

The Germans have been deeply involved in intelligence collection and analysis regarding the Iranian nuclear program. According to a story by Washington Post reporter Dafna Linzer soon after the laptop documents were first mentioned publicly by Powell in late 2004, US officials said they had been stolen from an Iranian whom German intelligence had been trying to recruit, and had been given to intelligence officials of an unnamed country in Turkey.

The German account of the origins of the laptop documents contradicts the insistence by unnamed US intelligence officials who insisted to journalists William J. Broad and David Sanger in November 2005 that the laptop documents did not come from any Iranian resistance groups.

Despite the fact that it was listed as a terrorist organization., the MEK was a favorite of neoconservatives in the Pentagon, who were proposing in 2003-2004 to use it as part of a policy to destabilize Iran. The United States is known to have used intelligence from the MEK on Iranian military questions for years. It was considered a credible source of intelligence on the Iranian nuclear program. after 2002, mainly because of its identification of the facility in Natanz as a nuclear site.

The German source said he did not know whether the documents were authentic or not. However, CIA analysts, and European and IAEA officials who were given access to the laptop documents in 2005 were very skeptical about their authenticity.

The Guardian’s Julian Borger last February quoted an IAEA official as saying there is “doubt over the provenance of the computer.”

A senior European diplomat who had examined the documents was quoted by the New York Times in November 2005 as saying, “I can fabricate that data. It looks beautiful, but is open to doubt.”

Scott Ritter, the former US military intelligence officer who was chief United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq from 1991 to 1998, noted in an interview that the CIA has the capability test the authenticity of laptop documents through forensic tests that would reveal when different versions of different documents were created.

The fact that the agency could not rule out the possibility of fabrication, according to Ritter, indicates that it had either chosen not to do such tests or that the tests had revealed fraud.”

March 1, 2008 2 Comments

In 1994, the world turned its back on Rwanda. In 100 days, some 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus were slaughtered while the international community did nothing. The Security Council sold UNAMIR down the river, events in the Balkans taking precedent over one of the most horrific and systematic acts of genocide since the Second World War.

But make no mistake; those that did nothing had their reasons. The French were flying some of the individuals involved in the masterminding of the genocide out of the country, even while it was occurring. They also supplied the Rwandan military at the time with arms. One of the revolving seats on the Security Council at the time was actually occupied by Rwanda, allowing those in power in Kigali a front row seat from which to observe the world’s response. The United States, gun shy due to previous events in Somalia, refused to intervene.

All of it led to the hobbling of any real, concerted effort that the UN could have taken. Thus, a skeleton force led by General Dallaire remained, despite the fact that the Security Council had ended UNAMIR’s mandate. Dallaire, and a handful of others, chose to remain and, at the very least, protect those that they had already given sanctuary to. In the end, they were able to save the lives of some 30,000 people without really firing a shot.

Now, consider what could have been accomplished had there been a real UN presence on the ground.

During a recent stop in Rwanda on his current tour of Africa, President Bush said the following…

“Evil must be confronted,” he said after touring the Kigali memorial.

He said the UN’s response to the crisis in Darfur “seems very bureaucratic to me, particularly with people suffering”.

Indeed it does, Mr. Bush. And being that your country has one of the most predominant voices on the Security Council, one has to wonder why more isn’t being done? True, UNAMID has been instituted, but the time for half measures has come and gone. The Sudanese government, with which your government has worked covertly, may refuse the presence of a substantial UN force in Darfur, the Chinese may very well fight you tooth and nail to stop a concerted intervention, but at least have the fortitude to make the issue one that is utterly unavoidable. Breath into it, sir, the urgency that it deserves.

There is the truth and then there is talk of it. In the case of African events of this nature, talk is all that is ever produced. The reality is that were an event comparable to Darfur to take place in, for example, the Balkans, the Western world’s actions would be considerable. In fact, it would become an issue that would dominate the headlines the world over. Unfortunately, when it comes to African nations, the horrible truth is that while the killing is occurring the world does nothing, and only after the fact laments it.

In comparison to UNAMID, UNMIK, empowered by UN resolution 1244, has been active in Kosovo since 1999. UNMIK is provided security by KFOR, which is a NATO led international force. In April of last year, KFOR’s numbers consisted of some 16,000 soldiers from 34 different nations – nine years after UNMIK’s mandate began. At its height, KFOR had 50,000 personnel in operation. As of January of this year, UNAMID, the joint UN-AU mission in Darfur, has a mere 9,065 personnel in place, of which 6,880 are soldiers, 645 are military staff and observers, 1,400 are police officers, 285 are civilian personnel, 552 are local civilian staff, and 63 and UN volunteers.

UNAMID’s actual mandate, as passed in UN resolution 1769 in July of last year, allows for – “Up to 19,555 military personnel; 6,432 police, including 3,772 police personnel and 19 formed police units comprising up to 140 personnel each; and a significant civilian component”.

So where are they?

Perhaps they’ve been employed writing speeches for the likes of Mr. Bush and other world leaders that use the issue when convenient and ignore it when it’s not.

In 1994, while the world was struggling to come to terms with the untimely death of Kurt Cobain, almost 1 million people died in Rwanda. Most of them, if not all of them, had never heard of Nirvana.

February 20, 2008 36 Comments

Daniel Ellsberg once said, and rightly so (and yes I have mentioned this on countless occasions), that foreign policy tends to have more to do with domestic politics than anything else. With regards to the US ‘surge’ in Iraq this year, the results have proven Ellsberg’s analogy true yet again.

Violence is down, reports the administration, and therefore the surge has been successful. But, as is always the case, a myriad of realities are conveniently not presented the average American with regards to what has transpired this year in Iraq. In truth, 2007 has been one of the worst years on record.

Dahr Jamail runs through Iraq’s 2007 realties…

When you’re sitting on your couch in front of your television on a leisurely Sunday afternoon and the news regarding ‘successes’ in Iraq are presented you, these are the details that are not revealed. And because the situation in Iraq is presented the American public in the simplest of terms, the belief that real progress has been made is becoming the norm.

The truth, on the other hand, isn’t as positive, and therefore it’s best not to delve too deeply beneath the surface.

With a day left in 2007, the United States has now militarily occupied Iraq for almost five years, longer than their entire involvement in the Second World War.

December 30, 2007 18 Comments