|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Feature
|
|
News :: Civil & Human Rights : Elections & Legislation : Government Secrecy : International Relations : Iraq : Political-Economy |
|
Americans Refuse Proposed Cease-Fire in Iraq (translated from Asahi Shinbun) |
Current rating: 0 |
by Mink!
Email: mink (nospam) tcp.com (unverified!) |
29 Jan 2005
|
|
Working through the "Committee of Islamic Relgious People," a group claiming to be the unified front of Sunni Iraqi militants proposes an end to hostilities if there is a pullout within
three years. The Americans refuse.
The article is translated from Asahi Shinbun morning edition of January 30th (published in Tokyo, Japan) by Mink! |
|
Ten Sunni Islamic armed groups in Iraq have created a unified command, and
concerning the National Assembly elections to be held on the 30th, wrote a
proposal for cease-fire upon conditions such as "The American Army pulls
out within three years," it has been discovered. This proposal was shown to
the American Embassy at the beginning of January, but the Americans refused it.
This is the first time that the anti-American militants have shown any
scenario that would lead to a cease-fire. This may play an important role
in the governmental process from this point forward, as well.
The organization is the "Islamic Peoples Resistance League." According to the
leaders of their unified command, when the Americans attacked Falluja in
April of last year, three local groups first unified, and then the organization increased
in scope.
The leadership says, "Our fighting membership is 50,000 people. We comprise
40 percent of the armed militants across Iraq." Islamic extremists such
as the "Al-Qaeda in Iraq" group which confessed to actions such as the
kidnapping and murder of Japanese hostages are not members of the alliance,
they say.
In statements from the leadership, the proposal for a cease-fire was drawn
up at a meeting of representatives of the ten armed member groups at the
end of December last year. The proposal requests things such as:
- American armed forces will completely withdraw from Iraq within three
years
- American armed forces will withdraw from urban areas within six months,
and the upcoming elections will also be postponed for that six months
- Release of political prisoners
- Change the format of the election from the current proportional
representation to a form of individual election districts where the
units are states
The proposal stated that if the Americans accepted this proposal, the
group would stop attacks
against the American armed forces and the Iraqi police and Iraqi army,
and the Sunni affiliated factions would also participate in the election,
they said.
According to the leadership, this proposal was communicated to the
American embassy at the beginning of January via someone affiliated
with the American armed forces. It was also sent to the "Committee of
Islamic Religious People" which has had influence in securing the release
of foreign hostages.
About the relationship with the "Committee of the Religious," the
leadership of the militant group explained that "They have the same
position on issues such as asking the American armed forces to withdraw,
and they are a group who will express our position on our behalf."
They added that "American ambassador Negroponte then held discussions
with representative Da-ri of the Committee. We received word that the
Americans answered that they cannot clearly express any timetable for
withdrawal."
The meeting between the American embassy officials and the "Committee
of the Religious" was said to have taken place on January 8th. The
American embassy has admitted to the AP news service that they
"exchanged opinions."
The Middle East satellite channel "Al Jazeera" also reported that "The Committee
of the Religious responded to the American embassy, which was seeking
Sunni participation in the elections, with a request that the Americans
show a timetable for withdrawal, but the Americans refused." Sunni
religious organizations and main political parties are boycotting the
upcoming elections as a protest against the American armed forces
clean sweep attack on the city of Falluja in November of last year.
|
See also:
http://www.asahi.com/international/update/0130/003.html
|
Related stories on this site:
Sunnis search for a political solution - stress differences with Al-Qaeda (more Asahi Shinbun)
The Tragedy of American Diplomacy in Iraq
| 
This work is in the public domain. |
Comments
|
Re: Americans Refuse Proposed Cease-Fire in Iraq (translated from Asahi Shinbun) |
by karl roenfanz ( rosey )
k_rosey48 (nospam) hotmail,com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
29 Jan 2005
|
|
three years is a resonable time line to get the iraqis military trained ,and the americans out. sounds like the typical christian right to refuse! |
|
Re: Americans Refuse Proposed Cease-Fire in Iraq (translated from Asahi Shinbun) |
by Trevor
Nothingnothing_2004 (nospam) yahoo.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
29 Jan 2005
|
I must have made a mistake I thought I read somewhere that in the UN resolution giving the Coalition forces (led by the United States) powers of occupation and reconstruction, including access to frozen accounts and oil export.
In which it clearly states that the coalition mandate was to expire on Dec. 31, 2005, unless a democratically elected government backed by a constitution asks them to stay on for security.
Why would we not agree to this since we will be gone by the end of the year anyway? |
|
Re: Americans Refuse Proposed Cease-Fire in Iraq (translated from Asahi Shinbun) |
by Kirkrrt
kirkgina (nospam) mindspring.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
30 Jan 2005
|
|
This is reminds me that the Saudi's made an offer to pay for an all muslem force to assist with the occupation and elections. It was rejected because those forces wouldn't be under US control. At least that was the official reason given. |
|
Re: Americans Refuse Proposed Cease-Fire in Iraq (translated from Asahi Shinbun) |
by Mike
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
02 Feb 2005
|
Yes, I would put that right up there with their picture of a "captured" toy action figure as another feeble attempt to delay the elections. Thank God (or Allah, if you prefer) that you folks at IMC aren't in charge and those that are, are not that gullible.
Hey Look!! I've got your nose!! |
|
Just A Note of Verification |
by finds ignorant rightwing trolls should be ignored since their fantasy of problems going away is delusional
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
02 Feb 2005
|
Iraqi Sunni Clerics: Election Lacked Legitimacy
by Lin Noueihed
BAGHDAD - Leading Sunni clerics declared on Wednesday that any government emerging from Iraq's historic election would lack legitimacy because many people had boycotted a poll they said was tainted by a U.S.-led occupation.
Iraqis defied militants' threats and flocked to the polls on Sunday in the Shi'ite south and Kurdish north, but many in the central Sunni Arab heartland -- where the 22-month-old anti-American insurgency is strongest -- stayed home.
While the Bush administration insisted the election was conducted fairly and world leaders heaped praise on Iraqi voters, Iraq's Muslim Clerics' Association railed against the country's first multi-party ballot in half a century.
"These elections lack legitimacy because a large segment of different sects, parties and currents ... boycotted," the Sunni religious group said in a statement as the vote count proceeded.
"This means the coming national assembly and government that will emerge will not possess the legitimacy to enable them to draft the constitution or sign security or economic agreements."
A sense of alienation among minority Sunni Arabs, who formed the backbone of Saddam Hussein's ruling class, poses a major challenge to Iraq's new leadership, which is certain to be dominated by members of the long-oppressed Shi'ite majority.
Many Iraqis fear the election results, which are expected to be finalized early next week, could fuel the Sunni-led insurgency and foment sectarian strife. Al Qaeda's wing in Iraq has vowed to pursue "holy war."
"We warn the United Nations and the international community of the danger of granting these elections legitimacy because this will open a door of evil and they will be the first to bear responsibility," the clerics' group said.
In fresh violence on Wednesday, four Iraqis -- two soldiers and two civilians -- were killed in separate roadside bombings in Samarra, and saboteurs blew up part of an oil pipeline running from northern oil fields to a refinery near Baghdad.
A Shi'ite leader claiming victory in the elections said on Tuesday he wanted all groups, including Sunni Arabs, to help shape Iraq's future.
Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, who tops the candidate list of the United Iraqi Alliance drawn up with the blessing of revered Shi'ite cleric Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, said he was reaching out to all ethnic and religious groups.
SUNNI CLERICS STAND FIRM
But the Sunni clerics stood firm. They had urged an election boycott in protest at U.S.-led assaults on Sunni cities and said the poll could not be fair with foreign troops on Iraqi soil.
"All Iraqi people are waiting for the opportunity to hold comprehensive, free and just elections that have legitimacy ... after the withdrawal of the occupation," the Sunni group said.
Iraqis voted for a 275-member transitional national assembly that will appoint a government and draft a constitution to be approved by referendum in October.
Despite its rejection of the polls, the clerics said they would respect the decision of Iraqis who voted but would regard the new government as having only limited powers.
The group met a senior U.S. embassy official before the elections and offered to drop its boycott if Washington set a timetable for troop withdrawal. The official refused.
Interim leaders say it is too early to ask foreign troops to leave until the country's security forces are built up.
Emboldened by their role in thwarting attacks on election day, the chief of police in Iraq's main northern Sunni city of Mosul has given insurgents two weeks to hand over all arms.
"Hand over your weapons or we will come and get you," Brigadier Mohammed Ahmed al-Jabouri said on a TV station to guerrillas in and around Iraq's third largest city.
It marked a turnaround in Mosul. Two months ago, virtually the entire police force deserted after rebels overran police stations. The police chief was sacked and Jabouri was appointed.
Across the country, police and soldiers backed by U.S.-led forces were credited with preventing a bloodbath at the polls.
But no one is claiming the insurgency is over, or even seriously weakened. Guerrillas still managed to kill 35 people on Sunday.
Additional reporting by Luke Baker and Khaled Yacoub Oweis in Baghdad and Maher al-Thanoon in Mosul. Writing by Matt Spetalnick, editing by Tim Pearce
© 2005 Reuters Ltd
http://www.reuters.com |
|
Train Wreck of an Election |
by James Carroll
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
02 Feb 2005
|
In thinking about the election in Iraq, my mind keeps jumping back to last week's train wreck in California. A deranged man, intending suicide, drove his Jeep Cherokee onto the railroad tracks, where it got stuck. The onrushing train drew near. The man suddenly left his vehicle and leapt out of the way. He watched as the train crashed into his SUV, derailed, jackknifed, and hit another train. Railroad cars crumbled. Eleven people were killed and nearly 200 were injured, some gravely. The deranged man was arrested. Whatever troubles had made him suicidal in the first place paled in comparison to the trouble he has now.
Iraq is a train wreck. The man who caused it is not in trouble. Tomorrow night he will give his State of the Union speech, and the Washington establishment will applaud him. Tens of thousands of Iraqis are dead. More than 1,400 Americans are dead. An Arab nation is humiliated. Islamic hatred of the West is ignited. The American military is emasculated. Lies define the foreign policy of the United States. On all sides of Operation Iraqi Freedom, there is wreckage. In the center, there are the dead, the maimed, the displaced -- those who will be the ghosts of this war for the rest of their days. All for what?
Tomorrow night, like a boy in a bubble, George W. Bush will tell the world it was for "freedom." He will claim the Iraqi election as a stamp of legitimacy for his policy, and many people will affirm it as such. Even critics of the war will mute their objections in response to the image of millions of Iraqis going to polling places, as if that act undoes the Bush catastrophe.
There is only one way in which the grand claims made by Washington for the weekend voting will be true -- and that is if the elections empower an Iraqi government that moves quickly to repudiate Washington. The only meaning "freedom" can have in Iraq right now is freedom from the US occupation, which is the ground of disorder. But such an outcome of the elections is not likely. The chaos of a destroyed society leaves every new instrument of governance dependent on the American force, even as the American force shows itself incapable of defending against, much less defeating, the suicide legions. The irony is exquisite. The worse the violence gets, the longer the Americans will claim the right to stay. In that way, the ever more emboldened -- and brutal -- "insurgents" do Bush's work for him by making it extremely difficult for an authentic Iraqi source of order to emerge. Likewise the elections, which, as universally predicted, have now ratified the country's deadly factionalism.
Full blown civil war, if it comes to that, will serve Bush's purpose, too. All the better if Syria and Iran leap into the fray. In such extremity, America's occupation of Iraq will be declared legitimate. America's city-smashing tactics, already displayed in Fallujah, will seem necessary. Further "regime change" will follow. America's ad hoc Middle East bases, meanwhile, will have become permanent. Iraq will have become America's client state in the world's great oil preserve. Bush's disastrous and immoral war policy will have "succeeded," even though no war will have been won. The region's war will be eternal, forever justifying America's presence. Bush's callow hubris will be celebrated as genius. Congress will give the military machine everything it needs to roll on to more "elections." These outcomes, of course, presume the ongoing deaths of tens of thousands more men, women, and children. And American soldiers.
Something else about that California train wreck strikes me. As news reports suggested, so many passengers were killed and injured because the locomotive was pushing the train from behind, which put the lightweight passenger coaches vulnerably in front. If, instead, the heavy, track-clearing locomotive had been leading and had hit the Jeep, it could have pushed the vehicle aside. The jack-knifing and derailment would not have occurred. The American war machine is like a train running in "push-mode," with the engineer safely back away from danger. In the train wreck of Iraq, it is passengers who have borne the brunt. The man with his hand on the throttle couldn't be more securely removed from the terrible consequences of his locomotion. Thus, Bush is like the man who caused the wreck, and like the man who was protected from it. Deranged. Detached. Alive and well in the bubble he calls "freedom," receiving applause.
James Carroll's column appears regularly in the Globe. His most recent book is "Crusade: Chronicles of an Unjust War."
© 2005 Boston Globe
http://www.boston.com/ |
|
