|
America's war of 'liberation' may
be over
Baghdad - It's
going wrong, faster than anyone could have imagined. The army of
"liberation" has already turned into the army of occupation.
The Shias are threatening to fight the Americans, to create their own
war of "liberation".
At night on every one of the Shia
Muslim barricades in Sadr City, there are 14 men with automatic
rifles. Even the US Marines in Baghdad are talking of the insults
being flung at them. "Go away! Get out of my face!" an
American soldier screamed at an Iraqi trying to push towards the wire
surrounding an infantry unit in the capital yesterday. I watched the
man's face suffuse with rage. "God is Great! God is Great!"
the Iraqi retorted.
"Fuck you!"
The Americans have now issued a
"Message to the Citizens of Baghdad", a document as colonial
in spirit as it is insensitive in tone. "Please avoid leaving
your homes during the night hours after evening prayers and before the
call to morning prayers," it tells the people of the city.
"During this time, terrorist forces associated with the former
regime of Saddam Hussein, as well as various criminal elements, are
known to move through the area ... please do not leave your homes
during this time. During all hours, please approach Coalition military
positions with extreme caution ..."
So now with neither electricity
nor running water the millions of Iraqis here are ordered to stay
in their homes from dusk to dawn. Lockdown. It's a form of
imprisonment. In their own country. Written by the command of the 1st
US Marine Division, it's a curfew in all but name.
"If I was an Iraqi and I read
that," an Arab woman shouted at me, "I would become a
suicide bomber." And all across Baghdad you hear the same thing,
from Shia Muslim clerics to Sunni businessmen, that the Americans have
come only for oil, and that soon very soon a guerrilla
resistance must start. No doubt the Americans will claim that these
attacks are "remnants" of Saddam's regime or "criminal
elements". But that will not be the case.
Marine officers in Baghdad were
holding talks yesterday with a Shia militant cleric from Najaf to
avert an outbreak of fighting around the holy city. I met the prelate
before the negotiations began and he told me that "history is
being repeated". He was talking of the British invasion of Iraq
in 1917, which ended in disaster for the British.
Everywhere are the signs of collapse.
And everywhere the signs that America's promises of
"freedom" and "democracy" are not to be honoured.
Why, Iraqis are asking, did the
United States allow the entire Iraqi cabinet to escape? And they're
right. Not just the Beast of Baghdad and his two sons, Qusay and Uday,
but the Vice-President, Taha Yassin Ramadan, the Deputy Prime
Minister, Tariq Aziz, Saddam's personal adviser, Dr A K Hashimi, the
ministers of defence, health, the economy, trade, even Mohammed Saeed
al-Sahaf, the Minister of Information who, long ago, in the days
before journalists cosied up to him, was the official who read out the
list of executed "brothers" in the purge that followed
Saddam's revolution relatives of prisoners would dose themselves
on valium before each Sahaf appearance.
Here's what Baghdadis are noticing
and what Iraqis are noticing in all the main cities of the
country. Take the vast security apparatus with which Saddam surrounded
himself, the torture chambers and the huge bureaucracy that was its
foundation. President Bush promised that America was campaigning for
human rights in Iraq, that the guilty, the war criminals, would be
brought to trial. The 60 secret police headquarters in Baghdad are
empty, even the three-square-mile compound headquarters of the Iraqi
Intelligence Service.
I have been to many of them. But
there is no evidence even that a single British or US forensic officer
has visited the sites to sift the wealth of documents lying there or
talk to the ex-prisoners returning to their former places of torment.
Is this idleness. Or is this wilful?
Take the Qasimiyeh security station
beside the river Tigris. It's a pleasant villa once owned by an
Iranian-born Iraqi who was deported to Iran in the 1980s. There's a
little lawn and a shrubbery and at first you don't notice the three
big hooks in the ceiling of each room or the fact that big sheets of
red paper, decorated with footballers, have been pasted over the
windows to conceal the rooms from outsiders. But across the floors, in
the garden, on the roof, are the files of this place of suffering.
They show, for example, that the head of the torture centre was Hashem
al-Tikrit, that his deputy was called Rashid al-Nababy.
Mohammed Aish Jassem, an ex-prisoner,
showed me how he was suspended from the ceiling by Captain Amar al-Isawi,
who believed Jassem was a member of the religious Dawa party.
"They put my hands behind my back like this and tied them and
then pulled me into the air by my tied wrists," he told me.
"They used a little generator to lift me up, right up to the
ceiling, then they'd release the rope in the hope of breaking my
shoulder when I fell."
The hooks in the ceiling are just in
front of Captain Isawi's desk. I understood what this meant. There
wasn't a separate torture chamber and office for documentation. The
torture chamber was the office. While the man or woman shrieked in
agony above him, Captain Isawi would sign papers, take telephone calls
and given the contents of his bin smoke many cigarettes while
he waited for the information he sought from his prisoners.
Were they monsters, these men? Yes.
Are they sought by the Americans? No. Are they now working for the
Americans? Yes, quite possibly indeed some of them may well be in
the long line of ex-security thugs who queue every morning outside the
Palestine Hotel in the hope of being re-hired by the US Marines' Civil
Affairs Unit.
The names of the guards at the
Qasimiyeh torture centre in Baghdad are in papers lying on the floor.
They were Ahmed Hassan Alawi, Akil Shaheed, Noaman Abbas and Moham-med
Fayad. But the Americans haven't bothered to find this out. So Messrs
Alawi, Shaheed, Abbas and Fayad are welcome to apply to work for them.
There are prisoner identification
papers on the desks and in the cupboards. What happened to Wahid
Mohamed, Majid Taha, Saddam Ali or Lazim Hmoud?A lady in a black
chador approached the old torture centre. Four of her brothers had
been taken there and, later, when she went to ask what happened, she
was told all four had been executed. She was ordered to leave. She
never saw or buried their bodies. Ex-prisoners told me that there is a
mass grave in the Khedeer desert, but no one least of all
Baghdad's new occupiers are interested in finding it.
And the men who suffered under
Saddam? What did they have to say? "We committed no sin,"
one of them said to me, a 40-year-old whose prison duties had included
the cleaning of the hangman's trap of blood and faeces after each
execution. "We are not guilty of anything. Why did they do this
to us?
"America, yes, it got rid of
Saddam. But Iraq belongs to us. Our oil belongs to us. We will keep
our nationality. It will stay Iraq. The Americans must go."
If the Americans and the British want
to understand the nature of the religious opposition here, they have
only to consult the files of Saddam's secret service archives. I found
one, Report No 7481, dated 24 February this year on the conflict
between Sheikh Mohammed al-Yacoubi and Mukhtada Sadr, the 22-year-old
grandson of Mohammed Sadr, who was executed on Saddam's orders more
than two decades ago.
The dispute showed the passion and
the determination with which the Shia religious leaders fight even
each other. But of course, no one has bothered to read this material
or even look for it.
At the end of the Second World War,
German-speaking British and US intelligence officers hoovered up every
document in the thousands of Gestapo and Abwehr bureaux across western
Germany. The Russians did the same in their zone. In Iraq, however,
the British and Americans have simply ignored the evidence.
There's an even more terrible place
for the Americans to visit in Baghdad the headquarters of the
whole intelligence apparatus, a massive grey-painted block that was
bombed by the US and a series of villas and office buildings that are
stashed with files, papers and card indexes. It was here that Saddam's
special political prisoners were brought for vicious interrogation
electricity being an essential part of this and it was here that
Farzad Bazoft, the Observer correspondent, was brought for questioning
before his dispatch to the hangman.
It's also graced with delicately
shaded laneways, a creche for the families of the torturers
and a school in which one pupil had written an essay in English on
(suitably perhaps) Beckett's Waiting for Godot. There's also a
miniature hospital and a road named "Freedom Street" and
flowerbeds and bougainvillea. It's the creepiest place in all of Iraq.
I met extraordinarily an
Iraqi nuclear scientist walking around the compound, a colleague of
the former head of Iraqi nuclear physics, Dr Sharistani. "This is
the last place I ever wanted to see and I will never return to
it," he said to me. "This was the place of greatest evil in
all the world."
The top security men in Saddam's
regime were busy in the last hours, shredding millions of documents. I
found a great pile of black plastic rubbish bags at the back of one
villa, each stuffed with the shreds of thousands of papers. Shouldn't
they be taken to Washington or London and reconstituted to learn their
secrets?
Even the unshredded files contain a
wealth of information. But again, the Americans have not bothered
or do not want to search through these papers. If they did, they
would find the names of dozens of senior intelligence men, many of
them identified in congratulatory letters they insisted on sending
each other every time they were promoted. Where now, for example, is
Colonel Abdulaziz Saadi, Captain Abdulsalam Salawi, Captain Saad Ahmed
al-Ayash, Colonel Saad Mohammed, Captain Majid Ahmed and scores of
others? We may never know. Or perhaps we are not supposed to know.
Iraqis are right to ask why the
Americans don't search for this information, just as they are right to
demand to know why the entire Saddam cabinet every man jack of
them got away. The capture by the Americans of Saddam's
half-brother and the ageing Palestinian gunman Abu Abbas, whose last
violent act was 18 years ago, is pathetic compensation for this.
Now here's another question the
Iraqis are asking and to which I cannot provide an answer. On 8
April, three weeks into the invasion, the Americans dropped four
2,000lb bombs on the Baghdad residential area of Mansur. They claimed
they thought Saddam was hiding there. They knew they would kill
civilians because it was not, as one Centcom mandarin said, a
"risk free venture" (sic). So they dropped their bombs and
killed 14 civilians in Mansur, most of them members of a Christian
family.
The Americans said they couldn't be
sure they had killed Saddam until they could carry out forensic tests
at the site. But this turns out to have been a lie. I went there two
days ago. Not a single US or British official had bothered to visit
the bomb craters. Indeed, when I arrived, there was a putrefying smell
and families pulled the remains of a baby from the rubble.
No American officers have apologised
for this appalling killing. And I can promise them that the baby I saw
being placed under a sheet of black plastic was very definitely not
Saddam Hussein. Had they bothered to look at this place as they
claimed they would they would at least have found the baby. Now
the craters are a place of pilgrimage for the people of Baghdad.
Then there's the fires that have
consumed every one of the city's ministries save, of course, for
the Ministry of Interior and the Ministry of Oil as well as UN
offices, embassies and shopping malls. I have counted a total of 35
ministries now gutted by fire and the number goes on rising.
Yesterday I found myself at the
Ministry of Oil, assiduously guarded by US troops, some of whom were
holding clothes over their mouths because of the clouds of smoke
swirling down on them from the neighbouring Ministry of Agricultural
Irrigation. Hard to believe, isn't it, that they were unaware that
someone was setting fire to the next building?
Then I spotted another fire, three
kilometres away. I drove to the scene to find flames curling out of
all the windows of the Ministry of Higher Education's Department of
Computer Science. And right next to it, perched on a wall, was a US
Marine, who said he was guarding a neighbouring hospital and didn't
know who had lit the next door fire because "you can't look
everywhere at once".
Now I'm sure the marine was not being
facetious or dishonest should the Americans not believe this
story, he was Corporal Ted Nyholm of the 3rd Regiment, 4th Marines
and, yes, I called his fiancιe, Jessica, in the States for him to
pass on his love but something is terribly wrong when US soldiers
are ordered simply to watch vast ministries being burnt by mobs and do
nothing about it.
Because there is also something
dangerous and deeply disturbing about the crowds setting light
to the buildings of Baghdad, including the great libraries and state
archives. For they are not looters. The looters come first. The
arsonists turn up later, often in blue-and-white buses. I followed one
after its passengers had set the Ministry of Trade on fire and it sped
out of town.
The official US line on all this is
that the looting is revenge an explanation that is growing very
thin and that the fires are started by "remnants of Saddam's
regime", the same "criminal elements", no doubt, who
feature in the marines' curfew orders. But people in Baghdad don't
believe Saddam's former supporters are starting these fires. And
neither do I.
The looters make money from their
rampages but the arsonists have to be paid. The passengers in those
buses are clearly being directed to their targets. If Saddam had
pre-paid them, they wouldn't start the fires. The moment he
disappeared, they would have pocketed the money and forgotten the
whole project.
So who are they, this army of
arsonists? I recognised one the other day, a middle-aged, unshaven man
in a red T-shirt, and the second time he saw me he pointed a
Kalashnikov at me. What was he frightened of? Who was he working for?
In whose interest is it to destroy the entire physical infrastructure
of the state, with its cultural heritage? Why didn't the Americans
stop this?
As I said, something is going
terribly wrong in Baghdad and something is going on which demands that
serious questions be asked of the United States government. Why, for
example, did Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defence, claim last week
that there was no widespread looting or destruction in Baghdad? His
statement was a lie. But why did he make it?
The Americans say they don't have
enough troops to control the fires. This is also untrue. If they
don't, what are the hundreds of soldiers deployed in the gardens of
the old Iran-Iraq war memorial doing all day? Or the hundreds camped
in the rose gardens of the President Palace?
So the people of Baghdad are asking
who is behind the destruction of their cultural heritage: the looting
of the archaeological treasures from the national museum; the burning
of the entire Ottoman, Royal and State archives; the Koranic library;
and the vast infrastructure of the nation we claim we are going to
create for them.
Why, they ask, do they still have no
electricity and no water? In whose interest is it for Iraq to be
deconstructed, divided, burnt, de-historied, destroyed? Why are they
issued with orders for a curfew by their so-called liberators?
And it's not just the people of
Baghdad, but the Shias of the city of Najaf and of Nasiriyah where
20,000 protested at America's first attempt to put together a puppet
government on Wednesday who are asking these questions. Now there
is looting in Mosul where thousands reportedly set fire to the
pro-American governor's car after he promised US help in restoring
electricity.
It's easy for a reporter to predict
doom, especially after a brutal war that lacked all international
legitimacy. But catastrophe usually waits for optimists in the Middle
East, especially for false optimists who invade oil-rich nations with
ideological excuses and high-flown moral claims and accusations, such
as weapons of mass destruction, which are still unproved. So I'll make
an awful prediction. That America's war of "liberation" is
over. Iraq's war of liberation from the Americans is about to begin.
In other words, the real and frightening story starts now. -- Associated
Press
Brudirect.com
|