Billions go to waste in Afghan rebuilding

Morning Star Online, Monday 30 November 2009

by Lizzie Cocker

Printable

Email

Gordon Brown has on Monday announced a further 500 troops are to be sent to Afghanistan

A disproportionate amount of aid in Afghanistan is being used to fight resistance to the occupation rather than being channelled into reconstruction and acute humanitarian needs, economists have revealed.

Researchers at the London School of Economics found that more than half of the US aid budget to Afghanistan was focused on the four most insecure provinces in the south of the country and that a fifth of Britain’s budget was allocated to projects in southern Helmand province where most British troops are based.

Continued >>

Iraq inquiry – another whitewash?

By Jacqueline Head, Al Jazeera, Nov 24, 2009

The leaders who led Britain into war will not befound ‘guilty’, commentators say [GETTY/GALLO] Britain’s most wide-ranging inquiry into the Iraq war is under way – but in a country where two previous inquiries were branded little more than “establishment whitewash” – is it likely the latest examination will satisfy the public? The opening of the official inquiry into Britain’s role in the Iraq war began with a promise on Tuesday. John Chilcot, the former civil servant heading the investigation, pledged that his committee would be “thorough, impartial, objective and fair” in its examination of the six-year conflict. Along with four other panel members, he has been tasked with examining the reasons Britain entered the war, the equipment and training of forces in Iraq, and the foreign policy and military lessons that can be used by future governments. Chilcot has insisted that there will be no cover-up and institutions or individuals will face criticism if it is deserved. Public scepticism But scepticism remains high among a public left disappointed by the two previous inquiries looking at aspects of the conflict. In 2004 the Hutton report, which examined the circumstances leading to the death of David Kelly, a former government adviser, was attacked for its lack of criticism of the government and its refusal to investigate its reasons for joining the war. The Butler report, which followed shortly after, did find that key intelligence used to justify the war in Iraq was unreliable, but did not accuse the government of misleading the public over the reasons for going into war, or apportion blame. Lindsey German of the Stop the War Coalition believes Chilcot’s inquiry will be no different. “This is a committee that is founded within the British establishment which will do nothing serious to challenge the British establishment,” she told Al Jazeera. “It’s not a genuine cross-section of British opinion – it has no anti-war opinion on the committee.” Anti-war voice She criticised the inclusions of Lawrence Freedman, an adviser to former British prime minister Tony Blair, Martin Gilbert, a “pro-war historian”, and Sir Roderic Lyne, who took up a post as an advisor to BP, which led a consortium that secured an Iraqi oil contract, on the inquiry’s five-member panel. “It will probably be the most forensic inquiry into Iraq anywhere in the world. We’ve not seen anything like this in the States”   Vincent Moss, political editor of the Sunday Mirror newspaper “Why shouldn’t a member of the military be a member of the panel, why shouldn’t there be people who opposed the war from the beginning?” German asked.She believes the decision to hold a public inquiry, rather than a judicial one, is a key failing of the investigation. “I don’t see the point of having an inquiry if at the end of it is says there is no one to blame for that.” Her views were echoed by Sabah al-Mukhtar, an Iraqi lawyer and president of the Arab Lawyers’ Association, who has questioned the motives behind the inquiry. “The government for the first time sets up an inquiry, which it sets out a time limit for … not when it finishes, but not to finish before [the general election]. One can imagine why it is being done this way. “Certainly this is the most comprehensive [inquiry] … but don’t forget, not many other countries [have seen] their politicians explicitly accused by other politicians of misleading the public and parliament as it happened here. “Here we would have thought that if somebody of that calibre is accused of this you would have to have a judicial inquiry… not to have just a whitewash, which just looks at the technicalities and the papers.” ‘Massive pressure’ But others remain more positive that the latest investigation can uncover some of the reasoning that led Britain into the much-criticised conflict. The inquiry will examine the training and equipping of British forces in Iraq [EPA] Vincent Moss, the political editor of Britain’s Sunday Mirror newspaper, believes the inquiry has no choice but to be transparent.”[Chilcot] is under such massive pressure from the media and the relatives to be as transparent and open as possible, and to be fair to him his opening remarks said that’s what he’s determined to do,” he said. “Most of it will be public and all the key players are going to be up there and answering questions. It will probably be the most forensic inquiry into Iraq anywhere in the world. We’ve not seen anything like this in the States. Moss said the new inquiry is likely to knock the Hutton and Butler reports into the shade due to the “deluge” of documentary evidence and “the number of people they’re able to call in”. ‘Detailed scrutiny’ But he cautioned that those who dream of seeing Tony Blair “tried, convicted and dragged off in chains” are likely to be disappointed. “I think what we’ll end up with is a good look at everything that happened in detailed scrutiny … but for those who hoped it would be some kind of old fashioned English court … those people will claim it’s a whitewash. “You’ll see a bit of lessons learnt, but if you think there’s going to be a tabloid headline saying ‘Tony Blair guilty as charged’, it’s not going to happen.” George Eaton, a journalist for Britain’s New Statesman magazine, also believes Chilcot will “not go soft on the government”. “He’s already ensured that as much of the inquiry as possible will be held in public. so I’m not cynical about this. I think Chilcot will do the job he’s set out to. But, as Moss points out, the proof of the pudding will be seen in the next few months.

Bush rewards his hired guns

The Morning Star, Tuesday 06 January 2009

by JAMES TWEEDIE

PAYBACK: George Bush has given out the highest civilian honour for “democracy, human rights and peace” to Tony Blair, John Howard and Alvaro Uribe.

THE White House revealed on Tuesday that US President George W Bush will reward partners in war crime Tony Blair, John Howard and Alvaro Uribe with the Presidential Medal of Freedom next week.

Spokeswoman Dana Perino announced that, in possibly the last act by the lame-duck president, former British prime minister Mr Blair will receive the prestigious award next Tuesday.

He will be joined by former Australian prime minister Mr Howard, whom Mr Bush once described as his “sheriff” in south-east Asia, and Colombian Premier Mr Uribe, under whose watch over 600 trade unionists have been assassinated and thousands of innocent civilians murdered and “disappeared” by the Colombian army and paramilitaries.

The prestigious award is the highest civilian honour in the US, alongside the Congressional Gold Medal, which Mr Blair was given in 2003.

Ms Perino explained that Mr Bush was rewarding the trio “for their efforts to promote democracy, human rights and peace abroad.”

She added: “Their efforts to bring hope and freedom to people around the globe have made their nations, America and the world community a safer and more secure world.”

But peace and human rights campaigners dismissed this warped line of reasoning. Respect MP George Galloway said: “What a grisly trio that is. It is a medal of dishonour.

“It would be funny if it wasn’t so tragic. Bush and Blair have made the world more dangerous than it has ever been.”

Justice for Colombia secretary Liam Craig-Best pointed out that “Bush is showing utter contempt for the people of Colombia by awarding this medal to Uribe.

“It must be particularly galling for the hundreds of political prisoners in Colombia’s jails that the man responsible is receiving a ‘medal of freedom’.”

Stop the War Coalition convener Lindsey German stormed: “This is going to be one of the last acts of George Bush and it tells you everything you need to know about his presidency.

“Blair and Bush’s support for the war crimes in Gaza is just the latest in their criminal record and millions of people around the world would think it was more fitting to see Blair in handcuffs than receiving a medal.”

Left Labour MP Jeremy Corbyn added: “Nothing could be more appropriate than the most unpopular president in history presenting a medal to Tony Blair.

“Bush has started an illegal war in Iraq aided and abetted by Tony Blair. Blair was then made the West’s representative in Palestine and has done nothing to protect the Palestinian people from attacks.”

Mr Blair, who is currently the Middle East peace envoy for the so-called Quartet of the US, EU, Russia and the UN, urged the new US administration of president-elect Barack Obama to focus on the Middle East peace process on Tuesday, saying that the issue was “absolutely central” to global security and that “we have to grip it and sort it.”

But he declared that there could be no end to Israel’s brutal blitzkrieg until the “smuggling” of arms and money to the Hamas government in Gaza ceased and resistance to Israeli aggression was stamped out.

But Mr Galloway retorted: “This is absolute rubbish. The arms that the resistance have were taken from the security forces of Mahmoud Abbas and were given to them by Britain and the US in the hope that they would use them against Hamas.”

And the winners are:

BLAIR, ANTHONY
Supported the war against Afghanistan, costing tens of thousands of lives.
Backed the illegal invasion of Iraq, costing over a million lives so far.
Complicit in the Israeli assault on Gaza, in which over 500 people have died.

HOWARD, JOHN
Backed the illegal invasion of Iraq, costing over a million lives so far.
Passed raft of repressive anti-union legislation on behalf of big business.
Responsible for racist laws leading to brutal treatment of refugees.

URIBE, ALVARO
Presided over the deaths of more than 600 trade unionists since election in 2002.
Accused of close links to notorious paramilitaries and drug traffickers.
Caused diplomatic crisis by bombing rebel camp in neighbouring Ecuador.

UK: Thousands march at Labour conference against war

Socialist Worker online, Sep 20, 2008

by Ken Olende

More than 5,000 people marched through central Manchester today against the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, and the spread of war to other countries.

The demonstration was timed to coincide with the start of the Labour Party conference. As marchers passed the conference venue many held their palms up towards it, shouting “blood on your hands”.

Falak, a young woman from Liverpool, said, “If you don’t speak up nothing’s going to change. The threats to Iran and the trouble in Pakistan show this war isn’t over.”

At a rally at the demonstration’s end Tony Woodley, the joint general secretary of the Unite union, called on marchers to remember the “many thousands of innocent victims of the lunatics that have taken us to war”.

Lindsey German, the convenor of the Stop the War Coalition, said, “In the middle of this economic crisis Gordon Brown should be helping the people struggling to pay the bills, not spending £3 million a day on the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan.”

Rose Gentle of Military Families Against the War said she was disgusted how the government treats its own soldiers. “They leave them to rot once they get back,” she said.

The demonstration was diverse and good spirited. There were banners from Stop the War groups from around the country and trade union banners from Bristol Health Service Unite to Kirklees Unison.

The march was called by Stop the War, CND and the British Muslim Initiative.