News n Notes from the Web

Jafari Is Shiite Candidate for Iraqi Prime Minister
By John Daniszewski - LA Times Staff Writer - 9:43 AM PST, February 22, 2005

BAGHDAD — The winning slate in Iraq's election picked the leader of the country's oldest Islamist party to head the government today, and delegates appeared ready to unveil a unity government for the country that would reach out to Sunni Arabs who largely boycotted the vote. If confirmed, the selection of Ibrahim Jafari, currently deputy president, would put the United States in the position of providing the armed might to support an Islamist administration in the Middle East.

It would also be the first Shiite-led government in Iraq's modern history, promising easier relations with Iraq's neighbor Iran. As part of the compact, Iyad Allawi, the current U.S.-backed prime minister would be given the important post of minister of defense. But Ahmad Chalabi, the controversial veteran oppositionist who had made a strong bid to win the top job for himself, was apparently passed over for prime minister because he was considered too divisive a figure, one spokesman said. Chalabi waged a strong challenge on grounds that he would be more secular, more capable of talking to the West and more radical in hunting down former Baath party members who dominated the country under the Saddam Hussein regime. But Jafari, a studiously humble man who wears rumpled suits and has an uneasy command of English despite having lived in London's Wembley neighborhood for 14 years, apparently will lead the new transitional government.

An observant Shiite Muslim, the 58-year-old Jafari leads a disciplined life. He doesn't drink, smoke, play cards, go to movies or listen to popular music. His recreation is reading widely, including works on history, economics and secular and religious thinking. Friends say he is noted for his honesty and integrity. During his years in Britain, Jafari often attended meetings with party members or sympathizers. He frequently lectured small groups on Islamic topics as well. Although not a cleric, through his scholarship he has reached the rank of a mujtahidÖ, one qualified to give rulings on Islamic texts. As head of the Islamic Dawa, or the Islamic Call, Jafari, despite his modesty, has strong ideas. He has promised to improve relations with Iraq, fight the insurgents, improve the economy and make a place in the government for radical Shiite cleric Muqtada Sadr. He opposes any permanent U.S. bases in the country. He believes that Islamic law, or Sharia, should be one of the main sources of legislation.

As a moderate and nonviolent Islamist and a patriotic Iraqi, he believes that he can be an acceptable representative for Sunni Muslims, Christians and nonobservant members of society as well as his own Shiite community. He says that he would behave as an Iraqi first, and a Shiite second. But his candidacy arouses misgivings. Some Iraqi women fear that he is too religious and will curtail their rights. Others, recalling that he spent the first nine years of his exile in Tehran and that the Iranians allegedly succeeded in penetrating some cells of the Dawa Party in those years, worry that he may be delivering Iraq to the Iranian sphere of influence. He dismisses the charges. "There is no justification for such fears," he said in a recent interview with the Times. Referring to Iraq, he said that Iraq's relations would be the same as "to any other neighboring country like Turkey, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Syria." "True, there might be a special quality to the relationship with Iraq, since it is a Shiite country with a large Shiite population. But you have to separate the Shiite religion from the people who follow it, who simply belong to the population of each country."

As to bases in Iraq, he says the United States and other countries should stay only as long as the new government requires military help. "When the Iraqi security forces are self-sufficient, then the presence of foreign forces would not be justified, either troops or bases," he said. "I am not talking about a day, a week or a month from now. It will take some time." He also emphasizes reaching out to other groups. "Nobody can rule Iraq unless he would be on the side of all Iraqis and represent all the Iraqis., Whether the ruler is a Sunni or a Shiite, an Arab or a Kurd, does not matter," he said. "To lead, he must represent all." But his attitude in may areas, for instance the rights of women, is governed by lifelong Islamic beliefs that may be in conflict with more secular views held in many quarters. In the early days of the now-defunct Iraqi Governing Council, Jafari was part of a group that moved for Sharia to govern family status, including marriage, divorce and inheritance. "Islam makes a woman the responsibility of her father until she marries," he said, "and then she is the responsibility of her husband."
***

*** Iraq, Then and Now ***
Bob Herbert - New York Times - 21 Feb 2005 (Op/Ed Column)

I remember going to Washington in mid-March 2003, nearly two years ago, to cover a demonstration by tens of thousands of protesters who were clinging to the last, tissue-thin strands of hope that they could bring the Bush administration to its senses and prevent the invasion of Iraq. But it was already clear that nothing would deter President Bush from his war. I filed a column that said, "We're about to watch the tragedy unfold."

Even more clearly than the protests that weekend, I remember the ominous stories in the press about the likelihood that a war in Iraq would embolden Islamic terrorist organizations and strengthen their recruitment efforts. The Times ran a front-page article on Sunday March 16, in which a senior counterintelligence official said: "An American invasion of Iraq is already being used as a recruitment tool by Al Qaeda and other groups. And it is a very effective tool."

On the same day The Washington Post reported that "specialists inside and outside the government question whether a U.S.-led invasion of Iraq would deliver a significant blow against international terrorism. Experts warn that war and occupation could also have the opposite effect by emboldening radical Islamic groups and adding to their grievances." All warnings were given the back of the administration's hand. Mr. Bush launched his invasion and many thousands died. Now fast-forward to last week's testimony of top administration officials before the Senate Intelligence Committee. If the war in Iraq was supposed to stem the terrorist tide, the comments of these officials made it clear that it hasn't worked.

Porter Goss, the C.I.A. director, told the committee, "Islamic extremists are exploiting the Iraqi conflict to recruit new anti-U.S. jihadists." He added, "These jihadists who survive will leave Iraq experienced and focus on acts of urban terrorism." The war, said Mr. Goss, "has become a cause for extremists." In his view, "It may only be a matter of time before Al Qaeda or another group attempts to use chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear weapons."

Vice Adm. Lowell Jacoby, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, said: "Our policies in the Middle East fuel Islamic resentment. Overwhelming majorities in Morocco, Jordan and Saudi Arabia believe the U.S. has a negative policy toward the Arab world." An article in last Friday's Washington Post said the radical group Ansar al-Islam, which has carried out dozens of suicide bombings in Iraq, is recruiting young Muslims across Europe to join the insurgency.

So tell me again. What was this war about? In terms of the fight against terror, the war in Iraq has been a big loss. We've energized the enemy. We've wasted the talents of the many men and women who have fought bravely and tenaciously in Iraq. Thousands upon thousands of American men and women have lost arms or legs, or been paralyzed or blinded or horribly burned or killed in this ill-advised war. A wiser administration would have avoided that carnage and marshaled instead a more robust effort against Al Qaeda, which remains a deadly threat to America.

What is also dismaying is the way in which the administration has taken every opportunity since Sept. 11, 2001, to utilize the lofty language of freedom, democracy and the rule of law while secretly pursuing policies that are both unjust and profoundly inhumane. It is the policy of the U.S. to deny due process of law to detainees at the scandalous interrogation camp at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, where prisoners, many of whom have turned out to be innocent, are routinely treated in a cruel and degrading manner.

The U.S. is also engaged in the reprehensible practice known as extraordinary rendition, in which terror suspects are abducted and sent off to be interrogated by foreign regimes that are known to practice torture. And the C.I.A. is operating ultrasecret prisons or detention centers overseas for so-called high-value detainees. What goes on in those places is anybody's guess. It may be that most Americans would prefer not to know about these practices, which are nothing less than malignant cells that are already spreading in the nation's soul. Denial is often the first response to the most painful realities. But most Americans also know what happens when a cancer is ignored.
***

BBC News: "French Intellectuals to be Deployed in Afghanistan"
March 21 2002

The cleanup portion of the ground war in Afghanistan heated up
yesterday when the Allies revealed plans to airdrop a platoon of crack
French existentialist philosophers into the country to destroy the
morale of the remaining Taliban zealots by proving the non-existence
of God.

Elements from the feared Jean-Paul Sartre Brigade, or 'Black Berets,'
will be parachuted into the combat zones to spread doubt, despondency
and existential anomie among the enemy. Hardened by numerous
intellectual battles fought during their long occupation of Paris's
Left Bank, their first action will be to establish a number of
sidewalk cafes at strategic points near the front lines. There they
will drink coffee and talk animatedly about the absurd nature of life
and man's lonely isolation in the universe. They will be accompanied
by a number of heartbreakingly beautiful girlfriends who will further
spread dismay by sticking their tongues in the philosophers' ears
every five minutes and looking remote and unattainable to everyone
else.

Their leader, Colonel Marc-Ange Belmondo, spoke yesterday of his
confidence in the success of their mission. Sorbonne graduate
Belmondo, a very intense and unshaven young man in a black pullover,
gesticulated wildly and said, "The Taliban are caught in a logical
fallacy of the most ridiculous. There is no God and I can prove it.
Take your tongue out of my ear, Juliet, I am talking." Marc-Ange plans
to deliver an impassioned thesis on man's nauseating freedom of action
with special reference to the work of Foucault and the films of Alfred
Hitchcock. However, humanitarian agencies have been quick to condemn
the operation as inhumane, pointing out that the effects of passive
smoking from the Frenchmen's' endless Gitanes could wreak a terrible
toll on civilians in the area.

[Author unknown]