For the past seven weeks U.S. military forces have waged an assault against al-Sadr’s militia and have made gains in their offensive. The progress of the occupiers is reflected not only on the military field but in isolating al-Sadr politically and creating an atmosphere in which other Shiite leaders are publicly distancing themselves from his group and are more openly calling for “dealing with his intransigence.” Al-Sadr has refused to recognize the U.S.-appointed Iraqi Governing Council and his forces have carried out attacks on occupation troops.

The U.S.-led forces provoked al-Sadr and his supporters into armed revolt two months ago by ordering the closure of their newspaper, arresting some of the group’s leaders, and killing demonstrators demanding the release of those arrested.

U.S. military officials have said their goal is to capture al-Sadr and put him on trial on charges of killing a rival Shiite cleric who returned to Iraq with the aid of U.S. forces following Saddam Hussein’s overthrow.

The latest agreement, the Washington Post reported, was brokered by Shiite political leaders, including Mowaffak Rubaie, the national security advisor of the Iraqi Governing Council.

Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt, spokesman for the occupation forces, compared the arrangement to one reached earlier in the city of Fallujah, west of Baghdad, where U.S. forces attacked insurgents in the largely Sunni Muslim city, which for years was a base of support for the Hussein regime.

Rubaie said al-Sadr handed him a letter in which he agreed to end “armed demonstrations and the occupation of government buildings, offices and institutions.” Nonresident members of the Mahdi Army would be withdrawn and the U.S.-trained Iraqi police would be allowed to provide “security and order.” The letter said it was al-Sadr’s understanding that as part of the arrangement Washington would be required to hold “broad talks with representatives of the Shiite establishment on the future” of the Mahdi Army and the charges against him.

Daniel Senor, a spokesman for the occupation forces, said U.S. troops would be repositioned in their bases outside Najaf and Kufa “as soon as the Iraqi security forces have assumed responsibility for public security and reestablished law and order.” But he added that Washington had not altered its position that the Mahdi Army must be dissolved and al-Sadr brought to trial.  
 
Washington seeks UN cover
Meanwhile, Washington, backed by London, has submitted a resolution seeking approval by the United Nations Security Council for an “interim” government in Iraq deemed “sovereign” by the imperialist occupation forces. That U.S.-backed regime is supposed to be in place by June 30.

This is one of the steps Washington is taking to maintain a stable protectorate in Baghdad that is obedient to U.S. imperialist interests and through which it can tighten its grip on the Middle East vis-à-vis its rivals in Paris and Berlin.

French president Jacques Chirac declared that the proposed UN resolution needs “serious improvement” and should guarantee the Iraqi interim government “full sovereignty,” Al-Jazeera reported May 28. Chirac said the interim government must have sovereignty in all fields and have control over oil and gas resources. Washington has barred companies from countries whose governments opposed Washington’s course in Iraq from access to contracts for rebuilding Iraq, including the oil and gas industry. The French and German rulers are above all concerned with their own “sovereignty” over investments and trade in Iraq.

Similarly, German chancellor Gerhard Schröder insisted that the interim government in Iraq “must be able to make decisions over security issues.”

The proposed resolution would give UN recognition to the U.S.-backed interim government in Iraq. The imperialist occupation of Iraq would continue but through a UN-sanctioned “multinational force.” In a May 24 speech at the War College in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, Bush said 138,000 U.S. troops would remain in Iraq after June 30 and more would be sent if needed to ensure control.

According to media summaries of the UN resolution, the U.S.-dominated international military force would have “authority to take all necessary measures” against those opposing the imperialist-backed interim government. The “new” occupation force would remain in Iraq for at least one year, after which it might be subject to review, but there is no deadline for its departure.

The resolution would further expand the number of occupying forces in Iraq by establishing a “special force” to “protect UN personnel.”

Regarding the UN’s role in Iraq, British ambassador Emyr Jones Parry told the BBC the resolution projected the UN having a “leading role—circumstances permitting, of course, on the ground.”

British prime minister Anthony Blair argued that turning over “operational authority” for security of Iraq is “essential” to convincing Iraqis that military actions by the occupation forces are in their interests, the Post reported. Without that, Blair said, opposition forces could still present themselves as fighting against an occupying power. Blair added that military operations like those conducted by U.S. troops in Fallujah would be done with the consent of the interim government. “That’s what the transfer of sovereignty means,” he said.

After speaking with Chirac by phone, Bush played down Washington’s differences with Paris and Berlin. He told reporters, “What President Chirac and others have said is they want to make sure that the transfer of sovereignty to the interim government is a real transfer. And that’s what we want.”

In his May 24 speech Bush made it clear U.S. troops would remain under U.S. command.  
 
U.S.-backed interim government
On May 28 the U.S.-appointed Iraqi Governing Council selected one of its members, Iyad Allawi, to be prime minister for the interim government, reported Al-Jazeera. Hussain Sharistani, who had been favored for the position by UN envoy Lakhdar Brahimi, withdrew his name from consideration after meeting stiff opposition from members of the Iraqi Governing Council. Bush and the U.S. proconsul in Iraq, L. Paul Bremer, both congratulated Allawi.

Allawi is a wealthy businessman and former member of the Baath party, which ruled Iraq for decades under the Saddam Hussein regime. Allawi ran afoul of Hussein and went into to exile in the early 1970s. In 1991 he formed the Iraqi National Accord with CIA backing. Since returning to Iraq, Allawi has fostered ties with high-ranking military officers from the old Iraqi army under Hussein.

On June 1, the Iraqi Governing Council dissolved itself, turning over its functions to an “interim government,” most of the members of which were the choices of the U.S.-run Governing Council. Ghazi Yawar was appointed to the ceremonial office of president of Iraq. A 45-year-old engineer with a master’s degree from George Washington University in Washington, D.C., Yawar is a Sunni Muslim who lived in exile under the Hussein regime.

Allawi, a Shiite, is the prime minister—the main post of the “interim” regime. One of the two vice-presidents is Ibrahim Jaafari from the Shiite Dawa Islamic Party. The second vice-president, Rowsch Shaways, and the deputy prime minister for national security, Barham Saleh, are from the two main Kurdish parties in northern Iraq.  
 
Abu Ghraib prison
In another step by the U.S. government to clean up its image following revelations of abuse and torture of Iraqis at the Abu Ghraib prison, the new head of the prison, Maj. Gen. Geoffrey Miller, said the U.S. military plans to vacate Abu Ghraib by August, handing it over to Iraqi security forces, the Washington Post reported May 26.

Miller was previously in charge of the notorious prison camp in Guantánamo, Cuba, where the U.S. government holds hundreds of prisoners dubbed “enemy combatants,” who have been held without charges and denied the right to an attorney or a trial in which to defend themselves.

At the same time, Miller made it clear that Washington will maintain a large prison facility in Iraq after June 30.

Seven members of the U.S. Army’s 372nd Military Police Company have been charged with abusing Iraqis at Abu Ghraib. The first to be court-martialed, U.S. Army specialist Jeremy Sivits, was sentenced to one year in prison May 19 for his role in the abuse and humiliation of Iraqi prisoners. The one-year sentence was the maximum that could be imposed under a special deal in which Sivits agreed to testify against six other soldiers to be court-martialed.

Miller was brought to Abu Ghraib to replace Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, who has been suspended indefinitely pending the results of a Pentagon investigation into her responsibility for the abuses that took place at the prison. In addition, Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, the top commander of U.S. troops in Iraq, is being recalled from his post this summer. Sanchez has been tarnished by accusations that he had knowledge of the brutalization of prisoners at Abu Ghraib and that he was present during some of the notorious “interrogations.”

According to transcripts of an army investigation into the abuse at Abu Ghraib, the top U.S. intelligence officer at the prison has said in sworn testimony that last summer Miller, then commander of the U.S. prison camp in Guantánamo, visited Iraq to give advice on how to extract information from prisoners, encouraging the use of guard dogs to frighten and intimidate prisoners.

The intelligence officer, Col. Thomas Pappas, told army investigator Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba that Miller said dogs had been used at Guantánamo in “setting the atmosphere” to get information from prisoners. He said Miller indicated that use of the dogs “with or without muzzle” was “okay” during interrogations.

Pappas told Taguba he had been frustrated with a rule that had required that dogs be muzzled. “It’s not very intimidating if they are muzzled,” he said.

Pappas also testified, according to press reports, that the use of dogs, shackling prisoners, making detainees strip naked, and similar measures used in the prison were often approved by Sanchez.  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home