News – Page 1235 – Antiwar.com Blog

Afghan Civilian Casualties Rise Sharply

Thanks to Nobel Peace Prize winner President Obama’s ramped up offensive in Afghanistan, Afghan civilian casualties are on the rise. While a bulk of the recent casualties have not been at the hands of America and the NATO coalition, one would have to believe that young boys and girls would not be stepping on bombs if there weren’t a foreign, invading force in the country.

Insurgents routinely seed roads and pathways with IEDs, or improvised explosive devices — their favored weapon against Western troops. But most often, those killed and injured by the hidden bombs are civilians.

Buried bombs killed 30 Afghans in a 48-hour span, in the latest grim illustration of the dangers faced by civilians as the season’s fighting heats up.

The latest casualties came Saturday in Zabul province, in southern Afghanistan, when a van filled with travelers struck a roadside bomb. Thirteen people were killed, including four children and four women, said a spokesman for the provincial government.

On Friday evening, two bombs planted close together killed four people in the rural Maruf district of volatile Kandahar province. One was apparently triggered by a donkey, and two people riding or leading the animal died in the explosion. Then two more people who rushed to the rescue were killed by the second bomb, police said.

The Taliban and other insurgents often plant bombs close together, in hopes of killing troops and those who try to help victims.

With the recent increases in combatant and noncombatant deaths, and a realization that the Taliban will have to take part in any meaningful reconciliation efforts, the time has come for Obama to immediately withdraw all troops from the volatile region. Neither the Taliban nor Afghanistan’s rigidly conservative brand of Islam are going anywhere anytime soon. Talk of democracy and central authority are downright antithetical to the culture and history of Afghanistan. How much more blood and treasure will Obama squander until the realization is made that this is a hopelessly futile war? We should find out by 2014, and even that’s a farfetched hope.

Ineffectual Intimidation

Journalism is a tough gig. Do not get me wrong, it is an extremely privileged role and one that any reasonable human being would very much treasure. However, you receive no training for the bombardment of abuse that follows much of what you put out there. There is no opportunity to reply to criticism – unless you wish to be labelled unprofessional – and there is no follow-up window in which to provide your evidence and justify yourself to detractors. You merely have to take it on the chin.

Recently, legendary veteran Middle East correspondent Robert Fisk found himself at the centre of a journalistic storm when his article concerning the Syrian trial of 48 medical professionals was lambasted by Syrian officials. With threats to sue his newspaper, The Independent, for libel and potential to ruin what must surely be one of journalism’s greatest careers, this incident brought to light the serious repercussions that result from ones writing.

Writing on the affairs of the Middle East, rather unsurprisingly, leads to insults. People with a difference of opinion challenge your viewpoint and angrily defend what they believe to be correct. There are ample examples. Take Fisk’s latest predicament. Or my own recent skirmish with a pro-Israeli website. Following an article I wrote, “Transparent and Trustworthy Israel“, I found myself featured heavily on anti-semitism.net. My article had been well and truly analysed and scrutinised. No stone left unturned. Lazy attempts were made to tag me as anti-Semitic and anti-Jewish. This was nothing more than an ineffectual effort to intimidate.

But why should I have been surprised. Journalists such as the brilliant Israeli reporter Gideon Levy have been dealing with this treatment relentlessly for over a decade now. He has been shot at and terrorised for merely speaking the truth and detailing the appalling situation in the Israeli-occupied areas of Gaza and the West Bank. My episode is not worthy of comparison. Nevertheless, it is the nearest I have come to the brutal realities of the Israeli propaganda network; hard at work in their efforts to silence truth-tellers.

In respect of Robert Fisk’s case, a story today provided abundant proof that what he had spelt out in his article last month was nothing but stark reality. Al Jazeera, in their reports on anti-government demonstrations taking place in Yemen, revealed how the crowds were chanting “tell Saudi Arabia that Yemen is a republic” and “Yemen is not Bahrain”. These protests act as evidence to Fisk’s – and my – claims that Bahrain is being ‘occupied’ by the Saudis. It is clearly a sentiment felt throughout the Middle East. There is no denying now.

Worse still, critics of journalists fail to gather any concrete proof to their claims despite aiming hypocritical criticism at the fact-collecting of their victims. To criticise Mr Fisk for not knowing the Middle East inside-out is preposterous. And to accuse me of being anti-Jewish without evidence is disgraceful. My issue is not with the majority of Israelis – who, on the whole, support my views – but with the malfeasant government that continues to torment and abuse the people of Palestine.

No matter how much abuse I receive, and however much intimidation is thrown my way, I shall never stop telling it as it is. A journalist’s number one priority should be to challenge those in power and stick up for the ‘little’ people. The voiceless. The victims. Not enough mainstream journalism is about that. Conflicts are treated and reported as if they were sporting events. Equal time offered to both sides. Equal admiration and denouncements. No ‘bias’ – a word I am sick of hearing – or subjectivity.

Instead, warfare needs to be emotionally conveyed. We are not robots. If we witness death and destruction, then what is so wrong with reporting it with passion and feeling? Why can we not state who the perpetrator is and provide a voice to the sufferers? Perhaps I am unprofessional. Too attached to my work. Perhaps I ought to transform myself into a robot, possess a completely neutral state of mind and merely report uncritically. Thankfully for my employers – and readers – this is not something I intend to do.

For All Their Money Troubles, Greeks Prevent Flotilla

The “Audacity of Hope,” a Palestinian aid ship part of the commemorative flotilla, has been towed back to Greece. Despite the monetary and economic troubles that Greece is currently experiencing, the Mediterranean nation has enough funds to stop a peaceful group of several hundred activists to deliver much needed aid to the besieged Gaza Strip. The Greeks were more professional than their Israeli counterparts, who, in a raid last year on the Mavi Marmara, killed 9, including an American citizen.

Greek commandos “surrounded” the Audacity of Hope with live weapons, boarded the boat, and eventually towed it back to a different port for fear of sabotage by Israelis:

The boat has not been free of sabotage attempts. On June 24, an annonymous complaint was filed against the ship’s “seaworthiness”. The Israel Law Centre (Shurat HaDin), took responsibility for the complaint in the Israeli press.

The Greek embassy in Tel Aviv put out a statement confirming that the Greek coast guard has enforced a decision by the Civil Defence to prevent all flotilla vessels from leaving Greek ports.

Greece’s Civil Protection Ministry said coast guard authorities had been ordered to take “all appropriate measures” to implement the ban.

It also said the “broader maritime area of the eastern Mediterranean will be continuously monitored by electronic means for tracking, where applicable, the movements of the ships allegedly participating” in the flotilla.

At this point, it is nonsensical for Israel to act like they are not acting to derail most, if not all, of these humanitarian flotillas. Some are even suggesting that Israel is using the fragile state of Greek finances to enforce the ban on the flotilla. To be fair, however, this cannot be corroborated until both Greece and Israel’s finances are made public record.

Riyadh Eyes the Nuke

Contrary to the groupthink so pervasive in the military-industrial complex, there is absolutely zero evidence that Iran is building a nuclear bomb. Even top intelligence officials conceded in their National Intelligence Estimates (N.I.E.’s) that such claims were false and unsubstantiated. Unforunately,the lies and propaganda of the military-industrial complex are spreading, much like in the run up to the war in Iraq.

While Saudi Arabia and Iran have been foes ever since the Iranian Revolution, comments from Prince Turki al-Faisal are raising tensions between the regional powerhouses. Buying into the Iran-has-a-bomb line, Faisal said, “We [Saudi Arabia] cannot live in a situation where Iran has nuclear weapons and we don’t. It’s as simple as that. If Iran develops a nuclear weapon, that will be unacceptable to us and we will have to follow suit.”

Curiously enough, some argue that Iran attaining a nuclear bomb would set off an arms race in the Middle East and thus must be stopped from doing so. Such ill informed comments from Prince Faisal only help bolster many of the warmongers’ claims. After all, it is far too apparent that the security interests of any nation are now the concerns of the United States.

Faisal did have two important and noble points, however: the Middle East should be a nuclear weapons free zone (including Israel), and that a military strike against Iran by the United States or Israel would be self-defeating.

US Expands Drone War

The United States has now expanded its (c)overt drone war to a 6th country: Somalia. Naturally, the justification was that if America just sat back and did nothing, al-Shabab, a Somali terrorist group, would attack the United States:

“As the al-Qaeda core has weakened under our unyielding pressure, it has looked increasingly to these other groups and individuals to take up its cause, including its goal of striking the United States,” said Brennan, Obama’s chief counterterrorism adviser. “From the territory it controls in Somalia,” he said, “al-Shabab continues to call for strikes against the United States.”

Of course, due to America’s policy of ambiguity, it isn’t known for certain whether or not this was the first strike of America’s drone war on Somalia. Civilians and militants alike reported seeing or hearing multiple airstrikes and other attacks using military helicopters.

America’s terrorism policy will only perpetuate more hatred and violence towards the United States, especially as al-Shabab’s operations have gone international:

Over the past year, al-Shabab has focused more openly outside Somalia in its statements and targets. In July, the group carried out suicide bombings in Kampala, Uganda, that killed 76 people, including one American. Uganda is one of the countries providing troops to a peacekeeping force that protects the U.S.-backed government in Somalia.

Al-Shabab obviously does not take kind to foreign intervention, whether it be by America or the African Union. While their ability to launch and coordinate attacks outside of the African continent remains to be seen, al-Shabab will continue to flourish in chaotic Somalia.

Hotel Attack Will Only Prolong American Adventurism in Afghanistan

A common misconception of blowback is that retaliation is limited to foreign governments and citizens. If this were to be the case, Chechen terrorists would not be bombing airports and the Taliban would not be bombing hotels. The Taliban’s coordinated attack on the Intercontinental Hotel in Kabul was an attack against both foreign and domestic oppressive forces. The aim of the attack was straightforward:

“We had three main goals in attacking the hotel,” the Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid said after the attack. “We wanted to target as many foreign advisers as we could, as many provincial governors as we could, and bring tension to Kabul on the same day of the security-transition conference.”

Foreigners and Afghans alike were killed. This brazen attack also accomplished the third goal of bringing tension to the “transition” conference. As if the trust deficit between American and Afghanistan were not enough, this will surely widen it.

Additionally, this attack comes at a crucial time for Barack Obama who just recently announced plans to withdraw 33,000 American troops by the fall of 2012. One of Obama’s justifications for starting to withdraw troops, other than political stratagem to appease a war-weary American public, was that the Afghans are becoming increasingly capable of dealing with the Taliban and other security issues. As the Afghans were unable to stop a raid in a hotel, NATO air support was called in to ultimately finish the job.

While Obama has declared to bring home 33,000 troops by next fall, and all troops by 2014, it will be incidents like these that prolong American involvement in the “Graveyard of Empires,” despite all of the “progress” that Obama and his advisors claim to see.