THE US, THE UN AND THE IRAQIS THEMSELVES, V. 7.0

But how many Italian spies would understand Arabic commands?

Heck, she "might" be one of them.

Print This Story E-mail This Story

Go to Original

"Foreign Forces Must Leave Iraq as Soon as Possible," Declares the Head of the Shiite Alliance
By Patrice Claude
Le Monde

Monday 08 March 2005

The elected Parliament will meet March 16. From our special envoy to Baghdad.

Permanent American bases in Iraq? The question seems so incongruous to His Most Austere "Eminence Abdul Aziz Al-Hakim," (as the leader of the Shiite party which won the January 30 elections identifies himself on his visiting card) that he almost bursts out laughing. "Ha! Ha! No. No one in Iraq desires the establishment of permanent foreign bases on our land. The United Nations Security Council resolutions are clear: it will be up to the elected Iraqi government, when the time comes, to give those forces a specific departure date. As soon as possible."

The head of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq - SCIRI, an embarrassing name today and one which should soon evolve towards something a little less radical - is, in fact, there to announce to us the imminent formation of this first legitimized government of the post-Saddam Hussein era. The parleys between the parties have been going on for five weeks and are nearly over.

"We've agreed to hold the first session of the elected National Assembly on March 16," he announces. The date is highly symbolic for the Kurdish minority, since it was on March 16, 1988 that the fallen regime had had around 5,000 residents of Halabja, in the north-east of the country, gassed. "We are hopeful that our discussions with our Kurdish brothers and the other groups we hope to bring into the government will be completed by this date." Seventeen years later to the day, and, excepting some dramatic event that is always possible in the prevailing political configurations today, Iraq will then have a head of state, a Prime Minister, and a government truly resultant from a national election in which, however imperfect it may have been, 58% of its citizens participated.

A member of one of the three great Shiite religious dynasties in the country, the Hodjatoleslam Al-Hakim spent more than twenty-three years in exile in Teheran, where he himself, and his older brother who was assassinated on his return to Iraq in May 2003, created the SCIRI. He was number one on the list of the 21 parties in the United Alliance, which won an absolute majority of the 275 seats in the new Assembly.

Nonetheless, the Fundamental Transitional Law, which American lawyers concocted before the partial restitution of their sovereignty to Iraqis on June 30, 2004, forces the Assembly to approve the Presidential Council by a 60% majority. Only the three members of the Presidential Council may propose the members of the next government from among those elected, beginning with its Prime Minister, most likely the head of the rival Islamist party, Daawa, Ibrahim Al-Jaffari. In order to impose the men and women of its choice, the Unified Alliance, which had announced its intention to include the largest number of parties, "Sunni and Christians included," into a kind of "government of national unity," therefore had to at first obtain the agreement of the second largest party in the Assembly, the so-called "Kurdish bloc," which controls 20% of the seats.

The Kurds have numerous and precise demands, which have been the source of much of the delay in forming the government. How many and which ministries for each of the competing parties? Even if the parties had apparently reached an understanding that the Presidential Council should be led by Jalal Talabani, a major Kurdish political personality who should become Head of State, and that his vice presidents should be, one from the Shiite tradition, and probably the other from the Sunni tradition, the totality of the process must still be carefully choreographed before it can be approved by the Assembly without any hitch.

With the gray beard and black turban of the "Sayyeds," the recognized descendants of the prophet among the Shiites, Abdul Aziz Al-Hakim agrees to one of the main Kurdish demands: the establishment of an Iraqi federation. To those on his side and elsewhere who fear that that will lead to a division of the country, the Sayyed responds: "More than 60 countries operate this way. If it can resolve problems in Iraq, why not?"

On the other hand, what is "unacceptable" in his eyes is to deliberate with the guerrilla movement. Ahmad Chalabi, the secular Shiite businessman who was accepted into the party and who will have a seat in the new Assembly, has recently let it be known that he has conducted "several meetings with the rebels to convince them to lay down their arms." Mr. Al-Hakim, for his part, refuses "to talk to these killers and criminals."

Last week, following the death of three members of the Badr organization - the former "Badr Brigade" that was SCIRI's military arm - in a police station, His Eminence launched a violent diatribe against the rampant "re-Baathization" of the security services. He repeats, "Everyone knows that the Baathists have infiltrated the army and the police. We must flush them out."

Translation: t r u t h o u t French language correspondent Leslie Thatcher.

Is Italy paying the price for Iraq ransoms?
Mon Mar 7, 2005 4:47 PM GMT
Printer Friendly | Email Article | RSS

By Phil Stewart

ROME (Reuters) - After a string of kidnappings in Iraq, Italians are wondering whether they are paying the price for a perceived state policy of paying ransom.

Ten Italians have been abducted in Iraq in the past year, a disproportionately high number by comparison with the United States or Britain, which staunchly oppose payments -- even if that means hostages die.

The last Italian hostage, award-winning war correspondent Giuliana Sgrena, was released unharmed by her Iraqi kidnappers on Friday amid reports of a multi-million-dollar pay-off which even a government minister called "likely".

But instead of celebrating Sgrena's release, Italy is in shock after an intelligence agent was shot dead by U.S. troops as he was ferrying her out of the country.

"We have to rethink our strategy in dealing with kidnappings," Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi was quoted as saying by Il Messaggero newspaper on Monday.

Berlusconi has always denied authorising the payment of ransoms in past kidnappings, saying only that his government had had to make "difficult choices". But speaking off the record, officials say large sums of money have changed hands.

Lucia Annunziata, former president of state television RAI, said on Monday that according to calculations made privately by government sources, Italy had paid Sunni guerrillas in Iraq nearly $15 million (7.8 million pounds) for hostages in the past year.

"The frequency of our kidnappings has transformed that which was an extraordinary, emergency option into plain and simple policy," said Annunziata, who worked in Iraq earlier this year as reporter for La Stampa newspaper.

IN THE DARK

La Stampa reported at the weekend that Italy might have kept the United States in the dark about the Sgrena mission for fear that it would disapprove and seek to block the exchange.

It said this lack of co-ordination meant U.S. forces did not realise Italian officials were on their way to Baghdad airport.

Sgrena herself has put a more sinister twist on the story, suggesting that the Americans deliberately fired at her to signal their disapproval of the negotiations.

"I think that the happy end to the negotiations may have bothered them. The Americans are against this type of operation. For them, war is war. Human life is worth little," she told Corriere della Sera newspaper.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said on Monday any suggestion the troops deliberately targeted them was "absurd".

Italy, long troubled by organised crime, has a culture of paying ransoms to home-grown kidnap gangs. But negotiations were hidden from view, especially after law was introduced more than a decade ago that made it a crime to pay cash for freedom.

Iraq hostage dramas have hit the nation particularly hard. Former hostages like security guard Fabrizio Quattrocchi, journalist Enzo Baldoni and charity workers Simona Torretta and Simona Pari have become household names.

Both Quattrocchi and Baldoni were killed by their captors.

A loyal U.S. ally, Berlusconi sent troops to Iraq despite strong opposition at home, and has been at pains during hostage dramas to show the nation that he has been personally involved in attempts to free kidnap victims.

Although the government denies ransoms have been handed over, its supporters speak openly of payments.

"Large sums were paid for the two Simonas, while for Baldoni, we didn't do it in time," Carlo Taormina, a lawmaker with Berlusconi's Forza Italia party, told Corriere della Sera.

In a sign of rising risks, Italy ordered all its journalists to leave Iraq last month.

"Italians in Iraq will be targeted more," Mustafa Alani, a security analyst at the Gulf Research Centre in Dubai, told Reuters. "Once you have the habit of paying ransom, certainly there is an element of encouraging these activities."


© Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved.

Here's a pic of the Sgrena car, found here.

I just ran across that story ...

Meanwhile, Italy's foreign minister disputed vehemently the U.S. claims in the Italian parliament, e.g. saying, the car was not speeding (travelling only at about 40 km/h) and that no one warned the car to stop.
Calipari had also made "all the necessary contacts" with US and Italian officials about the hostage's release and the journey to the airport, Minister Gianfranco Fini added.


But as we know by now: this can't be the truth because he is no member of the US-Forces.

'My truth'

By Giuliana Sgrena
Monday, March 7, 2005 Posted: 9:03 AM EST (1403 GMT)

Editor's Note: The following is a translation of a March 6, 2005, article by journalist Giuliana Sgrena, reprinted here with permission from the Italian newspaper Il Manifesto. Sgrena was shot and wounded by U.S. I'm still in the dark. Friday was the most dramatic day of my life. I had been in captivity for many days. I had just spoken with my captors. It had been days they were telling me I would be released. I was living in waiting for this moment. They were speaking about things that only later I would have understood the importance of. They were speaking about problems "related to transfers."

I learned to understand what was going on by the behavior of my two guards, the two guards that had me under custody every day. One in particular showed much attention to my desires. He was incredibly cheerful. To understand exactly what was going on I provocatively asked him if he was happy because I was going or because I was staying. I was shocked and happy when for the first time he said, "I only know that you will go, but I don't know when." To confirm the fact that something new was happening both of them came into my room and started comforting me and kidding: "Congratulations they said you are leaving for Rome." For Rome, that's exactly what they said.

I experienced a strange sensation because that word evoked in me freedom but also projected in me an immense sense of emptiness. I understood that it was the most difficult moment of my kidnapping and that if everything I had just experienced until then was "certain," now a huge vacuum of uncertainty was opening, one heavier than the other. I changed my clothes. They came back: "We'll take you and don't give any signals of your presence with us otherwise the Americans could intervene." It was confirmation that I didn't want to hear; it was altogether the most happy and most dangerous moment. If we bumped into someone, meaning American military, there would have been an exchange of fire. My captors were ready and would have answered. My eyes had to be covered. I was already getting used to momentary blindness. What was happening outside? I only knew that it had rained in Baghdad. The car was proceeding securely in a mud zone. There was a driver plus the two captors. I immediately heard something I didn't want to hear. A helicopter was hovering at low altitude right in the area that we had stopped. "Be calm, they will come and look for you...in 10 minutes they will come looking for." They spoke in Arabic the whole time, a little bit of French, and a lot in bad English. Even this time they were speaking that way.

Then they got out of the car. I remained in the condition of immobility and blindness. My eyes were padded with cotton, and I had sunglasses on. I was sitting still. I thought what should I do. I start counting the seconds that go by between now and the next condition, that of liberty? I had just started mentally counting when a friendly voice came to my ears "Giuliana, Giuliana. I am Nicola, don't worry I spoke to Gabriele Polo (editor in chief of Il Manifesto). Stay calm. You are free." They made me take my cotton bandage off, and the dark glasses. I felt relieved, not for what was happening and I couldn't understand but for the words of this "Nicola." He kept on talking and talking, you couldn't contain him, an avalanche of friendly phrases and jokes. I finally felt an almost physical consolation, warmth that I had forgotten for some time.

The car kept on the road, going under an underpass full of puddles and almost losing control to avoid them. We all incredibly laughed. It was liberating. Losing control of the car in a street full of water in Baghdad and maybe wind up in a bad car accident after all I had been through would really be a tale I would not be able to tell. Nicola Calipari sat next to me. The driver twice called the embassy and in Italy that we were heading towards the airport that I knew was heavily patrolled by U.S. troops. They told me that we were less than a kilometer away...when...I only remember fire. At that point, a rain of fire and bullets hit us, shutting up forever the cheerful voices of a few minutes earlier.

The driver started yelling that we were Italians. "We are Italians, we are Italians." Nicola Calipari threw himself on me to protect me and immediately, I repeat, immediately I heard his last breath as he was dying on me. I must have felt physical pain. I didn't know why. But then I realized my mind went immediately to the things the captors had told me. They declared that they were committed to the fullest to freeing me but I had to be careful, "the Americans don't want you to go back." Then when they had told me I considered those words superfluous and ideological. At that moment they risked acquiring the flavor of the bitterest of truths, at this time I cannot tell you the rest.

When that story claimed the car was not 'speeding' it contradicts Sgrena's 'Truth' story, of course her 'Truth' story contradicts one of her other reports that they were not speeding. I think she was elated about being freed and wasn't very coherent on the escape situation and is making things up as she goes.

If the brave fellow thart covered her and died in the process was on her, how much could she see or know?