Wednesday, December 15, 2004
Posted on Wed, Dec. 15, 2004
Gen. Pinochet's trial should go forwardOUR OPINION: PEOPLE OF CHILE DESERVE ANSWERS ABOUT TORMENTED PAST
The decision to place Gen. Augusto Pinochet on trial for alleged human-rights abuses is a victory for Chile's system of justice and the rule of law. Fourteen years after the Pinochet dictatorship ended, the country still is struggling to come to terms with a tormented past. A mountain of questions remains about the 17-year military regime that Gen. Pinochet led and about the orders he gave. The people of Chile deserve answers.
If Gen. Pinochet truly is a ''good angel'' who saved the country from leftist chaos, which is how he portrayed himself in a Spanish-language interview with a Miami TV station last year, he should be happy to have the truth revealed in a court of law. This interview, in which Gen. Pinochet appeared to be in control of his faculties, helped persuade Judge Juan Guzmán Tapia that the general is mentally competent to stand trial.
Murder network
If the Supreme Court agrees -- it has twice blocked earlier prosecutions after the general's lawyers argued that he wasn't up to it for health reasons -- the focus will be on the general's role in Operation Condor. This multinational murder and kidnapping network was operated by the military leaders of six South American countries, including Chile, and was designed to rub out leftist opponents. Its victims included former Chilean Foreign Minister Orlando Letelier, killed in a car-bomb explosion in 1976 in Washington, D.C.
Much is known already about the Letelier murder. But Judge Guzmán has spent months taking evidence from former subordinates of Gen. Pinochet that sheds new light on Operation Condor in 10 other cases. The evidence allegedly establishes a chain of command that leads to the general's desk. A network with the complexity of Operation Condor cannot be created without approval from the top, and that is what the trial will be about.
Not above the law
What is most important is that the evidence be tested in a court of law -- and let the chips fall where they may. Go through the process that establishes the truth or falsity of the charges in a fair and open judicial proceeding. As things now stand, given two previous exculpatory rulings, there is every appearance that Gen. Pinochet has unfairly managed to duck the charges and is above the law, answerable to no one for his actions.
Not incidentally, the trial could have a salutary effect on other Latin American countries. As Operation Condor makes clear, Chile wasn't the only place where government leaders resorted to extra-legal means to deal with guerrillas and political opponents. If the people of Chile are strong enough to demand to know what crimes were committed in their name, and by whom, the people of Argentina, Mexico and other countries whose leaders have tried to sweep the past under the rug also can demand to know the truth.
© 2004 Herald.com and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved.http://www.miami.com
December 13, 2004HEARTS AND MINDS
Pentagon Weighs Use of Deception in a Broad ArenaBy THOM SHANKER and ERIC SCHMITT
ASHINGTON, Dec. 12 - The Pentagon is engaged in bitter, high-level debate over how far it can and should go in managing or manipulating information to influence opinion abroad, senior Defense Department civilians and military officers say.
Such missions, if approved, could take the deceptive techniques endorsed for use on the battlefield to confuse an adversary and adopt them for covert propaganda campaigns aimed at neutral and even allied nations.
Critics of the proposals say such deceptive missions could shatter the Pentagon's credibility, leaving the American public and a world audience skeptical of anything the Defense Department and military say - a repeat of the credibility gap that roiled America during the Vietnam War.
The efforts under consideration risk blurring the traditional lines between public affairs programs in the Pentagon and military branches - whose charters call for giving truthful information to the media and the public - and the world of combat information campaigns or psychological operations.
The question is whether the Pentagon and military should undertake an official program that uses disinformation to shape perceptions abroad. But in a modern world wired by satellite television and the Internet, any misleading information and falsehoods could easily be repeated by American news outlets.
The military has faced these tough issues before. Nearly three years ago, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, under intense criticism, closed the Pentagon's Office of Strategic Influence, a short-lived operation to provide news items, possibly including false ones, to foreign journalists in an effort to influence overseas opinion.
Now, critics say, some of the proposals of that discredited office are quietly being resurrected elsewhere in the military and in the Pentagon.
Pentagon and military officials directly involved in the debate say that such a secret propaganda program, for example, could include planting news stories in the foreign press or creating false documents and Web sites translated into Arabic as an effort to discredit and undermine the influence of mosques and religious schools that preach anti-American principles.
Some of those are in the Middle Eastern and South Asian countries like Pakistan, still considered a haven for operatives of Al Qaeda. But such a campaign could reach even to allied countries like Germany, for example, where some mosques have become crucibles for Islamic militancy and anti-Americanism.
Before the invasion of Iraq, the military's vast electronic-warfare arsenal was used to single out certain members of Saddam Hussein's inner circle with e-mail messages and cellphone calls in an effort to sway them to the American cause. Arguments have been made for similar efforts to be mounted at leadership circles in other nations where the United States is not at war.
During the cold war, American intelligence agencies had journalists on their payrolls or operatives posing as journalists, particularly in Western Europe, with the aim of producing pro-American articles to influence the populations of those countries. But officials say that no one is considering using such tactics now.
Suspicions about disinformation programs also arose in the 1980's when the White House was accused of using such a campaign to destabilize Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi of Libya.
In the current debate, it is unclear how far along the other programs are or to what extent they are being carried out because of their largely classified nature.
Within the Pentagon, some of the military's most powerful figures have expressed concerns at some of the steps taken that risk blurring the traditional lines between public affairs and the world of combat information operations.
These tensions were cast into stark relief this summer in Iraq when Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the top commander in Iraq, approved the combining of the command's day-to-day public affairs operations with combat psychological and information operations into a single "strategic communications office."
In a rare expression of senior-level questions about such decisions, Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, issued a memorandum warning the military's regional combat commanders about the risks of mingling the military public affairs too closely with information operations.
"While organizations may be inclined to create physically integrated P.A./I.O. offices, such organizational constructs have the potential to compromise the commander's credibility with the media and the public," it said.
But General Myers's memorandum is not being followed, according to officers in Iraq, largely because commanders there believe they are safely separating the two operations and say they need all the flexibility possible to combat the insurgency.
Indeed, senior military officials in Washington say public affairs officers in war zones might, by choice or under pressure, issue statements to world news media that, while having elements of truth, are clearly devised primarily to provoke a response from the enemy.
Administration officials say they are increasingly troubled that a nation that can so successfully market its cars and colas around the world, even to foreigners hostile to American policies, is failing to sell its democratic ideals, even as the insurgents they are battling are spreading falsehoods over mass media outlets like the Arab news satellite channel Al Jazeera.
"In the battle of perception management, where the enemy is clearly using the media to help manage perceptions of the general public, our job is not perception management but to counter the enemy's perception management," said the chief Pentagon spokesman, Lawrence Di Rita.
The battle lines in this debate have been drawn in a flurry of classified studies, secret operational guidance statements and internal requests from Mr. Rumsfeld. Some go to the concepts of information warfare, and some complain about how the government's communications are organized.
The fervent debate today is focused most directly on a secret order signed by Mr. Rumsfeld late last year and called "Information Operations Roadmap." The 74-page directive, which remains classified but was described by officials who had read it, accelerated "a plan to advance the goal of information operations as a core military competency."
Noting the complexities and risks, Mr. Rumsfeld ordered studies to clarify the appropriate relationship between Pentagon and military public affairs - whose job is to educate and inform the public with accurate and timely information - and the practitioners of secret psychological operations and information campaigns to influence, deter or confuse adversaries.
In response, one far-reaching study conducted at the request of the strategic plans and policy branch of the military's Joint Staff recently produced a proposal to create a "director of central information." The director would have responsibility for budgeting and "authoritative control of messages" - whether public or covert - across all the government operations that deal with national security and foreign policy.
The study, conducted by the National Defense University, was presented Oct. 20 to a panel of senior Pentagon officials and military officers, including Douglas J. Feith, the under secretary of defense for policy, whose organization set up the original Office of Strategic Influence.
No senior officer today better represents the debate over a changing world of military information than Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt, an operational commander chosen to be the military's senior spokesman in Iraq after major combat operations shifted to counterinsurgency operations in the spring of 2003.
His role rankled many in the military's public affairs community who contend that the job should have gone to someone trained in the doctrine of Army communications and public affairs, rather than to an officer who had spent his career in combat arms.
"This is tough business," said General Kimmitt, who now serves as deputy director of plans for the American military command in the Middle East. "Are we trying to inform? Yes. Do we offer perspective? Yes. Do we offer military judgment? Yes. Must we tell the truth to stay credible? Yes. Is there a battlefield value in deceiving the enemy? Yes. Do we intentionally deceive the American people? No."
The rub, General Kimmitt said, is operating among those sometimes conflicting principles.
"There is a gray area," he said. "Tactical and operational deception are proper and legal on the battlefield." But "in a worldwide media environment," he asked, "how do you prevent that deception from spilling out from the battlefield and inadvertently deceiving the American people?"
Mr. Di Rita said the scope of the issue had changed in recent years. "We have a unique challenge in this department," he said, "because four-star military officers are the face of the United States abroad in ways that are almost unprecedented since the end of World War II."
He added, "Communication is becoming a capability that combatant commanders have to factor in to the kinds of operations they are doing."
Much of the Pentagon's work in this new area falls under a relatively unknown field called Defense Support for Public Diplomacy. This new phrase is used to describe the Pentagon's work in governmentwide efforts to communicate with foreign audiences but that is separate from support for generals in the field.
At the Pentagon, that effort is managed by Ryan Henry, Mr. Feith's principal deputy for policy.
"With the pace of technology and such, and with the nature of the global war on terrorism, information has become much more a part of strategic victory, and to a certain extent tactical victory, than it ever was in the past," Mr. Henry said.
However, a senior military officer said that without clear guidance from the Pentagon, the military's psychological operations, information operations and public affairs programs are "coming together on the battlefield like never before, and as such, the lines are blurred." This has led to a situation where "proponents of these elements jockey for position to lead the overall communication effort," the officer said.
Debate also continues over proposed amendments to a classified Defense Department directive, titled "3600.1: Information Operations," which would lay down Pentagon policy in coming years. Previous versions of the directive allow aggressive information campaigns to affect enemy leaders, but not those of allies or even neutral states. The current debate is over proposed revisions that would widen the target audience for such missions.
Mr. Di Rita, the Pentagon spokesman, says that even though the government is wrestling with these issues, the standard is still to tell to the truth.
"Our job is to put out information to the public that is accurate," he said, "and to put it out as quickly as we can."
Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company Home Privacy Policy Search Corrections RSS Help Back to Top
Bomb at Shiite Shrine Kills 7 in Karbala
By PAUL GARWOODAssociated Press Writer
BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) -- A bomb exploded at the gate of a revered Shiite shrine Wednesday, killing seven people in an apparent attempt to kill an aide to Iraq's top Shiite cleric and casting the shadow of violence over the first day of campaigning in the country's crucial January elections.
The attack in Karbala, which wounded the representative of Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, came hours after the campaign kicked off, with Iraqi interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi announcing his candidacy. Allawi's defense minister accused Iranian and Syrian intelligence agents of helping insurgents in Iraq.
Also on Wednesday, a government official in Baghdad said Saddam's notorious right-hand man, Ali Hassan al-Majid, known as "Chemical Ali," would be the first to appear in court next week to face charges for crimes allegedly committed during Saddam's 35-year dictatorship. Allawi said earlier that formal indictments could be issued against some of Saddam's top deputies next month - just ahead of the Jan. 30 election.
The blast south of Baghdad underlined worries over security during the campaign and the election, with insurgents expected to derail the vote creating a national assembly.
While Iraq's Shiite Muslim majority has welcomed an election it will likely dominate, Sunni Arabs have expressed fears they will be eclipsed and some have called for a boycott of the vote. Al-Sistani has backed a coalition of major Shiite political parties that has put forward a list of candidates and is expected to do well in the first national election since Saddam's fall.
Sunni militants have been accused in past attacks against Shiites and their holy sites. There was no immediate claim of responsibility for Wednesday's bombing.
The blast went off at the western gate of the Imam Hussein Shrine in Karbala, killing seven people and wounding 31, said Dr. Abdul-Abbas Al-Timimi, director of Al-Hussein hospital.
Al-Sistani's representative, Sheik Abdul Mahdi al-Karbalayee, was among the wounded, and an al-Sistani spokesman said al-Karbalayee was the intended target of the blast. Several of his bodyguards were among the dead and wounded, the spokesman - Hamed al-Khafaf - told Al-Jazeera television.
AP VIDEO
Campaigning Kicks Off Amid Iraq Insurgency
Audio
Garwood reports the threat of violence in Iraq is a major concern as Iraq's election day approaches.
PHOTO GALLERY
Iraq
Interactives
Iraq: Sights and Sounds
Street Fighting
1000 U.S. Deaths
Iraq's New Government
Prison Abuse Scandal
Tribes of Iraq
Reconstruction of Iraq
Coalition Casualties
Documents
Key Findings on WMD
Recent Stories
Army Spending $4B to Send Vehicles to Iraq
Bomb at Shiite Shrine Kills 7 in Karbala
Documents Show String of Iraq Abuse Claims
Sri Lankan Hostage Mistaken for American
Official: 'Chemical Ali' to Be Tried First
Disabled Firefighter Serving in Iraq
Blast at Iraq Shrine Kills 7, Wounds 31
The Imam Hussein Shrine was one of a number of Shiite holy sites in Karbala and Baghdad targeted in March, when coordinated bombs and suicide blasts hit pilgrims attending a religious festival, killing at least 181. The shrine houses the tomb of Imam Hussein, the son of Imam Ali, Shiism's founder.
The city, 50 miles south of Baghdad, was also the scene of heavy fighting in April between the militia of anti-U.S. cleric Muqtada al-Sadr and multinational forces.
Days after the al-Sistani-backed United Iraqi Alliance announced its candidates in the election, Allawi announced he was entering the race at the head of a list of 240 candidates meant to highlight his appeal to Iraq's diverse and sometimes fractious ethnic and religious groups.
Surrounded by supporters in tribal garb, clerical turbans and suits, the U.S.-backed prime minister pledged to work for national unity and move away from "religious and ethnic fanaticism" if elected to the assembly on Jan. 30.
"By depending on God, and with a firm determination and based on strong confidence in the abilities of our people, we are capable of confronting the difficulties and challenges and of making a bright future for our honorable people," Allawi said.
Allawi said his party would push for the eventual withdrawal of multinational forces "according to a set timetable."
In the election, each faction will win a number of seats in the new assembly proportional to the percentage of votes it wins nationwide - meaning those highest up on each faction's list are most likely to get seats. The groups that end up strongest in the assembly will be in a powerful position as the body picks the next government and draws up the nation's new constitution.
The United Iraqi Alliance - headed by Abdel-Aziz al-Hakim, a cleric who leads the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution party - is dominated by religious Shiites, though it also includes a few Sunnis and other minorities. Allawi, a secular Shiite, emphasized the broad nature of his list.
Elder Sunni statesman Adnan Pachachi, who had previously called for a postponement of the elections, said Wednesday he will take part. Pachachi, a former foreign minister, heads the Independent Democratic Gathering and said he would lead a list of at least 70 candidates.
Another Sunni group - the more religious Iraqi Islamic Party - has also put forward its own candidates. Wednesday was the cutoff day for parties or independents to register as candidates in the elections.
Meanwhile, Defense Minister Hazem Shaalan accused Iranian and Syrian agents of cooperating with former Saddam security operatives and Iraq's top terror figure - Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi - "to run criminal operations in Iraq."
"Key to terrorism is in Iran, which is the number one enemy for Iraq," Shaalan said. "They are fighting us because we want to build freedom and democracy and they want to build an Islamic dictatorship and have turbaned clerics to rule in Iraq."
Iran and Syria have rejected U.S. and Iraqi claims they support Iraq's insurgency, but Damascus has said it is unable to fully close its long, porous border with its neighbor.
Shaalan also sharply criticized the United Iraqi Alliance for links to Iran. He took a swipe at an architect of the 228-member coalition and leading member, nuclear physicist Hussain al-Shahristani, describing him as the "leader of an Iranian list" that wants to Iraq to be run similar to its Shiite-dominated neighbor.
Meanwile, Kurdish officials demanded that provincial elections that are being held at the same time as the national vote be postponed.
The Kurds will boycott the provincial elections if their demands were not met, said Kamal Kirkukly, a council member and an official of the Kurdistan Democratic Party, in an interview with The Associated Press.
Among their demands is the return of displaced Kurds to the ethnically mixed city of Kirkuk, where Saddam's regime drove out many Kurds and replaced them with Arabs from other areas. The Kurds apparently want to solidify their demographic presence in the city before any vote. There was no suggestion the Kurds would boycott the national vote.
In the latest violence, a U.S. Marine was killed in action Tuesday in Anbar province, west of Baghdad, while a U.S. soldier died from gunshot wounds sustained during a convoy mission south of Baghdad.
As of Wednesday, at least 1,304 U.S. military personnel have died since the war began in March 2003, according to an Associated Press count.
© 2004 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy.
Purchase this AP story for reprint.
Back to: AP News Home
'
By PAUL GARWOODAssociated Press Writer
BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) -- A bomb exploded at the gate of a revered Shiite shrine Wednesday, killing seven people in an apparent attempt to kill an aide to Iraq's top Shiite cleric and casting the shadow of violence over the first day of campaigning in the country's crucial January elections.
The attack in Karbala, which wounded the representative of Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, came hours after the campaign kicked off, with Iraqi interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi announcing his candidacy. Allawi's defense minister accused Iranian and Syrian intelligence agents of helping insurgents in Iraq.
Also on Wednesday, a government official in Baghdad said Saddam's notorious right-hand man, Ali Hassan al-Majid, known as "Chemical Ali," would be the first to appear in court next week to face charges for crimes allegedly committed during Saddam's 35-year dictatorship. Allawi said earlier that formal indictments could be issued against some of Saddam's top deputies next month - just ahead of the Jan. 30 election.
The blast south of Baghdad underlined worries over security during the campaign and the election, with insurgents expected to derail the vote creating a national assembly.
While Iraq's Shiite Muslim majority has welcomed an election it will likely dominate, Sunni Arabs have expressed fears they will be eclipsed and some have called for a boycott of the vote. Al-Sistani has backed a coalition of major Shiite political parties that has put forward a list of candidates and is expected to do well in the first national election since Saddam's fall.
Sunni militants have been accused in past attacks against Shiites and their holy sites. There was no immediate claim of responsibility for Wednesday's bombing.
The blast went off at the western gate of the Imam Hussein Shrine in Karbala, killing seven people and wounding 31, said Dr. Abdul-Abbas Al-Timimi, director of Al-Hussein hospital.
Al-Sistani's representative, Sheik Abdul Mahdi al-Karbalayee, was among the wounded, and an al-Sistani spokesman said al-Karbalayee was the intended target of the blast. Several of his bodyguards were among the dead and wounded, the spokesman - Hamed al-Khafaf - told Al-Jazeera television.
AP VIDEO
Campaigning Kicks Off Amid Iraq Insurgency
Audio
Garwood reports the threat of violence in Iraq is a major concern as Iraq's election day approaches.
PHOTO GALLERY
Iraq
Interactives
Iraq: Sights and Sounds
Street Fighting
1000 U.S. Deaths
Iraq's New Government
Prison Abuse Scandal
Tribes of Iraq
Reconstruction of Iraq
Coalition Casualties
Documents
Key Findings on WMD
Recent Stories
Army Spending $4B to Send Vehicles to Iraq
Bomb at Shiite Shrine Kills 7 in Karbala
Documents Show String of Iraq Abuse Claims
Sri Lankan Hostage Mistaken for American
Official: 'Chemical Ali' to Be Tried First
Disabled Firefighter Serving in Iraq
Blast at Iraq Shrine Kills 7, Wounds 31
The Imam Hussein Shrine was one of a number of Shiite holy sites in Karbala and Baghdad targeted in March, when coordinated bombs and suicide blasts hit pilgrims attending a religious festival, killing at least 181. The shrine houses the tomb of Imam Hussein, the son of Imam Ali, Shiism's founder.
The city, 50 miles south of Baghdad, was also the scene of heavy fighting in April between the militia of anti-U.S. cleric Muqtada al-Sadr and multinational forces.
Days after the al-Sistani-backed United Iraqi Alliance announced its candidates in the election, Allawi announced he was entering the race at the head of a list of 240 candidates meant to highlight his appeal to Iraq's diverse and sometimes fractious ethnic and religious groups.
Surrounded by supporters in tribal garb, clerical turbans and suits, the U.S.-backed prime minister pledged to work for national unity and move away from "religious and ethnic fanaticism" if elected to the assembly on Jan. 30.
"By depending on God, and with a firm determination and based on strong confidence in the abilities of our people, we are capable of confronting the difficulties and challenges and of making a bright future for our honorable people," Allawi said.
Allawi said his party would push for the eventual withdrawal of multinational forces "according to a set timetable."
In the election, each faction will win a number of seats in the new assembly proportional to the percentage of votes it wins nationwide - meaning those highest up on each faction's list are most likely to get seats. The groups that end up strongest in the assembly will be in a powerful position as the body picks the next government and draws up the nation's new constitution.
The United Iraqi Alliance - headed by Abdel-Aziz al-Hakim, a cleric who leads the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution party - is dominated by religious Shiites, though it also includes a few Sunnis and other minorities. Allawi, a secular Shiite, emphasized the broad nature of his list.
Elder Sunni statesman Adnan Pachachi, who had previously called for a postponement of the elections, said Wednesday he will take part. Pachachi, a former foreign minister, heads the Independent Democratic Gathering and said he would lead a list of at least 70 candidates.
Another Sunni group - the more religious Iraqi Islamic Party - has also put forward its own candidates. Wednesday was the cutoff day for parties or independents to register as candidates in the elections.
Meanwhile, Defense Minister Hazem Shaalan accused Iranian and Syrian agents of cooperating with former Saddam security operatives and Iraq's top terror figure - Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi - "to run criminal operations in Iraq."
"Key to terrorism is in Iran, which is the number one enemy for Iraq," Shaalan said. "They are fighting us because we want to build freedom and democracy and they want to build an Islamic dictatorship and have turbaned clerics to rule in Iraq."
Iran and Syria have rejected U.S. and Iraqi claims they support Iraq's insurgency, but Damascus has said it is unable to fully close its long, porous border with its neighbor.
Shaalan also sharply criticized the United Iraqi Alliance for links to Iran. He took a swipe at an architect of the 228-member coalition and leading member, nuclear physicist Hussain al-Shahristani, describing him as the "leader of an Iranian list" that wants to Iraq to be run similar to its Shiite-dominated neighbor.
Meanwile, Kurdish officials demanded that provincial elections that are being held at the same time as the national vote be postponed.
The Kurds will boycott the provincial elections if their demands were not met, said Kamal Kirkukly, a council member and an official of the Kurdistan Democratic Party, in an interview with The Associated Press.
Among their demands is the return of displaced Kurds to the ethnically mixed city of Kirkuk, where Saddam's regime drove out many Kurds and replaced them with Arabs from other areas. The Kurds apparently want to solidify their demographic presence in the city before any vote. There was no suggestion the Kurds would boycott the national vote.
In the latest violence, a U.S. Marine was killed in action Tuesday in Anbar province, west of Baghdad, while a U.S. soldier died from gunshot wounds sustained during a convoy mission south of Baghdad.
As of Wednesday, at least 1,304 U.S. military personnel have died since the war began in March 2003, according to an Associated Press count.
© 2004 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy.
Purchase this AP story for reprint.
Back to: AP News Home
'
'Straight Talk
Wednesday, December 15, 2004; Page A32
MOVEMENT TOWARD economic and political liberalization has slowed in much of the Arab Middle East. Saudi Arabia, awash in tens of billions of dollars thanks to high oil prices, has watered down or frozen the reform programs its spokesmen were promoting a year ago; some would-be reformers are in jail. Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak has appeased the Bush administration by casting himself as a champion of Palestinian accommodation to Israel instead of Egyptian accommodation to a free press or elections. The violence in Iraq has hardly been an advertisement for Western-style democracy, and the Bush administration itself has been modest in its efforts, dedicating far less funding to its Broader Middle East and North Africa Initiative than to more prosaic aid programs elsewhere.
Yet impetus for change in the region has not expired, as it did after the first U.S. war with Iraq. This time the pressure for liberalization is coming not only from Washington but from Arab business and political elites as well as common citizens fed up with their countries' stagnation and exclusion from the freedom and prosperity spreading elsewhere in the world. That mood can be glimpsed in the strong support among Palestinians for elections and for reform of the Palestinian Authority. It can be seen also in the rise of independent civic groups and human rights movements around the region, which have been gathering to draft and deliver pro-democracy manifestos and insisting that their governments listen.
Last week 30 representatives of civic organizations from 13 Arab countries met in Rabat, Morocco, on the sidelines of the first meeting of the "Forum for the Future," the diplomatic instrument the Bush administration and governments of other industrialized countries created this year to encourage liberalization in the zone from Morocco to Afghanistan. Media accounts of the meeting focused on the predictable rhetoric of Arab ministers who rejected Western pressure for change and insisted that the real issue was not reform of their monarchies and dictatorships but the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Such rhetoric, delivered by many of the same people, has remained unchanged at Middle Eastern conferences for decades, regardless of the situation in Palestine or the character of U.S. policy. What was new in Rabat was the presence of the civil society delegation, which delivered an entirely different message.
"The main obstacle hindering reform," said the civil society statement, read by spokesmen such as Bahey Eddin Hassan of the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies, "is the lack of willingness on the part of most Arab governments to undertake real reforms." "Palestinian and Iraqi issues," it added, "should not be used as excuses for not launching reforms"; moreover, Western governments should "stop using double standards" in assessing "violations of human rights and democracy principles in each country." Instead, they should "relate their political and economic cooperation to the progress of reforms."
What reforms? The civil society representatives were explicit: "Allow free ownership of media institutions and sources"; "allow freedom of expression and especially freedom of assembly and meetings"; "ensure women's rights and remove all forms of inequality and discrimination against women in the Arab world"; and "immediately release reformers, human rights activists and political prisoners."
None of these demands will be met soon by Mr. Mubarak and his brethren. Yet the fact that their foreign and finance ministers were obliged to listen to them in the presence of the representatives of the world's richest nations -- rather than throwing their authors in jail -- was something new in the Middle East. We hope Mr. Bush will follow up his pro-democracy rhetoric with more money and more practical action in his next term. But even if the Forum for the Future succeeds only in perpetuating such exchanges, and protecting the civil society groups that participate in them, it will be worthwhile.
© 2004 The Washington Post Company
'
Wednesday, December 15, 2004; Page A32
MOVEMENT TOWARD economic and political liberalization has slowed in much of the Arab Middle East. Saudi Arabia, awash in tens of billions of dollars thanks to high oil prices, has watered down or frozen the reform programs its spokesmen were promoting a year ago; some would-be reformers are in jail. Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak has appeased the Bush administration by casting himself as a champion of Palestinian accommodation to Israel instead of Egyptian accommodation to a free press or elections. The violence in Iraq has hardly been an advertisement for Western-style democracy, and the Bush administration itself has been modest in its efforts, dedicating far less funding to its Broader Middle East and North Africa Initiative than to more prosaic aid programs elsewhere.
Yet impetus for change in the region has not expired, as it did after the first U.S. war with Iraq. This time the pressure for liberalization is coming not only from Washington but from Arab business and political elites as well as common citizens fed up with their countries' stagnation and exclusion from the freedom and prosperity spreading elsewhere in the world. That mood can be glimpsed in the strong support among Palestinians for elections and for reform of the Palestinian Authority. It can be seen also in the rise of independent civic groups and human rights movements around the region, which have been gathering to draft and deliver pro-democracy manifestos and insisting that their governments listen.
Last week 30 representatives of civic organizations from 13 Arab countries met in Rabat, Morocco, on the sidelines of the first meeting of the "Forum for the Future," the diplomatic instrument the Bush administration and governments of other industrialized countries created this year to encourage liberalization in the zone from Morocco to Afghanistan. Media accounts of the meeting focused on the predictable rhetoric of Arab ministers who rejected Western pressure for change and insisted that the real issue was not reform of their monarchies and dictatorships but the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Such rhetoric, delivered by many of the same people, has remained unchanged at Middle Eastern conferences for decades, regardless of the situation in Palestine or the character of U.S. policy. What was new in Rabat was the presence of the civil society delegation, which delivered an entirely different message.
"The main obstacle hindering reform," said the civil society statement, read by spokesmen such as Bahey Eddin Hassan of the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies, "is the lack of willingness on the part of most Arab governments to undertake real reforms." "Palestinian and Iraqi issues," it added, "should not be used as excuses for not launching reforms"; moreover, Western governments should "stop using double standards" in assessing "violations of human rights and democracy principles in each country." Instead, they should "relate their political and economic cooperation to the progress of reforms."
What reforms? The civil society representatives were explicit: "Allow free ownership of media institutions and sources"; "allow freedom of expression and especially freedom of assembly and meetings"; "ensure women's rights and remove all forms of inequality and discrimination against women in the Arab world"; and "immediately release reformers, human rights activists and political prisoners."
None of these demands will be met soon by Mr. Mubarak and his brethren. Yet the fact that their foreign and finance ministers were obliged to listen to them in the presence of the representatives of the world's richest nations -- rather than throwing their authors in jail -- was something new in the Middle East. We hope Mr. Bush will follow up his pro-democracy rhetoric with more money and more practical action in his next term. But even if the Forum for the Future succeeds only in perpetuating such exchanges, and protecting the civil society groups that participate in them, it will be worthwhile.
© 2004 The Washington Post Company
'
today's papersWeekday at Bernie'sBy Eric UmanskyPosted Wednesday, Dec. 15, 2004, at 1:03 AM PT
The Los Angeles Times' top non-local story goes with about a dozen instances of Marines torturing Iraqi detainees, including setting one prisoner's hands on fire and using electric shocks on another. There have been about 10 courts martial in the cases, which were unveiled by the ACLU via another Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. The Washington Post also fronts the revelations, saying the incidents were spread over the past two years: "DETAINEE ABUSE BY MARINES IS DETAILED." The NYT takes a different angle, going inside and headlining: "MARINES FOUND GUILTY OF ABUSING IRAQIS, FILES SHOW."
The Post's top non-local spot goes to interim Iraqi Prime Minister Allawi's surprise announcement that pre-trial hearings for many former regime officials will began next week. Saddam isn't expected to be included. USA Today leads with new EPA numbers showing that the level of soot in the air dropped 10 percent from 1999 to 2003. Still, about 62 million people live in counties where particulate pollution exceeds federal standards. USAT says such pollution kills "tens of thousands" annually. The New York Times leads with an attempted reconstruction of how the White House failed to find the cemetery's worth of skeletons in Bernie Kerik's past—and present.
The NY Times' lead points out that back when he was police chief, Kerik hadn't filled out paperwork for an FBI background check, which would have given him top security clearance. He also never turned in a required financial disclosure form when he went to Iraq. Eventually, the Times gets around to the administration's issues: The White House had fallen into the Clinton-era habit of making nomination announcements before thorough vetting, a tendency that was particularly appealing in this case: "Throughout the process, the Republican close to the administration said, everyone at the White House knew that Mr. Bush liked Mr. Kerik, placing him in the special category of 'this guy's our guy.' "
The Times hides the fun stuff inside: Apparently Kerik had at least one affair (the Daily News says two simultaneous ones) in an apartment that was originally donated by a wealthy sort-of- police-groupie for use by weary Ground Zero workers. Kerik later requested to rent the apartment, though it's not clear for how much, or at which stage he started using it for his tryst(s). One building resident recalled seeing the former chief, "I said to myself, 'Hey, that's Bernie Kerik!' It was surprising. But then I thought, well, maybe he keeps a place down here because he's involved with security and 9/11."
The LAT and NYT go inside with the military saying it's ramping up its airlift operation inside Iraq. "Taking the trucks off the most dangerous routes where we have most of the trouble has become a goal," said the Air Force's top general. "There'll be increased [missile] threats to C-130s, but we've also got 100 casualties a month in convoys." Sunday's Post broke word of the change (on page A28).
The WP mentions that the Pentagon's top general acknowledged that in Fallujah there are "still pockets of people that are resisting."
The NYT off-leads with a reprise of the contention that Iran is the prime-mover behind Iraq's Shiite parties. The story's take is pretty clear: "Many Iraqis and American experts on Iraq believe those fears are overstated." One "Bush administration official" played therapist, saying that what those talking up Iranian influence are "really voicing is their angst over the transition from a Sunni-led state to a Shiite-led state." Maybe the NYT's headline writers should get on the couch: "IRAQI CAMPAIGN RAISES QUESTION OF IRAN'S SWAY."
The papers all flag Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas saying that attacks against Israelis are "a mistake" and opposition to the occupation should be peaceful. The NYT notices that overall Palestinian rhetoric has mellowed since Arafat's death.
The NYT says on Page One that the FDA is flailing at regulating new medical devices, such as home-use defibrillators. For one thing, the agency requires hospitals to report deaths that result from defective ones. But consumers (obviously) and "even many emergency units" (Times) aren't required to do so.
The NYT teases word that the Inuit plan to file claims that the U.S. is threatening their existence by contributing to and effectively ignoring global warming. The case will be filed to the Organization of American States, which doesn't have enforcement powers. But the suit could serve as the basis for later ones, and a black eye.
On Monday, USAT's lead say Army National Guardsman in Iraq were a third more likely to be killed than their active-duty brethren. Yesterday, USAT said—again on Page One—that the military gave the paper the wrong numbers and couldn't provide new ones. This morning's USAT does have the revised numbers, which show that Army National Guardsmen are less likely to be killed than active duty GIs. That walk-back is stuffed on Page 2.
An op-ed in the Post whales on SecDef Rumsfeld, pointing out that Rummy's facile response to the armor question wasn't just a mistake, it's part of a habit: "All defense secretaries in wartime have, needless to say, made misjudgments. Some have stubbornly persisted in their misjudgments. But have any so breezily dodged responsibility and so glibly passed the buck?" The writer: Bill Kristol.Eric Umansky writes "Today's Papers" for Slate. He can be reached at todayspapers@hotmail.com.Article URL: http://slate.msn.com/id/2111078/
The Los Angeles Times' top non-local story goes with about a dozen instances of Marines torturing Iraqi detainees, including setting one prisoner's hands on fire and using electric shocks on another. There have been about 10 courts martial in the cases, which were unveiled by the ACLU via another Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. The Washington Post also fronts the revelations, saying the incidents were spread over the past two years: "DETAINEE ABUSE BY MARINES IS DETAILED." The NYT takes a different angle, going inside and headlining: "MARINES FOUND GUILTY OF ABUSING IRAQIS, FILES SHOW."
The Post's top non-local spot goes to interim Iraqi Prime Minister Allawi's surprise announcement that pre-trial hearings for many former regime officials will began next week. Saddam isn't expected to be included. USA Today leads with new EPA numbers showing that the level of soot in the air dropped 10 percent from 1999 to 2003. Still, about 62 million people live in counties where particulate pollution exceeds federal standards. USAT says such pollution kills "tens of thousands" annually. The New York Times leads with an attempted reconstruction of how the White House failed to find the cemetery's worth of skeletons in Bernie Kerik's past—and present.
The NY Times' lead points out that back when he was police chief, Kerik hadn't filled out paperwork for an FBI background check, which would have given him top security clearance. He also never turned in a required financial disclosure form when he went to Iraq. Eventually, the Times gets around to the administration's issues: The White House had fallen into the Clinton-era habit of making nomination announcements before thorough vetting, a tendency that was particularly appealing in this case: "Throughout the process, the Republican close to the administration said, everyone at the White House knew that Mr. Bush liked Mr. Kerik, placing him in the special category of 'this guy's our guy.' "
The Times hides the fun stuff inside: Apparently Kerik had at least one affair (the Daily News says two simultaneous ones) in an apartment that was originally donated by a wealthy sort-of- police-groupie for use by weary Ground Zero workers. Kerik later requested to rent the apartment, though it's not clear for how much, or at which stage he started using it for his tryst(s). One building resident recalled seeing the former chief, "I said to myself, 'Hey, that's Bernie Kerik!' It was surprising. But then I thought, well, maybe he keeps a place down here because he's involved with security and 9/11."
The LAT and NYT go inside with the military saying it's ramping up its airlift operation inside Iraq. "Taking the trucks off the most dangerous routes where we have most of the trouble has become a goal," said the Air Force's top general. "There'll be increased [missile] threats to C-130s, but we've also got 100 casualties a month in convoys." Sunday's Post broke word of the change (on page A28).
The WP mentions that the Pentagon's top general acknowledged that in Fallujah there are "still pockets of people that are resisting."
The NYT off-leads with a reprise of the contention that Iran is the prime-mover behind Iraq's Shiite parties. The story's take is pretty clear: "Many Iraqis and American experts on Iraq believe those fears are overstated." One "Bush administration official" played therapist, saying that what those talking up Iranian influence are "really voicing is their angst over the transition from a Sunni-led state to a Shiite-led state." Maybe the NYT's headline writers should get on the couch: "IRAQI CAMPAIGN RAISES QUESTION OF IRAN'S SWAY."
The papers all flag Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas saying that attacks against Israelis are "a mistake" and opposition to the occupation should be peaceful. The NYT notices that overall Palestinian rhetoric has mellowed since Arafat's death.
The NYT says on Page One that the FDA is flailing at regulating new medical devices, such as home-use defibrillators. For one thing, the agency requires hospitals to report deaths that result from defective ones. But consumers (obviously) and "even many emergency units" (Times) aren't required to do so.
The NYT teases word that the Inuit plan to file claims that the U.S. is threatening their existence by contributing to and effectively ignoring global warming. The case will be filed to the Organization of American States, which doesn't have enforcement powers. But the suit could serve as the basis for later ones, and a black eye.
On Monday, USAT's lead say Army National Guardsman in Iraq were a third more likely to be killed than their active-duty brethren. Yesterday, USAT said—again on Page One—that the military gave the paper the wrong numbers and couldn't provide new ones. This morning's USAT does have the revised numbers, which show that Army National Guardsmen are less likely to be killed than active duty GIs. That walk-back is stuffed on Page 2.
An op-ed in the Post whales on SecDef Rumsfeld, pointing out that Rummy's facile response to the armor question wasn't just a mistake, it's part of a habit: "All defense secretaries in wartime have, needless to say, made misjudgments. Some have stubbornly persisted in their misjudgments. But have any so breezily dodged responsibility and so glibly passed the buck?" The writer: Bill Kristol.Eric Umansky writes "Today's Papers" for Slate. He can be reached at todayspapers@hotmail.com.Article URL: http://slate.msn.com/id/2111078/
December 15, 2004
Missteps Cited in Kerik Vetting by White HouseBy ELISABETH BUMILLER
his article was reported by Elisabeth Bumiller, Eric Lipton and David Johnston and written by Ms. Bumiller.
WASHINGTON, Dec. 14 - Despite hours of confrontational interviews by the White House counsel, Alberto R. Gonzales, the Bush administration failed to get a full picture of the legal and ethical problems of Bernard B. Kerik, its nominee for homeland security secretary, a government official said on Tuesday.
In addition, the White House did not consult with the one person in the West Wing who knew the most about Mr. Kerik's background, Frances Townsend, because Ms. Townsend, President Bush's adviser on homeland security and a former federal prosecutor in New York, was under consideration for the position herself, said the official, who would speak only on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.
Those problems, law enforcement officials and Republicans said, were just two of the factors that led to the collapse of the Kerik nomination and surprised a White House focused on changing more than half the cabinet.
The story of Mr. Kerik's nomination is one of how a normally careful White House faltered because of Mr. Bush's personal enthusiasm for Mr. Kerik, a desire by the administration to quickly fill a critical national security job and an apparent lack of candor from Mr. Kerik himself.
A Republican close to the White House who has participated in background reviews of presidential nominees said the fault lay both with Mr. Kerik and with "whoever's job it was to check him out."
A major problem, law enforcement officials said, was that the White House did not have the benefit of any F.B.I. investigation into Mr. Kerik's past. Mr. Kerik, as New York City's police commissioner on Sept. 11, 2001, had been offered a high security clearance by federal officials so he could receive classified intelligence about the city's security, a law enforcement official said. But he failed to return a questionnaire needed for the F.B.I. to conduct a background check, and he never received that clearance, the law enforcement official said.
Mr. Kerik said on Tuesday night through his spokesman, Christopher Rising, that he could not remember receiving the questionnaire. Mr. Kerik still received classified information from the F.B.I. and the C.I.A. regarding security issues in New York, the law enforcement official said, although the police commissioner was not given the most sensitive intelligence about the sources of the data. He served as police commissioner through the end of 2001.
Mr. Kerik also failed to complete a required federal financial disclosure form in May 2003, when he left the country to spend three and a half months in Iraq trying to train Iraqi police officers, a law enforcement official said. The disclosure form, law enforcement officials said, might have turned up some of the financial problems that surfaced this month in connection with a condominium he owned in New Jersey.
In addition, law enforcement officials said, Mr. Bush announced Mr. Kerik's nomination before the F.B.I. had begun the full field investigation required of all cabinet nominees. The officials said such an investigation would have readily uncovered the problems that doomed Mr. Kerik's nomination. The investigation was not done, administration officials said, because the Bush White House has generally not conducted such checks, which take numerous agents many weeks to complete, until after the president announces a nominee. A former White House official who has conducted background checks said that the Bush White House got into the habit during the abbreviated transition in 2000, when there was little time for investigating nominees.
The Clinton administration also waited on F.B.I. background checks, which caused a number of embarrassments. But the administrations of Ronald Reagan and the President Bush's father, for the most part, waited until an F.B.I. investigation was complete before the president announced a cabinet nominee.
White House officials said the counsel's office had conducted a less-comprehensive investigation of Mr. Kerik over several weeks in November, before the president announced his nomination, and that the White House was well aware that he had problems in his past, including a warrant for his arrest in connection with delinquent condominium fees.
Mr. Kerik was nominated by Mr. Bush on Dec. 3 but withdrew a week later, citing problems with a nanny who may have been in the country illegally and whose taxes he had not paid. Since then, Mr. Kerik has had to answer questions about his connections to a New Jersey company suspected of having ties to organized crime and his use of an apartment, donated as a resting spot for police officers at ground zero, where he conducted an affair with his book publisher, according to someone who discussed the relationship with him..
It is unclear exactly what the White House knew of Mr. Kerik's past. But aides there concluded that Mr. Kerik would be regarded as a "colorful" figure whose strong performance after the Sept. 11 attacks would propel him into office, one official said.
Mr. Gonzales, who is himself in the middle of a background review as Mr. Bush's nominee for attorney general, spent hours grilling Mr. Kerik, the official said. As with other nominees, the sessions were aggressive and designed to make Mr. Kerik uncomfortable enough to reveal possible embarrassing events in his record. Even so, he apparently withheld some pertinent facts. Mr. Gonzales declined to comment.
Throughout the process, the Republican close to the administration said, everyone at the White House knew that Mr. Bush liked Mr. Kerik, placing him in the special category of "this guy's our guy." Mr. Bush admired Mr. Kerik for his service as New York City's police commissioner on Sept. 11, 2001, for his willingness to try to train the police force in Iraq and for campaigning tirelessly for the president's re-election.
As for problems in his past that might have derailed his nomination, Republicans noted that former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani was enthusiastically vouching for Mr. Kerik. And no one could imagine that the life of a former New York police chief was not already an open book.
Mr. Bush, who first met Mr. Kerik when the president went to the still-smoking ruins of the World Trade Center on Sept. 14, 2001, lavished praise on Mr. Kerik when the two stood side by side on the White House South Lawn in October 2003. The president had just met in the Oval Office with Mr. Kerik upon his return from Iraq.
Others criticized Mr. Kerik for seeming to focus more on seeking publicity than on expanding training programs for new Iraqi police officers. "He was terrific about inspiring people and creating a goal, but he was often not very good about following up and getting it done," one former American official who spent time in Baghdad said this month.
But Mr. Bush did not forget Mr. Kerik's time under fire, or his reflected glow from New York's response to the attacks on the city. By the fall of 2004, Mr. Kerik had become one of the symbols of the Bush campaign's fight against terrorism and traveled the nation spreading the message.
Christopher Drew contributed reporting from New York for this article.
Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company Home Privacy Policy Search Corrections RSS Help Back to Top
