Reporting From The Front Line

Over the five year long War in Iraq, the Voice has carried extensive coverage of the misery and carnage brought upon that country by the US and Britain’s ‘War on Terror’.
The most important coverage has come from inside Iraq by Isam Rasheed.
Eddie Truman looks back at some of the articles sent at great risk from Isam.
One of the first things the occupiers of Iraq did on bringing Western style democracy to the country was to close down any kind of independent media.
Newspapers, television radio; any outlet that reported the truth about what was happening in the country or was beyond the control of the Occupation Authority was forcibly closed.
Iraqis were left with an Orwellian media that reported a country in love with the brutal occupation and in which anything bad happening was the fault of “the terrorists”.
The Western media, the BBC, CNN, Fox news etc, were no better and Iraqis quickly realised that the truth about the brutal occupation was being methodically covered up for domestic and foreign consumption.
An organisation, Occupation Watch, was set up by a group of Iraqis and a number of them started documenting the actions of the US and British.
One of those was Isam Rasheed who was to come to the Scottish Parliament in March 2005 with material that he had brought out of Iarq.
Despite the great risks to journalists in Iraq working outside the officially sanctioned Green Zone, Isam volunteered to keep in regular contact with the Voice.
In his first report report he wrote;
“I returned home to Baghdad on March 28. I had been out of Iraq for three months.
“Things have changed, even in this time.
“Since my return, many friends ask me why I came back. Life in Iraq becomes worse.
“The security situation is the same - there is none.
“Criminal gangs stole my nephew’s car, and my uncle’s.
“They both worked as taxi drivers.
“On a good day there is six hours of electricity, but less is normal.
“I work as a journalist to show the reality of life in Iraq.”
Isam documented the huge demonstrations on the 2nd anniversary of the invasion and right from the beginning identified the deliberate creation of sectarian conflict by the Americans.
In May 2005 Isam reported that his friend Junis had been released from Abu Ghraib with the assistance of Islamic and Christian Peacemaker teams, the MPT and CPT. These organisations were also assisting people fleeing Fallujah and Isam travelled there with them to talk to people who were returning following the American military actions.
“In Fallujah, I talked to families who returned. They say the US troops and the ING raid houses every day, and people are killed all the time.
“I talked to a woman whose son had been shot in front of their house eight days before.”
In order to attempt to afford Isam some degree of protection from trigger happy American troops we made him a Voice press card and he joined the National Union Of Journalists.
Isam was well aware of the dangers to reporters, he wrote for the Voice;
“During the build-up to the 2003 invasion, many journalists came to Iraq to cover events.
“Everyone, including the US military, knew they were staying at the Palestine Hotel.
When hostilities began, US troops bombarded these journalists at their hotel, killing Tariq Aywab, from the Al-jazeera news station, and another journalist from the Ukraine. Others were arrested on the road to Baghdad.
“This continued throughout the war and for some months after, when the Iraqi people began resisting the occupation forces. By then, journalists were being very badly treated, and were often attacked in the street as they tried to cover the activities of the coalition forces.”
Towards the end of 2005 Isam was coming across increasing cases of children born with birth defects and illnesses related to depleted uranium shells used during the first Gulf War. The pictures and stories he sent were harrowing.
As the occupation became under increasing attack from elements of Iraqi resistance the response of the US was to use overwhelming firepower, often massive airstrikes.
As Isam moved around Iraq he brought us eye witness stories of the most appalling random violence perpetrated by the occupation forces on innocent civilians.
In September 2005 Isam got himself a genuine scoop; an interview with Haj Ali, the prisoner of Abu Ghraib made famous around the world after the picture of him hooded and wired up was broadcast around the world, a symbol of the appalling brutality of the occupation.
As Iraq descended into sectarian killing and mayhem Isam’s partner gave birth to a baby girl but tragedy struck on 15th September 2006 when Isam’s close friend Alaa Adel was murdered by US troops.
Alaa had been working as Isam’s assistant and was heavily involved in getting aid to places like Fallujah, ripped apart by the occupation.
Reflecting on the execution of Saddam in December of 2006, Isam wrote; “Personally speaking, I think it is time for Iraq to look to the future, to build it ourselves, without occupation.
“I am sorry, not for Saddam, but for the fact that he was executed under occupation, which means that everything was controlled behind closed doors, rather than by us.
“Meanwhile, on the streets, the militias retain the upper hand. Iraqis are trying desperately to find some kind of normality, to live in peace, but the militias and their supporters continue to hijack life in Baghdad, through kidnapping and killing.”
For Isam life became increasingly dangerous as the sectarian forces unleashed by the occupation set to work;
“Events at Al Hurriya, in north west Baghdad, where Sunni and Shia had previously lived in peace for over a century, have caused great disquiet.
“Ten months ago, the Al Mahdi militia opened offices here, and began forcing Sunnis out of the area to make it Shia only. The Al Madhi army is Shia.
“By December, the only remaining Sunnis were to be found in a tiny area called Jed Hurriya.
“On 10 December, this area was surrounded by militia who then raided the houses, killing many Sunnis and raping three women.
“Every remaining Sunni was forced from the area.”
Isam and his neighbours organised themselves to defend their neighbourhood against the militias, patrolling at night and finding themselves featured in a BBC documentary on life in Baghdad.
By the start of 2007 Baghdad was the most dangerous place on earth and in February Isam’s house was hit by a missile, thankfully no one was injured.
For Isam reporting was now replaced by physically re-building his home, an incredible achievement in a city ravaged by kidnap and murder.
But Isam is an incredible man and if anyone could do it, it was him.

SSSSH... LET’S NOT TALK ABOUT INDEPENDENCE

Unionist parties’ constitutional love-in masks the seething tensions in their relationship, writes Ken Ferguson
STROLLING almost hand in hand in front of the Scottish Parliament, the leaders of the three main unionist parties unveiled their master plan to defeat independence.
Their supposed high-powered commission on the constitution will refuse to discuss it in the hope that it will go away.
United only in their determination to ensure the survival of the imperialist British state, Tory, LibDems and Labour leaders unveiled a plan which relies heavily on asking questions with already determined answers.
Along with the refusal to talk about independence, the choice of chairman for the ‘commission’ clearly signals the establishment nature of the plan.
Sir Kenneth Calman is what used to be labelled a ‘distinguished public servant’ with service as a senior medical officer in Edinburgh and London and in the university world.
Perhaps the most public role in his career to date was to oversee the BSE or ‘mad cow disease’ crisis in the early 1990s as the senior medic at the Department of Health.
What is clear is that the entire operation is about bogging down the wider democratic debate on independence in talk about the powers of the Holyrood parliament within the UK.
Reinforcing this point is the fact that the entire show is described as a ‘cross border’ affair or, in other words, subject to a London veto.
The can be no doubt that Gordon ‘Union Jack’ Brown will use all the political and bureaucratic resources of the Westminster machine to derail any moves towards independence.
And it is this ‘two state’ aspect of the unionist plan that is likely to prove its fatal flaw.
Already the leaks from within the Labour camp about the process being a two-way street, which might give powers to Edinburgh but also take some back to London, is ringing alarm bells.
This might not trouble the Tories but it has already sparked concern from the LibDems.
The game plan in Downing Street is to claw back powers on supposed big issues while firmly putting Edinburgh in its subordinate role.
For Brown this has the political attraction that it would placate the increasingly restive Scots Labour group of MPs whose noses have been put out of joint by the diminishment of their powers over Scottish affairs.
While the media has focused on the issue of terrorism as the area where London might take back powers, there is also pressure for Westminster to have all UK power on global warming.
Voters will be told that such a serious global issue can only be dealt with by London.
However this has a clear and immediate potential conflict, given that London Labour is increasingly presenting nuclear power as the ‘green’ energy source of choice.
In the debate so far the SNP government has firmly rejected the idea of new nuclear stations in Scotland and could, under current powers, block any such plans.
If global warming is to be dealt with by London, will go the argument, then London will decide how many new nukes we need and where they will be built.
This approach is only likely to be reinforced with the revelation that the neo-Thatcherite French government and the Brown administration are likely to collaborate to export nuclear power across the globe.
As a Scots MP Brown would dearly like to see new nuclear stations North of the border as part of the planned sales drive.
Tensions already clear from the LibDems on any moves to return powers to London are likely to be sharply increased by any proposal on nukes which would seriously compromise their much hyped green image.
Perhaps the party with most to gain from the unionist commission are the rebranded people’s friends of the Scottish Tories.
Having fought devolution tooth and nail in the Thatcher years, only to be wiped out by voters, the Dodo-like Scots Tories were thrown a lifeline by the proportional Holyrood elections. They have played their limited hand skilfully.
Yet it may well be the growing Tory revival which is the key factor blocking any serious input into the process from Goldie and Co.
Labour faces local council and London mayor elections in England in May and the indications are that they are headed for a kicking.
The commission is supposed to report in September but by then Labour could well be under the cosh of an increasingly confident Tory UK challenge boosted by local election gains.
There can be little doubt that the pressures generated by the battle to win the next general election will put any idea of cross party co-operation between Labour and the Tories firmly off the agenda.
Add in the fact that the ever flexible LibDems will be seeking votes from both the others and the inherent instability of the entire enterprise becomes clear.
The truth is that the apparently high-minded commission is really an anti-independence front dressed in supposedly neutral clothes.
Set against it the SNP’s national conversation with the proposal for a multi-option referendum not only looks more democratic and less elitist, it might actually provide a vote on independence at the point of maximum advantage to its supporters.

Is New Labour’s sell-by date up?

By Ken Ferguson

IN a softer moment you could almost feel sorry for the besieged Gordon Brown.
Years of plotting, compromise and smouldering fury culminated last year with the ex-socialist bowing the knee to the monarch and leaving with the keys to 10 Downing Street.
However the glittering prize of Prime Ministerial power turned, after a brief honeymoon, to ashes and dust as crisis piled on crisis and the real possibility of defeat loomed for the first time in a decade.
For that is the new reality.
At UK level the Tories, who seemed terminally doomed after the horrors of the Thatcher years, are now leading New Labour in opinion polls and are serious contenders for power.
Indeed the designer-dressed Blairite vanguardists who claimed that the left was as outdated as UK Gold might want to consider that recent UK polls place them on 29 per cent.
That is the same level of support achieved by the much-derided Michael Foot in the 1983 election, the high peak of Thatcherism.
To grasp the sheer depth of the crisis that ten years of warmongering and crawling to the rich has created it is now a serious prospect that the buffoon Boris Johnson could defeat the highly experienced Ken Livingstone in the elections for the London Mayor in May.
Nor is the news in Scotland any brighter with Salmond still dominating politics and Wendy Alexander stumbling from crisis to crisis amidst increasing backbench mutterings.
Once the dominating force in Scottish politics, New Labour now appears lost, carping and facing serious problems in deciding what to do about the SNP.
The result is that a recent poll put the SNP and Labour level pegging in a UK election while Salmond has a personal approval rating of 53 per cent with Wendy trailing far behind on 22.
On cue the ungrateful Jocks are being told by Labour London ministers that all manner of disasters, from not hosting the UKs war machine to facing certain poverty, are about to overwhelm them if they are foolish enough to leave the union.
All this is backed by an increasingly shrill campaign, fronted by Brown himself, to reinforce our Britishness, fly Union Jacks in every room of the house and then, most farcical of all, parade the country’s youth to swear loyalty to the crown.
So off the wall was the oath idea that even the Buckingham Palace spin machine was spurred into action and let it be known that we are not amused and the idea was a nonstarter.
Briefings suggested that the monarch had not been consulted and that the effort to conscript the monarchy into New Labour’s Britishness drive would be most unwelcome.
What is clear is that Labour’s dominance is under sustained attack and may well now be irretrievably lost both in the UK and in Scotland.
The truth is that this process was already well under way before Brown took the helm.
The Blair backing of Bush’s war was undoubtedly a key moment in this process but the sleaze and scandal which lapped around his government, from Blunkett’s cavortings to the cash for honours affair, clearly accelerated the decay.
Brown now faces the consequences of ten years of money worshipping and warmongering topped by a growing economic crisis at home and military pressure abroad.
The Northern Rock affair, which saw at least £50 billion pumped into a vain attempt to keep the bank private, struck Labour like a hammer blow.
The reformed former socialists around the cabinet table were forced to nationalise the bank.
Years of wooing the city money men and soothing the rich with tax breaks to create a business friendly image were blown away in days.
Now, amidst soaring prices, wage pegs, sackings and growing fears of a recession, the hollow shell at the heart of the market-friendly New Labour message is harshly revealed.
While billions are found at the drop of a hat for missiles or fat cat bankers the smallest spending on pensioners or public services is stone walled.
Sick workers are threatened with tough tests to ‘prove’ they are ill while well-heeled experts run propaganda campaigns to label them scroungers.
At the same time Darling tries desperately to placate the super rich and assure them that they will not face increased tax.
War spending is soaring as the costs of playing second fiddle to Bush in Iraq and Afghanistan hits home. Far from the short, sharp campaigns they were supposed to be, both Iraq and Afghanistan look increasingly long term.
Even in Iraq Brown’s claim of a pullout later this year is under pressure from both the US and the Iraqi green zone government pressing for the Brits to stay.
All of this adds up to what looks very like a terminal crisis for the entire New Labour pro-market project putting on the agenda the key question - what next?
At UK level the odds must now be shortening on a Cameron government which, ironically, is made to appear humane and people friendly by the sleaze and deception of New Labour.
However there is little doubt that the main change will be in the detail rather than any change in direction away from the current government’s pro-business policies.
In Scotland the real risk for Labour is that, now the illusion of invincibility has been shattered by the SNP 2007 victory, they will lose their Scottish dominance permanently.
The fear for Wendy must be that the prospect of a Tory UK victory bolsters the SNP as the defenders of the Scottish interest against a hostile Cameron government.
Longer term such a government could prove a fertile recruiting ground for the SNP if the Tories move to cut spending on services and attack Scottish interests.
With government in Edinburgh the SNP would be strongly placed to take on London and at the same time sideline Labour who would be forced to back them in a battle with the Tories.
Such a scenario could set the scene for a potential SNP triumph in the 2011 Holyrood polls and open the way to a successful drive to independence.