Peace in Iraq: Baghdad as a "Walled Fortress Town"

This may be one of the strangest pieces of journalism, hiding a significant story, I have ever read.

Today's New York Times has an article by Rod Nordland, "Iran’s Parliament Speaker Disparages Obama’s Video Overture". It's a sloppy, misleading report of a speech by Ali Larijani, misreading the significance. The Speaker's "pointed and abrasive tone", like that of Supreme Leader Khamenei last Friday, was not to reject discussions but to ensure that the US put no preconditions on the talks.

Nordland's distortion, however, is far from strange. The weirdness comes halfway down the article when he suddenly announces:

Meanwhile in Baghdad on Wednesday, Iraqi officials announced that work had begun to convert the city into a modern version of a walled fortress town.

Maj. Gen. Qassim Atta, spokesman for the Baghdad operations command of the Iraqi military, outlined plans to build four major entry points to the city, as well as 18 minor ones, and force all traffic through them to submit to systematic searches, using sophisticated X-ray and sonar equipment, and explosives detectors.

Some of the construction on the checkpoints has already begun, but General Atta did not say when it would be complete.

“Everyone who comes to Baghdad will be thoroughly searched so we can make sure the terrorist groups cannot come into the area,” he said.

I don't mind Times writers maintaining that Orwellian vision of Iraq as "violent semi-peace" --- heck, it even got Enduring America a mention amongst All the News Fit to Print --- but surely they can do better than to tuck the news of that violent semi-peace behind a story about a different country.

EA's Chris Emery in The Guardian: "Iran Reserves Judgement"

Chris Emery, who writes regularly for Enduring America on US-Iranian relations and Iranian politics, writes in the Comment is Free section of The Guardian on Iran's response to the Obama approach for "engagement". The article, which has already provoked heated debate amongst readers, offers an analysis which goes well beyond the immediate reaction in most of the American and British press:

Iran Reserves Judgement
CHRIS EMERY

The cautious response from Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, to Barack Obama's new year greeting can be interpreted as an effort to contain the debate on US-Iranian engagement at a crucial moment in Iranian politics. Khamenei, after taking a day to contemplate his response, moved to prevent the issue distracting Iran's political leaders. His message to the Iranian political system and America was the same; Iranian domestic and economic politics, including the presidential elections, must now take precedent. For this reason, it is probably unrealistic to expect any major public gestures by Iranian officials until after the June elections.

Read more....

Iraq: Enduring America Gets The Daily Show Seal of Approval!

Enduring America, 26 February: Just to Repeat: 50,000 US Troops in Iraq….Indefinitely

Jon Stewart,   3 March: "That's right. Everybody's coming home except for several dozens thousands of soldiers."

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Mess O'Potamia - The Iraq War Is Over

Daily Show Full Episodes
Important Things With Demetri Martin

Political Humor
Joke of the Day

Mr Obama's War: Pakistan Insurgency "Unites" (You Heard It Here First)

Related Post: Mr Obama’s Doctrine - Josh Mull on US Grand Strategy in Pakistan and Beyond

Enduring America, 23 February: "The Asia Times reports, in the aftermath of the local cease-fire between the Pakistani Governments and groups in the Northwest Frontier Provice, 'A mujahideen shura (Shura Ittehad al-Mujahideen) council was formed this weekend due to the personal efforts of Sirajuddin Haqqani.'"

The Guardian, 3 March: "Three rival Pakistani Taliban groups have agreed to form a united front against international forces in Afghanistan in a move likely to intensify the insurgency just as thousands of extra US soldiers begin pouring into the country as part of Barack Obama's surge plan. The Guardian has learned that three of the most powerful warlords in the region have settled their differences and come together under a grouping calling itself Shura Ittihad-ul-Mujahideen, or Council of United Holy Warriors."

The Guardian may be getting to the story a bit late but at least, unlike most media in the "West", it has noted a significant development.

And, to give reporter Saeed Shah further credit, the article picks up on the equally important "other half" of the story: "The unity among the militants comes after a call by Mullah Omar, the cleric who leads the Afghan Taliban, telling Pakistani militants to stop fighting at home in order to join the battle to 'liberate Afghanistan from the occupation forces'."

No doubt Josh Mull, who has posted essential blogs for Enduring America on the Pakistani insurgency, can go a bit further than the simple call-and-response narrative. As he has noted, the "Taliban" is now a coalition of forces, some of whom have moved beyond Mullah Omar, and Pakistani local insurgents have their own motives for offering to hold fire at home and fighting abroad.

Still the essential question is now put: are the manoeuvres between the insurgent groups and the Pakistani Government for cease-fires and local deals going to free up these forces to wage an even more intense campaign against the US and its "Obama Doctrine" not just in Pakistan but across the border?