Yearly archives: 2006

EU likely to roll back Uzbekistan sanctions

 in Uzbekistan by | View Comments

From EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS

The EU is likely to drastically scale down sanctions against Uzbekistan at the upcoming EU foreign ministers’ meeting in Brussels on 13 November, as Europe seeks to establish a long-term energy and security foothold in Central Asia.

The sanctions – which consist of an arms embargo, a visa ban on 12 Uzbek officials and freezing high-level bilateral talks – were imposed after last May’s massacre in Andijan, but elapse automatically on 17 November unless renewed by a consensus of all 25 member states.

Uzbekistan has not met any of the conditions stipulated in last year’s EU resolution – such as setting up an independent inquiry into the shooting of at least 180 civilians in Andijan – with European politicians and NGOs agreeing that human rights abuses have worsened in the past 18 months.

But Germany is suggesting cutting sanctions to an arms embargo only, EU diplomats say, after reports from the seven EU embassies in Tashkent said sanctions have achieved nothing except pushing Uzbekistan closer to Russia.

“The sanctions would probably be dropped sooner or later with no political gain for the EU, but now there is still an opportunity to sell them for some kind of closer cooperation,” one EU official said. “Everybody wants to be politically correct, but the [German] calculus is quite persuasive.”

France and Poland are also sympathetic to Germany’s mini-sanctions idea, but the decision still remains open with the UK pushing for the EU to take a hard line. “That’s the only leverage we have,” a British diplomat said. “It would be the wrong political signal at the wrong time.”

The UK’s integrity on Uzbekistan is under a question mark, however, after the former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, testified to MEPs in April that Uzbek authorities have tortured terrorist suspects on London’s behalf.

Meanwhile, the European Parliament on 26 October gave a mixed message, calling for the EU to keep the arms embargo and extend the visa ban list to president Islam Karimov, but also saying sanctions have “not produced positive results so far” and need “review” in light of any future Uzbek concessions.

The Uzbekistan gambit

German diplomats, the Finnish EU presidency and the European Commission will meet with Uzbek officials in Brussels on 8 November, with Tashkent expected to offer the EU a regular human rights dialogue and to bring forward the abolition of the death penalty from 2008 to 2007.

German foreign minister Frank Walter Steinmeier is visiting Uzbekistan this week to see what the Uzbeks might put on the table at the 8 November meeting, following a visit by the EU’s Central Asia special envoy, Pierre Morel, the week before.

But the EU official quoted above said speedy acceptance of any concessions on face-value would be “a fig-leaf for a Bismarck-style realpolitik” with member states wary of a media backlash from NGOs such as the International Crisis Group (ICG) if sanctions are dropped “for free.”

Berlin already attracted bad press on Uzbekistan after giving special permission for ex-Uzbek interior minister Zokirjon Almatov to visit Germany for medical treatment last November, just days after his name was put on the visa ban list.

The EU’s strategic interests in Uzbekistan include potential new gas supplies and security cooperation for NATO’s anti-Taleban operation in Afghanistan as well as wider intelligence gathering efforts in the “war on terror,” with Germany keeping a military air base in Termez, near the Uzbek-Afghan border.

Uzbekistan’s regional weight also makes it key to Berlin’s plan to extend the European Neighbourhood Policy – an enhanced EU political and economic integration package – to Central Asia under the German EU presidency next year.

Gas and terrorism

Tashkent is reputed to be sitting on 1.86 trillion cubic metres of natural gas reserves – enough to power the whole of the EU for four years – and controls the biggest population, the second biggest economy and second biggest army of the Central Asian states.

“If we do not build the Trans-Caspian pipeline [linking the EU to Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan via the Caspian Sea] we should be aware that this gas will flow to China,” energy commissioner Andris Piebalgs recently told EUobserver.

But analysts warn Europe could be overestimating both the size of Uzbekistan’s gas reserves and its willingness to fall in with EU needs. “Everyone in the region is laughing at the EU, because whatever gas there is has already been sold to Gazprom,” ICG expert Alba Lamberti said.

View with comments

UK Iraq policy a ‘rank disaster’

 in War in Iraq by | View Comments

From BBC Online

…the measure of success in foreign policy should be “minimisation of suffering” and “if that is your measure, our policy has been a rank disaster in the last few years in terms of blood shed. By that measure that invasion has been a much greater disaster even than Suez,”

A high ranking British diplomat, who quit over the war with Iraq, has called policy in the region a “rank disaster”. Carne Ross told MPs the intelligence presented to the public about weapons of mass destruction was “manipulated”.

He also added that “the proper legal advice from the Foreign office on the legality of the war was ignored”. Mr Blair has always defended the war’s legality and the Butler inquiry said there was no evidence of “deliberate distortion” of intelligence on WMD. During his 45-minute evidence session Mr Ross also attacked the “politicisation” of the diplomatic service, and claimed promotion depended on agreeing with Mr Blair.

Mr Ross, who said he had been a friend of weapons scientist Dr David Kelly and had a hand in drawing up one of the government’s weapons dossiers, said he accepted the prime minister was ultimately responsible for foreign policy. But he added: “Policy making in the run up to the Iraq was, I think, extremely poor in that I don’t think the proper available alternatives to war were properly considered.

“I think the presentation of intelligence to the public on weapons of mass destruction was manipulated and I think that the proper legal advice from the foreign office on the legality of the war was ignored.”

‘Creeping politicisation’

Mr Ross, who was head of strategy for the UN mission in Kosovo, and also played a leading role in devising policy on Iraq and Afghanistan, said decision-making power was concentrated in the hands of too small a group. And there was a “political element at work in promotions to the most senior levels of the foreign office”. He said he had also noticed a growing tendency for officials “to tell ministers what they wish to hear in order to advance one’s own individual prospects”.

He told MPs: “There is a kind of subtle and creeping politicisation of the diplomatic service that in order to get promoted you have to show yourself as being sympathetic in identifying with the views of ministers and, in particular, the prime minister.

“Secondly, and this was the case in the Conservative government before Labour took office, decision-making powers have become increasingly concentrated in Number 10… the Foreign Office has become subsidiary to Number 10.”

On Iraq, he said the measure of success in foreign policy should be “minimisation of suffering” and “if that is your measure, our policy has been a rank disaster in the last few years in terms of blood shed”.

By that measure that invasion has been a much greater disaster even than Suez,” he added.

Mr Ross said Foreign Office officials had been split over the invasion of Iraq.

Meanwhile, the Government hangs on to its right to declare war without parliamentary involvement. The Guardian reports that the government was accused yesterday of giving a “temporising and woolly” response to an inquiry by an all-party committee of peers into the role of parliament over the deployment of British forces overseas.

Lord Holme, chairman of the Lords constitution committee, said the government’s response to its report, Waging War: Parliament’s Role and Responsibility, demonstrated “a complete failure on the part of the government to give any real consideration to our key recommendation – that the role of parliament in the deployment of forces outside the UK should be established in a new convention”.

The government says in its response: “The ability of the executive to take decisions flexibly and quickly using prerogative powers remains an important cornerstone of our democracy”. However, it adds: “Whilst the government could in theory deploy the armed forces overseas without the support of parliament, it would be almost impossible to identify a set of circumstances which would allow the government to act without parliamentary support.”

View with comments

Review: Murder in Samarkand

 in The Book by | View Comments

From neweurasia

I know what you were thinking: ‘It’s about time for another post about Craig Murray, because we haven’t had enough of those.’ Well you are in luck, because I just read his new book, Murder in Samarkand, and am about to ‘ somewhat reluctantly ‘ share my thoughts on it.

But first I should note that, according to Mr. Murray, there are currently no plans to release the book in the States. Luckily, American readers can buy it on the UK Amazon site, although I wouldn’t recommend it as in-flight reading.

Love Murray or hate him, the book is an interesting read that anyone interested in Central Asia or the War on Terror should be familiar with. If you’ve been living in a cave, Craig Murray is the former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan during 2002-2004. He was eventually fired from his post by the Foreign Office, allegedly because of his personal indiscretion, but he argues that he was sacked because of his stance on human rights issues and opposition to the Iraq war. Murder in Samarkand is his side of the story.

The Good

For people who have not had the luxury to spend a great deal of time in Uzbekistan, this book is a wonderful way to obtain information one doesn’t necessarily get from academic journals or news reports. Murray relays the rumors and oral history directly from the mouths of people he meets, including torture victims, KGB agents, and government officials. Naturally all of this information must be taken with a grain of salt, but Murray is fairly up front about how he came by the stories he is told.

I was impressed by Murray’s defense of the accusations leveled against him. He often backs up his points with citations referencing websites on which he posts actual classified transcripts he went to pains to obtain, but was not allowed to publish for fear of legal action.

The book is obviously not a comedy, but there are parts that are hysterical. For instance, in one scene Murray repeats word-for-word Karimov’s ‘paranoid’ speech, complete with a translation from BS into English. I have heard others recount these infamous, rehashed speeches, but Murray describes it in particular detail and directly from the horse’s mouth:

[President Karimov] ‘The greatest misfortune in the history of the Uzbek people is what happened in what you call the Great Game. Unforunately, The British were never able to make any progress stowards Central Asia, and their efforts to do so met with some very historic defeats’

Subtext: your country doesn’t really cut that much ice around here.

‘ and so forth.

Finally, Murray is remarkably candid about his personal life. He seems to hold nothing back about his affair, the end of his marriage, nights spent at strip clubs, etc. There is a flip side to this honesty, however, which will be my first point in the next section.

(more…)

View with comments

Whitewash revisited

 in War in Iraq by | View Comments

The author of the Hutton Report is making a forlorn attempt to salvage his professional reputation by publishing a defence of his judgement, some 2 years after the enquiry. Blairwatch provides a useful reminder and critique of the task facing this rather shaky pillar of the establishment.

The Hutton Inquiry was convened in 2003 with the terms of reference to “…urgently to conduct an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the death of Dr Kelly.”

David Kelly had been an employee of the United Kingdom Ministry of Defence (MoD), an expert in biological warfare, and a former United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq. Kelly’s discussion with BBC journalist Andrew Gilligan about the British government’s dossier on weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq led to a major political scandal. Days after appearing before a Parliamentary committee investigating it David Kelly was found dead.

The public inquiry into the circumstances surrounding his death, ruled that he had committed suicide, and that Kelly had not said some of the quotes attributed to him by Gilligan. One of the many inconsistencies of the Hutton report is that evidence provided to the enquiry by BBC journalist Susan Watts confirmed that Kelly had indeed had serious doubts about the “45 minutes” claim published by the British government, and that he considered the Number 10 press office to be responsible for the inappropriate insertion of this claim into the published dossier on WMD.

Lord Hutton and the UK Government obviously have no problem with paradox!

View with comments

REMEMBRANCE DAY FOR IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN

 in UK Policy by | View Comments

From Military Families Against the War

Members of military families who have lost loved ones or have family serving in Iraq and Afghanistan have designated Saturday November 11 as Iraq and Afghanistan remembrance day.

We have organised a wreath-laying ceremony at the Cenotaph in Whitehall at 2pm on that day. After the ceremony we will be handing in a letter to Tony Blair signed by 500 military family members calling for the troops to be brought home.

We are appealing to members of military families, veterans and service people to join us in holding a minute’s silence and laying wreaths for all the service men and women and civilians killed in Blair’s wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

We will be assembling in Prince Charles Street off Whitehall at 2pm on Saturday November 11th.

Yours

Rose Gentle

Peter Brierley

Military Families Against the War

www.mfaw.org.uk

for further information contact:

Rose Gentle: 07951 767 530

Andrew Burgin: 07939 242 229

View with comments

Labour MP Hypocrisy

 in War in Iraq by | View Comments

Tartan Hero tallies the Labour MPs most responsible for the defeat of last weeks call for an Iraq war enquiry:

A quick glance of Hansard shows that the following EDM1088 signatures, voted against the SNP/Plaid Cymru debate with an almost identical text wording:

The Roll of Shame:

Colin Challen (very disappointing as I admired him for his Climate Change agenda)

Ronnie Campbell

Michael Clapham

Jim Cousins (Labour Scot)

Ann Cryer

Jim Devine (Livingston MP)

Neil Gerrard

Ian Gibson (Labour Scot)

Jim McGovern (Dundee West MP)

Austin Mitchell

Linda Riordan

Jon Trickett

The rush of Scottish, or Scottish-born but representing an English seat, Labour MPs who have rallied to support Blair this time even though they have publicly campaigned against the war on Iraq is galling. Michael Connarty. Ann McKechin. And Joan Ruddock? I used to admire her for her leadership of CND in the 1980s.

Congratulations to Dr Gavin Strang for having the integrity to vote according to his beliefs and previous support for EDM 1088.

It’s very clear that because it was a Nationalist motion they couldn’t bring themselves to support the motion. Talk about putting your party prejudices before your own beliefs, and your own country’s interests, disgraceful. But we wont forget.

View with comments

The sentencing of Saddam Hussein

 in War in Iraq by | View Comments

I hold no brief for Saddam Hussein. He is a gruesome dictator who is much better out of power, and a dangerous man who is much better in captivity. I am nonetheless sorry he will be murdered by the State. Iraq has seen quite enough death already, and like so many of the others, this will merely engender more. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have died already due to the Bush/Blair invasion. The vast majority of them were totally innocent. If you kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people, you are bound to kill the odd guilty one from time to time, whether by accident or design. That is the measure of the Bush/Blair achievement.

This death, just like that of al-Zaqarwi, will be hailed as a “Turning-point” by the invaders, their leaders, puppets and media spokesmen. So was the capture of Saddam, so were the elections, so was the formation of the government, so was the disbanding of the army. It is unsurprising that there have been so many – a downward spiral is just an unending circle of turning points, and Iraq has been embarked on a helter-skelter ride to Hell. Given what came after him, Bush/Blair have achieved the near impossible feat of making Saddam Hussein look like a comparatively better leader for the Iraqi people.

The trial itself was a political charade with the Americans as puppeteers. Judges were repeatedly changed if they showed any sign of independent thought. Defence lawyers who looked too effective were simply murdered. The TV cameras were turned off on the show trial if it got sticky for the US – with an American hand on the button. And the ultimate in stage management, the verdict was handed down two days before the US mid-term elections. Who honestly does not believe that timing was contrived?

I am all in favour of Dictators and War Criminals being punished. I wish Saddam had received a fair trial, and think the Hague would have been much better – he would have been seen to get a fair trial, and I am pretty sure a fair guilty verdict. We should not lose sight of the need to hold justice over the mighty. Bush and Blair are responsible for the unprovoked invasion of a sovereign state, against the wishes of the UN Security Council. They have on their hands the blood of hundreds of thousands of people. I live and hope that I will see the day when they are in the dock.

I will still be against the death penalty.

Craig Murray

View with comments

A Complete Review Of Craig Murray’s Seminar or How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Hate The Left

 in War in Iraq by | View Comments

“There is some validity in this critique, and certainly many on the left display an over-simplistic world view. But then so does this commentator, in being distracted from the truth of our illegal and aggressive foreign policy, which has killed hundreds of thousands of people – rather more important than being annoyed by a chap with a beard.”

From Semp

A Complete Review Of Craig Murray’s Seminar or How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Hate The Left

The other night, Bradford University’s Richmond Building was graced with the presence of Craig Murray, the former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan. Uzbekistan is ostensibly a great friend of the UK and the Coallition of the Willing, so dedicated to those noble values of Freedom and Democracy and Justice that when the CIA happens to drop off an individual who may or may not actually be guilty of something, in Tashkent, their security services stop at nothing to drain the suspect of every last drop of information. The standard gamut of what the US euphmeistically refers to as “hard interrogation” techniques are employed, as well as their own homegrown notoriety: the boiling of subjects alive. Either whole or limb by limb. Let Freedom Ring, baby.

So Murray came to Bradford as part of a tour supporting his new book which goes into greater detail about his discovery of this scheme of “extraordinary rendition”, and his subsequent dismissal from his post by the Home Office after he steadfastly refused to be cowed into silence on the matter. Unlike many speakers embraced by the Stop The War movement, Murray speaks with modesty and a cool head. While he does occasionally stray toward conspiracy theorist territory with some of his musings about the motivations for various wars and military strategy, he remains rooted in the overall political mainstream. This granted him a certain credibility that managed to overcome, for example, the faux-blood spattered banner of the Bradford Stop The War Coallition slung haphazardly from the whiteboard behind him. Too bad this credibility has yet to seep into the movement that supports him.

At the end of the evening, Murray opened the floor for a question and answer session. The first participant was a middle aged white man, who stood up and solemnly intoned “I’m going to say something that’s illegal.” At this point I was already thinking “Oh Christ. Here we go. ‘F*ck Tony Blair, down with capitalism. Fight the system, man'”

“You’ll say it’s glorifying terrorism. Victory to Hamas! Victory to the Insurgents in Iraq!”

When I’m angry I typically have two mental states: Quiet seething rage, and Verbose Invective. But I was so stultified by this demonstration of pure idiocy that was I stuck trotally dumb. The brutal tidal wave of deep foolishness pouring from this man’s primary oriphice seemed to knock my brain out of joint, leaving my jaw hanging, useless, totally mute. Before I even had a chance to try to organise my cluster of outraged semi-thoughts into some sort of blistering response at least half the room erupted into spontaneous applause. At that point, hell froze over, the world became a different place and a million and one shrill right-wingers were proved totally correct.

(more…)

View with comments

The Horrors of “Extraordinary Rendition”

 in Rendition by | View Comments

By Maher Arar in FPIF

Canadian citizen Maher Arar, who is barred from entering the United States, delivered his acceptance speech for the Letelier-Moffitt International Human Rights Award in a pre-recorded videotape. This is a transcript of his speech, which was viewed at the award ceremony hosted by the Institute for Policy Studies on Oct. 18, 2006 in Washington, DC.

This award means a tremendous amount to us. It means that there are still Americans out there who value our struggle for justice.

It means that there are Americans out there who are truly concerned about the future of America. We now know that my story is not a unique one. Over the past two years we have heard from many other people who were, who have been kidnapped, unlawfully detained, tortured and eventually released without being charged with any crime in any country.

Maher Arar, a Canadian citizen, was a victim of the U.S. policy known as “extraordinary rendition.” He was detained by U.S. officials in 2002, accused of terrorist links, and handed over to Syrian authorities, who tortured him. Arar is working with the Center for Constitutional Rights to appeal a case against the U.S. government that was dismissed on national security grounds.

View with comments

EU divided over Uzbek sanctions

 in Uzbekistan by | View Comments

By Stephen Castle in The Independent

Sanctions imposed by Europe on Uzbekistan over human rights abuses are likely to be scaled back this month, prompting divisions over EU efforts to expand its influence in Central Asia.

Although an arms embargo is almost certain to remain in place, there is pressure to lift a visa ban on 12 Uzbek officials, and to unfreeze high-level talks.

The measures were taken in protest at the shooting of at least 180 civilians in Andijan. But unless there is agreement from all 25 EU nations, the sanctions will expire on 17 November.

At a meeting with the EU this week, Uzbekistan is expected to offer to hold a human rights dialogue and to discuss Andijan. Many EU members want a judicial investigation into the massacre, and punishment of those responsible.

But Germany has argued that the visa ban has been ineffective since only eight of those named remain in their posts, and five are in a minor position. Germany’s critics claim that it is motivated by commercial and energy interest in Uzbekistan. But Berlin said a failure to construct a dialogue with Uzbekistan was counter-productive. That position could be supported by France and Spain. However, the UK is pushing for a tough line and said there was a strong case for sanctions to continue.

View with comments

The British parliament is God’s gift to dictatorship

 in UK Policy by | View Comments
By Simon Jenkins in The Guardian

Last night’s vote against an inquiry into the Iraq war underlines parliament’s surrender of its democratic function

The British parliament is God’s gift to dictatorship. If I were an absolute ruler I would get one immediately. Last night Britons were offered the spectacle of their MPs pleading with the government to be allowed an inquiry into the Iraq war. For all the vigour of the debate, they were still humiliated by the government’s supporters. While British soldiers ram democracy down others’ throats at the point of a gun, their representatives seem incapable of performing democracy’s simplest ritual, challenging the executive.

Go here for the full article

View with comments

MPs to vote today on an investigation of Government policy in going to Iraq

 in War in Iraq by | View Comments

From www.impeachblair.org

Members of Parliament today get a chance to cast vote on the need to set up an inquiry into the conduct of Government policy in relation to the war in Iraq.

The debate is secured in Plaid Cymru and SNP Opposition Day debate, and is supported by a cross party coalition of MPs. The motion concerning the debate is based on Early Day Motion 1088, ‘Conduct of Government Policy in relation to the war against Iraq’ * . The EDM and the longer version published in the House of Commons Future Business attracted 164 signatures (including 33 Labour, 60 Conservatives and 59 Liberal Democrats MPs).

Plaid Cymru’s Defence spokesperson, Adam Price MP said today:

“Three and a half years on and Iraq is mired in blood, and the shocking figures published recently show that the death toll has reached 655,000. Neither the Hutton nor Butler Inquiries addressed the question if the Parliament and country were misled into this bloody conflict. I believe that it is essential for the credibility of our democracy that we establish what combination of deception, delusion and ineptitude carried us down this fateful path.

“This debate is not about revisiting old ground ‘ it is an urgent attempt to restore the balance of power between Parliament and the Executive; and of the utmost contemporary relevance if we are to prevent such tragedies from happening again. It will probably be the first and last occasion to restore proper accountability of Government.”

SNP Leader Alex Salmond said:

“This debate offers MPs a second chance – a chance to re-establish Parliamentary accountability over an executive who has led the country into a bloody quagmire – and a last chance to change strategy and direction on the disastrous course of events in Iraq.

“If this motion carries – or indeed even if it records a substantial shift in opinion since the vote which took us to war – Mr Blair’s time in Downing Street will be numbered in days, not weeks or months.”

The text of the motion is based on Early Day Motion 1088:

“That this House believes that there should be a select committee of seven honourable Members, being members of Her Majesty’s Privy Council, to review the way in which the responsibilities of government were discharged in relation to Iraq and all matters relevant thereto, in the period leading up to military action in that country in March 2003 and in its aftermath.”

www.impeachblair.org

View with comments

UK Parliament to Debate Iraq War: Emergency protest called

 in War in Iraq by | View Comments

EMERGENCY PROTEST ON THE IRAQ WAR

TUESDAY 31 OCTOBER ASSEMBLE 5PM-7PM

PARLIAMENT SQUARE, LONDON SW1

On Tuesday 31 October, Parliament will debate and vote on the Iraq war for the first time since March 18 2003. Alex Salmond, one of the MPs who initiated the debate, says: “This is the first time since the invasion of Iraq that the government can be held to account over this illegal and unwanted war.”

STOP THE WAR COALITION has called an emergency protest in front of Parliament when the debate takes place between 5pm and 7pm. MPs must end a war which has brought nothing but mass slaughter and devastation to the people of Iraq. There is no excuse. It’s what the majority of British people want. It’s what even the head of the British armed forces, General Sir Richard Dannatt, wants.

View with comments

Ghost Plane

 in Rendition by | View Comments

From Newsnight

In a new book, British journalist Stephen Grey’s Ghost Plane documents his investigation into the secret CIA practice of transporting terror suspects to third countries – known as “extraordinary rendition”.

The book claims many of those prisoners subsequently suffered torture at the hands of regimes such as Syria – publicly pilloried by the Bush administration but, it says, privately colluded with in the name of defending the US.

View with comments

Torture is “a no brainer for me” – Cheney confirms that detainees were subjected to water-boarding

 in Rendition by | View Comments

By Jonathan S. Landay in McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON – Vice President Dick Cheney has confirmed that U.S. interrogators subjected captured senior al-Qaida suspects to a controversial interrogation technique called “water-boarding,” which creates a sensation of drowning.

Cheney indicated that the Bush administration doesn’t regard water-boarding as torture and allows the CIA to use it. “It’s a no-brainer for me,” Cheney said at one point in an interview.

Cheney’s comments, in a White House interview on Tuesday with a conservative radio talk show host, appeared to reflect the Bush administration’s view that the president has the constitutional power to do whatever he deems necessary to fight terrorism.

The U.S. Army, senior Republican lawmakers, human rights experts and many experts on the laws of war, however, consider water-boarding cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment that’s banned by U.S. law and by international treaties that prohibit torture. Some intelligence professionals argue that it often provides false or misleading information because many subjects will tell their interrogators what they think they want to hear to make the water-boarding stop.

Republican Sens. John Warner of Virginia, John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina have said that a law Bush signed last month prohibits water-boarding. The three are the sponsors of the Military Commissions Act, which authorized the administration to continue its interrogations of enemy combatants.

The radio interview Tuesday was the first time that a senior Bush administration official has confirmed that U.S. interrogators used water-boarding against important al-Qaida suspects, including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged chief architect of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Mohammad was captured in Pakistan on March 1, 2003, and turned over to the CIA.

Water-boarding means holding a person’s head under water or pouring water on cloth or cellophane placed over the nose and mouth to simulate drowning until the subject agrees to talk or confess.

Lee Ann McBride, a spokeswoman for Cheney, denied that Cheney confirmed that U.S. interrogators used water-boarding or endorsed the technique.

“What the vice president was referring to was an interrogation program without torture,” she said. “The vice president never goes into what may or may not be techniques or methods of questioning.”

In the interview on Tuesday, Scott Hennen of WDAY Radio in Fargo, N.D., told Cheney that listeners had asked him to “let the vice president know that if it takes dunking a terrorist in water, we’re all for it, if it saves American lives.”

“Again, this debate seems a little silly given the threat we face, would you agree?” Hennen said.

“I do agree,” Cheney replied, according to a transcript of the interview released Wednesday. “And I think the terrorist threat, for example, with respect to our ability to interrogate high-value detainees like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, that’s been a very important tool that we’ve had to be able to secure the nation.”

Cheney added that Mohammed had provided “enormously valuable information about how many (al-Qaida members) there are, about how they plan, what their training processes are and so forth. We’ve learned a lot. We need to be able to continue that.”

“Would you agree that a dunk in water is a no-brainer if it can save lives?” asked Hennen.

“It’s a no-brainer for me, but for a while there, I was criticized as being the vice president ‘for torture.’ We don’t torture. That’s not what we’re involved in,” Cheney replied. “We live up to our obligations in international treaties that we’re party to and so forth. But the fact is, you can have a fairly robust interrogation program without torture, and we need to be able to do that.”

The interview transcript was posted on the White House Web site. Interview of the Vice President by Scott Hennen, WDAY.

CIA spokeswoman Michelle Neff said, “While we do not discuss specific interrogation methods, the techniques we use have been reviewed by the Department of Justice and are in keeping with our laws and treaty obligations. We neither conduct nor condone torture.”

View with comments

US ‘arrogant and stupid’ in Iraq

 in War in Iraq by | View Comments

From BBC Online

A senior US state department official has said that the US has shown “arrogance and stupidity” in Iraq. Alberto Fernandez made the remarks during an interview with Arabic television station al-Jazeera.

The state department says Mr Fernandez was quoted incorrectly – but BBC Arabic language experts say Mr Fernandez did indeed use the words. It comes after President George W Bush discussed changing tactics with top US commanders to try to combat the unrest.

Mr Fernandez, an Arabic speaker who is director of public diplomacy in the state department’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, told Qatar-based al-Jazeera that the world was “witnessing failure in Iraq”.

View with comments

No to Torture – former British ambassador to Uzbekistan speaks out against UK/US torture collaboration

 in Uncategorized by | View Comments

From IndyMedia UK

Craig Murray, former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan with over 20 years of foreign affairs experience, talks about torture and human righs abuses in Uzbekistan. He presented his book: “Murder in Samarkand – A British Ambassador’s Controversial Defiance of Tyranny in the War on Terror” at the Edinburgh Independent and Radical Bookfair on Friday, 13th of October 2006, at the session on “Political Terrorism and the US Imperial Project”.

On a day when BBC News reports that a third of the world’s population supports torture in some cases, it seems important to give you the opportunity to listen to this audio, where Craig Murray talks about human rights abuses and torture in Uzbekistan.

Most importantly, he gives examples about “false-positive” outcomes of torture cases, where people consent to any charges brought forward just to stop the pain on themselves or their families members.

He also gives examples on how Britain and the US support the torture by using the extracted, often false information, to back up their success rate on the War in Terror, and by backing the abusive regime of Islam Karimov.

Go here to read the full article and listen to the interviews

View with comments

Crucial Extradition Treaty Vote Tomorrow!

 in UK Policy by | View Comments

From www.notoextradition.co.uk

We now have confirmation that the Commons will be voting on crucial amendments to the UK-US Extradition Treaty 2003 on TUESDAY 24TH OCTOBER 2006.

If the vote is won, this will directly affect cases of several British Citizens facing extradition to the U.S. (including that of Babar Ahmad).

Please follow the steps below and urgently contact your MP to make sure they clear their diaries to attend the vote. MP’s from all parties need to be contacted, ESPECIALLY Labour MP’s.

This will take less than 10 minutes of your time.

STEP 1: Go to www.writetothem.com and paste the paragraph below in the box. You must include your name and postal address:

I am writing to you as your constituent to urge you to vote to support both amendments to the UK-US Extradition Act 2003 (prima facie evidence and forum) when the Police and Justice Bill returns to the Commons on 24th October 2006. I would urge you to please make yourself available to vote on that day to back both amendments and to encourage your fellow MP’s to do the same. I hope that you will vote to give British citizens the same rights as the U.S Government gives to its citzens.

STEP 2: Follow up the email with a phonecall.

Ring 020 7219 6967 (House of Commons Switchboard) and ask for your MP’s office.

Give them your name and address.

Tell the staff you have sent an email and would like your MP to back both amendments to the Extradition Act 2003 and would like them to cancel any prior engagements to make themselves available to vote on Tuesday 24th October 2006.

Please pass this email on to all your contacts TODAY and circulate on mailing lists and forums so as many MP’s as possible contacted.

Thank you for your time and efforts

Yours sincerely

Free Babar Ahmad Campaign

www.freebabarahmad.com

View with comments

Aznar is gone, Berlusconi is gone, Blair has gone and now Bush must go!

 in Speeches by | View Comments

On Monday, October 2nd, more than six hundred people packed into Cooper Union’s Great Hall, New York, for a meeting held by World Can’t Wait [worldcantwait.org], to respond to Bush’s new torture legislation and to mobilize for nation-wide protest on October 5th to Drive Out the Bush Regime.

Craig was one one of several speakers that also included Alice Walker, Mark Ruffalo, Olympia Dukakis, Daniel Ellsberg, Boots Riley, Malachy McCourt, Bill Goodman, Reno, Elmaz Abinader, and a special message from Sean Penn.

An extract from Craig’s speech:

“They revoke our civil rights and patronize Muslims as non-humans so that when they arrest and torture humans we accept this, so that when they tell us habeas corpus is gone we will accept this, so that when they invade Muslim countries to get their oil and gas we will accept this’we are not accepting it anymore! It is the anti-war movement in the United Kingdom that has caused Tony Blair to have to leave office. The architects of this crusade are being driven out. Aznar is gone, Berlusconi is gone, Blair has gone and now Bush must go!”

Click here to hear Craig’s speech (mp3) and go here for full details of the meeting and the other speakers.

View with comments