Kurds, Jews, And Shi'a Shoes
by Gerald A. Honigman
As I'm sure you've heard by now, on a recent surprise visit to Iraq, President Bush had to duck when a Shi'a Arab journalist threw shoes at him in protest of American policies and presence in Iraq. During a news conference, Muntadhar al-Zaidi yelled out, "this is a gift from the Iraqis, a farewell kiss, you dog" and fired away.
Thrown shoes and dogs are about as low as you go in the Arab world. Forget about Marley and Me, Rin Tin Tin, or Old Yeller. I wish I could say that I was shocked by this disrespect usually reserved for such folks as the tolerant Arabs' kilab yahud—Jew dogs. I wasn't. Polls show that most Arab Iraqis—especially Shi'a—supported both al-Zaidi. While he was roughed up by those with a stake in the current regime, those later reports reveal the pulse of the nation.
While the Sunni have no love for America either—they were Saddam's folks—they now fear what's in store for themselves later on. While estimates of the dead vary (some hundreds of thousands), the 60% of Iraq who are Shi'a had their own aspirations suppressed only via the iron fist of the Sunni Arabs' Saddam. He employed the same murderous tactics against them as he did with non-Arab Kurds in the north.
Similar bloody actions against others in neighboring Iran by the majority non-Arab, Persian Shi'a are probably not a bad model for what to expect after America leaves a Shi'a-dominated Iraq as well …Payback time, so to speak. And don't expect a President Obama to move back in.
Unfortunately, the Kurds will also be caught up in this murderous, age old Arab feud. The one thing both Shi'a and Sunni Arabs can agree on (just like with Israel, the black African Sudan, Berber North Africa, and elsewhere) is that Kurds should have no claims on alleged "purely Arab patrimony." Having supported America's move against Saddam, decades of intense study, publication in academic journals and elsewhere, and involvement with the region still made me very wary.
While the Arabs owed Great Britain a huge debt for the very creation of a united, Arab-ruled Iraq out of the post-World War I Mandate of Mesopotamia, this didn't stop them not long afterwards from rising up against what they only saw as British imperialism. No giving the devil his due here…Use him then lose him. I can understand that. Too bad Arabs can't grant this same understanding to others though.
Imperialism is only nasty when it's not Arabs dishing it out. How do you think the region became "purely Arab patrimony" in too many an Arab mind? Without the Brits' involvement, the Turkish phoenix rising under Ataturk from the ruins of the centuries' old Ottoman Empire would have surely grabbed the oil-rich region around Mosul (which it formerly ruled) and probably would have extended its claim to the black gold of Kirkuk as well.
To make the new prospective Arab state viable (the British navy had recently switched from coal to oil and was the main arm of the British Empire), the Brits had to attach the oil of the Kurdish north to the Sunni Arab center and Shi'a Arab oil of the south. In the process of siring the Middle East's version of Yugoslavia, London thus shafted Kurds out of the best chance they ever had at regaining their own independence…something the Brits had promised them earlier as well.
After having their very country created and handed to them by the Brits (who also supplied aircraft and such to fight the Kurds), the Arabs soon revolted to try to drive the Brits out. Granted, imperialism has its nasty side, and the Brits created an Arab Iraq for their own reasons, yet still…
So, the point here is that America should have known not to expect any gratitude from most Iraqi Arabs either. Hence the thrown shoes, the thrower now a national hero, and so forth. There's yet another angle to this…
Think of all the American blood, lives, money, and other aid which have been spent for the sake of Arabs in Iraq, giving them new freedoms which they have never had. Trillions of American dollars will be spent before it's over, billions each month. Visit a local VA hospital to see just some of the other tragic, lasting costs…
That shoe-thrower who called President Bush a dog would have literally been fed to the dogs if he tried that trick with the man America freed him from. The innocents who died whom the shoe thrower complained about mostly died because of the same cowardly Arab trick Israel deals with daily. Arabs love to use their non-combatants as human shields…against the Geneva Conventions, and so forth. They shoot and then run behind the skirts of their women and toys of their kids.
Was/is America hoping to get something positive for itself as a result of its Iraq expenditures? Sure…But does that erase the above truisms? Think about those anti-Israel voices quick to protest about two billion dollars in aid sent to Israel each year…an investment whose return comes back to us positively in many ways. The current war in Iraq costs America more (for the sake of Arabs who mostly hate us as "infidels" in a context of a war for their Dar ul-Islam) in one week than Israel gets in foreign assistance in one year.
And, in exchange for that assistance, the State Department feels it has the right to pressure Jews into suicidal concessions. America has already spent about $500 billion dollars for Iraq, with much more set to come. It would take Israel centuries to get this much aid from America. And Israel doesn't ask for American blood to be shed on its behalf or to be bribed to display America's own values and democratic inclinations.
How long will the latter last among Arabs after America's exit from Iraq? Ironically, the one people in Iraq who better share our values--the Kurds--are the folks the Arabist James Baker types in the State Department are determined to shaft yet again on behalf of Arabs who want to be sure that oil in Kurdish lands remains part of the "purely Arab patrimony."
Sound familiar?
Same shafting game you read above…just different shafters.
While I didn't vote for the Obama-Biden ticket largely because of the long list of known anti-Semitic and anti-Israel friends and advisors Obama has aligned himself with (he's already brought several into his future Administration), Senator Joe Biden has a better understanding of the Yugoslavian nature of Iraqi demographics than most politicians.
I'm hoping against the odds that he'll pull more weight than the shaft the Jews and Kurds Arabists who are all-too-common in the State Department (and among Obama's buddies) which Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton will soon be leading.
~ Gerald A. Honigman
WFRL WISHES FERALMANITY A JOYOUS NOEL
Personnel:
The Bush administration claims that the use of the military to support civil authorities stems from core national values as expressed in the Constitution. Article I, Section 8. It states, "Congress shall have power... to provide for calling forth the Militia to execute laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections, and repel invasions."
The establishment of the new units "builds upon a decade of improving [Defense Department] capabilities to deal with a domestic terrorist attack involving a weapon of mass destruction," McHale said. The first new 4,700-member task force was assigned to a component of U.S. Northern Command on Oct. 1, 2008 McHale said. The new unit, he said, is built around a core of active-duty soldiers from the U.S. Army 3rd Infantry Division's 1st Brigade Combat Team based at Fort Stewart, Ga.
The task forces would be ordered into action by the president, McHale said, following requests for disaster-relief assistance from state governors. The Bush administration indicates that the President is authorized by the Constitution and Title 10 (10 USC 331–334) to suppress insurrections, rebellions, and domestic violence. After issuing a Cease and Desist Order, the President issues an executive order that directs the Attorney General and the SECDEF to take appropriate steps to disperse insurgents and restore law and order.
However the USNORTHCOM Concept Plan (CONPLAN) 2502 (Civil Disturbance Operations), is the plan for supporting state and local authorities during civil disturbances. This plan serves as the foundation for any CDO operation and standardizes most activities and command relationships. Tasks performed by military forces may include joint patrolling with law enforcement officers; securing key buildings, memorials, intersections and bridges; and acting as a quick reaction force.
The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 (PCA), subsequent amendments and policy decisions prohibits the use of federal military forces (to include Reserve forces) to perform internal police functions. PCA thus restricts the type of support DoD can provide domestic law enforcement organizations. There are a wide variety of exceptions to the PCA and the law essentially gives the President all the authority he needs to employ DoD forces inside the U.S. although there may appropriately be political consequence that would inhibit such employment.
In some counties it is a crime to refuse assistance. In general, members of a posse comitatus have been permitted to use force if necessary to achieve a posse's legitimate ends, but state laws differ as to the legal liability of one who in good faith aids an officer himself acting beyond his authority. Congress sought to terminate the prevalent use of federal soldiers in civilian law enforcement roles in the South during the Reconstruction Period following the Civil War. The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 created general prohibition against use of military personnel in civilian law enforcement. The most renowned statutory exception has been traditionally referred to as The Insurrection Acts (10 USC 331–334) that were modified and renamed to Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order by the 2007 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).
The new language clarifies Presidential authority to invoke the acts for situations resulting from natural disasters and other emergencies. Military resources may be employed in support of civilian law enforcement operations in the 50 States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the U.S. territories and possessions only in the parameters of the Constitution and laws of the United States and the authority of the President and the Secretary of Defense, including delegations of that authority through this Directive or other means. 
"Our job at NORTHCOM is to ensure that if there's a seam or a gap there that we're thinking of how we could fill that with some other capability out of" the Defense Department "What that has forced us to do it is think about, 'How do you solve that time/distance problem, even on a short-notice event. And so I have access to capabilities now that I didn't have a year or two ago that I can move very quickly to fill that need. said Gen. Victor E. Renuart Jr., commander of United States Northern Command and the North American Aerospace Defense Commander. "For example, if there were something that occurred in the El Paso area that the Texas National Guard might not have a capability immediately available to respond, but Fort Bliss did in an active-duty unit, then I would pull that active-duty unit out and make that available to the state to assist."
DOD task force operations to quell civil disturbances off military property can be initiated only by Presidential order. Cases of such initiation in the past occurred during the urban political and racial unrest in the Vietnam era when federal troops were deployed on a number of occasions. GARDEN PLOT operations may include terrorist incidents, though the FBI, not the Army, will then be the lead agent. In the event of civil unrest upon the high seas and waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, where in the Coast Guard has standing statutory responsibility, Coast Guard units will in all likelihood be legitimately involved in law enforcement operations well before any Presidential invocation of civil disturbance plans.
