Why won’t John Howard admit that our participation in the invasion of Iraq increased the risk that Australia will be targetted for a terrorist attack?
Pretty simple really. If he admits the obvious, as the AFP chief Mick Keelty did, then he’s back to square one in explaining his decision to go to war (see Terrorist attack on Australia inevitable, warns FBI expert).
We know that intelligence agencies advised that invading Iraq would INCREASE the risk of terrorism in general. We know that there were no WMDs, so Howard’s stated reason for war – that it would reduce the terrorist risk – is wrong, and we also know that Howard was not relying on the intelligence service’s objective assessment of the Iraq risk, but, like Bush and Blair, decided to invade then looked for evidence to convince the UN it was justified (see the Parliamentary Committee WMD report) .
We also know that the Iraq invasion and occupation split the world and damaged co-operation in controlling terrorism, and that the war could drag on indefinitely, sucking energy from the United States defence force and adding people to terrorist ranks.
Surely, we’re reaching endgame on Howard’s credibility on security. Surely few of us trust him to tell us the truth any more.
That’s how I explain the sudden rush for even more terrorism laws – now to include socialising with suspected terrorists – crushing even more civil liberties. The idea is to force Labor to oppose some of the more extreme measures, and thus blame Labor if an attack occurs. Basic stuff.
The NSW government’s announcement that it would extend its already draconian terror laws is based on a different calculation. The Carr government is now so discredited and rancid that any way to divert attention from its disgraceful management of our hospitals, schools and public transport is a relief. On past performance the State Liberals will back any extension of anti-terror laws. Carr’s justification – that existing laws weren’t designed to deal with “murder planned on such a vast scale” as Madrid – is ludicrous. He passed his laws after Bali!
Overlaying the decisions by the NSW and federal governments is the calculation that they want to be SEEN to be responding to Spain, and this way there’s no real financial investment required. If you wanted to defend us against terrorism at home, you’d be training drivers of chemical trucks how to react to a hijacking, you’d be securing ALL our airports, and you’d be widely encouraging participation by the public. But that requires money and it also requires TRUST.
Do we trust the federal and state governments? No.
I set out the premium on trust between citizens and government in today’s world in reporting Carr’s new anti-terror laws in 2002, and suggested that the use of Carr’s extraordinary new police powers be overseen by an Australian trusted by all of us, like Sir William Deane. But no, the police minister oversees everything, and he doesn’t even need to report to Parliament. My reports included Costa: Police watchdog, Protecting our safety AND our liberty and Democracy’s watchdogs blind to the danger
On the federal front trust is even more important, so people feel safe in coming forward to give information about their suspicions, particularly people from minority communities. Locking people up for ‘consorting’ will REDUCE trust and REDUCE cooperation.
From what I’ve read a big factor in the rejection of the Spanish conservatives by the Spanish people was disgust that they ware again being lied to, with the government blaming ETA without evidence. I hope the people also sack Howard, Bush and Blair to cleanse all their democracies and allow their successors to rebuild the trust in government so vital to defeat terrorism (see the Financial Times report Blair more isolated over Iraq policy).
Today, a piece by Webdiary debutant Sam Guthrie on Keelty, Damien Hogan rounds up progress on the war on terror, and some seriously wild reports claiming the US is importing WMDs into Iraq. Noam Chomsky’s latest on Iraq is at The Guardian.
*
Sam Guthrie
In response to The American elections, the future of alliances and the lessons of Spain, and the article I am sure you are about to write regarding the Government’s reaction to Commissioner Keelty’s analysis of the terror threat to Australia post Iraq, please find the attached torrent.
As a PhD student in politics and international relations I am wading through security related analysis every day. I find the Howard Government’s attack on Commissioner Keelty and every academic and analyst who correctly assert the view that our membership of the Coalition of the Willing has made us a more prominent terrorist target, absolutely appalling. It is a new low in political expediency.
The Abstract Reality Express rumbles back into town
What is the latest political dumb show our Prime Minister is performing? Are we in for more of the rhetorical hop scotch we saw during the recent WMD inquiry? Hands up if you’re sick of being treated like an imbecile by a Government whose grasp on the concept of honesty extends only as far as the sound bite of a few cautious, well chosen words from a suburban lawyer “based on the information available to us at the time”.
Yes the Abstract Reality Express has rumbled back into town as the Prime Minister and Attorney General attempt to sell the idea that whilst the security of the country is at constant risk from Islamic terrorism, such risks are in no way connected to or increased by Australia’s role in the invasion of Iraq. This despite claims to the contrary yesterday by such authorities as the Federal Police Commissioner, the NSW Police Commissioner, internationally acclaimed Al-Qaeda analyst Rohan Guna Ratna and a videotape, purportedly from Osama bin Laden’s Al Qaeda, saying it carried out the attacks in Spain due to that country’s support for the US-led war on Iraq.
Is there a better example of a Government wanting to have its cake and eat it too? On one hand they jump on the events in Madrid knowing it facilitates the opportunity to trot out the national security credentials which since 2001 have inspired enough fear to translate into electoral support for the Coalition. On the other, the Government furiously seeks to avoid any responsibility for a rise in the level of potential terrorist threat which may be due to their strategically naive involvement in Iraq.
What is more disturbing is the fact that the Prime Minister, the Attorney General and today the Foreign Minister and Defence Minister are willing to compromise the vital experience and expertise of the Federal Police Commissioner to defend themselves.
This is the blame shifting tradition that saw the anonymous bureaucrats and members of the Defence Force blamed for the children overboard claim, and ONA blamed for Howard’s false WMD claims. In the face of ailing support and descending polls it seems the Government has become even more brazen in placing its own political success above the security of the nation.
Today as FBI executive assistant director (counter-terrorism) John Pistole, goes on record stating Australia’s alliance with the US has made it more of a terrorist target, we discover that moments after making a similar claim on Channel Nine’s Sunday program Federal Police Commissioner Keelty was rebuked by Arthur Sinodinis, the Prime Minister’s chief of staff, for contradicting the Government’s message.
Whilst such a contempt for truth may be permissible when used merely to manipulate the trauma of drowning refugees to win an election or to justify sending the sons and daughters of Australia into an unjust war, when it directly effects the security of the nation surely the Government must, at last, be called to account.
The Howard Coalition is fast losing its credibility on the last policy front upon which it thought it could hold its ground: National Security. Rather than providing the country with a single streamlined department specifically dealing with security issues the Governments anti-terrorism apparatus has been exposed as fractured, de-centralised and at the whim of a blinkered political agenda.
The treatment of Commissioner Keelty is despicable considering the remarkable role he has played in furthering the security of the country since 9/11. During the Bali investigations he worked not only as the operational chief of the AFP but as a fine diplomat for Australian security, developing a level of regional cooperation which the erratic diplomacy of our Foreign Minister had failed to achieve. The regional networks on security that he continues to spearhead, the experience he has garnered working on the ground in terrorist related investigations and his exposure to vast intelligence sources (including that of ASIO) makes him one of the most well informed commentators in the country on matters of security. By rebuking him the Government has not only shown its contempt f or Keelty but the role of the AFP and the vital work it has achieved since 2001.
It is widely acknowledged that the war against terror is an untraditional conflict, a war that will not be won on a battlefield but rather through the effective analysis of intelligence. The treatment of Keelty underlines the reoccurring crisis in Australian intelligence and indeed the wider Public Service. He has been rebuked for not initiating the self censorship that the Parliamentary Joint Committee Inquiry into Intelligence on Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction found rife in ONA’s analysis of the WMD threat.
In short, Keelty has been attacked for not telling the Government what it wanted to hear. This, during a time where our intelligence should be our strongest weapon against the terrorist threat, is further evidence of the Governments inability to priorities the security of the country over the security of its’ own opinion polls.
***
Damien Hogan
With the dust yet to settle in Madrid and our own Prime Minister claiming “security” as one of his pre-election strengths, I thought a quick roundup of the War on Terror might be in order.
Obviously this is not a war in the traditional sense. Al Qaeda have no plans to occupy and hold the western half of Utah or embark on a Lend-Lease agreement. So what are their plans and how has the war been going for them? By a stroke of luck Osama’s “secret” plans were left on the bus seat next to me today:
Our Secret Plan – August, 2001
* Create fear
Fear is the backbone of any terrorist organisation. Lacking the resources to mount any large scale invasions or military occupations, the anticipation of horror is our greatest weapon. The acts themselves will probably generate their own publicity, but ideally local politicians should never let the concept slip from the public’s mind for more than a few days – some kind of “terror indicator” (colours would be good) that can be placed on the front pages of newspapers or in TV bulletins would be useful. Obviously, it is mere fantasy to think of it, but an expensive television advertising campaign promoting the concept of “being terrified” would be great. To make it more palatable we might have to substitute the word “alert” for “terrified”, but the message should still be clear.
* Alienate US from her allies
The combined forces of The West are enormous. With a unified approach they would be almost unbeatable. We must divide and conquer. The UK is touch and go (and Australia is simply untouchable) but 150+ or more of the remaining countries should be easily separated. The mere appearance of the US (or even a small handful of minor powers) as “rogue states” will be an enormously powerful propaganda tool in recruiting new members.
* Massively increase US military spending
This should weaken one of America’s great strengths (their economy) and may directly lead to pain in the American community (via reduced services and/or higher taxes). A massive military build up in conventional weapons (and high tech weapons in particular) would be largely ineffectual in fighting us and so should be encouraged. In a perfect world a focus on space-based weapons or even a missile shield would be excellent as these are simultaneously astronomically expensive and entirely useless. As an additional benefit, military spending also consumes resources that might otherwise be used to woo our power-base of poverty stricken, powerless, despotically ruled zealots.
* Unite the Arab world
There is no need to spell out that fighting amongst ourselves is the road to ruin. Whilst our differences are large, we can surely draw together around a common enemy. If we can somehow get the US president to use terms like “crusade” when discussing various conflicts we will be doing very well indeed. I can’t see how this is possible as it would play completely into our hands… but Allah willing.
* Disperse US forces
The more countries the US attacks the better. Occupation will generate thousands of new supporters. Standard military theory teaches that the concentration of force is vital for any victory. Arab countries are preferred targets but beggars can’t be choosers. There will be real dangers for us if America remains focussed on Afghanistan for any length of time. An attack on Iran or Syria would be excellent – North Korea would be OK, but would take the spotlight of us and is not preferred. I was joking the other day with Omar about how funny it would be if the US attacked that infidel Hussein!
* Training facilities
If I may briefly continue the joke and presume that somehow all sense had left our enemy’ minds and that they DID invade Iraq – well that would be a great service. A fundamentalist Islamic government would almost certainly eventually take power and prior to that event many of the techniques of terrorism would be best taught in the kind of arena that Baghdad would offer. I think we could say with great confidence that Baghdad would become to us what Fort Bragg is to the Americans.
* USA out of Saudi
We must remove American military forces from the holy land.
* Weaken moderate leaders
We should hope for US arrogance towards unstable regimes. If possible open threats and/or blatant bribes by the US should be encouraged. We must separate the people from their governments. This should create either a shift to policies more favourable to our position or alternatively more repression from those regimes. Either helps us.
* Increase recruitment
Any US action which leads to increased recruitment or support from the countries in which we operate should be supported. It goes without saying that the American’s only real chance of final victory is to turn the locals against us. We must prevent this. Racism is our friend.
* Attack American legal institutions
Whilst there is already plenty of material to work with, anything which increases global the perception of hypocrisy by the Americans will be propaganda gold. This is a very tough one as many of the American’s rights are enshrined in the constitution. But since we are making wish lists, it would be great to get the US to hold without trial (or even deport) thousands of innocent middle eastern looking citizens. The rights of the 1st and 4th and 5th amendments should be gutted. Gulags would be good. In addition, multilateral treaties (eg Chemical, Nuclear or Biological treaties) should be ignored for the US and Israel but rigorously applied to others.
* Ignore Palestine
Any peace in Palestine would be a terrible blow and rob us of a great deal of “righteousness”. Luckily the US seems to determined to let the Israelis solve this one on their own! So that pot should be boiling for a couple of decades yet.
* Discourage non-military solutions
Military solutions inevitably lead to collateral damage no matter how carefully they are carried out. Collateral damage is the life blood of “radical” recruitment. Occupation is equally useful. If possible every problem should be viewed by the US as a military problem.
* Finally – avoid capture of important leaders (eg Me)
Whilst I technically play a very small role in the actual organisation, my capture would be a significant propaganda defeat. America will probably recognise this and would show themselves as complete fools if they were to become distracted by other less important targets e.g. Hussein. If however I am captured alive then under no circumstance must I be tried fairly for my crimes or kept alive to rot in a cell. My trial must appear to be manifestly biased (or even illegal if possible) and martyrdom would greatly increase the movement’s power and legitimacy.
*
Two things occurred to me as I sat on the bus and read this document.
1) Even blind Freddy could guess Al Qaeda’s plan, and
2) There appeared to be not a single significant setback in the last 4 years.
***
The following reports were compiled by Scott Burchill, who warns they have not been verified to date
U.S. Unloading WMD in Iraq
Tehran Times | March 13 2004 – TEHRAN: Over the past few days, in the wake of the bombings in Karbala and the ideological disputes that delayed the signing of Iraq’s interim constitution, there have been reports that U.S. forces have unloaded a large cargo of parts for constructing long-range missiles and weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in the southern ports of Iraq.
A reliable source from the Iraqi Governing Council, speaking on condition of anonymity, told the Mehr News Agency that U.S. forces, with the help of British forces stationed in southern Iraq, had made extensive efforts to conceal their actions.
He added that the cargo was unloaded during the night as attention was still focused on the aftermath of the deadly bombings in Karbala and the signing of Iraq’s interim constitution.
The source said that in order to avoid suspicion, ordinary cargo ships were used to download the cargo, which consisted of weapons produced in the 1980s and 1990s.
He mentioned the fact that the United States had facilitated Iraq’s WMD program during the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq and said that some of the weapons being downloaded are similar to those weapons, although international inspectors had announced Saddam Hussein’s Baath regime had destroyed all its WMD.
The source went on to say that the rest of the weapons were probably transferred in vans to an unknown location somewhere in the vicinity of Basra overnight.
“Most of these weapons are of Eastern European origin and some parts are from the former Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc. The U.S. obtained them through confiscations during sales of banned arms over the past two decades,” he said.
This action comes as certain U.S. and Western officials have been pointing out the fact that no weapons of mass destruction have been discovered in Iraq and the issue of Saddam’s trial begins to take center stage.
In addition, former chief UN weapons inspector Hans Blix has emphasized that the U.S. and British intelligence agencies issued false reports on Iraq leading to the U.S. attack.
Meanwhile, the suspicious death of weapons inspector David Kelly is also an unresolved issue in Britain.
*
Occupation Forces Official Claims to Have No Information About Transfer of WMD to Iraq
A security official for the coalition forces in Iraq said that he has not received any information about the unloading of weapons of mass destruction in ports in southern Iraq.
Shane Wolf told the Mehr News Agency that the occupation forces have received no reports on such events, but said he hoped that the coalition forces would find the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction one day.
Coalition forces and inspectors have so far been unable to find any Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. The U.S. invaded Iraq under the pretext that Iraq possessed a stockpile of weapons of mass destruction.
*
US tried to plant WMDs, failed: whistleblower, see http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/?page=story_12-8-2003_pg1_9
Daily Times Monitor – Lehore, Pakistan – 15 March: According to a stunning report posted by a retired Navy Lt Commander and 28-year veteran of the Defense Department (DoD), the Bush administration’s assurance about finding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq was based on a Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) plan to “plant” WMDs inside the country. Nelda Rogers, the Pentagon whistleblower, claims the plan failed when the secret mission was mistakenly taken out by “friendly fire”, the Environmentalists Against War report.
Nelda Rogers is a 28-year veteran debriefer for the DoD. She has become so concerned for her safety that she decided to tell the story about this latest CIA-military fiasco in Iraq. According to Al Martin Raw.com: “Ms Rogers is number two in the chain of command within this DoD special intelligence office. This is a ten-person debriefing unit within the central debriefing office for the Department of Defense.”
The information that is being leaked out is information “obtained while she was in Germany heading up the debriefing of returning service personnel, involved in intelligence work in Iraq for the DoD and/or the CIA. “According to Ms Rogers, there was a covert military operation that took place both preceding and during the hostilities in Iraq,” reports Al Martin Raw.com, an online subscriber-based news/analysis service which provides “Political, Economic and Financial Intelligence”.
Al Martin is a retired Lt Commander (US Navy), the author of a memoir called “The Conspirators: Secrets of an Iran-Contra Insider,” and is considered one of America’s foremost experts on corporate and government fraud. Ms Rogers reports that this particular covert operation team was manned by former military personnel and “the unit was paid through the Department of Agriculture in order to hide it, which is also very commonplace”.
According to Al Martin Raw.com, “the Agriculture Department has often been used as a paymaster on behalf of the CIA, DIA, NSA and others”. According to the Al Martin Raw.com story, another aspect of Ms Rogers’ report concerns a covert operation which was to locate the assets of Saddam Hussein and his family, including cash, gold bullion, jewelry and assorted valuable antiquities. The problem became evident when “the operation in Iraq involved 100 people, all of whom apparently are now dead, having succumbed to so-called ‘friendly fire’. The scope of this operation included the penetration of the Central Bank of Iraq, other large commercial banks in Baghdad, the Iraqi National Museum and certain presidential palaces where monies and bullion were secreted.”
“They identified about $2 billion in cash, another $150 million in Euros, in physical banknotes, and about another $100 million in sundry foreign currencies ranging from Yen to British Pounds,” reports Al Martin.
“These people died, mostly in the same place in Baghdad, supposedly from a stray cruise missile or a combination of missiles and bombs that went astray,” Martin continues. “There were supposedly 76 who died there and the other 24 died through a variety of ‘friendly fire’, ‘mistaken identity’ and some of them?their whereabouts are simply unknown.” Ms Rogers’ story sounds like an updated 21st-century version of Treasure Island meets Ali Baba and the Bush Cabal Thieves, writes Martin.
“This was a contingent of CIA/ DoD operatives, but it was really the CIA that bungled it,” Ms Rogers said. “They were relying on the CIA’s ability to organise an effort to seize these assets and to be able to extract these assets because the CIA claimed it had resources on the ground within the Iraqi army and the Iraqi government who had been paid. That turned out to be completely bogus. As usual.”
“CIA people were supposed to be handling it,” Martin continues. “They had a special ‘black’ aircraft to fly it out. But none of that happened because the regular US Army showed up, stumbled onto it and everyone involved had to scramble. These new Iraqi “asset seizures” go directly to the New US Ruling Junta. The US Viceroy in Iraq Paul Bremer is reportedly drinking Saddam’s $2000 a bottle Napoleon-era brandy, smoking his expensive Davidoff cigars and he has even furnished his office with Saddam’s Napoleon-era furniture.