I'm still in regular contact with the people I met in Baghdad during my assignment there last year. Friendships forged under such intense conditions tend to endure given the shared experiences of life under fire, despite the erratic contact that living on opposite sides of the globe imposes. I had an interesting telephone conversation with J last week, one of the Brits who made my stay in Iraq so much fun. Unlike my parent agency, which recalled me to the UK when the security situation deteriorated, hers kept her out there and she's been working there ever since with just the odd trip back to England to keep her sane. She says that the situation on the ground there now is worse than at any time since the end of the War and that the close protection teams who provide bodyguard services to British and American staff are no longer prepared to guarantee security along the notorious Qadisiyah Expressway, the 15 mile stretch of road which links Baghdad's Green Zone with BIAP, its airport. When Tony Blair paid a surprise visit to the Green Zone last month, he made the journey by helicopter. It's a move which has now become the defacto means of transport for my friend J and those British and U.S staff still working tirelessly to rebuild the shattered infrastructure, whenever they enter or leave Iraq. Until recently, the Qadisiyah Expressway betwen the airport and city centre was said to the world's most expensive 'taxi ride' as the CP teams employed to protect Coalition staff charged around £2,750 ($5,108) for the perilous journey. The route has long been the scene of regular attacks and kidnappings by insurgents and security costs have soared in Iraq to reflect the escalating risks for foreign workers. When available, the high-speed drive costs four times more than the £670 that Royal Jordanian charges for a one-way flight from London to Baghdad via Amman. It equates to about £183 a mile compared to 25p a mile for the 2,540-mile flight on the only commercial airline flying to Baghdad. Royal Jordanian offers two daily 90-minute flights, although times are subject to changes and cancellations, depending on whether the airport is under mortar attack. Known as 'BIAP', the airport is the hub of the US-led coalition's military activities, while the high-security "green zone" is the centre of civilian administration. What that £2,750 buys you is two armoured SUVs and four Western ex-military bodyguards, usually American, South African or British, packing MP5 submachine guns, M16 rifles and/or AK47 assault rifles. The client rides in one vehicle at speeds averaging 100 mph, while the other, called the "gun car", travels close-by, looking out for potential assailants. Since the beginning of the resistance, this vital route has come under attack from car bombs, suicide attacks, snipers and rocket-propelled grenades. As if to drive the point home, the three Britons killed in one attack last week were targeted as they left the military checkpoint at the Green Zone's Gate 12, which is the entry and exit point for the Qadisiyah Expressway.
J also informs me that the insurgents are using snipers with some success to target people moving around within the Green Zone - unconfirmed reports last week said that two people had been killed in this manner.
All of this should come as no surprise of course, given that many commentators reported last week that "the head of Iraq's intelligence service, General Muhammad Shahwani now puts the number of insurgents at 200,000" The BBC's report stated; "These figures do not represent an insurgency. They represent a war" with "insurgents now outnumbering the number of US troops in country".
Well, fair enough. Except that General Shahwani, appears to have been widely - and literally -misinterpreted. An original translation of the original Jan. 4 interview in Al-Sharq newspaper makes it clear he's talking about the passive support of the insurgency. Christoper Allbritton, the former AP and New York Daily News reporter who is working as a freelancer in Baghdad provides the following translation on his website, Back to Iraq: What is your opinion about the number of the armed fighters in Iraq? "Officially call them 'terrorists' because they are doing terrorism against the people and they are outside the law, Their number is between 20,000 and 30,000, in all of Iraq, distributed in the Sunni area. And the people who live in this area and emotionally support them, are about 200,000 without offering them money or logistic support. As an example, they don't give any information about their activities if they have this information". That means those 200,000 do not fight with the fighters? "It’s impossible that the fighters' numbers reach 200,000. These are those who live in the areas where the fighters are active. For example, the right side Mosul is completely out of control and in this area, the terrorists are very active without any announcement about them for the local people, and very often they offer them shelter" At least the BBC included some of the supporting quotes in its report, putting the soundbite in context. But some other sections of the media - and much of the blogoshpere - seem intent on seeing only what it wants to see and reporting that as fact where Gen. Shahwani's quotes are concerned. Gen Shawani has his own agenda anyway, so just who are we to believe? Confusion, or deliberate misrepresentaion of the facts? Regardless of the actual figure, insurgents are engaging U.S and British forces in the worst type of battle - street by street, house by house, and with a faceless ghost of an enemy. BBC reporter Paul Wood was embedded with the US' 1st Battalion, 8th Marine Regiment last month as they undertook bitter street fighting in the battle to capture Fallujah. The 16 minute video report which he filed is a first class example of battlefield reportage and captures perfectly the stress and chaos of house to house combat. Watch it here. With the planned election date of January 30th rapidly approaching, and no end in sight to the insurgents' attempts to destabalise the whole process, expect further half truths and obfuscation of facts to emanate from the various agencies involved as they attempt to aportion blame with the attendant internecine rivalries that encompasses.
OBFUSCATE, OBFUSCATE, OBFUSCATE
10.1.05 13:18
|
Lisa / Website (10.1.05 17:57) First, I think that drive on the "Expressway" (is it called) is a tad too expensive and dangerous for me! I would much prefer the helicopter method.. armoured, please. Also, it's beyond me how people would begin to count insurgents. It seems that it would be easy to discern 20,000 from 200,000 people. I imagine what you say is correct: Quite a bit if misinformation will be circulated as the elections approach, perhaps to scare people away from voting or make it look like a farce in the end. I would like to believe that democracy will prevail and would hope that, in the end, Iraq will achieve what they desire truly in the scope of widely supported leadership. Good post. I almost felt like I was there on the expressway. |
|
(10.1.05 18:10) Lisa: Thanks for that. It's difficult to see how the elections can be effective with minority Sunni groups refusing to take part; Truth be told, it's difficult to see any effective way out of this whole mess for either the U.S or Britain - I honestly can't see democracy as we know it ever proving effective in Iraq given its history since the 9th Century. |
|
Lisa (10.1.05 18:52) Exactly... There is something to be said about "history", isn't there? Sometimes I look at what is going on in Iraq and think, "What a hopeless mess. I still hope for the best in Iraq, miracle or not. It will be interesting, at least, to see what the voting process looks like and the results thereof. |
|
(10.1.05 19:30) Lisa: I'm not holding my breath - Alawi said as recently as last Wednesday that the elections would go ahead regardless, but then he would, wouldn't he? I don't see how they can forge ahead with the security situation being what it is and polling stations likly to become prime targets for the insurgents. If they can't protect the soldiers or the police officers - or the high level officials in governement against assasintation and attack, what chance the ordinrary Iraqi sihing to vote? |
|
lisa (10.1.05 21:07) I see your point. I don't see how they can continue with the election date myself. I'm sure the insurgents will all be meeting the voters at the polling places or on the way. |
|
(14.1.05 21:01) Finally catching up on my RSS feeds. The problem regarding the highway sounds like a nightmare - and unimaginably stressful given what we see of those people kidnapped. Given the resources the US & UK have at their disposal travelling in road vehicles seems a nonsense. The only realistic road transport should be Warrior Armoured car and suitable escort and sweeps for IED's. Otherwise helicopters flying high enough to avoid fire and dropping chaff etc. Back to the politico. I have a fairly simplistic and broad brush view on this. Modern civilisation is peppered with Imperialism and expansion. We are no different today. We lost our empire after WW2 and I really believe that this is the agenda. (The US has never had an empire, nor needed one, but as the only superpower they have the means to build one). The casualties to date and ongoing are quite acceptable if you are an administration/government/people intent on building an empire. As the US's only allies in Iraq we actually form a formidable alliance - regardless of any use of UK influence to smooth over diplomatic problems we have a history of success in this and well honed military and adminstrative expertise beyond the capabilities of the US. Put it this way, we have the brains and diplomacy, they have the might and muscle. We share the spoils over the next hundred years. |
|
Rhea / Website (16.1.05 18:53) Just watched the Paul Wood report. It rendered me speechless for some time afterwards. Reports such as this should be required viewing for each generation of newly enfranchised voters. |
|
(17.1.05 11:00) Steve: Nice to see you back, fella. Given my own experiences there, much about Baghdad and the Coalition's approach to Iraq as a whole doesn't stand up to scrutiny. What possible reason was there, for example, for only British SUVs to be armoured? Whilst we enjoyed the relative safety of travelling in 2 car convoys of fully armoured SUVs, the US' citizens based out there travelled around in soft-skinned cars, and for the most part, without CP teams. They were armed themselves and drove themselves; only after several deaths at the hands of insurgents did things begin to change, but even so, not until long after I returned - a good year after the 'end' of the conventional war. Interesting comments on the wider issues there, thanks for those. Rhea: Thanks for stopping by and commenting. Yes, that report is something else, isn't it. Shame that mainstream TV news can't devote the airtime to such in-depth reportage, it would lend people a far deeper understanding of the issues involved. I quite agree with you, it should be required viewing; might make a difference to our collective futures. |
powered by
20six.co.uk
