Civil war averted—for now
February 28, 2006 | By Nathaniel Ward
Terrorists deliberately sought to incite violence in Iraq by destroying this historic mosque in Samarra last week.
Last week, terrorists destroyed a beautiful mosque in Samarra, Iraq—a mosque that also happens to be among the holiest sites for Shiite Muslims. Heritage’s James Phillips explained that the attacks were probably carried out by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi’s al Qaeda gang, precisely designed to incite mayhem and stir up a civil war. But it’s not only al Qaeda that wants to stir up sectarian trouble in Iraq. “Diehard remnants of Saddam Hussein’s regime also have a vested interest in making Iraq ungovernable,” Phillips said.
The scheme almost worked, and 1,300 people died in the ensuing violence. But fortunately, after a three-day curfew and an intense diplomatic campaign, the violence seems to have subsided.
There is some good news out of all this: the Iraqi people are now fed up, and this could be a turning point against the terrorists. Phillips wrote that “Iraq’s Shiite leaders are growing increasingly frustrated with bloody attacks on their followers, and now are sure to threaten a harsh crackdown on the Sunni insurgency.” And over at NationalSecurity.org, Heritage's defense analysts wrote that “Iraqi forces are leading the crisis response” in the chaos after the bombing. Iraqi forces, with little or no help from American troops, enforced the multi-day daytime curfew and helped restore order. That they have been able to shoulder this burden alone “should be an encouraging sign.”
But perhaps some of the news about the violence in Iraq, as it often seems to be, is distorted somewhat by the media. Blogger Paul Mirengoff writes that the media "seem to await a civil war in Iraq with the same breathlessness that Marxists used to await the final crisis of capitalism." This is not to downplay the seriousness of the situation in Iraq, but it’s worth keeping in mind in the coming days.
The UN’s pro-terrorist, anti-America report
The new United Nations report on the Guantanamo Bay terrorist detention facilities is unsubstantiated and politically motivated, and should be dismissed.
Two weeks ago, the UN Commission on Human Rights issued a report calling on the United States to close its terrorist detention facility at Guantanamo Bay “without further delay.”
Rather than following the UN’s “highly charged political polemic,” the United States should promote its own national security, Heritage’s Nile Gardiner and James Carafano explain. “The U.S. military should do what is best to secure the nation and its allies against the threat of transnational terrorism while continuing to respect its obligations to follow U.S. law, including applicable international treaties.”
“So far, Guantanamo has succeeded as an effective tool in the war on terrorism, and the absence of any terrorist attacks on U.S. soil since 2001 is a testament to that,” write Gardiner, the Lomas Fellow at the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom, and Carafano.
Not only did the authors of the report never visit the terrorist detention facility, they continue, but several of the investigators have it in for America. “A survey of the backgrounds of [investigation chairwoman Leila] Zerrougui’s colleagues on the UN’s Guantanamo investigation reveals in some instances extreme and highly biased views regarding the U.S.-led war on terrorism, as well as a trigger-happy willingness to make unsubstantiated allegations against the United States and key allies.”
The UN report, Gardiner and Carafano conclude, is a baseless United Nations ploy to divert attention from internal corruption and abuse scandals and so “deserves to be rejected out of hand”
Incidentally, this Heritage paper on the United Nations was the 1,000th Web Memo produced by The Heritage Foundation. The first Web Memo was posted to the Heritage website in 2001.
Reviewing the ports deal
Despite last week’s heated rhetoric, it seems cooler heads may be prevailing in the fight over the sale of terminals at six ports to a company from the United Arab Emirates. The Bush administration, following a Heritage proposal, has agreed to conduct a new 45-day review of the deal, and the company has also, sensibly, agreed to the new timeline. Meanwhile, Congress will be conducting hearings into the deal this week to find out more, though some in Congress want to pass legislation banning the deal right away.
One MyHeritage.org reader posed an interesting question about the Dubai Ports World ruckus: “Congress reviewed the Education Bill, the Medicare Bill, the Highway Bill, the Tax Bill and the Farm Bill; with all those failures, why should we trust this body of sterling thinkers with this one?”
Several readers also noted a detail that’s often overlooked by hysterical reporting in the media: It is not the ports themselves that are being sold but terminals within the ports that manage operations there. The ports would remain under municipal ownership, just as security would still be coordinated by the Coast Guard and other government agencies.
Your tax dollars at work
I spotted this item in a Washington-area restaurant magazine over the weekend: “Georgia Democrat Cynthia McKinney introduced the ‘Tupac Amaru Shakur Records Collection Act of 2005’ at the end of last year, directing Congress to ‘provide for the expeditious disclosure of records relevant to the life and death of Tupac Amaru Shakur.’” Shakur, a rapper whose songs included messages urging violence against police officers, was shot dead in 1996.
In other news
- The Boston Globe reports that the health care reform package pushed by Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) may not pass the liberal-dominated state legislature. Developed in conjunction with Heritage’s health care experts, Gov. Romney’s plan would have expanded health care to the uninsured while putting in place additional market reforms—while not costing taxpayers a penny.
- The “feeble” attempted terrorist attack on Saudi oil facilities last week “shows that al Qaeda, while still dangerous, couldn’t muster the wherewithal to pull off a major attack despite repeated threats against Saudi oil,” Peter Brookes writes on National Review Online. “This says a lot about the weakened state of al Qaeda operations today beyond Iraq.”
- Heritage’s James Carafano will testify Thursday before the House Armed Services Committee about the dangers terrorism poses to our nation’s ports. In addition to these broad issues, Carafano will also discuss the UAE ports deal.
- A former spokesman for the Taliban government in Afghanistan is now a student at Yale University, John Fund reports in The Wall Street Journal. "This is taking the obsession that U.S. universities have with promoting diversity a bit too far," Fund writes.
Coming up at Heritage
To attend these or any other Heritage Foundation events, RSVP at Heritage’s events website. Or you can watch these events live online at Heritage.org. All times are Eastern.
- On Wednesday at 9:30, Heritage will host a panel on the truth about the Guantanamo Bay abuse allegations. Panelists include the former superintendent of Camp Delta, the national commander of the American Legion, and a representative of Human Rights Watch.
- On Thursday at noon, Heritage’s Ariel Cohen will lead a discussion of Russia’s use of energy exports for foreign policy clout.
- On March 9 at 1:00, Heritage President Ed Feulner will present his new book, Getting America Right, which explains the six basic steps America can take to return to its conservative roots. You can pre-order a copy of the book today!
Nathaniel Ward is the Editor of MyHeritage.org—a website for members and supporters of The Heritage Foundation.
