|
They
got him -- the big, bad, beheading berserker in
Iraq. But, something's gone unreported in all
the glee over getting Zarqawi ... who invited him
into Iraq in the first place?
If
you prefer your fairy tales unsoiled by facts,
read no further. If you want the uncomfortable
truth, begin with this: A phone call to Baghdad
to Saddam's Palace on the night of April 21, 2003.
It was Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld on
a secure line from Washington to General Jay Garner.
The
General had arrives in Baghdad just hours before
to take charge of the newly occupied nation.
The message from Rumsfeld was not a heartwarming
welcome. Rummy told Garner, Don't unpack, Jack
-- you're fired.
What
had Garner done? The many-starred general had
been sent by the President himself to take charge
of a deeply dangerous mission. Iraq was tense
but relatively peaceful. Garner's job was to
keep the peace and bring democracy.
Unfortunately
for the general, he took the President at his
word. But the general was wrong. "Peace" and
"Democracy" were the slogans.
"My
preference," Garner told me in his understated
manner, "was to put the Iraqis in charge as soon
as we can and do it in some form of elections."
But
elections were not in The Plan.
The
Plan was a 101-page document to guide the long-term
future of the land we'd just conquered. There
was nothing in it about democracy or elections
or safety. There was, rather, a detailed schedule
for selling off "all [Iraq's] state assets" --
and Iraq, that's just about everything -- "especially,"
said The Plan, "the oil and supporting industries."
Especially the oil.
There
was more than oil to sell off. The Plan included
the sale of Iraq's banks, and weirdly, changing
it's copyright laws and other odd items that made
the plan look less like a program for Iraq to
get on its feet than a program for corporate looting
of the nation's assets. (And indeed, we discovered
at BBC, behind many of the odder elements -- copyright
and tax code changes -- was the hand of lobbyist
Jack Abramoff's associate Grover Norquist.)
But
Garner didn't think much of The Plan, he told
me when we met a year later in Washington. He
had other things on his mind. "You prevent epidemics,
you start the food distribution program to prevent
famine."
Seizing
title and ownership of Iraq's oil fields was not
on Garner's must-do list. He let that be known
to Washington. "I don't think [Iraqis] need to
go by the U.S. plan, I think that what we need
to do is set an Iraqi government that represents
the freely elected will of the people." He added,
"It's their country ... their oil."
Apparently,
the Secretary of Defense disagreed. So did lobbyist
Norquist. And Garner incurred their fury by getting
carried away with the "democracy" idea: he called
for quick elections -- within 90 days of the taking
of Baghdad.
But
Garner's 90-days-to-elections commitment ran straight
into the oil sell-off program. Annex D of the
plan indicated that would take at least 270 days
-- at least 9 months.
Worse,
Garner was brokering a truce between Sunnis, Shias
and Kurds. They were about to begin what Garner
called a "Big Tent" meeting to hammer out the
details and set the election date. He figured
he had 90 days to get it done before the factions
started slitting each other's throats.
But
a quick election would mean the end of the state-asset
sell-off plan: An Iraqi-controlled government
would never go along with what would certainly
amount to foreign corporations swallowing their
entire economy. Especially the oil. Garner had
spent years in Iraq, in charge of the Northern
Kurdish zone and knew Iraqis well. He was certain
that an asset-and-oil grab, "privatizations,"
would cause a sensitive population to take up
the gun. "That's just one fight you don't want
to take on right now."
But
that's just the fight the neo-cons at Defense
wanted. And in Rumsfeld's replacement for Garner,
they had a man itching for the fight. Paul Bremer
III had no experience on the ground in Iraq, but
he had one unbeatable credential that Garner lacked:
Bremer had served as Managing Director of Kissinger
and Associates.
In
April 2003, Bremer instituted democracy Bush style:
he canceled elections and appointed the entire
government himself. Two months later, Bremer
ordered a halt to all municipal elections including
the crucial vote to Shia seeking to select a mayor
in the city of Najaf. The front-runner, moderate
Shia Asad Sultan Abu Gilal warned, "If they don't
give us freedom, what will we do? We have patience,
but not for long." Local Shias formed the "Mahdi
Army," and within a year, provoked by Bremer's
shutting their paper, attacked and killed 21 U.S.
soldiers.
The
insurgency had begun. But Bremer's job was hardly
over. There were Sunnis to go after. He issued
"Order Number One: De-Ba'athification." In effect,
this became "De-Sunni-fication."
Saddam's
generals, mostly Sunnis, who had, we learned,
secretly collaborated with the US invasion and
now expected their reward found themselves hunted
and arrested. Falah Aljibury, an Iraqi-born US
resident who helped with the pre-invasion brokering,
told me, "U.S. forces imprisoned all those we
named as political leaders," who stopped Iraq's
army from firing on U.S. troops.
Aljibury's
main concern was that busting Iraqi collaborators
and Ba'athist big shots was a gift "to the Wahabis,"
by which he meant the foreign insurgents, who
now gained experienced military commanders, Sunnis,
who now had no choice but to fight the US-installed
regime or face arrest, ruin or death. They would
soon link up with the Sunni-defending Wahabi,
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who was committed to destroying
"Shia snakes."
And
the oil fields? It was, Aljibury noted, when
word got out about the plans to sell off the oil
fields (thanks to loose lips of the US-appointed
oil minister) that pipelines began to blow. Although
he had been at the center of planning for invasion,
Aljibury now saw the greed-crazed grab for the
oil fields as the fuel for a civil war that would
rip his country to pieces:
"Insurgents,"
he said, "and those who wanted to destabilize
a new Iraq have used this as means of saying,
'Look, you're losing your country. You're losing
your leadership. You're losing all of your resources
to a bunch of wealthy people. A bunch of billionaires
in the world want to take you over and make your
life miserable.' And we saw an increase in the
bombing of oil facilities, pipelines, of course,
built on -- built on the premise that privatization
[of oil] is coming."
General
Garner, watching the insurgency unfold from the
occupation authority's provocations, told me,
in his understated manner, "I'm a believer that
you don't want to end the day with more enemies
than you started with."
But
you can't have a war president without a war.
And you can't have a war without enemies. "Bring
'em on," our Commander-in-Chief said. And Zarqawi
answered the call.
--------
Greg Palast is the author of Armed Madhouse out
this week from Penguin Dutton, from which this
is adapted. Armed Madhouse: Who's Afraid of
Osama Wolf?, China Floats Bush Sinks, the Scheme
to Steal '08, No Child's Behind Left and other
Dispatches from the Front Lines of the Class War.
Topplebush.com
Posted:
June 12,
2006
|