BREAKING: Discover How A Slacker Makes $100,000 A Year!

WEBMASTERS! Get Your Website To The Top Of Google

Worldwide Support for Free Media

Friday, May 2nd, 2008

By Mick Meaney - RINF | A new major survey of world nations has found the majority of people support a free media and strongly object to government control on both traditional and Internet news organisations.

The poll was conducted by WorldPublicOpinion.org and involved 18,122 respondents in 20 of the world’s largest nations including the United States, Great Britain, China, Russia, India, Egypt, Indonesia, Nigeria, Argentina, Azerbaijan, France, Iran, Jordan, Turkey, Mexico, Peru, Poland, South Korea, Ukraine, and the Palestinian Territories.

“The principle that the media should be free of government control receives robust support from all corners of the world. With few exceptions, people think that the Internet should be free of government control as well” said WPO and PIPA director, Steven Kull.

However, an average of 36 percent of respondents from nations such as Russia and Muslim countries support regulation of news that could be potentially damaging to the government.

The survey also focused on Internet censorship. In China 71 percent of the public said “people should have the right to read whatever is on the Internet” with just 21 percent endorsing the government’s right to censorship.

Freedom House, a group that has been monitoring the press for 30 years has concluded that global freedom of the press is in “a clear decline”.

Jennifer Windsor, the group’s executive director, said: “For every step forward in press freedom last year, there were two steps back.”

In a statement the World Public Opinion said:

“The biggest area of controversy is over whether the government should have the ‘right to prevent the media from publishing information that it thinks will be politically destabilizing’. In the majority of countries the dominant view is that it should not and on average 55 percent have this view.

“However, in six-majority Muslim countries plus Russia substantial numbers think the government should have the right to restrict politically sensitive information. Majorities favor government controls in Jordan (66%), the Palestinian Territories (59%), and Indonesia (56%) while a plurality does in Iran (a plurality - 45 to 31%). Views are evenly divided in Egypt, Turkey and Russia.

“But this does not mean that these publics favor greater government regulation. In four of these countries, majorities think the media should have more freedom: Egypt (64%), the Palestinian Territories (62%), Jordan (56%) and Indonesia (53%). In the others, most want the media to have the same amount or more freedom, with only small minorities saying it should have less: Iran (9%), Russia (17%), Turkey (30%) and India (32%).”

The survey is being released as part of a series of international polls related to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

A recent report suggests the public are becoming tired of traditional news and are turning to the alternative media which is predominately found on the Internet.

The full results of the survey are:

Poll conducted and compiled by worldpublicopinion.org

Have Your Say: Worldwide Support for Free Media
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Banksy throws London stencil party

Friday, May 2nd, 2008

By Raphael G. Satter | Graffiti impresario Banksy and airbrush-wielding guerrilla artists blanketed the walls of an abandoned London tunnel with offbeat murals as part of a three-day stencil-art street party this weekend.Banksy marshaled more than three dozen international artists for what he’s calling the “Cans Festival” — and is encouraging visitors to contribute their own graffiti starting Saturday.

“I’m hoping we can transform a dark forgotten filth pit into an oasis of beautiful art — in a dark forgotten filth pit,” Banksy was quoted as saying in the Times of London, which carried a preview of the exhibition Friday.

Festival spokeswoman Jo Brooks said work will be featured from 40 international artists and collectives, which sport names such as Bandit, Schhh, Pure Evil and Orticancvoodles.

Among Banksy’s pieces are security cameras growing from a tree, a hooded figure cutting itself with a knife and a worker spraying over ancient cave drawings. Other work includes an image of the pope pushing down his fluttering robes in an imitation of Marilyn Monroe by Norwegian artist Dolk.

Armed with aerosol cans and paint rollers, artists were still touching up the walls of the damp archway tunnel Friday.

Unlike many of Banksy’s previous stunts, the exhibition was approved by Eurostar, which manages the site under its old train platform at Waterloo Station.

It’s a sign of how far the artist — who has refused to give his real name — has come since he began his graffiti career in the 1980s and 1990s. Most of his work had a wickedly ironic and strongly anti-authoritarian bent. (His graffiti of two uniformed policemen locked in a passionate kiss is a longtime favorite.)

But although his identity has never been fully confirmed, critical success has made him something of an establishment figure. Banksy’s work commands hundreds of thousands of dollars at auction, and Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie are among his fans.

The event, which is free, will be held in the tunnel Saturday through Monday.

Have Your Say: Banksy throws London stencil party
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Nepal police detain 100 Tibetan protestors

Friday, May 2nd, 2008

AFP | More than 100 Tibetan exiles, mostly young monks and nuns, were detained Friday at a pro-Tibet protest in front of a Chinese embassy building in the Nepalese capital, police said.

“More than 100 Tibetans have been taken to various police stations and will be freed by nightfall,” Kathmandu police officer Hom Jung Chauhan told AFP.

Demonstrators shouted slogans such as “China liars,” “We want a free Tibet,” “We want justice,” an AFP reporter at the scene said.

Kathmandu has seen almost daily protests since unrest erupted in March in the Tibetan capital Lhasa, prompting a crackdown by Chinese security forces.

The US ambassador to Nepal on Thursday voiced concern about the treatment of exiled Tibetans by Kathmandu police who have baton-charged, punched and kicked protesters.

In a meeting with Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala, “Ambassador (Nancy) Powell .. expressed official US concern about the treatment of Tibetans by Nepali authorities,” the embassy said in a statement

She “urged the prime minister to ensure that the right to peaceful protest was maintained and that the human rights of Tibetans in Nepal are respected.”

Nepal officially acknowledges Beijing’s “One China” policy that sees Tibet and Taiwan as integral parts of China.

Nepal is home to more than 20,000 Tibetan refugees and around 2,500 still arrive annually in Kathmandu before heading to Dharamshala in northern India, home of the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan government-in-exile.

Have Your Say: Nepal police detain 100 Tibetan protestors
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Ex-Guantanamo man: “Torture is terrorism”

Friday, May 2nd, 2008

By Opheera McDoom - KHARTOUM | Reuters - Al Jazeera journalist Sami al-Haj returned home to Sudan on Friday after more than six years in the U.S.-run Guantanamo Bay prison, urging Washington to respect human rights and branding torture as terrorism.

Haj said he and the other Guantanamo detainees had been subjected to all kinds of torture, but the worst had been when his jailers insulted Islam or desecrated the Koran in front of prisoners.

“Security and human rights are inseparable issues — you cannot have one without the other,” he told Reuters in an interview.

“Human rights are not only for times of peace — you need to hold onto them always even during difficult times and times of war,” he added.

“My last message to the U.S. administration is that torture will not stop terrorism — torture is terrorism.”

Haj looked frail but visibly stronger than 12 hours earlier, when he arrived in chains aboard a U.S. military plane from the U.S. prison in Cuba, where he spent the last 16 months on hunger strike in protest at his illegal detention.

Lying on his hospital bed he barely had enough strength to greet President Omar Hassan al-Bashir and the dozens of ministers and well-wishers ecstatic at his return.

His brother Asim collapsed with exhaustion on his arrival after the years of campaigning for his release finally drew to an end.

Al-Haj met his eight-year-old son Mohamed for the first time since his son was a year old in an emotional reunion. The cameraman was arrested near the Afghan border in 2001 and later taken to the highly criticised U.S. military base in Cuba.

“His mother was constantly sending me pictures of him … but even if I had not seen the picture I would have known him among thousands of children by my strong sense of fatherhood,” he said.

Haj will spend the next few days undergoing tests in the hospital after his hunger strike and months of force feeding twice a day left him weak and with many ailments.

“God willing our happiness and celebrations will be complete once our brothers left in Guantanamo prison are released,” he said. Four Sudanese prisoners remain in Guantanamo. (Editing by Jon Boyle)

Have Your Say: Ex-Guantanamo man: “Torture is terrorism”
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Why Gordon Brown should halt ID cards

Friday, May 2nd, 2008

Geraint Bevan | Government departments cannot be trusted to keep citizens’ personal data secure. It is not only in Italy that tax records are not as confidential as people might have expected.

Treasury minister Jane Kennedy has admitted that last year, 192 staff at HM Revenue & Customs were disciplined for inappropriate access to personal or sensitive data. This brings to 600 the number of staff facing disciplinary proceedings since 2005 when the agency was created; the same agency that managed to lose unencrypted copies of the entire child benefit database last November.

Despite six years and millions of pounds wasted on consultants, the government has still failed to make a convincing case for collecting even more personal data on a National Identity Register.

advertisement

Home Office assurances that the data will be safe from prying eyes look increasing ludicrous as we learn more about the abysmal insecurity of existing databases.

The notion behind Transformational Government - that promiscuous data sharing is a good in its own right - is fundamentally flawed.

While the Prime Minister ponders the latest message from the electorate in England and Wales, he should halt the ID scheme and start considering how the government could better respect our privacy.

Have Your Say: Why Gordon Brown should halt ID cards
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Sex offender DNA files expanded

Friday, May 2nd, 2008

BBC | Police in Fife have become the first in Scotland to fully manage DNA samples from non-registered sex offenders. The force has started collecting swabs from people convicted before 1997 or who hold no record for sex crimes but are considered a potential danger.

Legislation only requires that DNA samples are kept on a database for registered sex offenders.

Officers have no power to force people to give their DNA but said they have had high levels of co-operation.

The system of managing the data is the same one used to keep track of registered sex offenders.

Eliminating suspects

Swabs are taken from the volunteer’s cheek and samples are stored in a forensic laboratory in Dundee.

Officers said that when a crime occurs, having a broader range of samples allows them to eliminate suspects more quickly.

Det Sgt Nigel Orkney, from the offender management unit, said: “Most importantly, it sends a powerful message to these offenders that they are more likely to be caught, proving an effective deterrent.

“We also hope it reassures the public that we are doing all we can to effectively manage our offenders and keep the risk of reoffending to a minimum.”

Fife Constabulary started gathering the DNA samples last year but now has in place a fully integrated system of managing registered and non-registered sex offenders.

Officers are continuing to collect DNA swabs to enter into the database.

Have Your Say: Sex offender DNA files expanded
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Secret Bush “Finding” Widens War on Iran

Friday, May 2nd, 2008

By Andrew Cockburn | Six weeks ago, President Bush signed a secret finding authorizing a covert offensive against the Iranian regime that, according to those familiar with its contents, “unprecedented in its scope.”

Bush’s secret directive covers actions across a huge geographic area – from Lebanon to Afghanistan – but is also far more sweeping in the type of actions permitted under its guidelines – up to and including the assassination of targeted officials.  This widened scope clears the way, for example, for full support for the military arm of Mujahedin-e Khalq, the cultish Iranian opposition group, despite its enduring position on the State Department’s list of terrorist groups.

Similarly, covert funds can now flow without restriction to Jundullah, or “army of god,” the militant Sunni group in Iranian Baluchistan – just across the Afghan border — whose leader was featured not long ago on Dan Rather Reports cutting his brother in law’s throat.
 
Other elements that will benefit from U.S. largesse and advice include Iranian Kurdish nationalists, as well the Ahwazi arabs of south west Iran.  Further afield, operations against Iran’s Hezbollah allies in Lebanon will be stepped up, along with efforts to destabilize the Syrian regime.
 
All this costs money, which in turn must be authorized by Congress, or at least a by few witting members of the intelligence committees.  That has not proved a problem.  An initial outlay of $300 million to finance implementation of the finding has been swiftly approved with bipartisan support, apparently regardless of the unpopularity of the current war and the perilous condition of the U.S. economy.

Until recently, the administration faced a serious obstacle to action against Iran in the form of Centcom commander Admiral William Fallon, who made no secret of his contempt for official determination to take us to war.  In a widely publicized incident last January, Iranian patrol boats approached a U.S. ship in what the Pentagon described as a “taunting” manner. According to Centcom staff officers, the American commander on the spot was about to open fire. At that point, the U.S. was close to war.   He desisted only when Fallon personally and explicitly ordered him not to shoot.  The White House, according to the staff officers, was “absolutely furious” with Fallon for defusing the incident.

Fallon has since departed.  His abrupt resignation in early March followed the publication of his unvarnished views on our policy of confrontation with Iran, something that is unlikely to happen to his replacement, George Bush’s favorite general, David Petraeus.

Though Petraeus is not due to take formal command at Centcom until late summer,  there are abundant signs that something may happen before then.  A Marine amphibious force, originally due to leave San Diego for the Persian Gulf in mid June, has had its sailing date abruptly moved up to May 4.  A scheduled meeting in Europe between French diplomats acting as intermediaries for the U.S. and Iranian representatives has been abruptly cancelled in the last two weeks.  Petraeus is said to be at work on a master briefing for congress to demonstrate conclusively that the Iranians are the source of our current troubles in Iraq, thanks to their support for the Shia militia currently under attack by U.S. forces in Baghdad. 

Interestingly, despite the bellicose complaints, Petraeus has made little effort to seal the Iran-Iraq border, and in any case two thirds of U.S. casualties still come from Sunni insurgents.  “The Shia account for less than one third,” a recently returned member of the command staff in Baghdad familiar with the relevant intelligence  told me, “but if you want a war you have to sell it.”

Even without the covert initiatives described above, the huge and growing armada currently on station in the Gulf is an impressive symbol of American power.

Armed Might of US Marred By Begging Bowl to Arabs

Sometime in the next two weeks, fleet radar operator may notice a blip on their screens that represents something rather more profound: America’s growing financial weakness. The blip will be former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin’s plane commencing its descent into Abu Dhabi.  Rubin’s responsibility these days is to help keep Citigroup afloat despite a balance sheet still waterlogged, despite frantic bail out efforts by the Federal Reserve and others, by staggering losses in mortgage bonds.  The Abu Dhabi Sovereign Wealth Fund injected $7.5 billion last November (albeit at a sub-prime interest rate of eleven percent,) but the bank’s urgent need for fresh capital persists, and Abu Dhabi is where the money is.

Even if those radar operators pay no attention to Mr. Rubin’s flight, and the ironic contrast it illustrates between American military power and financial weakness, others will, and not just in Tehran.  There’s not much a finding can do about that.

Have Your Say: Secret Bush “Finding” Widens War on Iran
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Denying Palestinians Free Movement in the West Bank

Friday, May 2nd, 2008

By Stephen Lendman | RINF - This article summarizes an August 2007 B’Tselem report now available in print. It’s one of a series of studies it conducts on life in Occupied Palestine to reveal what major media accounts suppress. This one is titled: “Ground to a Halt - Denial of Palestinians’ Freedom of Movement in the West Bank.”B’Tselem has a well-deserved reputation for accuracy and integrity. It’s the Jerusalem-based independent Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT). It was founded in 1989 by prominent academics, attorneys, journalists and Knesset members to “document and educate the Israeli public and policymakers about human rights violations in (Occupied Palestine), combat (the Israeli public’s) denial, and create a human rights culture in Israel” to convince government officials to respect human rights and obey international law.

Its work is detailed, wide-ranging, carefully researched, and based on hundreds of testimonies and dozens of on-the-ground observations. For verification, it’s also cross-checked with relevant documents and other government sources. Work on this report was completed over a six month period in 2007. It included information from other reports, statements from political and military officials, petitions to Israel’s High Court of Justice, and media accounts.

B’Tselem states: “For the past seven years (since the September 2000 Second Intifada began), Israel has imposed restrictions and prohibitions on Palestinian movement that are unprecedented in scope and duration.” It refers to hundreds of permanent and temporary checkpoints, other obstacles, physical barriers, and Israel’s Separation Wall (ruled illegal by the World Court) on confiscated Palestinian land.

Free movement in the West Bank is severely restricted and nearly always entails “intolerable and arbitrary delays, much uncertainty, friction with soldiers, and often substantial expense.” B’Tselem stresses that throughout 2008, it will continue to focus on this topic - with new maps, short videos, and various “public education and advocacy activities to highlight” Israel’s unnecessary, outlandish and illegal restrictive measures. People need to know, and B’Tselem intends to tell them.

This is its 14th report on this topic since September 2000. Previous ones covered specific type restrictions like checkpoints, for-Jews only roads, and the Separation Wall. The one is comprehensive. It surveys all of them and their collective effects on Palestinians’ lives.

The measures aren’t new or restricted to the West Bank. They’ve been ongoing since the early 1990s and have undergone expansion and refinement ever since. Until 1991, Palestinians (except small numbers designated security threats) could move freely throughout the Territories and were able to enter and stay in Israel during daytime hours. It helped Palestine establish social, cultural and commercial ties to its neighbor, Israeli Arab citizens in it, as well as between Gaza and the West Bank.

During the January 1991 Gulf war, everything changed. General permits were cancelled and replaced by new restrictive policies. Thereafter, all Palestinians needed (selectively authorized) permits to enter Israel and East Jerusalem. Checkpoints and barriers were erected for enforcement. They’ve restricted movement ever since, and at times, like the 1993 killings of nine Israelis, became a general closure policy. All free movement was halted, Palestinians lost their jobs in Israel, few opportunities at home could replace them, and the Territories suffered great economic and social harm.

Closure also split the OPT into three areas: East Jerusalem, the remaining West Bank and Gaza. After September 2000, Israel tightened free movement further and continues harassing and containing relentlessly. Two main factors explain how:

– Israel’s “ever-expanding settlement enterprise….along the length and breadth of the West Bank;” they’re on strategically chosen and most valued lands; in areas designed to contain Palestinian city expansions; further harmed by Israel’s (for-Jews-only) bypass roads that constrict, isolate and divide West Bank areas; and

– the effects of the Oslo Accords; they split the West Bank into three areas - Area A under Palestinian Authority (PA) security and civil affairs control; Area B under Israel security and right to restrict free movement; and Area C under total Israeli control, including on matters relating to land, planning and building; Areas B and C comprise 80% of the West Bank, including its main roads, so that lets Israel restrict movement how, when, for as long, and for whatever purpose it wishes over most of the Territory.

After September 2000, its measures were hardened. It clamped down on free movement, isolated Palestinians in cantonized enclosures, and made a fundamental human right a privilege to grant or withhold as it pleases. Its pretext is security but, in fact, that’s false. The real aim is harassment, land grab, and a state-sponsored expulsion plan so Israel can seize all the land it wants for Jews only. It’s gone on for decades and so far unchallenged by the world community. B’Tselem wants to stop it along with all other law violations so Palestinians can have their long denied justice they deserve and should get.

Israel’s Means to Control Movement

B’Tselem divides Israeli control into three categories reflecting “different layers” of restrictive policy. They, in turn, build on each other and are interrelated:

– physical means to divert movement to certain passageways and roads and prevent access to others;

– restrictions and prohibitions that first layer physical tools enforce; and

– the means to ease or tighten, selectively and under careful monitoring, second layer restrictions and prohibitions.

The essential idea is that in combination these layers represent a single control mechanism, all parts operate together, and determining their impact requires evaluating the combined effect of four types of control:

(1) obstructions to deny access to main roads; they divert Palestinians to checkpoints where the army (IDF) supervises movement from one area to another or can deny it altogether; obstructions are in different forms - dirt mounds, concrete blocks, boulders, trenches, fences and iron gates; their numbers have gradually increased and in mid-2007 totaled 455 throughout the West Bank; they limit pedestrian and vehicular movement, and especially affect the elderly, the ill, pregnant women and small children; they’re even more restrictive in winter when water accumulation turns dirt areas muddy;

(2) permanent staffed checkpoints; they’re fairly constant in number, and Israel has used them to some degree throughout 41 years of occupation; they gained prominence, however, after Israel cancelled general-entry (free movement) permits in 1991; they were then expanded during the Second Intifada; over time, they’ve become the most conspicuous occupation symbol and one of its most hated;

– in mid-2007, 80 were in place of which 33 were the last inspection point before entering Israel along the Green Line; the other 47 lie inside the West Bank, some with control towers; seven are to transfer goods; they’re called “back-to-back” because merchandise is unloaded on one side, checked, then reloaded on another truck on the other side; operating times vary - many open at 6AM and close at night; others are staffed around the clock but limit crossings to “urgent humanitarian” cases;

– movement restrictions vary from one checkpoint to another and always at Israel’s discretion; to pass, travelers must show proper ID or crossing permits; searches may be conducted; procedures are at the discretion and mood of soldiers; some checkpoints are for pedestrians only; others are restricted to commercial and public transportation.

(3) so-called flying checkpoints; they’re temporary, may be erected anywhere, and remain for hours or longer; in recent years, they’ve increased in numbers - from a weekly average of 73 in late 2005 to 136 in 2006 to about 150 in 2007 and at times up to 200. Again, the pretext is security, their real aim is to harass, and no one does it better than Israelis.

Consider the effects of all checkpoints. Since September 2000, they’ve become “the main (source of) friction (between) Palestinians and Israeli security forces.” They generate tension, create uncertainty, deny or delay passage, humiliate and overall makes things intolerable. They’re also degrading by demanding that males expose their upper bodies in public simply as a way to harass them.

It gets worse by selective detentions in so-called “positions” - isolated holding areas for additional “security” checks that, in fact, are to punish and further humiliate; they can last hours, in exposed heat or cold, without food or water, and at times include physical abuse; many Palestinians are affected daily; Israel’s high command has full knowledge; the government does as well; nominal recommendations are made to stop it, yet abuse continues and few offenders are ever punished.

(4) the Separation Wall; in June 2002, Israel decided to build it; again the claim was security; in fact, it was separation and theft of over 10% of Palestinian land, including for-Jews only roads to connect settlements with Israel and other settlements; most of the Wall is completed; its planned length is 721 kilometers; only 20% of it lies along the Green Line; most of it runs deep inside the West Bank; near Jerusalem, it surrounds the Ma’ale Adumim settlements about 14 km into the West Bank on stolen Palestinian land;

– its route creates two kinds of Palestinian enclaves - villages and farmland between the Wall and Green Line (in the “seam zone”) on the Israeli side of the barrier; another area comprises villages on the Palestinian side that are surrounded on three or more sides because of the route’s winding path or that the Wall meets roads on which Palestinian movement is forbidden or physical obstructions prevent it.

Physical restrictions and movement prohibitions give Israeli security forces more latitude, and they take full advantage through a fourfold layer of control:

(1) by imposing a siege to completely or partially prevent Palestinians from crossing to or from a certain area as well as isolating the area from other parts of the West Bank; it’s done with physical obstructions to block access and force residents to pass through staffed checkpoints; closing off the area facilitates sweeping movement prohibitions on specific classifications of people by gender, age or place of residence; the IDF claims their “risk profile” makes them “potential terrorists;” targeting them by siege is a frequently used post-September 2000 tactic; large areas of the West Bank have been affected; their degree of harshness varies; and areas like the Jordan Valley, Area A and cities like Nablus, Jenin, Tulkarm and Hebron have been especially impacted.

– in December 2001, the West Bank IDF commander signed the Proclamation Regarding the Closure of Area (Encirclement) (Area A); it classified it as a closed military area, was unlimited in duration and still remains in force; in April 2007, a separate order was issued for Nablus restricting entry to and exit from the city to certain checkpoints; again the army claims it’s a security measure “to prevent terrorists and materiel from leaving Palestinian towns in Judea and Samaria….”

(2) the “seam zone;” Israelis say it’s the enclosed area between the Green Line and Separation Wall; when its first section was completed (in October 2003), the IDF declared this section a closed military area with entry into it forbidden; later areas may also be closed off, but even ones that aren’t will have severe movement restrictions the way they’re imposed throughout the West Bank; all Palestinians are affected; Jews and foreigners have permits permitting easy entry and exit.

(3) prohibiting travel on certain roads for Jews only; on some roads, no Palestinian vehicles are allowed; on others, travel is allowed for ones with special permits; the Oslo Accords set the rules; most often (but not always), Palestinians may travel on Areas A and B roads but prohibited or restricted in Area C; they’re excluded from about 311 km of West Bank roads for Jews only; they connect settlements to Israel or other settlements.

– rules are so harsh and convoluted that further restrictions are imposed on some roads Palestinians may use; an example is forbidding Palestinian vehicles from crossing a road, requiring passengers to leave their vehicles on one side, cross on foot, and get other transportation on the other side; this creates great hardship, is only to harass, and in cases of passenger illness or mothers in labor it may be life-threatening; in addition, Israeli security forces have great enforcement latitude; orders are issued verbally, not in writing, and soldiers at checkpoints can pretty much do as they please, depending on their mood.

(4) harsh travel laws act as deterrence; they impose high fines and/or insurance requirements; Palestinian violators are treated discriminatorily; and a high percentage of drivers are affected.

To counter public criticism, Israel issued two selective easing measures; they help some Palestinians but tighten movement restrictions for others:

(1) the permits regime; since 1991, Israel required Palestinians to have personal entry permits to enter its territory and East Jerusalem; after 1996, Palestinians also needed permits to enter West Bank jurisdictional areas; post-September 2000, rules were further tightened; some Palestinians must have permits to enter, remain in, or leave large areas inside the West Bank, including the “seam zone” and areas under siege; other permits are needed to arrange (passenger and commercial) vehicular checkpoint crossings; a limited number are allowed based on the capacity of security forces to inspect vehicles, goods and passengers;

– B’Tselem lists nine different type permits for passenger vehicles - commercial ones; public ones for taxis and buses; movement in areas under encirclement; humanitarian ones; for permanent “seam zone” residents; for daily “seam zone” entry; “seam zone” entry for farming or work; and to enter the Jordan Valley;

– movement restrictions and prohibitions are so onerous and for so many reasons that Israelis consider permits a privilege; for Palestinians, they’re essential to meet daily needs; West Bank District Coordination Offices (DCOs) issue them, but procedures are unclear and lack transparency; B’Tselem believes “two general and sweeping criteria must be met” to get one:

(a) “lack of ‘prevention,’ either for security or police-related reasons relating to the applicant,” and

(b) having documents to show justification for the request.

Quotas exist in all cases; when they’re filled, many qualified residents are left out; in addition, other qualifying procedures exist but are unstated; ultimately DCO officials have total discretion in awarding or denying permits and can be pretty arbitrary about it; “seam zone” residents provide an example of what all Palestinians endure; to get a permit to their own home area, they must prove they reside there from their ID card address on the day the declaration of closed military area was made or in some other way show their center of life is there; those getting one are allowed entry via one checkpoint only;

(2) So-called “fabric of life” roads for Palestinians only; the West Bank’s main roads are only for Jews; initially, those for Palestinians passed through villages and city centers, but because of criticism an alternate plan was developed - creating a separate, contiguous road network running north-south in the West Bank; it’s based on separate levels in places where Israeli and Palestinian roads meet; bridges and interchanges achieve separation with Israelis able to travel on top at high speed; lower level “fabric of life” roads comprising 20% of the West Bank’s total are for Palestinians; elements of the plan have been implemented and “fabric of life” roads are being built; they represent another part of Israel’s repressive apartheid scheme.

Splitting the West Bank

Article 13 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights states:

(1) “Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.

(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.”

Israel is a serial international law and human rights abuser. For Palestinians, it believes allowing free movement is a privilege, denying it is the norm, and actions no matter how outlandish require no explanation or justification.

Israel divided the West Bank into three control areas - A, B and C. For purposes of restricting movement, it further split the Territory into six geographical units:

– North that includes the Jenin, Tulkarm, Tubas and Nablus districts, except for those in the Jordan Valley and Separation Wall enclaves; about 840,000 Palestinians lived in this area as of summer 2007; today the number is somewhat higher;

– Central that includes the Salfit, Ramallah, and Jericho districts, except for parts in the Separation Wall enclaves; in summer 2007, the Palestinian population exceeded 400,000;

– South that includes the Hebron and Bethlehem districts, except for the northern Dead Sea and Separation Wall enclaves; Palestinians here number over 700,000;

– the Jordan Valley and northern Dead Sea that includes the eastern strip of the West Bank, except for Jericho and nearby refugee camps; the Palestinian population is around 10,000;

– the Separation Wall-created “seam zone” and inside the West Bank “internal” enclaves; when the Wall is completed, the “seam zone” Palestinian population will number about 30,000; an additional 25,000 will be in “internal” enclaves; the “seam zone” also contains thousands of Palestinian farmland dunams (a dunam equals about one fourth of an acre) and 39 settlements; unlike the other geographical units, the enclaves are dozens of non-contiguous sections that are separated from the rest of the West Bank; and

– East Jerusalem that includes all the area Israel annexed in 1967 and is attached to the Jerusalem Municipality, except for the Shu’afat refugee camp and Kfar Aqeb that the Wall separates from the city; around 200,000 Palestinians live in this section.

All geographical units are constricted by Israel’s rigid control system explained above. Below are the checkpoints that control movement from one section to another:

– Za’tara (Tupuah) Checkpoint controls North to Central sections movement; in addition, the IDF directs to this checkpoint all west and east traffic along the Trans-Samaria highway and from Route 60 from Nablus in the north and Ramallah in the southwest and south; Palestinians may generally pass freely heading north; those traveling south encounter ID and sometimes vehicle checks; delays are common; males aged 16 - 35 often aren’t allowed to go south.

– Container Checkpoint almost totally controls movement between the South and Central sections; Border Police staff it round the clock; from 2002 to February 2007, passenger cars were prohibited without a special permit; it’s now cancelled; since September 2000, Palestinians have been prohibited from using Route 398 that runs from the checkpoint to the Ma’ale Adumim and Qedar settlements; Palestinians are diverted to other worn roads of nearby villages; Palestinian traffic passing through the checkpoint are subjected to lengthy delays and at times searches; when Israel declares a comprehensive closure, it applies to this checkpoint; it severs the southern West Bank from the rest of the Territory and requires Palestinians traveling to or from the South to do it by foot.

– Tayasir, Hamra, Gittit and Yitav checkpoints control movement to and from the Jordan Valley. In May 2005, Israel instituted sweeping Palestinian movement prohibitions here, except for residents with ID cards and persons with special permits. They were cancelled in April 2007, it affects only pedestrians and those using public transportation (that also requires a permit), and applies only to the Tayasir and Hamra crossings.

– Almog Checkpoint that controls movement to and from the northern Dead Sea; generally only Palestinians with work permits for nearby settlements and/or to enter Israel may pass; since May 2007, the latter category was cancelled.

– the Separation Wall directs movement between the “seam zone” enclaves and the rest of the West Bank to several gates in the Wall; only Palestinians with special entry permits may pass; 38 gates are in place; only six operate daily from 12 to 24 hours continuously; 17 others open two or three times a day for 30 minutes to two hours; 13 additional ones operate during farming season; two other gates allow movement of residents of a few houses that are enclosed by the Wall and separated from their village; still other crossings are for Israeli travel between the West Bank and Israel; they operate round the clock.

– the Separation Wall also directs movement between East Jerusalem and the rest of the West Bank; this section is called the “Jerusalem envelope” and has 12 checkpoints; crossing (permitted only through four of them) requires a valid ID and permit and submitting to stringent checks; they include exiting vehicles, having them searched, and passing through a revolving gate equipped with a metal detector; the remaining eight checkpoints are for settlers, Israeli residents and East Jerusalem Palestinians with Israeli IDs.

In addition to area to area restrictions, Israel tightens them further with others within areas by breaking them into sub-areas and controlling movement between them. Nablus in the North is separated from nearby villages and from other northern West Bank districts.

The Nablus area includes the city, three refugee camps and 15 villages that contain over 200,000 Palestinians combined. It’s been under siege for seven years; entry and exit is through four surrounding checkpoints; passage through them entails stringent personal and vehicle checks, including for all merchandise in both directions; and special permits are required for passenger vehicle entry.

Collective Nablus movement prohibitions are harsh and unique in the Territory. Males between 16 and 35 are especially affected, but they overall disrupt life for everyone. The restricted male population alone affects 26,000 persons. If the age is lowered to 15, it rises to 36,000, and if females are included (as sometimes happens) it totals 73,000. This group is the area’s main work force, its entire economic life depends on them, and prohibiting their movement brings it to a halt.

When it’s in force, siege conditions vary by checkpoint for those allowed through. The two main Beit Iba and Huwara ones inflict the longest and most burdensome delays and restrictions. In addition, all persons having a “risk profile” because of age are forbidden to leave the area and need a “movement permit in area under encirclement” if they want to exit. However, it’s not easy getting one with a convoluted system in place that requires a party permitted to cross to apply for persons who aren’t and even they can’t do it easily. In addition, permits aren’t issued for “ordinary” needs, such as work, family visits or school. Those considered are only for “humanitarian” reasons like needed medical care. Few overall are issued.

The Nablus siege also restricts movement in the Jenin Tulkarm and Tubas districts. Nablus is vital for them and for years was the West Bank’s economic and industrial center. Now these districts are separated, and major roads between them are blocked. In the past, traveling from Jenin to Nablus took about 40 minutes on the main road. It now takes one to three hours on narrow, winding roads plus a long wait at one of the Nablus area checkpoints.

Over the past two years especially, accessing Nablus has been hard and complicated for villagers located to its north. Checkpoint access is limited, some are closed to traffic, and those that operate have delays running up to hours. In addition, soldiers at times block road traffic for several hours, no advance notice is given, and it causes undue hardship for travelers having to wait or use alternate routes. The IDF is also at times punitive. It sets up indiscriminate flying checkpoints, uses them for punishment, and makes it harsher with instances of violence and confiscation of permits and identity cards that can only be redeemed at a permanent checkpoint that may or may not be operating.

The Central Section splitting caused much the same type hardships. It created two principal sub-areas around Salfit and Ramallah. It detached some of these cities’ villages and separated them from their residents’ farmland.

After the IDF blocked Salfit’s main entrance road from the north, alternate routes became necessary, and they lengthened travel times considerably. It created great hardship for travelers who rely on Nablus for basic services and also for villagers who are blocked from their farmland. Sixty-six thousand people are affected.

It’s even worse for the 300,000 Ramallah district residents in a city that’s the West Bank’s seat of government because Israel denies East Jerusalem that status. In addition, after undo restrictions and hardships caused many Palestinian entrepreneurs to leave Nablus and the northern West Bank, Ramallah developed into the Territory’s cultural and economic center. Obstructions, checkpoints and the Separation Wall demarcate the area and combined make movement just as hard as throughout the rest of the West Bank.

It’s the same for Jericho’s 40,000 residents. In addition, for 10,000 of them in the north in the besieged Jordan Valley, they’re separated from the city, and for those in the east there’s another obstacle - 19 km of trenches and land east of it that’s a closed military area.

The South section’s splitting has been less conspicuous, but it hasn’t made movement easier. Most notably since September 2000, have been restrictions in Route 60’s southern section that runs the entire length of the southern West Bank and is this subsection’s principal roadway. Access roads to the Route are now blocked, over time some have been eased, but use of the road remains limited.

Most harmed are residents in towns and villages in Hebron’s southern area. To reach the city, they must use long, winding, beat-up roads that are no substitute for decent ones. Once the Separation Wall is completed east of the Efrat and Gush Atzion settlements, Route 60’s northern quarter in the South section will be on the Wall’s Israeli side and completely off-limits to Palestinians. As a result, Bethlehem will be separated from Jerusalem as well as the main road to Hebron with all the hardships that will create.

Consider how they affect Hebron. It’s the only Palestinian West Bank city (other than East Jerusalem that Israel annexed in 1967) with an Israeli settlement in its center. Because of it, the IDF created a contiguous strip of land through the city over which Palestinian vehicles are prohibited. It runs from the Kiryat Arba settlement in the east to the Palestinian Tel Rumeida neighborhood in the west, and in many sections along its center, Palestinian pedestrians are banned. The main Shuhada Street is most affected. In addition, the strip blocks Hebron’s main north-south artery harming the entire Palestinian population.

Jordan Valley and northern Dead Sea restrictions involve the use of Route 90 that runs the entire length of the section. Israel operates five checkpoints here for control. Only public transportation and vehicles with special permits may pass. That frees the Route for settlers and Israelis traveling between Jerusalem and the Beit She’an Valley, the Sea of Galilee, or the Galilee area in the north. It also allows the IDF to use large Jordan Valley sections as fire-exercise zones and close off much of their water and grazing areas to Palestinians.

Dozens of non-contiguous “seam-zone” enclaves are also affected. The Separation Wall separates them by winding back and forth between the Green Line and deep into the West Bank. They all contain Palestinian farmland on the barrier’s Israeli side. Some also include villages where 30,000 Palestinians live. Because they aren’t connected, crossing from one subsection to another at best is hard and at worst impossible. It forces travelers to cross the Wall twice with all the hardships that entails. Further, since permits are for one enclave only, entering another one requires a second permit.

The Separation Wall then can be divided into five sections plus the Jerusalem area, and each one contains separate enclaves. Combined they form a crazy quilt isolation pattern with physical obstacles and human repression used against a defenseless civilian population.

Internal community and farmland enclaves are affected as well but not by having to pass through the Wall or obtain permits. However, roads that used to connect them have been closed making travel times longer and more complicated. When completed, the Wall’s route will create 13 non-contiguous internal enclaves for about 240,000 Palestinians in dozens of towns and villages.

East Jerusalem is the final section. Israeli Arabs with identity cards may move about fairly freely with one notable exception. It’s the use of temporary checkpoints (so-called “collection” ones) to collect resident tax debts. They operate a few hours at a time on main neighborhood roads where Israeli Police (usually Border Police) provide security along with tax officials to do the collecting. Police stop cars, collectors do the rest, but never to Jerusalem’s Jewish residents.

Harm to Palestinians’ Fabric of Life

West Bank separation and division inflicts great harm to Palestinians’ fabric of life in the short and longer term. This section examines how.

First consider health as a fundamental human right and how restricting movement affects it. Ill persons needing treatment are greatly impeded reaching medical centers. The quality and availability of service is hampered as well by delaying or restricting physicians and staff. First aid crews also aren’t able to reach the sick and injured quickly. Even when situations aren’t life threatening, movement restrictions increase morbidity chances and may shorten a life span.

Overall, West Bank Palestinians have limited or no access to medical care, and residents of villages and outlying areas are most gravely affected. Then consider so-called “risk profile” people being denied passage through checkpoints. Another example is persons needing a permit for access to Jerusalem hospital treatment. To get one, patients must provide medical documents testifying to their illness and confirming their appointment at a specific hospital.

The situation is especially problematic for pregnant women when their time to deliver approaches and their hospital is in Jerusalem. Permits are valid only for one or two days, as it is for all ill persons, but the moment when it’s needed is uncertain. They must thus be continually renewed, and there are times when it’s impossible. It thus forces mothers to give birth at checkpoints because they’re denied passage through them.

In 1996, the Physicians for Human Rights petitioned the State Attorney’s office for relief and nominally got it - to allow passage through checkpoints without permits in cases of medical emergency so ill persons can be treated. All checkpoint locations are supposed to comply, but it turns out they don’t. Soldiers don’t treat Palestinians kindly, are unresponsive to their needs, and are untrained medically to recognize emergencies.

Patients encounter other obstacles as well. Their travel is slowed by having to use long, winding and worn roads; they’re sometimes blocked causing long delays; they have no access to ambulances or other transportation; must pass through checkpoints when they do or by foot; be up against closed ones; be forced to wait at open ones; and undergo searches.

These problems make people more dependent on first aid that can’t cope in emergency cases where special expertise is required. At times, long distances are involved, and when need is greatest, it means lives are endangered. This is what Palestinians endure daily.

Movement restrictions also affect hospitals, especially East Jerusalem ones that are considered the OPT’s best because they provide services unavailable elsewhere in the Territories. East Jerusalem’s separation from the rest of the West Bank and needing a permit to enter is the problem. It affects staff and patients with the situation at al-Makassed Hospital typical. Twelve of its workers live outside the city and are classified “prevented entry.” They have no permits. Even workers with them face long checkpoint delays or their closure when Israel wishes.

Restricting free movement also impacts health care professionals from developing their skills through in-service training. Students as well are affected, are unable to complete their studies or receive a lower professional training degree. It places Palestinians needing medical care in a hopeless situation. They’re unable to move freely or receive expert care if they can.

B’Tselem’s report is on the West Bank. Gaza is another matter, and since Israel’s June 2007 siege, 130 in the Territory have died because they couldn’t be treated. Their deaths are in addition to the hundreds of others from near daily incursions that continue without letup.

Movement restrictions also greatly affect the OPT’s economy and trade. Post-September 2000, it’s been in deep depression. GDP has declined around 40%, unemployment stands at about 80%, and the poverty level is punishing. It’s how Israel and Washington planned it to bring the Territories to their knees and demand surrender as the price for relief.

At present, look how working conditions and transport of goods are affected. Palestinians could once travel freely outside their communities to jobs. No longer, and many lost out and have no means of employment. Employers as well are affected. They lost workers, had to scale back their operations or shut them down entirely.

The same hardships apply to transporting goods. They can no longer move freely, permits are required, they’re hard to get, travel times are longer even with them, at much greater cost, and an example is trade between Nablus and Ramallah. The cost is fourfold what it was in 2002, the result is greatly reduced trade, it’s forced merchants to concentrate more on their own communities and those nearby, and the result is far less commerce overall that severely impacts everyone.

Here’s what’s involved to move goods between Nablus and East Jerusalem:

– permits are needed;

– a quota restricts the number;

– goods allowed to be transported endure the so-called “back-to-back” method; at point of shipment they’re loaded; then stopped at a checkpoint; unloaded; inspected by mechanical scanner, manually, and/or by dogs; they’re then reloaded on another truck for delivery;

– damage is frequent because of extra handling and Israelis aren’t too gentle about it;

– delays are the rule and they’re costly;

– transport requires passing through other checkpoints and repeating the whole procedure again that may be more or less stringent depending on the whims of inspectors;

– when the Separation Wall is completed, transport will be even harder and its cost greater.

Tourism is also affected. Between the Oslo Accords and September 2000, cities like Bethlehem were desired destinations. No longer because of difficulties getting there and how hard it is to move around. The result is privately owned tourist sites throughout the West Bank have closed or have greatly cut back. An example is the Barahameh family’s park in al-Badhan, a village 10 km north of Nablus. Getting there from Ramallah means passing through four permanent checkpoints plus whatever flying ones are up for the day. The result is wasted hours to spend a day at the park, and most tourists won’t do it.

Small businesses like stores, souvenir shops and restaurants are also impacted. Many close down or operate at a fraction of their former levels. A World Bank West Bank report cites movement restrictions and their costs as two major obstacles affecting a healthy Palestinian economy.

They affect farming as well in areas like the Jordan Valley and “seam zone.” Agriculture is an important source of Palestinians’ income. Farmers need permits for it in these areas. Many are denied and their livelihoods destroyed or greatly impacted. Farm workers are also affected. They, too, need permits, but even having them means putting up with long travel times and exhausting days. Many workers won’t do it it so farmers lose a vital work force and the ability to grow their crops productively.

Farmer and merchant Husni Muhammad ‘Adb a-Rahman Sawafteh is an example of what others like him endure:

– he lives, works and farms in Tubas; he and his brothers have a house and 250 dunams of land in Bardala, a northern Jordan Valley village; they also have livestock;

– to reach Bardala, they must pass through Tayasir checkpoint; doing it involves “much difficulty;” it affects their workers as well;

– to sell their produce, they need to reach Bardala, but the hardship forces Sawafteh to manage things by phone; it’s inadequate because it’s vital to be current on prices and dealer payments that requires being in Bardala to do it;

– sometimes he can’t be for a month; the result is dealers send “payment on account” and pay less than the amount owed; their back due debts accumulate; being there is essential to handle things; when he can’t do it, he hasn’t enough money for materials to fertilize the land and grow crops;

– caring for the livestock is another problem; they need daily care; Sawafteh had to build a new Tubas farm to do it, but it was lacking; Tubas hasn’t enough grazing land so the flock can’t do it daily as they need to; he thus has to buy them food; it’s an additional expense he can’t afford;

– he and other farmers have an additional problem as well; they need permits for themselves but also for their tractors and farm vehicles; it forces most of them to go long distances on foot or donkeys;

– it also restricts what crops can be grown; restrictions forced farmers like Sawafteh to forgo higher revenue-generating ones like tomatoes and cucumbers and switch to less labor intensive ones like wheat;

– some farmers give up altogether and let their land lie fallow rather than risk economic failure or work under onerous conditions.

Family and social life are also affected. Palestinian community life is based on extended familial ties even though members don’t often live in the same towns and villages. Movement restrictions and inability to get permits prevent their ability to see each other, and it’s especially felt in the “seam zone,” Jordan Valley and Nablus under siege.

Ni’ma ‘Ali Salameh Abu Sahara from Nablus is a case in point:

– her daughter married and moved to the Jordan Valley;

– no one has been able to see her, not even during holidays, because “the army doesn’t let us cross the Hamra checkpoint;”

– she wasn’t able to visit her first grandson and only saw him two months after his birth when her daughter visited her;

– her daughter just had a second child by Caesarean section; Abu Sahara went to the checkpoint to get through to see her; soldiers refused to let her pass; she begged them; they still refused; Abu Sahara “went home and cried.”

This story and many others like it are commonplace, and it’s caused the splitting up of nuclear families. Students leave parents to be near school. Wage earners and tradesmen leave families to be close to work. The ill live in cities to be near essential medical care facilities. From the time they leave homes to whenever they try to return, they encounter problems. For most Palestinians, they’re painful to impossible.

Restrictions prevent routine family gatherings as well as special ones like weddings, funerals, and caring for the sick. Palestinians once could take vacations, and a favorite spot was the northern Dead Sea area with its 25 km of coastline. No longer. The ‘Ein Fascha nature reserves there (one of the most popular recreational sites) are now operated by Israel’s Nature Reserves and Parks Authority for Jews only.

Movement restrictions affect all facets of daily life, including basic services and law enforcement - urban infrastructure, social services, mail, governance, rescue operations, electricity and gas, water, and locally-based security. When breakdowns occur and repairs are needed or other vital services have to be performed, district government employees get no preferential treatment crossing checkpoints to handle them. The result is long delays fixing essential public services or dealing with problems like medical emergencies.

“Fabric of life” roads for Palestinians are also affected, including the way they were built. They’re on expropriated private land, inefficiently use public property, and take other Palestinian land for the Separation Wall. An example is a road Israel built between the village of Shufa (south of Tulkarm) and a-Ras, northeast of the Sal’it settlement. Israel took village lands for it - from Far’on, a-Ras and ‘Izbat Shufa. To connect the two district seats, Israel seized private land, destroyed olive and citrus orchards on them, asked no permission to do it, and paid no compensation for the losses.

Israel unilaterally chooses routes for new roads, Palestinians’ interests aren’t considered, and injuries and losses they incur get no redress. They’re also harmed in other ways. Roads often demarcate villages, they limit their ability to build and expand for their growing populations, their costs outweighs their benefits, the harm affects whole communities, and it’s long-term.

Restrictions on Free Movement from the Perspective of International Law

Besides Article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international humanitarian law, the UN’s International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is very clear about free movement. Its Article 12 states:

1. “Everyone lawfully within the territory of a State shall, within the territory, have the right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his residence.

2. Everyone shall be free to leave any country, including his own.

3. The above-mentioned rights shall not be subject to any restrictions except those which are provided by law, are necessary to protect national security, public order, public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others, and are consistent with the other rights recognized in the present Covenant.

4. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country.”

Besides legitimate national security and military necessity, restricting free movement must meet another requirement - proportionality. Under Israeli administrative law as well, the state must prove the legitimate necessity of restrictions, that security can’t be achieved by less harmful means, and that the end result justifies the cost under international law. The UN Human Rights Committee states that the principle of proportionality requires that movement restrictions be incorporated in clear and justifiable legislation. Failure to do so violates international law under which Israel is accountable.

Israel claims justification for its occupation policies - that they’re vital to secure its West Bank settlers as well as Israelis traveling on the Territory’s roads. Clearly, the threat is real, but unasked is why. It’s because of Israel’s longstanding belligerency forcing Palestinians to respond in self-defense and at times take Israeli lives. There’s no secret how to stop it, but Israel abjures - stop attacking Palestinians so they stop fighting back. Long ago it was that way before Palestine became Israel. Arabs and Jews lived peacefully at a time the population imbalance heavily favored Palestinians and the great Jewish immigration wave hadn’t begun.

Today, it’s another matter, Israel manufactures its own security problem, then unjustifiably claims the right to react, and in the process, inflict great harm on a mostly-civilian population. Its actions are unrelated to security, are entirely political and stem from its annexation aims - to seize the West Bank’s most valued areas, remove the Palestinian population, and resettle them in isolated cantons unconnected to the others except by a crazy quilt patchwork of obstructive checkpoints, barriers, and hard to traverse road network.

Israel acts illegally on occupied lands, and its draconian restrictions follow as a result. They’re less for security and mainly to let settlers (on stolen land) move around freely. They’re heavily protected, isolated from their Arab neighbors, able to travel on for-Jews only roads, live in Jewish-only communities, and get all the conveniences of a modern state that denies them to non-Jews in a country claiming to be a model democracy.

All West Bank settlements are illegal under international law. So is the main road network forbidden to Palestinians that’s built on annexed land. Israel’s justifications are unfounded. Security is a non-starter. So is the claim that it’s to protect against terrorist attacks that are, in fact, self-defense measures in an unfair fight. Palestinians are matched against the world’s fourth most powerful military that flexes its muscles by attacking civilians and claims its occupation is just. International law says otherwise, but Israel ignores it.

It also acts disproportionately. It fails the test by all measures:

– there’s no rational connection between the harm restrictions cause and Israel’s declared security objective; independent security and human rights experts concur on this; their view is that there’s a converse relationship between restrictions imposed and security desired; the greater the former, the less of the latter;

– a second failure is the lack of an alternative that causes less harm to achieve a security goal; in some instances, Israel admitted it hasn’t used other methods that would have caused less harm; the Separation Wall is the clearest example of a measure causing great harm with little payback except for confiscated land; after that, the Wall is purely punitive and the Palestinian response justifiable anger;

– a third failure is the lack of a proper relationship between the harm caused and security benefit gained; whatever reasons Israel claims for its policy, it must still justify that it acted in proper proportion to the benefit achieved; sweeping and protracted West Bank restrictions clearly fail the test; they affect all aspects of Palestinians’ lives, infringe on their human rights and deny them the right to family life, health, education, work, and all else Israelis take for granted and get; and in cases of Nablus under siege, the effects are much worse on a locked-down population; there’s no justification for causing so much harm for whatever benefits Israel claims to be getting; they’re disproportionately way out of whack.

Israel also imposes its might without military legislation or written orders. For measures this far-reaching and causing so much harm, orders are merely passed down the chain of command verbally with lots of latitude on their implementation on the ground no matter how harsh. Such a system begs for abuse, and that’s exactly what happens repeatedly.

Without official restrictions in writing, it’s near impossible to monitor how the IDF administers them or judge what’s right or wrong. By its policy, Israel has, in fact, given the army unlimited latitude, made it unaccountable, and instituted a system guaranteed to punish and abuse.

Under international humanitarian law, it’s a system of strictly prohibited collective punishment. Article 50 of the Hague Regulations states: “No general penalty, pecuniary or otherwise, shall be inflicted upon the population on account of the acts of individuals for which they cannot be regarded as jointly and severally responsible.”

Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention also states: “No protected person may be punished for an offense he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.” The UN’s International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (quoted above) concurs. So do all independent human rights experts.

Israel claims it acts to deter, not collectively punish, but evidence on the ground proves otherwise. The vast majority of Palestinians affected are innocent civilians, they’re suspected of nothing, they’re made to endure great suffering, and Israel’s actions have been imposed continuously and repressively for over seven and a half years plus the punitive effects of 41 years under occupation.

These are actions of one ethnic group against another, thus constituting another international law violation. It’s prohibited by the 1966 (UN General Assembly-adopted) Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination that Israel ratified in 1979. Article 1.1 defines racial discrimination as follows:

“Any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, color, descent, or national origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life.”

Article 5(d)(1) gives every person the right of free movement within the borders of the state without discrimination. Article 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights prohibits all measures that discriminate solely on the basis of race, color, sex, language, religion, or social origin. Israel violates all of the above. Its claims otherwise hold no water and are, in fact, convoluted. It denies legitimate citizens their legal rights on their own land, but provides preferential treatment for illegal settlers in stark breach of the law.

Conclusion

Israel’s repressive measures force West Bank Palestinians to live in a constant state of uncertainty, prevent them from making plans, deny them their basic rights, harm them when emergencies arise, and overall consign their lives to the will and whims to an illegal occupier.

Beyond the immediate harm that’s considerable, the West Bank’s geographical division causes severe long-term detriment to the entire Palestinian fabric of life - affecting their economic, political and social welfare. The result is an entire nation locked down, punished for being unwanted and in the way, and denied their right of self-determination and free movement on their own land.

Israel’s justification is fraudulent on its face, yet goes unchallenged by the world community as well as by neighboring Arab states. Shamefully and willfully, they turn a blind eye to a human calamity they won’t confront and denounce publicly as illegal and unacceptable.

B’Tselem has no such hesitancy. It ends its report by calling on Israel to:

– “immediately remove all the permanent and sweeping restrictions on movement inside the West Bank (including the Separation Wall ruled illegal by the International Court of Justice). In their place, Israel should” protect its citizens along the Green Line and inside the Jewish state according to the rule of law;

– “act immediately to evacuate all the settlements in the West Bank. Until this is done, Israel” has every right to protect its settlers security, but not to the detriment of the Palestinian people who are the lawful occupants of their own land; and

– “verify, before any temporary restriction….is approved (while settlements remain in place),” that it’s “needed for a legitimate security purpose and that the resultant harm to the Palestinian population will be proportionate,” according to international law. Restrictions in place “must be incorporated in a written order that specifies the nature of the restriction and the period of time it will remain in force.”

Until Israel takes these measures and begins ending its 41 year occupation, it will continue violating international law and remain in violation of dozens of UN resolutions condemning it for its actions, deploring it for committing them, and demanding they be ended. So far, Israel shows no signs of complying and continues acting with impunity, arrogance and defiance of the rule of law it disdains.

Have Your Say: Denying Palestinians Free Movement in the West Bank
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

RINF Forums Now Online

Friday, May 2nd, 2008

After a year long year hiatus due to security problems, the RINF Forums are back online and starting from scratch. Unfortunately the original database was damaged on our old server but now after rigorous software testing we are all set. We take daily back ups so if an attack does happen again it will not keep us offline for long.

You can create an account here and view the forums here.

The forums have many networking tools and should be easy to use. We expect things to be a little slow at the start as it exists on its own domain name (http://forums.rinf.com) and will take a while for the search engines to properly index it.

We hope you enjoy the new addition and let us know what you think.

Have Your Say: RINF Forums Now Online
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Pentagon Documents Highlight Torture Methods

Friday, May 2nd, 2008

By Adam Goldman | New York - The military continued to use abusive interrogation methods on detainees after a 2003 directive meant to end such practices, the American Civil Liberties Union said Wednesday after reviewing newly released documents.The Department of Defense documents shed light on the use of psychologists in military interrogations and the failure of medical workers to report abuse of detainees, the ACLU said.

“The documents reveal that psychologists and medical personnel played a key role in sustaining prisoner abuse - a clear violation of their ethical and legal obligations,” ACLU attorney Amrit Singh said.

A Pentagon spokesman said medical workers understood the responsibility to provide humane medical care to detainees.

The ACLU obtained the documents - newly unredacted data from what is known as the Church Report - in connection with a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed in 2004. The government did not release details on the interrogation methods that continued to be used after 2003, she said.

The documents also show “the use of some of the techniques … continued even until July 2004, despite the fact that many were retracted by the October 2003 memorandum, and some were subsequently prohibited by the May 2004 memorandum.”

The report says, “The relatively widespread use of these techniques supports our finding that the policy documents were not always received or thoroughly understood.”

The Pentagon says it conducted a thorough review of prisoner interrogation policies after the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal. The Church Report concluded that no uniformed or civilian leaders directed or encouraged the prisoner abuses committed in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Humane treatment of detainees “is and always has been the Department of Defense standard,” Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Mark Ballesteros said Wednesday.

“The Church Report is one of a dozen major reviews, assessments or investigations related to detention operations,” he said. “None of them found that there was a governmental policy directing, encouraging or condoning abuse.”

The report was largely disclosed in 2005, and a declassified version of the review was made public last year. Some of the documents were initially redacted because they were classified, Singh said. The government claimed that if the information were released it would cause serious damage to national security. The newly released documents are part of the Church Report not previously released.

Singh called the government’s argument bogus, saying it furthered a pattern “of claiming national security as pretext for withholding information to cover up embarrassing information.”

The ACLU has been highly critical of the report, saying the Pentagon didn’t analyze all open abuse cases at the time. The ACLU says the report shows “enlisted medics witnessed obvious episodes of detainee abuse apparently without reporting them to superiors.”

Singh said the documents make it clear that the psychologists were employed in the context of military operations. They were not there to serve as mental health providers, she said.

Ballesteros pointed to the executive summary of the report, which states that medical personnel “understood their responsibility to provide humane medical care to detainees, in accordance with U.S. Military medical doctrine and the Geneva Conventions.”

He said the report also discusses the role of behavioral science workers, who were not involved in detainee medical care or permitted access to detainees’ medical records for purposes of developing interrogation strategies.

“More than 600 criminal investigations have been initiated into allegations of detainee mistreatment. More than 250 servicemembers have been held accountable for their roles in those cases,” he said.

The ACLU submitted a freedom of information request in October 2003 and sued in June 2004 demanding immediate disclosure of records relating to prisoners held in facilities abroad. The litigation is ongoing.

Have Your Say: Pentagon Documents Highlight Torture Methods
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Poll: Bush most unpopular in modern history

Friday, May 2nd, 2008

CNN |  A new poll suggests that George W. Bush is the most unpopular president in modern American history. A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Thursday indicates that 71 percent of the American public disapprove of how Bush his handling his job as president.”No president has ever had a higher disapproval rating in any CNN or Gallup poll; in fact, this is the first time that any president’s disapproval rating has cracked the 70 percent mark,” said CNN Polling Director Keating Holland.

“Bush’s approval rating, which stands at 28 percent in our new poll, remains better than the all-time lows set by Harry Truman and Richard Nixon (22 percent and 24 percent, respectively) but even those two presidents never got a disapproval rating in the 70s,” Holland added. “The previous all-time record in CNN or Gallup polling was set by Truman, 66 percent disapproval in January 1952.”

CNN Senior Political Analyst Bill Schneider adds, “He is more unpopular than Richard Nixon was just before he resigned from the presidency in August 1974.” President Nixon’s disapproval rating in August 1974 stood at 67 percent.

The poll also indicates that support for the war in Iraq has never been lower. Thirty percent of those questioned favored the war while 68 percent opposed the conflict.

“Americans are growing more pessimistic about the war,” Holland said. “In January, nearly half believed that things were going well for the U.S. in Iraq; now that figure has dropped to 39 percent.”

The numbers on the Iraq war come on the five-year anniversary of President Bush’s “mission accomplished” moment onboard the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln, when Bush proclaimed that “major combat operations in Iraq have ended.”

The record low support for the war in a CNN poll could be one reason behind the president’s unpopularity, but it probably is not the only one.

“Support for the war, the assessment of the economy and approval of Mr. Bush are all about the same — bad,” Schneider said.

The CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll was conducted by telephone from Monday through Wednesday, with 1,008 adult Americans questioned. The poll’s sampling error is plus or minus 3 percentage points.

Have Your Say: Poll: Bush most unpopular in modern history
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Labour facing its worst losses in a generation

Friday, May 2nd, 2008

By Andrew Porter and James Kirkup | Gordon Brown is set for punishing losses in his first electoral test as Prime Minister after the Conservatives made key gains across the country. With more than 1 million votes counted, a BBC projection based on results in key wards forecast Labour will record 24 per cent of the national vote, its worst result in a generation. The Tories were projected to win 47 per cent.

However, the official Conservative HQ projection put the party’s final share on 43 per cent.

The Tories won control of a series of target councils, including Bury and Southampton, and by have gained almost 70 council seats.

Labour by contrast, has lost more than 60 council seats and control of four councils.

Conservative strategists are predicting the party was on course to gain more than 200 council seats, while Labour officials admitted they were likely to lose that number. The Tory leader David Cameron is likely to claim the results are his party’s biggest electoral boost while in opposition.

• Andrew Porter Rare Wales wins | Labour in third place?
• Robert Colvile Cabbies back Boris
• Iain Martin Ministers respond badly to losses

A spokesman said: “Gordon Brown has had his Life on Mars moment. He went to sleep in 2008 and today he’s waking up with support back to the worst his party has seen since records began in 1973.”

As the results came in, the Minister for London Tessa Jowell, who masterminded Labour’s campaign in the capital, conceded “this is likely to be tough”.

John Denham, the Universities Secretary and Labour MP for Southampton Itchen, said the Government now had to listen to the fears of middle class southern voters.

He said: “There have been some disappointments tonight. We have to go back to voters and say we are listening, we will get back to what people have enjoyed in the south in the past 10 years.”

Shadow chancellor George Osborne said it looked like it was going to be “a very good night” for the Conservatives.

The results suggested Mr Brown will face a summer of discontent as his own MPs consider whether there is any possibility that he can lead Labour to a general election success. Labour insiders feared the results would be even worse than Tony Blair’s poor showing at last year’s local elections.

Only a win today for Ken Livingstone in London over Boris Johnson would save any face for Labour. The results are not expected until this evening and last night the result still appeared on a knife edge.

The Conservatives unexpectedly picked up wards in Swansea, Sunderland, Durham and Wigan.

In perhaps the biggest surprise of the early declaration, the Tories also won control of Southampton from its ruling Labour-Lib Dem coalition.

The last time the Tories held control in the city was 1984. The party also won control of Bedworth, Harlow and West Lindsey councils.

All had been considered possible but not probable gains for Mr Cameron’s party, and the results fuelled expectations of a dismal night for Labour.

The Liberal Democrats meanwhile claimed they had taken control of Hull, once a Labour stronghold.

Labour was resigned to lose Reading, a council it has held since 1986 and its last southern foothold outside London.

There were 4,023 seats up for election on 137 English councils and 22 Welsh ones.

London voters were also choosing a mayor, with the results of the race between Mr Livingstone and Mr Johnson due to be declared this evening.

The elections are the first real test of Gordon Brown’s standing among voters.

David Chaytor, Labour MP for Bury North, said many voters were unconvinced by Gordon Brown’s record to date.

He said: “Floating voters are still uncertain about the Government and how it has performed over the past six months. We knew this was going to be a difficult night.”

”Our aim has been to limit the damage and hold on to what we have got.”

However, the biggest Conservative hope for gains in the north, North Tyneside, will not declare until this afternoon.

And Labour was preparing to take some cold comfort from the Tories’ continued troubles in bid northern cities.

After several dismal weeks and the damaging Labour rebellion over the 10 p tax rate, senior Labour sources believe disillusioned voters have delivered a severe reprimand to his Government.

Based on private reports from Labour activists, the party was projecting a “spread” of 25 Â 27 per cent of the vote, against 44 Â 47 per cent for the Tories.

Turn out is thought to be up throughout the country and in London.

Labour strategists plan to blame bad results on popular worries about the economy and the global credit crunch.

”These are elections being fought against a difficult economic backdrop,” said Ed Miliband, the Cabinet Office minister and a key confidante of Mr Brown.

Labour figures are taking limited comfort in their projections that the Tories will not make major gains in the North of England, suggesting the Conservatives will not realise their ambitions to take councils like North Tyneside and Bury.

Mr Brown will “take it on the chin” and come out in a string of media appearances on Sunday to say he understands the anger and concern of voters, and promise to respond over the coming months and years.

Key to the Labour recovery strategy is an optimistic view of the UK economy. The Bank of England on Wednesday said that the worst of the global credit crunch could be over and Mr Brown is betting on a significant up-turn.

Yet an ICM poll for BBC Newsnight shows that the economy is, for now, a major Labour vulnerability.

The poll, showed the share of voters who trust to run the economy is 32 per cent, down from 48 per cent a year ago.

The Tories meanwhile scored 46 per cent, up from 36 per cent.

Labour’s long-term strategy is to meet such concerns by drawing a sharp contrast between Mr Brown’s decade at the Treasury with Mr Cameron’s lack of significant government experience.

In the Commons on Wednesday, Mr Brown derided his opponent as a “shallow salesman” who lacks substance.

Speaking on BBC Newsnight last night, Mr Miliband said personal credibility will be decisive.

He said: “In difficult economic times, Gordon Brown is absolutely the right person to lead Britain.”

The ICM poll showed that

42 per cent of voters believe the Prime Minster is an electoral asset for Labour, and 52 per cent said he is a liability

Mr Cameron’s ratings were 68 per cent against 24 per cent.

Have Your Say: Labour facing its worst losses in a generation
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Leader: US spreading insecurity, terrorism

Friday, May 2nd, 2008

Press TV | The Leader of the Islamic Revolution has said that Iran’s armed forces are like a strong fortress that defends people’s security and tranquility. Addressing the armed forces commanders and officers in Fars province, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei said that Iran’s military should become stronger everyday through its innovations.

Referring to the US invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, the Leader opined that although the occupiers said that they wanted to establish security in Iraq and Afghanistan, they have made both places the most insecure states in the world.

Ayatollah Khamenei termed US President George W. Bush as the worst president in that country’s contemporary history.

“Although Bush will leave the White House several months from now, everyone will remember him for the spread of terrorism and insecurity around the world,” he added.

Have Your Say: Leader: US spreading insecurity, terrorism
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

US officials: Decision on confronting Iran up to Iraq

Friday, May 2nd, 2008

By Robert Burns | Iraqi leaders have been given the latest U.S. evidence of Iranian support for militias inside Iraq, and Baghdad will decide what to do about it, two senior Pentagon officials said Wednesday.Marine Lt. Gen. John Sattler, director of strategy, plans and policy for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki possesses the evidence, which other officials said contradicts Tehran’s stated commitment to stop providing arms, weapons technology and training to Shiite militias inside Iraq.

“It’s in Prime Minister al-Maliki’s hands right now, the evidence as to whether or not he’s been lied to — bald-faced lied to — by the Iranian government,” Sattler told a Pentagon news conference.

“The evidence inside Baghdad has been shared with the Iraqi leadership, and that’s where it stands right now,” he added.

The Iraqi leaders are hoping to pressure Iran to stop aiding militias by presenting Tehran with the latest evidence, another senior defense official said. The official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the information, said it’s not clear whether the Iranians have agreed to meet to discuss the evidence. But the official said the Iraqis want to press the Iranians to stop.

CIA Director Michael Hayden said Wednesday that Iran’s policy is to help kill Americans in Iraq. Hayden made the statement in response to a student question while speaking at Kansas State University.

“It is my opinion, it is the policy of the Iranian government, approved to highest level of that government, to facilitate the killing of Americans in Iraq,” Hayden said.

U.S. military officials have said its evidence that Iran is aiding Iraqi militias includes caches of weapons that have date stamps showing they were produced in Iran this year. The weapons include mortars, rockets, small arms, roadside bombs and armor-piercing explosives — known as explosively formed penetrators, or EFPs — that troops have discovered in recent months, according to another senior military official who spoke on condition of anonymity because the evidence has not yet been made public.

According to one official, plans for U.S. officials to publicly present the evidence of Iranian support for the militias have been delayed to give the Iraqis time to speak directly to Tehran about the problem.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates and other U.S. government officials have asserted that Iranian-trained Iraqi Shiite militiamen are carrying out attacks in Baghdad and elsewhere in Iraq — using weapons supplied by Iran — that are killing not only Iraqis but U.S. troops as well.

Appearing with Sattler at the Pentagon was the Joint Chiefs’ operations chief, Army Lt. Gen. Carter Ham, who said the Iraqis will play “a leading role” in determining how to deal with the problem.

“The government of Iran … made a commitment to stem the flow of fighters and material from Iran into Iraq,” Ham said, adding that U.S. military commanders in Baghdad “have stated that they’re not seeing evidence that that is, in fact, the case. I think it now is a matter for the government of Iraq.”

Asked more directly what the U.S. government intends to do about the Iranian actions in Iraq, Ham replied, “Clearly the Iraqis have a leading role, but it is necessarily an international effort to which the United States clearly is a significant factor in this.”

Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said last week that U.S. officials in Baghdad planned to publicly release evidence of continuing lethal Iranian assistance to militias inside Iraq. That plan is on hold to give the Iraqis time to speak directly to Tehran about the problem, one official said.

Gates said Tuesday that the U.S. is not laying the groundwork for an attack against Iran.

Addressing the same issue, Sattler said he knows of “no order or stepped-up effort to plan” for military action against Iran, adding that in his position as head of planning for the Joint Chiefs, he would know.

The U.S. briefly had two Navy aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf this week — a move that Gates said Tuesday could be seen as a “reminder” to Iran. The Pentagon has routinely said that moving ships to the Gulf is a way of showing countries there that the U.S. remains committed to the region.

The USS Abraham Lincoln entered the Gulf in a normal rotation of forces, and the USS Harry Truman and its battle group began heading toward their home base at Norfolk, Va., officials said. Ham said the two carriers were together in the Gulf for only a day, and that they conducted joint air exercises in the northern Gulf.

———

Associated Press writer Lolita C. Baldor, traveling with Defense Secretary Robert Gates in Mexico City and Texas, contributed to this report.

Have Your Say: US officials: Decision on confronting Iran up to Iraq
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Five Years Since Mission Accomplished

Friday, May 2nd, 2008

It has been five years since the President declared victory in the battle for Iraq. Since that day, more than 3,900 American troops have been killed – bringing the total to more than 4,000. There are still 150,000 American troops in Iraq, just as in May 2003 – but the number of soldiers from other countries fighting alongside them has fallen by more than half, to just 9,800. Under the strain of repeated deployments, two-thirds of Army brigades are rated “not combat ready.” The cost to the American economy has reached $1.3 trillion ($16,500 per family of four) and in the end will likely rise to $3 trillion ($35,000 per family of four). Iraqi civilian casualties are in the hundreds of thousands, and four and a half million Iraqis have been forced from their homes. The Iraqi economy is stagnant with oil production and electricity below prewar levels.

The Military Commitment: No End in Sight

“I believe that we can win an overwhelming victory in a very short period of time.” – John McCain, 9/29/02

“The idea that it’s going to be a long, long, long battle of some kind I think is belied by the fact of what happened in 1990. Five days or five weeks or five months, but it certainly isn’t going to last any longer than that . . . It won’t be a World War III.” - Donald Rumsfeld, 11/15/02

“It’s hard to conceive that it would take more forces to provide stability in post-Saddam Iraq than it would take to conduct the war itself and to secure the surrender of Saddam’s security forces and his army. Hard to imagine.” - Paul Wolfowitz, 3/27/03

The Iraq War has lasted longer than World War II. It has been 61 months since military operations in Iraq began. As of May 1, 2008 American troops have been in Iraq for 1,870 days, 267 weeks. World War II lasted 45 months.

Five years in, American troop levels in Iraq are where they were when Bush declared “mission accomplished.” There were 150,000 American troops in Iraq in April 2003. Today there are 155,000 troops in Iraq. [Brookings Institution, 4/21/08]

Source: Brookings Institution [4/21/08]

Costs are Rising

“Well, the Office of Management and Budget has come up come up with a number that’s something under $50 billion for the cost.” - Donald Rumsfeld, 1/19/03

The direct cost of the war in Iraq is more than 10 times what the Bush Administration said it would be. Roughly $525 billion have been allocated to fight the war in Iraq, with no end in sight. Once the fiscal year 2008 funding process is complete, the cost will go above $600 billion. [Brookings Institution, 3/10/08]

Even the White House’s most realistic analysis was far lower than the actual costs of the war. White House Economic Adviser Lawrence Lindsay’s aggressive pre-war estimate stated that the war would cost $100 billion to $200 billion. He was asked to resign. [MSNBC, 3/17/06]

The war has cost the overall economy $1.3 trillion ($16,500 per family of four) thus far and Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz estimates that it could rise to $3 trillion ($35,000 per family of four). The cost of war estimate from Stiglitz, unlike conventional estimates, calculates the value of losses in military readiness, increased recruitment costs, the cost of medical treatment for returning veterans, and other impacts on the economy. [Congressional Joint Economic Committee, 2/28/2008]

Violence Continues Unabated

“The level of activity that we see today from a military standpoint, I think, will clearly decline. I think they’re in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency.” - Vice President Cheney, 06/20/05

“Overall, I think a year from now, we will have made a fair amount of progress if we stay the course.” - John McCain, 12/05

Last year was the deadliest yet for American troops in Iraq. 901 Americans were killed in Iraq in 2007, the most of any year of the war. [Iraq Coalition Casualty Count]

While violence has dropped from its late 2006 peak, the 2008 level is still unacceptable and because of intra-Shi’a violence has risen to its highest level since August 2007. According to the Department of Defense, attacks have risen over the past few months, returning to mid-2005 levels of roughly 500 attacks per week. Meanwhile, according to Iraq’s interior, defense and health ministries, 923 civilians were killed in March 2008, making it the most violent month since August 2007. [DOD, 3/7/08. Reuters, 4/1/08.]

Civilian casualties appear to be well over 200,000 – roughly one percent of Iraq’s population. The World Health Organization (WHO) concludes that 150,000 Iraqi civilians were killed between April 2003 and the summer of 2006. Trend lines from other data suggest that today’s casualty figure is well over 200,000 people and more than one percent of Iraq’s total pre-war population. [New England Journal of Medicine, 1/31/08. Financial Times, 1/10/2008 . Brookings Institution, 4/21/08]

4.7 Million Iraqis have been forced from their homes. 2 million have fled the country. 2.7 million are displaced inside of Iraq. [UNHCR]

Little Progress on Politics and Reconstruction

“The bulk of the funds for Iraq’s reconstruction will come from Iraqis” – Donald Rumsfeld, 10/03

There has been little substantive political progress. “Iraq’s political transition remains stuck where it was in 2005, with no real advances on constitutional reform and worrisome unanswered questions on the implementation of three recently passed laws. The laws cited by supporters of keeping U.S. troops in Iraq indefinitely as remarkable legislative achievements—de-Baathification reform, a provincial powers law, and an amnesty law for detainees—do not by themselves represent a major step forward. As we know from the experience of our own country, the passage of legislation does not guarantee implementation.” [Center for American Progress, 4/08]

Five years later, Iraqi oil production remains below prewar levels. Despite the assertion that Iraqi oil production would pay for the war, production is at 2.23 million barrels per day compared to 2.5 before the war. [Brookings Institution, 4/21/08]

Baghdad is getting only 9.7 hours of electricity per day – a fraction of what it was getting before the war. Without a steady supply of power businesses have suffered. The original goal was to increase nationwide electrical output to 6,000 megawatts per day by mid-2004. Instead electricity is currently at 4,100. “Last July and August, massive blackouts stretched across parts of Baghdad. This summer could be worse because drought has cut in half power generated by hydroelectric plants. Add war, attacks on transmission lines, antiquated equipment, overdue maintenance and local corruption or bureaucracy and reliable electricity remains out of reach for most Iraqis.” [Brookings Institution, 4/21/08. USA Today, 4/27/08]

Iraq is experiencing a windfall in oil revenue, but Iraq’s leaders fail to spend on reconstruction. Special Inspector General for Iraq Stuart Bowen estimated that Iraqi oil revenues for 2007 would likely rise to about $60 billion, yet the Iraqi government has failed to draw on these soaring revenues for reconstruction. Meanwhile, the United States spent $8.6 billion on Iraq’s reconstruction in 2007. [AP, 3/11/08. NY Times, 1/16/08. Congressional Research Service, 11/07/07 ]

Military Strain

“As you know, you go to war with the Army you have. Not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time.” – Donald Rumsfeld, 12/04/04

“I don’t think Americans are concerned if we’re there for 100 years or 1,000 years or 10,000 years.” – John McCain, 1/6/08

Army Chief of Staff: Iraq is hurting the Army’s ability to sustain itself and plan for future incidents around the world. Gen. George Casey stated that “The cumulative effects of the last six-plus years at war have left our Army out of balance, consumed by the current fight and unable to do the things we know we need to do to properly sustain our all-volunteer force and restore our flexibility for an uncertain future.” [Reuters, 2/26/08]

Iraq War poses “significant risk” to all-volunteer army. Vice Chief of the Army Gen. Cody said that the “heavy deployments are inflicting ‘incredible stress’ on soldiers and families and that they pose ‘a significant risk’ to the nation’s all-volunteer military. ‘When the five-brigade surge went in, that took all the stroke out of the shock absorbers for the United States Army,’ Cody testified. ‘Our readiness is being consumed as fast as we build it. Lengthy and repeated deployments with insufficient recovery time have placed incredible stress on our soldiers and our families, testing the resolve of our all-volunteer force like never before.’” [Washington Post, 4/2/08. NY Times, 4/6/08 ]

The U.S. military is overstretched, understaffed and under-equipped. “It will take years for the Army and Marine Corps to recover from what some officials privately have called a “death spiral,” in which the ever more rapid pace of war-zone rotations has consumed 40 percent of their total gear, wearied troops and left no time to train to fight anything other than the insurgencies now at hand.” “The combat readiness of the total Army (active units, the National Guard, and the Army Reserve) is in tatters… The simple fact is that the United States currently does not have enough troops who are ready and available for potential contingency missions in places like Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, or anywhere else.” [Lawrence Korb, Testimony Before House Armed Services Committee, 7/27/07 . Washington Post, 3/19/07 ]

The Real Costs of the Iraq War

Copyright National Security Network

Have Your Say: Five Years Since Mission Accomplished
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report in our forum .

Related News

• Zogby: Alternative Media Replacing Mainstream News
• Public, media losing sight of Iraq, study finds
• Poll: 39% of Public Already Support Impeachment
• Censorship ‘changes face of net’
• Laptops Lost Like Hot Cakes at US Airports

This entry was posted on Friday, May 2nd, 2008 at 11:27 pm and is filed under General, Latest News, Media News, Top Story . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.