Shutting down the hospital
US military commanders in Iraq have identified a major new threat-- Iraqi hospitals!
That seems the only conclusion to be drawn from this piece of spine-chilling reporting from the NYT's Eric Schmitt:
Military commanders point to several accomplishments in Falluja. A bastion of resistance has been eliminated, with lower than expected American military and Iraqi civilian casualties. Senior military officials say up to 1,600 insurgents have been killed and hundreds more captured, altogether more than half the number they estimated were in the city when the campaign began.
The offensive also shut down what officers said was a propaganda weapon for the militants: Falluja General Hospital, with its stream of reports of civilian casualties.
Not only (see previous post) has the US made a positive decision not to count Iraqi civilian casualties. But now, any independent institution that issues casualty reports is judged to be "a propaganda weapon for the militants" and on that basis is to be shut down.
Watch out, the people who run the excellent British medical journal, The Lancet! There might be a Tomahawk missile heading your way any day now!
There is a difference, of course, between The Lancet and Fallujah General Hospital. Fallujah hospital was actually, until it was shut down, providing urgently needed medical services to a beleaguered population. Shutting it down in a situation of anything less than immediate military necessity--if there had been snipers on its roof, for example--is therefore clearly a major violation of the laws of war.
No such argument of "military necessity" has yet been made. All we have is the claim that the hospital was a "propaganda weapon in the hands of the militants."
This is so sick, so unbelievably tragic. How can US commanders make these outrageous arguments and believe that the people who hear them will simply nod sagely and say, "Oh yes, that makes good sense"??
Also, why should anyone take seriously their claim that the Iraqi civilian casualties in Fallujah were "lower than expected", since they also clearly admit that they don't "do" casualty counts.
I wonder, at the military briefing from which those quotes were taken, where the follow-up questions from the press were:
"Okay, so how many Iraqi civilian casualties have there been?" " How many were you expecting?" " Was it valid to go ahead and launch the offensive even if you were expecting that high a number of casualties?" " Tell us what is actually being done to help the wounded among the Iraqi civilians?"
No, none of those questions appear to have been asked. The media people involved just went along for the ride. Virtually oblivious to the moral consequences of what they were writing about-- not to mention, to the quite predictable fallout of the anti-humanitarian nature of US actions on the politics inside Iraq.
It's as if they don't even really see Iraqis as fully human, subject to normal human motivations and the natural human desire for personal dignity... But perhaps doing that would be a dangerous exercize.
'Sleep of reason breeds strange monsters' Dept. :
NEW YORK - Special safety precautions were taken in Presbyterian churches throughout the United States on Sunday after leaders received threats that churches would be burned by Monday if they did not demand a reversal of what a letter writer called their "anti-Israel" policy. The Presbyterian church decided in June to divest itself of companies doing business with Israel. The threats were contained in an anonymous letter received last weekend at the denomination's headquarters in Louisville, Kentucky. The letter, postmarked Queens, New York, threatened that in response to the church's "anti-Israel and anti-Jewish" stance, its houses of worship and offices would be set on fire. Jerry Van Marter, a church leader, said Sunday that the letter cited Monday as the day by which its authors were to demand the church change its policies on Israel. "We take the threat seriously," Van Meter said. Relations between the Presbyterian church and the U.S. Jewish community and Israel soured after the June decision. Van Marter admitted Sunday that since the decision was made, thousands of letters and e-mails protesting it have been received.
http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/501561.html
Hi Helena,
I share your indignation concerning the destruction of the main Falludja hospital. US is also stopping a Red Crescent supply convoy from entering the city : they are waiting since Friday to get US OK to enter the city and distribute their aid. Until now they have offered three arguments to deny this help :
1) That the security conditions aren't allowing the Red Crescent to get in (but if the Marines don't shoot at them, the security would be granted I'm sure).
2) There are no more civilians in the city (which seems questionnable and doesn't match with the few eyewitnesses who were able to get out). The population is probably hidding in thier houses.
3) The Marines will provide all the help needed to the civilians and they would send them to the hospital at the SouthWest limit of the city (this contradict their second arguments).
You are right pointing that the press isn't doing her job. Reuter's wires are just phoning what the government says without any critical distance.
I feel so poweless in front of these misdeeds, I can't believe that US is denying help to the civilians. What kind of horrible things did they do to the Falludjans ? Or worse, what do they plan to do to the people who are still trapped in the city ? What can we do ?
Great post, Helena. I just read that article and that line caught my eye as well.
Did you happen to see this, from the LA Times?
Iraqi City Lies in Ruins
FALLOUJA, Iraq — Even as small groups of guerrillas continued putting up fierce resistance here Sunday, U.S. commanders were preparing for the next phase of the operation: the complete reconstruction of a city that has been devastated in battle.
"It's a monumental task," acknowledged Marine Maj. Timothy Hanson, one of the first civil affairs officers on the scene to assess the scope of destruction . . .
In the works is some kind of "Welcome Back to Fallouja" campaign, directing residents to military civil affairs offices where people can find reconstruction help.
"It won't be a fruit basket or anything like that," said Hanson, the Marine major. He had $500,000 in cash for various expenses: compensating civilians who had suffered property losses or injuries or lost relatives deemed not to be insurgents. . . "We're poised and ready to go to help Fallouja rebuild," said Marine Capt. Matt Nodine, an attorney for the 1st Battalion. "People will know where to find us if they need help."
Now, to be fair, $500,000 isn't all that's available for the rebuilding of Fallujah - the article says that $200 million is available for Fallujah and Ramadi. However, the article also says
The reconstruction effort in Fallouja . . . seems likely to dwarf the large-scale rebuilding scheme in the southern city of Najaf, where damage was estimated at $500 million after a Marine offensive in August
I think it's obvious that the US is not going to rebuild Fallujah. It's not even going to come close.
This article has nothing to say about civilian casualties, though it does say this:
Mortuary teams to pick up the remains of hundreds of insurgents killed in the fighting also have been held back, as bodies rot in the streets.
I would like to know how the reporter - and the Marines - are able to determine that the bodies rotting in the street are those of insurgents.
It is depressing, because many of these reporters seem to be reasonable and intelligent people, yet there seems to be some terrible screw loose. As you and Christiane say, our media just don't seem to be able to imagine or voice what this could be like for Iraqis.
The U.S. media has never been able to treat Iraqis as humans. During the sanctions, the U.S. repeatedly told transparent lies about Iraq which even the smallest effort by the media could have exposed. This rarely happened. When Madeline ALbright can announce on 60 minutes that killing 500,000 Iraqi children is "worth the price" of containing Saddam Hussein without eliciting much response from the U.S. public what can one expect?
The military may be correct in believing there will be less negative impact from seizing the hospital then allowing it to broadcast to the world the "collateral damage" which the U.S. denies. This was done in Najaf without any outcry. Pictures seem to make all the difference, as the Abu Graib scandel illustrates.
Helena:
It is unclear from the story whether it was the hospital ITSELF that was shut down by the marines, or whether the writer meant to say that it was the USE of the hospital as a propoganda too by the insurgency that was shut down by the marines taking it out of their hands.
If the hospital was actually CLOSED by the marines and hasn't been re-opened then I agree, that is an absolute travesty and probably some sort of war crime if alternative medical care is not being provided. However, if it was simply poor wording by the writer and all he was saying is that the marines took the hospital out of the hands of the insurgency but it is still operating, then I'm less concerned.
I'm just pointing out that it isn't entirely clear which is the case from the NYT article. Are there other reports that clarify this question?
In reference to rebuilding Fallujah, does this mean that the Marines go in and destroy the city, and Halliburton and other U.S. companies go in, rebuild, collect the big bucks while the Iraqis are still unemployed. Would all this distruction be "profiteering" on a grand scale?
Kent, good question. According to this Bloomberg story,
Fallujah General Hospital is fully staffed and has medical supplies, water and food, the military said.
So it looks like the hospital is in fact open. I'm still PO'ed at the military's description of civilian casualties reported there as propaganda, though.
Helena,
You are right. The U.S. public and the U.S. media can only cheerlead for U.S. troops, and even there the picture of dead and wounded is far from complete. Iraqi civilian casualties play no role in the national dialog.
Over my desk I have a picture of the original seal of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. In the center stands an American Indian with a balloon sign coming out of his mouth that states, "Come over and help us."
This incredibly self-justifying mythos is the thread that underlies almost all U.S. public support for military action beyond our borders, no less a cancer today than it was for the native American population in the 1600's.
Under its rubric, no war crime is too terrible to justify this nation's imposition of "freedom" on civilian populations.
Jackie
I read a report today from LA Times called "Doctor is haunted by siege of Fallujah". That story is actually about a doctor who was bombed in a triage center in downtown Fallujah (and walked miles to get out of the city), but he reports a phone call from Fallujah General Hospital saying that the US Marines and ING handcuffed the doctors (we saw the photos of that) and forced patients out into the parking lot. So, I would say it was "closed" at least for a while. Further reports that I have read on the net indicate that the bridge to Fallujah General Hospital was closed (photos of that too) and the Hospital lies outside the main part of the city (saw photos of the layout of the city at Healing Iraq blog).
Anyway, I called the White House comment line today and told them that I felt closing Fallujah General Hospital was a war crime and that made Mr. Bush a war criminal in my eyes. Their number is 202-456-1112 or 202-456-1111. They ask for the state you are calling from, but not your name.
I sent postcards to both my Senators and my Representative. I write in big red lettering, and this also has the advantage of allowing the post office to read my opinions.
Since May 2003, I have been after CNN, NYT, WP and other "news" outlets about the lack of reporting on Iraqi civilian casualties. I don't seem to be having any effect, but I will go to my grave knowning that I TRIED. And I am trying more than occasionally, I try to do something nearly EVERY day.
I wish I had raised a ruckus when Albright said what she did. She has since apologized.
Helena,
You are right. The U.S. public and the U.S. media can only cheerlead for U.S. troops, and even there the picture of dead and wounded is far from complete. Iraqi civilian casualties play no role in the national dialog.
Over my desk I have a picture of the original seal of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. In the center stands an American Indian with a balloon sign coming out of his mouth that states, "Come over and help us."
This incredibly self-justifying mythos is the thread that underlies almost all U.S. public support for military action beyond our borders, no less a cancer today than it was for the native American population in the 1600's.
Under its rubric, no war crime is too terrible to justify this nation's imposition of "freedom" on civilian populations.
Jackie
Kent,
Concerning hospital : there were several hospitals in Falludja. One has been bombed at the very beginning of the US assault and some tenth of doctors and patients and died in it, so no hospital remained in the center of the city.
There is another main hospital at the south of Falludja. But you have to cross a bridge to get to that hospital and the US has closed the bridge which prevents Falludjans to reach it. People tried to organize a makeshift hospital in the center, but it was also targetted by the US from what I've read.
THe Red Crescent has prepared an aid convoy. The convoy is composed of 4 trucks and three ambulances. They are now waiting at the main hospital, expecting US OK to enter the City. THey want to bring a water purification unit, medecine, food, blankets etc.. They want to use their ambulances to take the wounded back to the hospital. The US is barring them access to the city. The military pretends that they have rations of food to distribute to the inhabitants themselves and that they will tell to people needing medical care to got to the main hospital. But what about people who are not able to go on foot ? those who are the more in need of hospital cares ? And further, if US argument is that the security condition don't allow the Red Cross personal to get in, then why is it secure for wounded people to come to the hospital by their own means. This is just cynical. This is a breach of all humanitarian laws.
The assault begun on last Monday. THat was 7 days ago. THe deads are rotting in the streets or under the ruined fallen houses. This could lead to severe deaseases, but the US prevents the Red Crescent to send in crews to take care of the human remains.
THis all is a true scandal..
The Associated Press had a local photojournalist there. He couldn't get out to take any pictures, because any person getting out was fired at by snipers. All the people were hidding in the deep of their houses. Finally things went so badly that he begun to fear for his own life and he flied the city on Friday. Alas, the situation was so freightening that he forgot his camera and lens in his house. So apparently he has no pictures, but we do still have his testimony. There is an AP account of his story. May be that I can find the link when I get home from work.
Grim pictures from Fallujah
(In addition to Mosul) Iraqi rebels are now also in control of large areas of Ramadi, Samarra, Haditha, Baquba, Hiyt, Qaim, Latifiyah,Taji and Khaldiyah. Fighting has been reported also in the Shia holy city Kerbala.
The uprising has spread across the capital as well. The districts al-Dora, al-Amiriyah, Abu Ghraib, al-Adhamiya and Khan Dhari are now largely controlled by resistance fighters.
Dahr Jamail
"In reference to rebuilding Fallujah, does this mean that the Marines go in and destroy the city, and Halliburton and other U.S. companies go in, rebuild, collect the big bucks while the Iraqis are still unemployed."
Without a doubt, yes. That has been the pattern so far throughout Iraq over the past 19 months. The U.S. destroys, then awards huge contracts to U.S. companies who bring in hoards of workers from outside to do the work while Iraqis sit idle and without income.
"Would all this distruction be "profiteering" on a grand scale?"
It would be, and it is.
Concerning reconstruction, I've heard that big US and Kuwaiti firms were planning to erase the older city buildings of Najaf and to build new modern buildings for the pilgrims instead. That is new buildings which have nothing to do with the history and architecture of Najaf. New complexes which would reject the small shops god knows where. Some weeks after the insurrection, Juan Cole issued the call of a University professor denouncing the fact. They wanted a renovation of the historic center of the city rather than the new construction of soulless buildings. They wanted jobs for the local Iraqis firms instead of the foreing companies.
Concerning the hospitals of Falludjah and the Red Crescent convoy, there is a follow up. The latest Reuters wires don't mention the fact that US military refused them access to the center of the city. The Red Crescent supposedly declared they renounced to enter the city for security reasons !!
I think that this tells only part of the true. I've worked at the ICRC headquarters for a short time and a long time ago. The usual procedure when you have a convoy to send is to negotiate with the belligerents, to indicate the road you intend to take and ask that they refrain attacking these parts for the time needed. The US constitute the part with the higher fire power. So it's absolutely indispensable that the US promise not to attack the convoy while they enter Falludjah. I'm pretty sure that if the REd Crescent declares that the security conditions wern't given, it's because the US didn't accept to restrain their fire, because the US didn't want to grant them the time to achieve their humanitarian job.
Naturally there is also the other side, which is much more complicated because there are several groups and it is probably much more difficult to negotiate directly with them. I suppose that if the Red Crescent had the green light from the Marines, they would have taken the risk to enter Falludjah even if they weren't able to contact the insurgents directly : after all, they were coming in order to help the Falludjans. It would have been dangerous, because of possible uncontrolled elements, but probably doable.
Note that it's not the first time that US targets hospital and aid agencies. THe buildings of the ICRC in Afghanistan have been hit twice. Yet they were clearly marked on the rooves and their coordinates had been given to the army. Nevertheless, they destroyed a depot full of flour ready to be distributed in the mountains before the winter. Does anyone believe that the same buildings can be hit twice by error in a couple of weeks ?? After that the highpass were closed and it was too late to bring fresh supplies to the starving mountaineers.
"In addition to the (uranium enrichment)suspension, the agreement commits Iran to support two U.S.-led endeavors: the war against al Qaeda and efforts to establish a democratic government in Iraq. Iran is holding several senior al Qaeda leaders and exerts significant influence in neighboring Iraq."
I have to say that if the Shi'a authorities in Iran, Iraq, or anywhere else, think they can conclude a mutual non-aggression pact with the USA they are fools. The USA will destroy them in the fairly near future unless they ally with the anti-US Sunnis.
sorry, that last quote is from the WaPo, as you insiders call it:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52673-2004Nov15.html