Hell in the North

The attack in Mosul yes­ter­day was the sin­gle worst attack against U.S. mil­i­tary per­son­nel in Iraq to date. U.S. mil­i­tary spokes­men in Bagh­dad say 19 Amer­i­can sol­diers were killed and three other mil­i­tary per­son­nel were killed. (Prob­a­bly Iraqi mil­i­tary, as I don’t think there are too many other nation­al­i­ties up there.) Other reports put the num­ber of dead at 24 and include con­trac­tors and Iraqi civil­ians in the toll. Need­less to say the sit­u­a­tion is con­fu­sion and such dis­crep­an­cies are nor­mal in the “chaos fol­low­ing such events”:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17891-2004Dec21.html.
[UPDATE 1150 +0300 GMT: In a release dated today, the U.S. mil­i­tary says, “Of the 22 peo­ple killed, 14 were U.S. mil­i­tary per­son­nel and the remain­der four U.S. civil­ians and four Iraqi Secu­rity Forces. Of the 72 wounded, 51 were U.S. Mil­i­tary per­son­nel and the remain­der U.S., other coun­try civil­ians and ISF. Twenty-nine peo­ple have been released from the hos­pi­tal.“
“Other reports”:http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002127159_iraq22.html say 15 U.S. mil­i­tary dead and five civil­ian con­trac­tors. Two Iraqi sol­diers were killed. The same report says the attack was a 122-mm rocket, although “some secu­rity experts said the extent of injuries indi­cated that it was pos­si­ble a bomb had been planted inside the hall.”]
_The Wash­ing­ton Post_ “reports”:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17892-2004Dec21.html: “Before yes­ter­day, the worst inci­dents were the deaths of 17 sol­diers from the 101st Air­borne Divi­sion in the Novem­ber 2003 col­li­sion of two UH-60 Black Hawk heli­copters, also in Mosul, and, two weeks before that, the loss of 15 sol­diers when a CH-47 Chi­nook trans­port heli­copter crashed west of Bagh­dad. All three occurred after Pres­i­dent Bush’s May 2003 dec­la­ra­tion that major com­bat oper­a­tions in Iraq had ended.“
The insur­gent group Ansar al-Sunna claimed respon­si­bil­ity. An off­shoot of the Ansar al-Islam group, which oper­ated mainly on the Iran­ian bor­der near Hal­abja in the Kur­dish areas before the war, Ansar al-Sunna is made up of Salafists and a few nation­al­ists and for­mer Ba’athists. It is friendly with the Wah­habi groups such as Abu Mas­soud al-Zarqawi’s Al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia, and it has a sig­nif­i­cant Kur­dish mem­ber­ship, reflect­ing its roots in the north.
I’m doubt­ful that it con­ducted a sui­cide oper­a­tion, as Ansar al-Sunna has claimed on its Web site, although I sup­pose it’s pos­si­ble. It’s more likely it was a mor­tar or a rocket that finally man­aged to hit some­thing. U.S. bases are pep­pered every­day with incom­ing indi­rect fire, but they usu­ally fall harm­lessly. This time, how­ever…
But a real ques­tion is why were these sol­diers sit­ting down to lunch in a soft-roofed struc­ture? They were in a tent with con­crete walls while a hard­ened din­ing facil­ity (DFAC) was being built nearby. The new DFAC was sup­posed to be ready by Thanks­giv­ing, I’m hear­ing from my guys up there, but it wasn’t. Why not? Was there a screw-up? Was it just that some things take longer than expected in the mil­i­tary some times? Was it because of too many attacks that slowed down the con­struc­tion? I don’t know, and I’ve not been able to get any answers, because the pub­lic affairs offi­cer for Camp Marez turned his phone off last night or it was out of the cov­er­age area.
Iraq is begin­ning to look more and more like Lebanon in the 1980s. Sec­tar­ian vio­lence, a brew­ing civil war and now a large attack on U.S. forces. In 1983, “241 Marines were killed”:http://www.beirut-memorial.org/ in a sui­cide truck bomb­ing that led to the pull­out of U.S. forces from that belea­guered coun­try.
In the same _Post_ arti­cle I ref­er­enced above, experts are wor­ried that this attack may show either the abil­ity to gather pre­cise intel­li­gence from _inside_ U.S. bases or mark an esca­la­tion of vio­lence that could end in a storm­ing or ground assault of a U.S. base.
As the arti­cle con­tin­ues: “If anti-American vio­lence does hit a new level, pres­sure is likely to increase on the Bush admin­is­tra­tion to either boost the U.S. mil­i­tary pres­ence in Iraq or find a fast way to get out.“
Indeed. And nei­ther option is a good one for the White House. With the war already “increas­ingly unpopular”:http://news.ft.com/cms/s/846d780a-5394-11d9-b6e4-00000e2511c8,dwp_uuid=c1a5b968-e1ed-11d7-81c6-0820abe49a01.html, and Sec­re­tary of Defense Don­ald Rums­feld even more so, what will the polit­i­cal fall­out of this attack be? Espe­cially if it turns out that the Camp Marez din­ing tent was the equiv­a­lent of a “hill­billy armor” humvee?
In all of this, please remem­ber that although for the Amer­i­can pub­lic, the deaths of their coun­try­men and coun­try­women obvi­ously hit close to home, it is the Iraqi pub­lic that is really suf­fer­ing. The twin attacks in Kar­bala and Najaf two days killed more than 70. and lit­er­ally hun­dreds of Iraqis die every week month in vio­lence. The secu­rity sit­u­a­tion is dire and it’s likely to get worse as the elec­tions approach. There will be many more griev­ing fam­i­lies in Amer­ica and Iraq before this is all over.

Options in Fallujah and about those elections…

My friend George over at _Warblogging_ has a post today on the pro­posed ID sys­tem for Fal­lu­jans when they return to their shat­tered city. George is not amused.
In short, the plan — as reported in “var­i­ous media”:http://www.boston.com/news/world/articles/2004/12/05/returning_fallujans_will_face_clampdown/ — will mean that

troops would fun­nel Fal­lu­jans to so-called cit­i­zen pro­cess­ing cen­ters on the out­skirts of the city to com­pile a data­base of their iden­ti­ties through DNA test­ing and retina scans. Res­i­dents would receive badges dis­play­ing their home addresses that they must wear at all times. Buses would ferry them into the city, where cars, the dead­liest tool of sui­cide bombers, would be banned.

George, and oth­ers, com­pare this to the War­saw Ghetto in World War II, along with all the Nazi imagery you can imag­ine.
I’m not so sure I buy this. While I think the solu­tion pro­posed is dis­taste­ful and highly unlikely to improve Amer­i­cans’ rock-bottom stand­ing in Iraq, I fail to see any real­is­tic alter­na­tive. The prob­lem is this: Fal­lu­jah was a nerve cen­ter of an insur­gency that has killed U.S. sol­diers and thou­sands of inno­cent Iraqis. (It wasn’t the brain or the hub, but it was an impor­tant stag­ing area.) How do you let the cit­i­zens back while keep­ing the insur­gents out while keep­ing it a free and open city? Well, after some thought, I think that you just can’t let it be a free and open city.
Is this a vio­la­tion of Fal­lu­jans’ rights? Or course. But does the good it _might_ do for the rest of the coun­try out­weigh the bad that is done in Fal­lu­jah? That’s the ques­tion. I’m not sure what the equa­tion is, but allow­ing insur­gents back into Fal­lu­jah is not really an option.
The real crime here is not the require­ment for Fal­lu­jans to wear ID badges or even to make the men work at recon­struc­tion. The real crime is that poor plan­ning and wish­ful think­ing regard­ing the future of 25 mil­lion peo­ple has nar­rowed the uni­verse of avail­able options to a series of iron-fisted tac­tics that range from hor­ri­ble to truly cat­a­strophic.
The strait­jacket elec­tion sched­ule isn’t help­ing mat­ters either. Again, all the options are bad. Hold­ing elec­tions on Jan. 30 means that the Sun­nis — about 20 per­cent of the coun­try — will be excluded from a process that will result in a per­ma­nent con­sti­tu­tion. This is not a sce­nario that sug­gests sta­bil­ity, even if Sunni mem­bers of the new 275-seat national par­lia­ment are some­how appointed. If the elec­tions aren’t seen as legit­i­mate by the Sun­nis, they won’t see the result­ing Con­sti­tu­tion as legit­i­mate, either. Can you say con­tin­ued insur­gency?
But post­pon­ing the elec­tions is a non-starter, too, because the Shi’a will be roy­ally pissed off. Sis­tani and the rest of the _merjariya_, the Shi’a reli­gious lead­er­ship, have been work­ing on elec­tions for months. Dawa, SCIRI and Bayt al-Shi’a have been orga­niz­ing and get­ting their lists together. They are fully expect­ing to win the elec­tions and take the major­ity of seats in Par­lia­ment and form a new gov­ern­ment.
But the sta­bil­ity in the Shi’a areas is ten­u­ous. There are signs the Moq­tada al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army may be mov­ing into posi­tions to cause trou­ble again. Any moves to post­pone what the Shi’a regard as their right­ful oppor­tu­nity to finally assert their con­trol over Iraq as the major­ity party could be the trig­ger that starts a new insur­gency. And with the rumors that Shi’a mili­tia have formed to exact revenge on Sunni mili­tia, you have yet another seed for sec­tar­ian con­flict. There are real rea­sons for con­cern.
(Aside: The newly formed Shi’a mili­tia, it is said, has a wicked cool name: The Fury Brigade.)
Sis­tani was only reluc­tantly per­suaded to drop the idea of direct elec­tions in June this year after U.N. spe­cial rep­re­sen­ta­tive Lak­dar Brahimi con­vinced him it wasn’t pos­si­ble. Could he be per­suaded a sec­ond time? I don’t know. I have hope that he could be, as he’s not com­pletely unrea­son­able and the prospect of an elec­tion day car­nage with Shi’a as the bulk of the vic­tims might be too much for him to take.
Brahimi has said the coun­try is in no shape for elec­tions and many Sunni groups are plead­ing for post­pone­ment. But Dr. Farid Ayar, the spokesman for the Inde­pen­dent Elec­tion Com­mis­sion in Iraq, told me that elec­tions would not be post­poned for “any” rea­son. Well, he allowed, maybe if an earth­quake destroyed every city in Iraq, “includ­ing this con­ven­tion cen­ter,” then maybe they would delay the elec­tions. Or if all the planes car­ry­ing the bal­lots crashed and burned, they might delay the vote for five days to print new ones.
That Farid sure is a joke­ster.
[UPDATE: One com­menter said the U.S. should just pull out, which is the same posi­tion that “George holds”:http://www.warblogging.com/archives/000991.php. I dis­agree and the spec­tre of civil is “why.”:http://www.back-to-iraq.com/archives/000807.php#000807 (Read down a bit.) In short, civil war on top of a major source of the world’s oil sup­ply would mean astro­nom­i­cal oil prices, pos­si­ble col­lapse of the U.S. — and world — econ­omy and regional con­flict that could lead to Turk­ish and Iran­ian inter­ven­tions. Does that sound fun? I didn’t think so. And that’s not even con­sid­er­ing the human cost.]
For what it’s worth, I think the elec­tions will be post­poned a while — and I even have $5 rid­ing on the deci­sion — even though there’s no legal frame­work to post­pone them. That may just be my still-intact naïveté that with an inse­cure sit­u­a­tion that would see 20 per­cent or so of the coun­try dis­en­fran­chised and the fears of a high body-count, the U.S. and its allies in Iraq won’t be so obsti­nate to force flawed elec­tions down Iraqis’ throats. I’m fully pre­pared to be wrong and pay that $5. I just hope the Iraqis and the Amer­i­cans are pre­pared to pay a much higher price.
So you see why I’m not up in arms over the plight of the poor Fal­lu­jans. The prob­lems of Iraq are so huge that forced name badges in one town are just the sym­bols of a much greater prob­lem — which is poor plan­ning, sec­tar­ian ten­sions and unre­al­is­tic expec­ta­tions from a coun­try that may be ungovern­able except under a dic­ta­tor­ship. Don’t dimin­ish the hor­rors of the Nazis by such facile com­par­isons. The Holo­caust was pol­icy; the Tragedy of Iraq is a series of hor­rific blunders.

The Death of Arafat

DSC01137.jpg
*Pales­tini­ans in Lebanon grieved for Yasser Arafat Fri­day at a sym­bolic funeral.* (© 2004 Christo­pher Allbritton)

BEIRUT  — Among the Pales­tin­ian refugees packed into the 13 camps scat­tered around Lebanon, the mood in the days before their leader’s death was one of anx­ious wait­ing. They were wait­ing for word of the death of _khatiab_ — “The Old Man” — as Yasser Arafat was affec­tion­ately known among his peo­ple.
In the tan­gled alley­ways that thread between the poorly con­structed con­crete shel­ters of Sabraa and Shatila in south Beirut — the site of the Sep­tem­ber 1982 mas­sacre of Pales­tini­ans by Chris­t­ian Pha­langes mili­tia mem­bers allied with the Israeli Defense Force under the com­mand of then-Defense Min­is­ter Ariel Sharon — chil­dren now play under memo­ri­als to the dead and the soon-to-be dead. Posters of Pales­tin­ian youths killed in the strug­gle against Israel, _shaheed_ (“mar­tyrs”) to the refugees, adorn the walls made of care­lessly stacked cin­derblocks. They are almost as numer­ous as the posters of Arafat, all of which pro­claim him the sym­bol of Pales­tine, a father to his peo­ple. He smiles down from build­ings three sto­ries high and intended to be tem­po­rary when this camp was estab­lished in 1948. He sur­veys the dirt tracks that turn to lakes of open sewage when it rains. He over­looks the stalls of the souk, sell­ing every­thing from sweets to shoes, veg­eta­bles from the Bekaa Val­ley and children’s clothes. Tables groan­ing under coconuts, toys, jack­ets, radishes and pota­toes serve as defen­sive posi­tions for the ubiq­ui­tous chil­dren, all of who seem to be clutch­ing toy pis­tols and Kalash­nikovs, shoot­ing at imag­i­nary Israeli sol­diers.
While Arafat lay on his deathbed in Paris, res­i­dents of Shatila expressed prayers for his recov­ery while admit­ting that the sym­bol of their strug­gle was soon to be gone. “We hope he gets bet­ter quickly,” said Mah­moud Zurouri, 38, who was born in Shatila. “After all, he is our pres­i­dent. But he wasn’t the first or the last per­son to die. We’ll be sorry, of course, to see him go, but the cause remains.“
“May God make him bet­ter,” prayed Has­san Mustafa, who said he fought with Arafat in Jor­dan and Lebanon in the 1970s. “He is a rev­o­lu­tion­ary. He is a great mind. An Israeli jour­nal­ist once described him as the man who couldn’t be con­trolled. After Abu Ammar,” he con­tin­ued, using Arafat’s _nom de guerre_, “there is no one per­son.“
But the next day, Arafat died, and the mood in Rashidiyah, out­side of Tyre, was somber and quiet, with none of the wail­ing or gun­fire seen in the Occu­pied Ter­ri­to­ries. Instead, quiet men filed into a recep­tion hall fes­tooned with green, black and white bunting and posters of Arafat in his youth. There, they worked their way down a recep­tion line, shak­ing hands with the Fat­tah lead­er­ship in Lebanon, for Rashidiyah is a Fat­tah camp. Par­lia­ment mem­bers from Sidon, Nasserites and even mem­bers of the al-Qaf Islamic group came by to pay their respects.
Sul­tan Abu Aynayn, the head of Fat­tah in Lebanon, sat in his grief, and accepted hand­shake after hand­shake of well wish­ers.
“I can’t express my feel­ings at this moment,” he said. “Death is a right, but when it becomes a real­ity, you can’t believe God’s will has actu­ally been car­ried out. The sym­bol­ism of Arafat for 40 years, no other Pales­tin­ian can take that sym­bol­ism.“
Arafat’s death hit the younger gen­er­a­tion of Pales­tini­ans hard. “It is the worst day for the Pales­tin­ian peo­ple because we lost our pres­i­dent,” said Hisham Sharari, 20, a mem­ber of the Fat­tah Youth Move­ment.
“It was the biggest shock to us,” said his friend Ali Ramadan, also 20. “It was worse than the day of _nekbah_.” The _nekbah_, which means “cat­a­stro­phe,” is the day Israel was founded.
Arafat’s death leaves a power vac­uum in the region, with many look­ing to fill it. The exist­ing Pales­tin­ian lead­er­ship, which includes the new PLO leader Mah­moud Abbas, wants to main­tain sta­bil­ity, some­thing neigh­bor­ing gov­ern­ments want as well. Lebanon’s Karami gov­ern­ment, a Syr­ian client, is tak­ing a wait-and-see atti­tude to the post-Arafat era. “The Pales­tini­ans know very well they need a lead­er­ship that is able to make a dia­logue with the United States,” said Elie Fir­zli, Lebanon’s new Min­is­ter of Infor­ma­tion.
The new gov­ern­ment has good rea­son to be guarded in its response: this tiny coun­try suf­fered two Israeli inva­sions in the 1980s aimed at destroy­ing Arafat and his PLO, all while it fought a civil war that many Lebanese say started because of Pales­tin­ian exac­er­ba­tion of exist­ing reli­gious ten­sions. By the time the 15-year war ended in 1990, hun­dreds of thou­sands were dead and many more wounded. Lebanon was occu­pied by Syria and is still con­sid­ered a vas­sal state to Dam­as­cus. Beirut, the “Paris of the Mid­dle East” was ruined.
The Pales­tini­ans suf­fered their own hor­ror in the Civil War. The Sabraa-Shatila mas­sacre was one of the worst, in which a Pha­langist mili­tia, Chris­t­ian allies of the Israelis, entered the refugee camps and slaugh­ters hun­dreds of men, women and chil­dren while Israeli troops stood by and did noth­ing. Today, the crime is memo­ri­al­ized by an empty field in the Sabraa camp, with the words “So we shall never for­get” over the gate.
It is the bur­den of such his­tory that any new lead­er­ship of the Pales­tini­ans must labor under. It will be dif­fi­cult for Fat­tah, Arafat’s group and a nucleus of the PLO, to find a new leader who can hold all the dif­fer­ent parts of the Pales­tin­ian move­ment together.
“Arafat was able,” said Fathi Abu Ardat, a Fat­tah com­man­der in Rashidiyah who fought with Arafat in Jor­dan and Lebanon, “to trans­form the refugees of the camps from a peo­ple who were suf­fer­ing, peo­ple who were lost, just wait­ing for hand­outs into peo­ple with a national iden­tity, a cause. He turned them into rev­o­lu­tion­ar­ies.“
*The Rev­o­lu­tion­ary*
One such rev­o­lu­tion­ary is Munir Muq­dah, 44, who founded the Al-Aqsa Brigade after the start of the sec­ond _intifada_ in 2000. He had his quar­rels with Arafat, mainly over money going to Fat­tah mem­bers in Ein al-Helweh, the densely packed camp out­side of Sidon, instead of the Aqsa Brigades in the Occu­pied Ter­ri­to­ries. But now, he empha­sizes the unity of the Pales­tin­ian peo­ple: “We can guar­an­tee that all the Pales­tin­ian insti­tu­tions and orga­ni­za­tion are work­ing in close coop­er­a­tion to find the alter­na­tive to Abu Ammar, and to fur­ther the Pales­tin­ian cause.“
Muq­dah is a wanted man, how­ever; he can­not leave the Ein al-Helweh camp because of sev­eral con­vic­tions for mur­der hang­ing over his head. He is the ide­o­log­i­cal leader and founder of the Al-Aqsa Brigades and has allegedly recruited an unknown num­ber of young men to blow them­selves up in sui­cide oper­a­tions. He is adept at guerilla war­fare and he is pre­pared to keep the cause alive — against who­ever would betray it.
“These are prin­ci­ples that the _intifada_ and al-Aqsa unan­i­mously adopted and that all fac­tions agreed upon,” he said. “And there are red lines that nobody can cross.“
Those “red lines” are these: An inde­pen­dent state in Pales­tine and a return of the refugees to their homes. “This revolt will not be put down until every sin­gle last Pales­tin­ian refugee is able to return to his land and coun­try,” Muq­dah said. “That is the school of Yasser Arafat.“
Muqdah’s rev­o­lu­tion­ary state­ments are a warn­ing sign to Abbas not to give ground on the right of return. Any sign of con­ces­sion on the part of the new Pales­tin­ian lead­er­ship could trig­ger unrest in the refugee camps around the region, with men like Muq­dah using their skills honed in the fight against the Israelis against the Pales­tin­ian lead­er­ship.
This is a very real con­cern, because there are about 350,000 Pales­tin­ian refugees in Lebanon alone — about 10 per­cent of the country’s pop­u­la­tion. They have no right to work nor are they allowed to become cit­i­zens. They sub­sist on for­eign aid and what money they can make mainly as day labor­ers. The camps are dens of squalor and the sit­u­a­tion is des­per­ate. Any sense of betrayal by the new lead­er­ship has the poten­tial to send refugees into the arms of oth­ers who say they will advance the cause. These seduc­ers whis­per, _if nation­al­ism and pan-Arabism have failed you, Islam will not._
*The Islamists*
Arafat’s death is an oppor­tu­nity for Islamic hard­lin­ers in Hamas, Islamic Jihad and other fun­da­men­tal­ist groups. Amer­i­cans are warned by the Lebanese gov­ern­ment not to enter Ein al-Helweh, Lebanon’s largest camp, because Islamic fun­da­men­tal­ists who fol­low the wah­habist sect of Islam are recruit­ing among the 90,000 refugees packed into six square kilo­me­ters. Groups affil­i­ated with Osama bin Laden’s al-Qa’ida and Abu Mas­soud al-Zarqawi’s allied group in Iraq are said to be jock­ey­ing for influ­ence against the more estab­lished Islamic groups such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad as well as Arafat’s nation­al­ist and sec­u­lar Fat­tah fac­tion.
Abu Ardat warned that the vac­uum of Arafat’s per­son­al­ity would leave an open­ing for other groups to try to gain influ­ence. “He had his spe­cial meth­ods to keep con­trol,” he said obliquely. But he blamed any rise in Islamic fun­da­men­tal­ism on the fail­ure of the peace process and the Israelis. “When you have a peace process and it stale­mates, the more extreme forces become stronger,” he said.
These Islamist groups have two assets, said Soheil al-Natour, a cen­tral com­mit­tee mem­ber of the Demo­c­ra­tic Front for the Lib­er­a­tion of Pales­tine. They have a cul­ture of vendetta and revenge, and they have a lot of money. If Mah­moud Abbas fails in the eyes of the refugees, the Islamists will be there wait­ing to exert their influ­ence, said al-Natour. Camps such as Ein al-Helweh har­bor the fun­da­men­tal­ists, he said, and that men like Muq­dah work with them for oper­a­tion inside Israel. If Pales­tini­ans feel their national cause is not being advanced by the new PLO lead­er­ship, they will turn to the Islamic cause to return them home. And men like Muq­dah are ready to work with the Islamist groups.
“The Pales­tin­ian issue is an Islamic issue for all,” Muq­dah told me and added that he has good rela­tions with the wahab­bist groups in Ein al-Helweh.
*A Ques­tion of Money*
Moham­mad Salam, a news ana­lyst in Beirut, who has reported on the Pales­tini­ans since 1970, warned that the Islamists are ready to buy the Pales­tini­ans’ loy­alty.
It’s a ques­tion of money. As the head of the PLO, the pres­i­dent of the Pales­tin­ian National Author­ity and of Fat­tah, the dom­i­nant fac­tion within the PLO, Arafat con­trolled a vast for­tune that has been esti­mated in the bil­lions and includes funds from for­eign aid, Israeli tax trans­fers and rev­enues from com­pa­nies con­trolled by the PLO. His per­sonal net worth has been esti­mated at any­where from $200 mil­lion to $1.3 bil­lion. He sup­pos­edly had dozens of bank accounts around the world — in Switzer­land, Malaysia, the Cay­man Islands, just to name a few. He had both num­bered accounts and in his own name. He allegedly held stakes in hotels, mobile phone com­pa­nies and an air­line.
This money went to buy­ing friend­ships. Over the years, Arafat was able to pull funds from a vari­ety of sources to pay off ene­mies and reward friends. He kept the frac­tious PLO together this way. And he paid the salaries of thou­sands of refugees who belonged to Fat­tah in the camps scat­tered around the region.
There is real worry that with the death of Arafat, Fattah’s finances will be tied up and the money won’t go out. Arafat for many Pales­tini­ans “is sim­ply a job,” said Salam. “If Arafat ceases to exist, they would sign with who­ever would sign the check.“
And those peo­ple include Islamists who base them­selves in the law­less camps. Ein al-Helweh is home to the Al-Ansar League and the Ashan Sol­diers, who sub­scribe to Osama bin Laden’s severe wah­habist inter­pre­ta­tion of Islam. And these Islamists have money. Beirut is a pop­u­lar sum­mer spot for vaca­tion­ing Gulf Arabs, and it’s not uncom­mon for them to arrive with a trunk of cash for dis­burse­ment to wah­habists in the camps, Salam said.
“They will start work­ing for the Islamists, plant­ing bombs,” said Salam. “It’s going to be bad. It’s _jihad_ for hire, just like in Iraq. And some Pales­tin­ian extrem­ists try to go to Iraq to join the insur­gency there.“
Salam said he knew of sev­eral Pales­tini­ans from Ein al-Helweh who tried to get into Iraq to com­mit sui­cide bomb­ings, but were turned back and returned to the camp. The Pales­tini­ans are a pow­derkeg that has been kept under con­trol because of Arafat’s patron­age, Salam said.
Salam’s fears are echoed by the Lebanese gov­ern­ment. Fir­zli, Lebanon’s Min­is­ter of Infor­ma­tion, acknowl­edges that Arafat’s pass­ing will leave a power vac­uum that would be only par­tially filled by his suc­ces­sors — an open­ing Islamic groups would likely exploit. “The Islamic groups found him a real obsta­cle,” said Fir­zli. “When he’s not there, the job is much eas­ier for them.“
Fun­da­men­tal­ists will ini­tially sup­port who­ever suc­ceeds Arafat, but on the bet that the suc­ces­sors will fail and lose sup­port of the Pales­tin­ian masses, he said. “Then they will then be jus­ti­fied.“
“I think the Arab gov­ern­ments and George Bush will miss Arafat,” mused Salam. “Who will con­trol the Pales­tini­ans after he’s gone? Islamists are steal­ing the Palestinians.”

Yasser Arafat dead at 75

Yasser Arafat died early this morn­ing, leav­ing behind a mixed legacy and unre­al­ized state­hood for his peo­ple.
I’m not pre­pared to write a long post on this right now, but for the past week I’ve been work­ing the Pales­tin­ian refugee angle here in Lebanon (home to about 340,000 refugees in camps dat­ing back to 1948) for TIME Mag­a­zine. I’m off to some of the camps today for more report­ing.
This work has been the cause of my silence, and also: Why inter­rupt the good con­ver­sa­tion from “this pre­vi­ous post?”:http://www.back-to-iraq.com/archives/000835.php

Some More Thoughts From Abroad

From Whiskey Bar:

This may be the year when we finally come face to face with our­selves; finally just lay back and say it — that we are really just a nation of 220 mil­lion used car sales­men with all the money we need to buy guns, and no qualms at all about killing any­body else in the world who tries to make us uncomfortable.

Hunter S. Thomp­son Fear and Loathing on the Cam­paign Trail
Novem­ber 1972

This is the view from over­seas. I’m in Beirut now, and I’ve had a cou­ple of peo­ple — Lebanese and British — tell me that the Amer­i­can peo­ple have val­i­dated the last three years, years which are seen as uni­ver­sally dis­as­trous. Before, there was a dis­tinc­tion drawn between the Amer­i­can gov­ern­ment and the Amer­i­can peo­ple. A few nights ago, one cab­bie told me that he thinks Amer­i­can peo­ple are very nice, but the Amer­i­can gov­ern­ment is “very bad.” Now, as one of my friends said, “The Amer­i­can peo­ple are the prob­lem.”
This will trans­late into increased hos­til­ity against Amer­i­cans, espe­cially in the Mid­dle East. (I’m in Beirut at the moment.) The Amer­i­can gov­ern­ment is seen as hope­lessly biased against Arabs and Pales­tini­ans, but now the Amer­i­can peo­ple are cul­pa­ble as well. I long thought America’s Euro­pean allies would wel­come her back into the fam­ily of nations if Kerry won. Instead, they will hold the Amer­i­can peo­ple in even greater con­tempt than they already do.
After 9/11 I was damned scared of the future. Now I’m even more anx­ious about what lies before the world.
PS: The orig­i­nal “Thoughts from Abroad” was a rant against why didn’t cer­tain groups of vot­ers show up to vote. It was inac­cu­rate and mean, so I won’t be post­ing it.
*PPS:* To elab­o­rate, in the deleted post, I took young and minor­ity vot­ers to task for not show­ing up. I took it down almost imme­di­ately, because I wrote it in the heat of the moment. Good thing, as it turns out it was inac­cu­rate. The young peo­ple _did_ show up, but they were swamped by evan­gel­i­cals. Bush raised his points among minori­ties, how­ever, by 2 points, over his show­ing in 2000, which I don’t get. Any­way, I took the post down, but I had already emailed out an update, which I couldn’t take back. That was what many peo­ple saw. My apolo­gies for piss­ing peo­ple off who worked hard. That was not my intention.