Posted By Steve LeVine – Thursday, October 7, 2010 – 6:28 PM
As the saying goes, people gravitate to public service to do good, and stay on to do well. In any case, that apparently is Peter Galbraith’s motto. In the 1980s, this foreign policy maven (and son of economist John Kenneth Galbraith) became known for his part in exposing Saddam Hussain’s gassing of the Kurds, and for being one of Benazir Bhutto’s best allies in America; in the 1990s, he was a key diplomat in the Balkans; and most recently, he was fired as deputy United Nations envoy in Afghanistan, then accused the Kabul government of massive fraud in the 2009 presidential election.
Late last year, we learned from the work of journalists at the Norwegian newspaper Dagens Naeringsliv (Galbraith’s wife is from Norway) and the New York Times that Galbraith also has cashed in on his long work in Kurdistan. After the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq, Galbraith was instrumental in Kurdistan gaining as much independence from the central government in Baghdad as it did. Now we know fairly well how much Galbraith’s work was worth — between $55 million and $75 million, as established yesterday by a British court presiding over a commercial lawsuit.
Galbraith perceives no ethical issue, he told the Boston Globe’s Farah Stockman while on the campaign trail in Vermont, where he is a candidate for state Senate. He told Stockman that he plans to “reinvest the proceeds in alternate energy development both here in Vermont and in Kurdistan.”
The story reminds me of Stanley Escudero, the former U.S. ambassador to Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and Azerbaijan. When I first heard of Escudero in the early 1990s in Tajikistan, I was amused to learn that he fashioned himself as a macho Stallone type, because during the first shots of the civil war, in 1992, Escudero wouldn’t set foot in the country; he let his deputy chief of mission, Ed McWilliams, handle the show. Whatever the case, Escudero took his tough-talking act on to Tashkent, then Baku. And then it was time to retire. Escudero moved back home to Florida.
It wasn’t long, however, before Escudero turned up again back in Baku — this time as a private “consultant.” You see, Escudero had become mighty close to Ilham Aliyev, who had recently taken over as president after the death of his father, Heydar; Escudero in fact was a hunting buddy of Ilham’s. Now, Escudero became an insider. Bluntly speaking, he sold access to Ilham, the customs ministry and so on — all those fellows he had come to know as ambassador. Escudero was open about his motives: He wanted to get rich. He is still there.
Escudero isn’t breaking any U.S. law, I have been told by U.S. officials. But his behavior is important knowledge for local officials — the ambassador you meet today, suggesting that the fair and market-based thing to do would be to close a contract with this or that American oil or telecoms company, could be returning a year hence as the representative of that same company. That same ambassador who, while he was working for the U.S. State Department, railed against local officials enriching themselves on the job.
This former ambassador — and Peter Galbraith — makes it difficult for current diplomats working to make good policy with a straight face.
Reuters – Worshippers light candles after attending a weekly mass at Sacred Heart Catholic Church in Baghdad October …
By Tom Heneghan, Religion Editor Tom Heneghan, Religion Editor – Thu Oct 7, 6:26 am ET
PARIS (Reuters) – With Christianity dwindling in its Middle Eastern birthplace, Pope Benedict has convened Catholic bishops from the region to debate how to save its minority communities and promote harmony with their Muslim neighbors.
For two weeks starting on Sunday, the bishops will discuss problems for the faithful ranging from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and strife in Iraq to radical Islamism, economic crisis and the divisions among the region’s many Christian churches.
They come from local churches affiliated with the Vatican, but the relentless exodus of all Christians — Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants — has prompted them to take a broad look at the challenges facing all followers of Jesus there.
While conditions for Christians vary from country to country, the overall picture is dramatic. Christians made up around 20 percent of the region’s population a century ago, but now account for about five percent and falling.
“If this phenomenon continues, Christianity in the Middle East will disappear,” said Rev. Samir Khalil Samir, a Beirut-based Egyptian Jesuit who helped draw up the working documents for the October 10-24 synod at the Vatican.
“This is not an unreal hypothesis — Turkey went from 20 percent Christian in the early 20th century to 0.2 percent now,” he told journalists in Paris. The Christian exodus since the U.S.-led 2003 invasion “could bleed the Church in Iraq dry.”
CALL FOR CHANGE
Instead of simply appealing for more aid to Catholics in the region, the experts who prepared the synod call for sweeping social changes to bring forth democratic secular states, interfaith cooperation and a rollback of advancing Islamism.
“At issue is the renewal of Arab society,” said Samir, who stressed most Christians and Muslims there are fellow Arabs.
Challenged by western-style modernity, many Middle Eastern societies have fused their Arab and Muslim identities, he said, narrowing religious freedom for non-Muslim minorities.
The working document stated: “Catholics, along with other Christian citizens and Muslim thinkers and reformers, ought to be able to support initiatives at examining thoroughly the concept of the ‘positive laicity’ of the state.
“This could help eliminate the theocratic character of government and allow for greater equality among citizens of different religions, thereby fostering the promotion of a sound democracy, positively secular in nature.”
The document pins most of the blame for the Christian exodus on political tensions in the region: “Today, emigration is particularly prevalent because of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the resulting instability throughout the region.”
It cited the “menacing social situation in Iraq,” where about half the estimated 850,000 Christians there in 2003 have since fled sectarian violence and persecution, and “political instability of Lebanon” as further factors driving them out.
The rise of political Islam since the 1970s, especially its violent variations, menaces the whole region, it added, saying: “These extremist currents, clearly a threat to everyone, Christians and Muslims alike, require joint action.”
CHRISTIAN COOPERATION
The region’s Christians have also been weakened by age-old splits. The Catholics are divided into Latin Catholic, Coptic, Maronite, Chaldean, Armenian, Syrian and Greek Melkite churches — and they are outnumbered by various Orthodox churches.
Protestants are also present, in older communities founded by colonial missionaries or in newer evangelical groups whose aggressive proselytizing — often backed by conservative U.S. churches — has provoked a backlash from Muslim authorities.
The synod document urges the sometimes competing Catholic churches to work with each other and with other Christians to make their voice heard in Middle Eastern society.
Its advice to open up to other churches and faiths, simplify their ancient liturgies and introduce more Arabic into their services echoes the Second Vatican Council reforms that worldwide Roman Catholicism launched back in the 1960s.
Highlighting this openness, the synod has invited an Iranian ayatollah, a Lebanese Muslim and a rabbi from Jerusalem to attend the proceedings and address the 250 participants.
“I don’t think people in the West appreciate to what extent the thematics of the synod are totally new to so much of the Church in the Middle East,” said Rev. David Jaeger, a Franciscan and leading Roman Catholic expert on the Middle East.
“The whole discussion of the civic duty of the Christian … is totally new for the region as a whole. For 13 centuries, Christians in the Middle East have been made to live in a kind of socio-economic ghetto,” he told Reuters Television in Rome.
As Samir summed it up: “If we can do something with other Christians, it is better than doing it alone. If we Christians can do something with the Muslims, that is even better.”
Semra Özal, wife of former Turkish President Turgut Özal, talks to Rudaw in Istanbul.—– Photo by Rudaw.
ISTANBUL, Turkey: Semra Özal is the wife of the former Turkish president Turgut Özal. She was born in 1934 in Istanbul. She was the second wife of Mr. Özal and was with president until the last days of his life. In 1990-92, she served as chairwoman of the Motherland Party (ANAP). In an exclusive and rare interview, Rudaw talked to her about Kurdish question in Turkey as well as her life with former Turkish president Turgut Özal, who passed away in 1993 in a controversial death.
RUDAW: Who is Semra Özal? How did she become the partner of one of the famous presidents of Turkey?
Özal: It is difficult to talk about yourself. I was born in Besiktashi in Istanbul. I finished high school in the same neighborhood. One day, in 1954 we went to Ankara to visit my uncles. There I met Turgut Özal and then we married later on. It was a coincidence. After we got married we continued to live in Ankara, because Turgut was working there.
RUDAW: At that time, did you have kind of relations with Kurds?
Özal: due to my husband’s job, we used to travel across the cities of Anatolia constantly. My husband was an engineer [specialized] in dam constructions. Therefore, we took part in the construction of most of the dams built in Turkey. This required us to stay in different cities for different periods of time.
Back then, when we were traveling all around the Anatolia, the east and southeast, I witnessed what a harsh condition the women were living in. That hurt me. Back then I was working in several NGOs, hospitals and the like, voluntarily in Ankara. But when I saw the women of those areas I told myself these women need help, not those in Ankara.
Then in 1985 I founded an Organization named “Introducing and Strengthening Turkish Women.” Up to now when our ladies going abroad are asked ‘Are you the first wife?’ And many more weird and disturbing questions are asked.
These were not all we were offering. In addition to the health services we offered instructions and guidance to the people. Our work was very productive. Then we moved on, and built some permanent health clinics. One of those clinics is still operating in a poor neighborhood in Diyarbakir. The clinic now offers help to more than two thousand patients on a daily basis. I was proud to be able to help the kids and women of those areas.
Then I realized there were a huge number of married couples who had not documented their marriage in the court. This had left a number of kids without having identity cards of any kind. That was a very hurtful thing, because the husband could just dismiss the wife anytime and the women in that case did not have any rights. They would remain unprotected with their kids. Therefore, I started a campaign for legal documentation of the married couples. In a short period of time, we documented about 30.000 marriages. This made tens of thousands of kids to obtain ID cards. Each family had seven to eight kids. Now if you calculate that you know how many kids benefited from that campaign!
We kept our campaigning in many other countries of the world including America, Japan where we presented the Turkish women’s situations. In Paris we held several exhibitions. We tried to present Turkish women’s abilities. Then we organized a portable exhibition in America and Japan. This awarded me an honor medal from the UNICEF.
The medal then led to receipt of an honorary doctoral certificate from an American university. Despite all these I am still carrying on and would not stop in doing charity works.
RUDAW: You said you had traveled to the Kurdish areas with Turgut Özal, did the Kurdish roots of Turgut Özal have any impacts on your views towards the Kurds?
Özal: We did not segregate between/among Turkey’s different groups and ethnicities. My ancestors are from Istanbul. We never thought of ethnic differences until recently. I have not thought about I am Turkish or Kurdish, we are all human. We were viewing the people in a human prospective. My husband was the same. We had friends from all the different groups. And just so you know, Turgut Özal’s parents were Kurdish. Some other Kurdish key figures had emerged, figures such as the military chief commander and prime minister. Therefore, in the Turkish society I have had friends from all the different groups and ethnicities. I have never differentiated between the people of Turkey.
RUDAW: Turgut Özal tried to solve the Kurdish problem but life did not give him the chance to…
Özal: Turgut Özal was a very intelligent man. He was farsighted. I don’t think there is anyone like him in the world. He was very talented. His thinking and ability were not one of a normal human being. If you remember, in the 1980s, the GAP T.V was established by the state for the first time. Back then, he asked for an hour Kurdish news program in the morning and an hour in the evening. He was saying with this step, we can prevent the negative news that is relied on the Kurdish people from other places. That is why he believed the T.V should have Kurdish news casting.
But unfortunately, the politicians in his time defied this move. They were saying this was not a necessary thing to have! The politicians were wrong. What Özal was doing was necessary. If that step were taken at the time, more steps would have followed by now. Özal was saying language has to be freed. Everybody should be free to listen to the news, read book, sing, and publish newspapers in their own language. He was saying this is not a danger to anyone. Now that Kurdish language and music are allowed, what dangers do they pose? In one of our weddings, Ibrahim Tatlisas with Kanan Ivran sang in Kurdish!
If Özal were alive and if he were not blocked he would have solved the issue step after step. Not only this, he had taken many other important steps in the interest of Turkey. An example is the establishment of three small financial institutions that served this country a lot. These institutions, one of them was dedicated to architecture development. Another to dams and the last one to roads. These institutions were funded by the customs put on the precious goods. This means the funding would not pressure the people nor would it have affected the nation’s financial storage. This would have funded all these roads and dams we see now without hurting the economy. But unfortunately, after Özal when Tanso Ciller came to power, the first thing Chiller did was shutting down these institutions. Özal had many great projects in mind, but he was not given a chance to realize them.
RUDAW: After Mr. Özal’s death, there were many discussions saying that Özal’s death was not a natural death, but rather he was assassinated. What do you say?
Ms.Özal: No, of course it was not a natural death. I assure you 100% that he was killed. He was poisoned. Unfortunately, the evidences, which we found to prove he was murdered, are destroyed. We tried to prove the killing at the court, but the evidences were destroyed/hidden. We did not give up. And will not give up. We will find the truth one day. When Ahmet, my son was a member of the parliament he asked the parliament to form a committee to investigate Özal’s death. But the committee did not do any investigation about the subject. We will not give up.
RUDAW: The Ergenekon issue is now under investigation. And it’s said that everything is going to be investigated, why they are not make a case for Özal’s poisoning, within that framework?
Özal: I do not know about his assassination, but before the assassination there was a failed assassination attempt. I think that one was orchestrated by the Ergenekon. Ahmet, my son, will not give up on that. He is working on it.
RUDAW: As you were Turkey’s first lady, you visited several countries with Turgut Özal. In your visits which country’s first lady was attracting your attention, and did you have any joint works with the other first ladies?
Özal: I went everywhere with Özal. I had relations and joint works with other first ladies. For example, I worked with Nancy Regan’s for two years fighting against drugs. I worked with the Belgium princess for three years. We were working on the future of women in the mountainous regions. Among all the first ladies I met, two of them were very dear to me. Margret Thatcher, the British Prime Minister and Benazir Bhutto, Pakistan’s Prime Minister. Sadly, Thatcher is currently suffering with dementia and Bhutto was killed. Benazir visited me a few times after the death of Özal. The Spanish princess came to visit me in my home. And when I went to Spain they received me in the presidential palace. I have good relations with all of them who are alive. Especially with the Bush senior’s family. I have a very good relations with them.
RUDAW: Barbara Bush, Bush senior’s wife in her memoirs says Danielle Mitterrand talked about the Kurds to me. Has anybody talked about Kurds to you? Were you discussing politics?
Özal: Barbara was a very good woman. She has a very strong maternity feeling. In fact we were not talking about politics very much. But with Bhutto, we were discussing politics a lot. We were talking about the country. What should be done, and how should it be done. We were discussing the way in which we could co-operate with one another. But not with the other first ladies.
RUDAW: Before Özal’s death you had taken a few steps towards politics but then after his death you gave up. Why did you not carry on his path?
Özal: That is a question that everybody has. I have been often asked why did you not become the chairwoman of the party and carry on? I was in shock. Özal and me were walking and all the sudden he fell on the ground and was dead. Just as simple as that! I was in shock for two years. I cannot remember anything that has happened in those two years. After in the two years, when I realized things, they were already of out our control. In fact back then I did not believe in becoming the chairwoman of the party and thought it was none sense. But later I regretted it. I became the leader of the ANAP, the motherland party, on the insistence of Özal.
When I was the leader of ANAP I was constantly working and collecting votes for ANAP. The results were productive. In the elections we scored a great success. But after the elections I resigned.
RUDAW: As you said, Turgut Özal was very far sighted, and you accompanied him in many of his visits, you knew how he was thinking. Following his death, Turkey fell into a crisis and took a decade to recover. Do you see anyone of the Turkish politicians to be able replace him?
Ms. Özal: As a matter of fact no one has understood Özal, so they cannot be a replacement to him. His Excellency Erdogan talks about Özal’s activities a lot, he respects what Özal had achieved. He is trying to go on Özal’s path. I hope he will be successful and continue on Özal’s path. I don’t see anybody else, apart from Erdogan to be continuing on Özal’s policies. I think Erdogan does. I hope he succeeds.
RUDAW: To speaking about Prime Minister Erdogan, how is your relation with him? I think you and the Turkish current first lady and Erdogan’s wife meet one another’s in social ceremonies?
Özal: I know Abdullah Gul for a long time. He was a consultant of planning in the time of Turgut Özal. And one time he was accompanying Özal to a Muslim conference. I have known him ever since then. We have good relations. When we meet we talk to one another. If I need something I will call him. I have no relation with the president’s wife. But Erdogan and Amine (Ms. Erdogan), we meet very often and talk very often. We invite them, and they invite us. When my son got married, Mrs. Erdogan came to my son’s engagement ceremony. We are very close to Erdogan and his wife. We can understand one another very well.
RUDAW: Huseyin Çelik, deputy chairman of the AK party, says what we have done is un-comparable to what was done in the Özal’s tenure. He says we have done much more. What do you think?
Özal: I disagree. Özal’s works are obvious. Some of his works were not completed and now are under completion. Now those are in office were very close friends to Özal including [Turkish Deputy Prime Minister] Cemil Çiçek and many more.
RUDAW: Do you think that the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) has the courage of Özal to solve Kurdish question?
Özal: They want to be as courageous as Özal. They will succeed hopefully. But the issue requires a gradual solution. It cannot be solved over night.
RUDAW: Do you think if Özal were still alive, the Kurdish problem would have been solved by now?
Özal: it would have been solved long time ago. Much more would have been accomplished. Let me say this, the world map would have changed, If he were alive. One day before his death, we were on a visit abroad. He had signed an agreement with all the Turkic states to form a Turkish union. He had decided to visit China in six days and announce this union over there. But this was not let to happen. Because there were some people who did not wish to see something like this. If this Turkish union succeeded, the world map would have been changed now. A huge amount of oil and gas would have been in the union. Actually this factor [oil] led to the prevention of creation of the union. Therefore, I believe some international powers poisoned Turgut Özal and killed him.
RUDAW: One of the simplest rights of humans is to study in their mother tongue. Now in Turkey the subject of studying in Kurdish is provoked and the Turkish government does not want to admit that this is the right of the Kurdish people, how do you view this subject?
Özal: I do not understand the purpose of studying in Kurdish. If the purpose is that the kids should learn their mother tongue, there is no any restriction on that anybody can learn Kurdish. It has been set into the education curriculum as a selective lesson. As far as I know, Kurdish language department is to be opened in the universities too.
RUDAW: In the nineties, Kurdish leaders Massoud Barzani and Jalal Talabani met with Özal. Özal played a big role in the creation of the no fly zone in the Kurdistan region. Were you aware of these things?
Özal: Özal was a close friend of Barzani. When Barzani came to Ankara, I just greeted him. And then they had to go for a formal meeting. But later, after 19 years, Barzani invited me to Erbil. He received me very warmly and we talked to me abut many things. Özal liked Barzani very much. I remember he was repeatedly saying we will not be hurt by him. After my visit and talks with Barzani, I am convinced with what Özal was saying. With Barzani we talked about the past. Barzani respected me so much because of the past relations with Özal.
RUDAW: When Barzani and Talabani came to Ankara, attempts to solve Kurdish problem solving already started, therefore letters were exchanged between Özal and Ocalan. To what extent are you aware of that?
Özal: I have no information about this. I have no information about Ocalan.
RUDAW: Now a ceasefire has been announced by the rebels of the PKK against Turkey, what do you think about that?
Özal: I don’t know much about these sorts of things. But I know war does not solve the issues. Now the government and the state would not engage in direct talks with PKK but there could be a mediating organization. I don’t know if there is or not.
RUDAW: What did you think of the Kurdistan region in your visit?
Özal: I went to Erbil. I think I will go back to Erbil. I think Erbil is becoming a city like the American cities. Erbil is in a fast development. There they respect and trust Turks. I send my greeting to the people of Erbil. Next time if I go there, I will try to meet with those women who are active in the women rights field, so I can help them too. I will surely do some works and activities there.
Admiral Mike Mullen, the Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, visited Turkey last week. Although the official purpose of Mullen’s visit was to congratulate his Turkish counterpart General Isik Kosaner, recently appointed as the Chief of the General Staff, this introductory visit had no fixed agenda. Mullen had a chance to gauge Turkey’s position on many of US policies in the surrounding regions. In his meetings with Turkish military and civilian leaders, Mullen exchanged opinions on US withdrawal from Iraq, the Iranian nuclear issue and the international military presence in Afghanistan, as well as reiterating US support for Turkey on various issues such as its struggle against the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and sales of military equipment for the Turkish armed forces (Hurriyet, Cumhuriyet, Radikal, September 5).
On the issue of Iran, Mullen downplayed recent disagreements, arguing that both Turkey and the US share the common objective of preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability. However, as Ankara’s earlier diplomacy on the Iranian nuclear standoff attested, such blanket mutual understanding was not enough to eliminate major differences of opinion over how best to deal with Iran (EDM, June 1). Ankara’s objections to a tougher US position and insistence on a diplomatic solution culminated in Turkey’s vote against a US-brokered UN Security Council resolution authorizing a new round of sanctions in June. Coupled with other crises, such as the problems encountered in Turkish-Israeli relations, this development further strained bilateral relations, prompting many US politicians and interest groups to question the strategic partnership with Turkey. In this tense environment, in August the Republicans blocked President Barack Obama’s nominee for the next Ambassador to Turkey, Frank Ricciardione. The vacant post highlighted how tenuous Obama’s Turkey policy remained, as well as the impact of Ankara’s recent policies on US domestic politics.
While for Washington a combination of diplomatic efforts and punitive sanctions is needed to deal with Iran, Ankara still believes that constructive diplomacy must be prioritized. Earlier in August, Mullen had raised tensions in the region, following his statement that military options against Iran remain on the table, which invited a harsh reaction from Iran, placing Turkey in a difficult diplomatic position (AFP, August 3).
In this context, Mullen adopted a rather balanced tone in Ankara and said that he had no plan to question Turkey over the Security Council vote and emphasized that he welcomed Turkish leaders’ statements that they would comply with UN sanctions against Iran. Nonetheless, this last point underscored continued differences over Iran. The Turkish government has reiterated on many occasions that it would implement only sanctions authorized by the UN, not the stricter set of measures being introduced by the US and the European countries.
Mullen also referred to ongoing discussions within NATO pertaining to the formation of a missile defense system against Iran, which will be part of the agenda of the upcoming NATO summit in November. Turkey is one of the possible locations for radars and interceptors. However, the Turkish position on this issue remains unclear, and it is unlikely to welcome such a proposal considering Ankara’s sensitivity to Tehran’s concerns.
Turkey’s contribution to the international military effort in Afghanistan was also discussed. Praising Turkey’s critical role in ensuring Afghanistan’s security through its provision of troops and training to Afghan security personnel, Mullen requested that Turkey maintains its military contribution after its command over international troops in Kabul and the surrounding area expires in October. Turkey has contributed to the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) since its inception immediately after the US invasion of the country in 2001, and has assumed the command of ISAF on many occasions. Although the US has pressured Turkey to increase its troop levels, Ankara has refused to do so, on the grounds that non-military means should be used to address the root causes of the conflict. Washington has come to acknowledge Ankara’s concerns on this issue, but wants to ensure that Turkey maintains at least its current level of commitment to ISAF.
An additional area discussed during the bilateral talks was Turkey’s specific role in US withdrawal plans from Iraq. Ever since the Obama administration announced its withdrawal plans, there has been speculation that Turkey would serve as one of the exit routes for US troops and military equipment (EDM, March 9, 2009). Denying such reports, Mullen stressed that he was not in Ankara to negotiate the terms of the US military exit from Iraq through Turkey. Since the transfer of military units will require authorization from the Turkish parliament, it is unlikely that Washington will seriously consider this option. Indeed, a recent statement from the Turkish foreign ministry also ruled out such an option, though welcoming the possibility of moving non-combat elements through the country. If an agreement is reached, Turkey would be ready to create a safe zone for the transfer of technical equipment (Sabah, September 3).
The visit by Mullen underscores the extent to which US-Turkish relations are characterized by military-strategic issues, and how the United States needs Turkey’s cooperation at best and at the very least its acquiescence for the successful execution of its military engagements in the regions surrounding Turkey. Therefore, Turkey is a key part of discussions on major US military campaigns, which serves as a constraint on Washington and prevents it from severing ties with this critical ally over its independent policies. Turkey, in contrast, relies on US assistance and the transfer of military technology, which curbs any tendency on its part to pursue unilateral policies. Aware of this mutual interdependence in military-security affairs, civilian and military bureaucrats from both sides have intensified their efforts to maintain the pace of cooperation. Recently, Turkish foreign ministry officials visited Washington to reiterate Ankara’s determination to maintain strategic ties with the US. This message will perhaps be repeated during the visit to the US later this month by Turkish President, Abdullah Gul, and Foreign Minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, as part of the UN General Assembly.
(Reuters) – Former premier Tony Blair has postponed a party at the Tate Modern art gallery celebrating the launch of his autobiography because of threats from protesters, his office said on Wednesday.
Anti-war demonstrators had planned to disrupt the reception on Wednesday evening and a group of celebrated artists including Tracey Emin and Vivienne Westwood had called on the gallery to cancel the “disgraceful” event.
Blair has also been forced to cancel a signing session for “A Journey” at a bookstore in central London.
“It has been postponed for the same reason as the book signing,” a spokesman for Blair said.
“We don’t want to put our guests through the unpleasant consequences of the actions of demonstrators.”
At the weekend, protestors hurled eggs and shoes at the former prime minister during a promotional event in Dublin.
Blair, prime minister for Labour between 1997 and 2007, led Britain into wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In particular, the occupation of Iraq by Western coalition forces was widely opposed and contributed to a dive in Blair’s popularity.
Emin, Westwood and musician Brian Eno, were among figures from the arts world who wrote a letter to the Guardian newspaper on Wednesday to voice their concern about the Tate Modern event.
“It is disgraceful that the Tate is being used for this purpose,” they said.
(Reporting by Matt Falloon; Editing by Steve Addison)
Flights redirected to Baghdad after political objections and local protests
Owen Bowcott
At least sixty people are being held at Colnbrook detention centre, near Heathrow, awaiting deportation to Iraq. Photograph: Tim Ockenden/PA
Home Office deportation flights are being prevented from taking failed asylum seekers directly to northern Iraq because of a diplomatic dispute with the Kurdish regional government (KRG).
A ban has in effect been placed on incoming flights from the UK landing forcibly returned Kurds at the regional airport in Irbil. Political objections and local protests have led to the UK Border Agency redirecting the planes to Baghdad.
Another round-up of failed Iraqi asylum seekers has been ordered in the past week. At least 60 people are now being held at Colnbrook detention centre, near Heathrow, awaiting removal by charter flight. Those about to be deported have been given tickets dated 1 or 6 September.
Thousands of Iraqi refugees remain in Britain, many having arrived before the 2003 invasion when Saddam Hussein was persecuting the Kurds.
The Home Office’s forced repatriation of asylum seekers denied permission to remain in Britain has been diplomatically fraught. The first flight to Baghdad last year led to airport officials in the Iraqi capital refusing to accept all but a handful of passengers. Most were denied entry and sent back to the UK.
To assuage political sensitivities, Iraqi interior ministry officials are permitted the unusual privilege of interviewing and screening detained asylum seekers in UK detention centres to confirm they will accept each individual.
The UK policy of sending deportees back to, or through, the central provinces of Iraq, which include Baghdad, is in defiance of guidelines issued by the United Nations high commissioner for refugees, which warns that the area remains unsafe due to suicide bombs and attacks by al-Qaida militants.
One Iraqi deported from the UK was killed by a car bomb in Kirkuk in 2007. The continuing violence claimed more than 60 lives following a series of co-ordinated blasts in Iraqi cities during just one day – 25 August – last week.
The KRG, the semi-autonomous administration that runs the Kurdistan region of north-east Iraq, controls its own militia. For many years, it has objected to forcible returns of failed asylum seekers from western European countries, threatening to withdraw diplomatic co-operation.
Many deportation flights from the UK have nonetheless been sent to Iribil; on the first flights deportees were ordered to wear flak jackets for their return to what was deemed a safe country.
An official at the KRG representative office in London said: “The KRG has asked the British government to send only those people who want to go back. It is opposed to forcible deportations.”
The last UK deportation flight to Kurdistan was about five months ago. The Home Office now accepts that it will have to send Kurdish Iraqis back via Baghdad unless the KRG agrees to reopen direct flights.
The border agency told the Guardian: “UKBA only ever returns those who both the agency and the courts are satisfied do not need our protection and refuse to leave voluntarily.
“Currently we have agreement with the government of Iraq to return all Iraqi citizens to Baghdad. We make arrangements for those who require onward travel to their home towns, and this includes those travelling to the KR [Kurdish region].
“These arrangements worked well on the recent charter flights to Baghdad and we are confident they will continue to do so.”
Political opposition to forcible deportations has been led by the International Federation of Iraqi Refugees, which has organised protests both in western European countries and within Kurdistan.
More than 2 million Iraqis fled the sectarian violence which erupted after the 2003 invasion. Most sought sanctuary in neighbouring Arab states but many were attracted by the opportunities of employment in the EU.
Richard Whittel, of the Coalition to Stop Deportations to Iraq, said: “It is inspiring that popular pressure in Kurdistan forced the government there to take a stand against these deportations but disturbing that our government persists with them, pandering to the myth that immigration is to blame for the country’s problems.”
Among the common complaints raised by opponents of forced removals have been persistent allegations that failed asylum seekers are mistreated by security guards when they are forced on to planes in Britain for flights back to Iraq.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/aug/31/kurdish-uk-asylum-seekers-iraq, 31 August 2010
