All the Shah’s Men — Stephen Kinzer

All the Shah's Men


All the Shah’s Men
Stephen Kinzer
258 pages including index
published in 2003

If you read the name Roosevelt, you probably think of the American president during World War II, or perhaps his predecesor Theodore Roosevelt, who gave his name to the teddy bear. But there’s another Roosevelt who has been of some influence in world history, a grandson of Theodore, Kermit Roosevelt, Jr., the man behind the coup against the democratically elected government of Iran in 1953. That was the coup that overthrew a government nominally an ally of the United States, on the behest of a British oil company to install a dictator whose father had had nazi sympathies, who himself would be overthrown a quarter century later in the Islamic revolution of 1979, when Americans were baffled to realise most of Iran hated them, a ahtred that had its roots in 1953.

That 1953 coup is one of those monumental changes in history that are far less well known than they should be. Though not exactly a secret, the American involvement and leadership of the coup is even less known, or at least that was the case when this book was published, in the year the US would invade another former client state, Iraq. These days the sad and sordid story of American meddling in the Middle East is well known, at least to those who paid attention to what happened after 9/11. I’m not sure how much Stephen Kinzer’s book contributed to this though.

Read more

Hullo John got a new ‘puter?



Well, yes, I do, as my old one died two weeks back. That was Sandra’s old computer, Id bought for her from a co-worker in 2008 or so and the hard disks just gave up the ghost. Its been through the wars before and she had already lost the data that had been on it a long time ago, so no great loss. Might buy a cheap new harddrive and get it fixed anyway, just for kicks. The new computer is great and I’m well in the honeymoon phase of owning a new computer, except for having to reinstall all my old favourite programmes and settings, which is always a chore. Not of great interest to anyone but me, I know, so have some Alexei Sayle.

Of more interest, this casual suggestion that the US might have experienced its Suez moment:

Humphrey is increasingly of the opinion that we are witnessing the USA’s ‘east of Suez moment’ at which the US is faced with the same strategic challenges that all empires are faced with. The legions will be recalled from Europe soon, and this is going to leave a major series of security and other challenges that need to be filled.

Which would make the War on Iraq something like what the Suez Crisis was for the UK: a point at which America’s military capabilities outreach its political power. It was capable of invading and winning battles, but its military might did not help America reach its wider goals. The War on Iraq was the quintessential late imperial war, one not waged for a concrete, achievable goal, but more to show that the aggressor is still an empire, still top dog. It didn’t quite work out that way, which means the empire is still looking for another enemy to defeat to make everything right again, hence the confrontational stance with Iran.

That Osama killing

Slightly suspicious, isn’t it? Suddenly, after a decade of failure Osama Bin Laden is found conveniently in a compound in Pakistan, an American special forces team is flown in and manage to subdue Osama after a brief firefight, then executed him, dumping his body in the sea on their way back. It all seems tailor made for conspiracy theorists.

Which shouldn’t distract from the main question: why not take him alive and let him stand trial for his crimes? The stupider sort of American may believe this is justice, but it remains a revenge killing that shows how of little value America’s supposed ideals are when things get tough. This looks like a triumph for America but instead it is an act of fear — a truly strong country would find the strength to put its enemies on trial.

UPDATE: come to think of it, having Osama executed in this way makes Khadaffi’s accusations of NATO trying to kill him and his family that more plausible.

Afghanistan: the Warlogs

Yesterday The Guardian revealed it had recieved, via Wikileaks a massive collection of US military logfiles which showed the War on Afghanistan going even worse than we already knew about:

A huge cache of secret US military files today provides a devastating portrait of the failing war in Afghanistan, revealing how coalition forces have killed hundreds of civilians in unreported incidents, Taliban attacks have soared and Nato commanders fear neighbouring Pakistan and Iran are fuelling the insurgency.

The war logs also detail:

[…]

• How a secret “black” unit of special forces hunts down Taliban leaders for “kill or capture” without trial.

• How the US covered up evidence that the Taliban have acquired deadly surface-to-air missiles.

• How the coalition is increasingly using deadly Reaper drones to hunt and kill Taliban targets by remote control from a base in Nevada.

• How the Taliban have caused growing carnage with a massive escalation of their roadside bombing campaign, which has killed more than 2,000 civilians to date.

Interesting material and I’ve seen people on Twitter refer to it as the Pentagon Papers volume II, but does it change anything significantly about our view of the war? The original Pentagon Papers had an impact because they were the first source to make fully clear the catastrophe the War on Vietnam was and how culpable the US military and government were in covering up the truth. With the current wars on Afghanistan and Iraq this was known or suspected from the start and too much shit has already come out to be too surprised by what’s in those logs.

But it is important as a cache of evidence, for historical purposes if nothing else, to show that once again those who were against the war from the start where right about it, that the reasons we opposed the war have been proven right. Not to brag, but as a warning for the next time our leaders want to sell us a humantarian intervention.

The raw logs are available as a torrent from the Piratebay, or downloadable in spreadsheet (.csv), database (.sql) or Google maps (.kml) format from Cryptogon. It’s only some 15 megabytes big, so easy enough to get.

UPDATE: a better torrent.

Meanwhile, in Haiti..

UN soldiers shoot into a crowd of mourners for Father Gerard Jean-Juste, a long time opponent of the UN-installed provisional government in Haiti:

All this happened in the run up to the senate elections in Haiti, for which all candidates of the Fanmi Lavalas were barred from standing. Fanmi Lavalas is the party led by Jean-Bertrand Aristide, who was ousted as president in 2004 by the UN backed coup against him. It is of course a popular leftwing party and if there’s one thing that cannot be tolerated in Haiti it is a popular leftwing party. As in Iran, ordinary people have been protesting in the streets against the unfair and dishonest elections, boycotting them in large numbers. As in Iran, people have been shot at. Unlike Iran, they’ve been shot at by UN troops and unlike Iran, this went largely unreported. The difference is that Iran is our official enemy, while what happens in Haiti (and Honduras) is happening with our blessing.

(I’ve linked to Peter Hallward’s article on the 2004 Haiti coup before, but it’s still the best overview of what happened, why it happened and why it’s important I’ve found.)