BB FANS

Iraq pledges to tackle Kurdish fighters




The Iraqi prime minister, Nuri al-Maliki, called the PKK a 'terrorist organisation'. Photograph: Brendan Smialowski/Getty Images

Iraq today pledged to shut down the operations of Kurdish fighters operating in the country amid frantic efforts to head off a Turkish attack.

The Iraqi prime minister, Nuri al-Maliki, called the Kurdistan Workers party (PKK) a "terrorist organisation" and announced that he would "shut down their offices".

The move came as the US and Iraq attempt to avert a threatened invasion by Turkish troops looking to crush PKK fighters operating on the Iraqi border.


"The PKK is a terrorist organisation and we have taken a decision to shut down their offices and not allow them to operate on Iraqi soil," Mr Maliki said.

"We will also work on limiting their terrorist activities, which are threatening Iraq and Turkey."

He gave no details of how the fighters could be prevented from launching attacks from their remote mountain bases in northern Iraq.

Earlier today, the Turkish prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan warned that his country could not "wait forever" as troops lined the Iraqi border in preparation for an attack on Kurdish guerrillas.

The guerrillas have been responsible for the deaths of around 40 Turkish soldiers over the past month.

Mr Erdogan - who was last week given a mandate by the Turkish parliament to order a military incursion into northern Iraq - was speaking after talks with Gordon Brown in Downing Street.

He has come under increasing pressure from the Turkish public and military to sanction a cross-border assault following a weekend attack by PKK fighters in south-east Turkey in which at least 12 soldiers died. A further eight remain missing.

Mr Brown said Britain would "step up" counter-terrorism cooperation with Turkey.

"We condemn absolutely and unequivocally the terrorist violence of the PKK," he added. "The fact that 12 members of the Turkish army have been killed, the fact that eight have been kidnapped ... is something that the whole world community has condemned over the past few days."

Mr Erdogan reassured Iraq that Turkey would "continue to support the Iraqi people", but appeared to criticise Baghdad for not doing more to combat the PKK.

He said that it was forbidden "within the framework of international law" for a state to allow a terrorist organisation to operate from inside its borders, adding that he had met the Iraqi government four times to discuss the threat posed by the PKK.

"Despite all of these efforts, we have some expectation with what is to be done about the terrorist organisation in the north of Iraq," he added. "The Iraqi government must know that we can exercise the mandate [at] any time. We cannot wait forever."

Earlier, the Turkish foreign minister, Ali Babacan, rejected any ceasefire by Kurdish fighters as he met Iraqi leaders in Baghdad and urged them to crack down on the PKK.

"Ceasefires are possible between states and regular forces," he said. "The problem here is that we are dealing with a terrorist organisation."

However, Mr Babacan expressed his willingness to employ "political dialogue, diplomacy, economic and cultural tools as well as military measures".

The Iraqi foreign minister, Hoshiyar Zebari - himself a Kurd - called the crisis "complex and grave". Mr Zebari said he hoped a diplomatic push would help stave off any incursion.

Iraqi and US leaders have warned that a Turkish intervention would threaten peace in northern Iraq - the one stable area in the war-torn country.

The Iraqi president, Jalal Talabani, also a Kurd, yesterday held out the prospect of the PKK announcing a unilateral ceasefire.

The PKK called on Turkey not to attack Iraq, claiming a unilateral ceasefire, declared in June, was still in place although fighting had not stopped.

"We have not officially ended the ceasefire," the group said, the pro-Kurdish Firat news agency reported. "We're stating clearly that, if the Turkish state stops its attacks, increased tensions will be replaced with a clash-free environment."

Turkey has deployed up to 100,000 troops, backed by tanks, F16 fighters and helicopter gunships along its Iraqi border. It estimates that 3,000 PKK rebels are based in Iraq.

The US president, George Bush, yesterday expressed his "deep concern" about the Kurdish fighter attacks. Mr Bush held talks with the Iraqi prime minister, Nuri al-Maliki, and the two agreed to work with Turkey to stop the PKK strikes.

The US secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, and the British foreign secretary, David Miliband, said they had proposed a meeting of US, Turkish and Iraqi officials to discuss how to stop the attacks.

The PKK claims to have captured the eight Turkish soldiers missing since Sunday.

A spokesman said they were seized during fighting and would be treated with respect, but insisted it was "premature" to talk about their release.

"We are responsible for the safety of the captives in compliance with international laws," Abdul-Rahman al-Chadarchi told the Associated Press.

"The soldiers were seized as they were attacking our forces. They are all in good shape. When the Turkish government asks for them, we can talk about conditions."
guardian

Iraqis to take over in Basra



Foreign Secretary David Miliband said last night he was "delighted" Basra was to be handed over to Iraqi forces.

The transfer, part of the Government's plan to "progressively" give up control of the country, takes place in December.

In a joint statement with Defence Secretary Des Browne, currently visiting troops in Iraq, Mr Miliband said: "We congratulate all of those who have helped achieve this, most notably British and Coalition military and civilian personnel."

Iraqi PM Nouri Maliki indicated yesterday his forces were preparing to take control in Basra - the last area where British troops have responsibility for security.


Earlier this month, Gordon Brown set out plans to reduce UK troop numbers to 2,500 from next spring.

The PM said then there would be "two distinct stages" in the hand over of Basra. The joint statement confirmed the move was "firmly in line" with the plans for withdrawing troops which remained on schedule.
Mirror

Robert Fisk: King Abdullah flies in to lecture us on terrorism


In what world do these people live? True, there'll be no public executions outside Buckingham Palace when His Royal Highness rides in stately formation down The Mall. We gave up capital punishment about half a century ago. There won't even be a backhander – or will there? – which is the Saudi way of doing business. But for King Abdullah to tell the world, as he did in a BBC interview yesterday, that Britain is not doing enough to counter "terrorism", and that most countries are not taking it as seriously as his country is, is really pushing it. Weren't most of the 11 September 2001 hijackers from – er – Saudi Arabia? Is this the land that is really going to teach us lessons?

The sheer implausibility of the claim that Saudi intelligence could have prevented the ondon bombings if only the British Government had taken it seriously, seems to have passed the Saudi monarch by. "We have sent information to Great Britain before the terrorist attacks in Britain but unfortunately no action was taken. And it may have been able to maybe avert the tragedy," he told the BBC. This claim is frankly incredible.

The sad, awful truth is that we fete these people, we fawn on them, we supply them with fighter jets, whisky and whores. No, of course, there will be no visas for this reporter because Saudi Arabia is no democracy. Yet how many times have we been encouraged to think otherwise about a state that will not even allow its women to drive? Kim Howells, the Foreign Office minister, was telling us again yesterday that we should work more closely with the Saudis, because we "share values" with them. And what values precisely would they be, I might ask?

Saudi Arabia is a state which bankrolled – a definite no-no this for discussion today – Saddam's legions as they invaded Iran in 1980 (with our Western encouragement, let it be added). And which said nothing – a total and natural silence – when Saddam swamped the Iranians with gas. The Iraqi war communiqué made no bones about it. "The waves of insects are attacking the eastern gates of the Arab nation. But we have the pesticides to wipe them out."

Did the Saudi royal family protest? Was there any sympathy for those upon whom the pesticides would be used? No. The then Keeper of the Two Holy Places was perfectly happy to allow gas to be used because he was paying for it – components were supplied, of course, by the US – while the Iranians died in hell. And we Brits are supposed to be not keeping up with our Saudi friends when they are "cracking down on terrorism".

Like the Saudis were so brilliant in cracking down on terror in 1979 when hundreds of gunmen poured into the Great Mosque at Mecca, an event so mishandled by a certain commander of the Saudi National Guard called Prince Abdullah that they had to call in toughs from a French intervention force. And it was a former National Guard officer who led the siege.

Saudi Arabia's role in the 9/11 attacks has still not been fully explored. Senior members of the royal family expressed the shock and horror expected of them, but no attempt was made to examine the nature of Wahhabism, the state religion, and its inherent contempt for all representation of human activity or death. It was Saudi Muslim legal iconoclasm which led directly to the destruction of the Buddhas of Bamiyan by the Taliban, Saudi Arabia's friends. And only weeks after Kamal Salibi, a Lebanese history professor, suggested in the late 1990s that once-Jewish villages in what is now Saudi Arabia might have been locations in the Bible, the Saudis sent bulldozers to destroy the ancient buildings there.

In the name of Islam, Saudi organisations have destroyed hundreds of historic structures in Mecca and Medina and UN officials have condemned the destruction of Ottoman buildings in Bosnia by a Saudi aid agency, which decided they were "idolatrous". Were the twin towers in New York another piece of architecture which Wahhabis wanted to destroy?

Nine years ago a Saudi student at Harvard produced a remarkable thesis which argued that US forces had suffered casualties in bombing attacks in Saudi Arabia because American intelligence did not understand Wahhabism and had underestimated the extent of hostility to the US presence in the kingdom. Nawaf Obaid even quoted a Saudi National Guard officer as saying "the more visible the Americans became, the darker I saw the future of the country". The problem is that Wahhabi puritanism meant that Saudi Arabia would always throw up men who believe they had been chosen to "cleanse" their society from corruption, yet Abdul Wahhab also preached that royal rulers should not be overthrown. Thus the Saudis were unable to confront the duality, that protection-and-threat that Wahhabism represented for them.

Prince Bandar, formerly Saudi Arabia's ambassador to Washington, once characterised his country's religion as part of a "timeless culture" while a former British ambassador advised Westerners in Saudi Arabia to "adapt" and "to act with the grain of Saudi traditions and culture".

Amnesty International has appealed for hundreds of men – and occasionally women – to be spared the Saudi executioner's blade. They have all been beheaded, often after torture and grossly unfair trials. Women are shot.

The ritual of chopping off heads was graphically described by an Irish witness to a triple execution in Jeddah in 1997. "Standing to the left of the first prisoner, and a little behind him, the executioner focused on his quarry ... I watched as the sword was being drawn back with the right hand. A one-handed back swing of a golf club came to mind ... the down-swing begins ... the blade met the neck and cut through it like ... a heavy cleaver cutting through a melon ... a crisp moist smack. The head fell and rolled a little. The torso slumped neatly. I see now why they tied wrists to feet ... the brain had no time to tell the heart to stop, and the final beat bumped a gush of blood out of the headless torso on to the plinth."

And you can bet they won't be talking about this at Buckingham Palace today.

Independent

Japan pulls out of Afghanistan coalition






Japan's government has ordered its navy to end its mission in support of coalition forces in Afghanistan after failing to win opposition backing to renew the deployment before today's midnight deadline.

Since 2001, Japan has provided about 126m gallons of fuel to US, British and other vessels operating in the Indian Ocean. The two Japanese ships on duty - the supply ship Tokiwa and the destroyer Kirisame - are expected back home in about three weeks.

Opposition parties, which gained control of the upper house of Japan's parliament in July, said the mission did not have a UN mandate and possibly violated the country's pacifist constitution, which severely limits the military's overseas role.

The prime minister, Yasuko ****, today vowed to pass new legislation that would enable Japan to play a smaller, but symbolically important part in the US-led war on terror.

"To fulfill our responsibility as part of international efforts towards eradicating terrorism, we need to continue our refueling mission," he said in a statement. "The government will do all it can to pass the special bill for the refueling mission so we can restart our mission as soon as possible."

Earlier this week, Mr **** failed in a last-ditch attempt to persuade Ichiro Ozawa, who leads the biggest opposition party, to support the mission.

The withdrawal was a blow to US efforts to keep the coalition together. Several senior US officials have publicly urged Mr Ozawa to think again and yesterday the ambassadors of the US, Britain and nine other countries met dozens of Japanese MPs to stress the value of the country's contribution.

The Australian foreign minister, Alexander Downer, said he was concerned by the withdrawal. "Defeating terrorists is one of the highest security challenges the world faces," he said. "It is a global challenge and combating terrorism is a collective responsibility."

But US defence department spokesman Geoff Morrell said the decision would not have "any operational impact whatsoever". Japan provided about one-fifth of all fuel consumed by coalition ships between December 2001 and February 2003, according to Pentagon data, but only about 7% since then.

Officials in Washington denied that the US defence secretary, Robert Gates, would apply more pressure on Japan when he visits Tokyo next week.

The timing of the visit was "purely coincidental", a Pentagon official was quoted as telling Japanese reporters in Washington. "I assure you the United States has no intention of injecting itself into that legislative process."

The issue is expected to be on the agenda, however, when Mr **** meets the US president, George Bush, later this month.
guardian

Turkey defends cross-border raids on Kurdish guerrillas


Thursday November 1, 2007




Turkey's foreign minister insisted today that cross-border raids against Kurdish militants in northern Iraq were justified, despite international efforts to halt such operations.

Ali Babacan said a meeting on Monday between Prime Minister Tayyip Recep Erdogan and President George Bush "will determine the steps that Turkey would take" against the by the Kurdistan Workers' party, or PKK.

But he stressed that if Turkey sends its troops into Iraq "any cross-border attack would be aimed at hitting terrorist bases and would not be an invasion".


Mr Babacan indicated growing frustration with the government of the semi-autonomous Kurdish region of northern Iraq, accusing it of failing to the tackle PKK attacks on Turkish troops.

"We have doubts about the sincerity of the administration in northern Iraq in the struggle against the terrorist organisation," he said.

The Turkish foreign minister also confirmed that economic measures aimed at the PKK in northern Iraq have already been put in place, and that Turkey is considering banning flights to and from the region.

"We are not going to announce them, but will implement them when needed," he said, adding only that flights to northern Iraq "might be" restricted as well.

Earlier Mr Erdogan denied reports on Turkish television that a ban on flights had already been imposed.

The Iraqi government and US have stepped up efforts to persuade Turkey against mounting cross-border operations. Baghdad promised more border checkpoints while Washington said it was sharing "lots of intelligence" with Turkey. Ankara has complained for months about what it sees as lack of US support against the rebel fighters.

Mr Erdogan flies this weekend to the US for talks with President Bush.

The White House spokesman, Dana Perino, said yesterday that Mr Bush would emphasise that Washington expects Baghdad to act against the PKK.

She said: "Turkey has a right to defend its people, it has a right to look for its soldiers, and we are asking Turkey, as well, to exercise restraint and to limit its exercises to the PKK. And so far that's continuing to work, but it takes a lot of dialogue and discussions."

Following a six-hour meeting of Mr Erdogan's cabinet, the deputy prime minister, Cemil Cicek, said yesterday that Turkey was looking for "concrete results" from the talks with Mr Bush.

"This is a meeting about the PKK, which America also considers a terrorist organisation," he said.

The cross-border attacks have left 47 people dead on the Turkish side, including 35 soldiers, since the end of September.

The latest death occurred yesterday, when a soldier succumbed to injuries sustained while fighting rebels on the border earlier in the week.

"We have given them more and more intelligence as a result of their recent concerns," said the US defence department spokesman, Geoff Morrell.

He did not specify when that process started, but another official said the US has in recent days sent U2 spy planes to the area.

The Iraqi foreign minister, Hoshyar Zebari, said his government would erect more checkpoints along its northern border to halt fuel, food and other supplies reaching the insurgents.

Mr Zebari, a Kurd himself, said Iraq would also take other, unspecified measures to hinder PKK incursions.

Iraq is ready "to cooperate actively with the Turkish government to find practical measures" to prevent the attacks, he said.

It is widely feared that a Turkish cross-border campaign would spread disorder in one of Iraq's few relatively stable regions.

Before meeting Mr Bush, the Turkish prime minister is scheduled to meet the secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, when she visits Turkey tomorrow.

High-ranking officials from the UN security council, the G8, the Organisation of the Islamic Conference, the Arab League and the EU are also holding talks today in Istanbul ahead of a foreign ministers' meeting on Iraq.

Mr Erdogan has accused Massoud Barzani, the leader of Iraq's semi-autonomous Kurdish region, of "aiding and abetting" the rebels.

Turkey fears that Iraqi Kurds could establish an independent Kurdish state - Mr Barzani has set this as his ultimate goal - which could fuel separatist sentiments within Kurdish parts of Turkey.
guardian

Envoys Resist Forced Iraq Duty washingtonpost

US: Church that pickets dead soldiers' funerals ordered to pay $11m in damages



The grieving father of a dead US soldier has won nearly $11m (€7.6m) damages from a fundamentalist church that pickets military funerals as a campaign against homosexuality.

The Westboro Baptist Church believes the war in Iraq is a punishment for America’s tolerance of homosexuality.

Albert Snyder sued after members demonstrated at the funeral of his son, Marine Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder, who was killed in an accident in Iraq last year.

Church members waved signs reading “Thank God for dead soldiers,” and “Fag troops”, even though l/cpl Snyder was not gay.

The federal jury awarded $2.9m US (€2m) in compensatory damages $6m US (€4.2m) in punitive damages for invasion of privacy and $2m (€1.4m) for causing emotional distress.

However, one of the church’s leaders, Shirley Phelps-Roper, said the members would continue to picket military funerals.

“Absolutely; don’t you understand this was an act in futility?” she said.

Church members routinely protest at funerals of military personnel killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, carrying signs such as “Thank God for dead soldiers” and “God hates fags.”

They claim they are following their religious beliefs and that the funerals are public events and that views are protected by the First Amendment which guarantees, among other things, freedom of religion and speech.

Mr Snyder claimed the protests intruded upon what should have been a private ceremony and ruined his memory of the event.

On NBC’s Today show Mr Snyder said that while his son was fighting for freedom for Iraqis, “my son did not fight for hate speech.

“And that’s basically what it is,” he said of the church’s protest. “Everybody’s under the impression that the First Amendment gives them the right to do anything, say anything any where, any time. And along with the First Amendment also comes responsibility.”

Several states have passed laws regarding funeral protests, and Congress has banned protests at federal cemeteries.

However, the Snyder case in Baltimore is believed to be the first by the family of a dead serviceman.

The church and three of its leaders – Fred Phelps and his two daughters, Phelps-Roper and Rebekah Phelps-Davis, 46 – were found liable for invasion of privacy and intent to inflict emotional distress.

It was unclear whether Mr Snyder will be able to collect the damages.

Defence lawyer Jonathan Katz said the church has about 75 members and is funded by donations.

He said the assets of the church and the three defendants are less than a million dollars.

One of Mr Snyder’s attorneys, Sean Summers, said he would tirelessly seek payment of the award.

“We will chase them forever if it takes that long.”
breakingnews

Faulty Intel Source "Curve Ball" Revealed cbsnews

We're all in danger from supermorons
Mail

The Lost War: Our despairing troops in Afghanistan, fighting the war they can never win Mail

Iraq 'will arrest Kurdish rebels'

Turkish troops could strike against PKK rebels in Iraq soon
Iraq says it is ready to track down and arrest Kurdish rebel leaders responsible for cross-border raids into Turkey from northern Iraq.

Government spokesman Ali Dabbagh also said Baghdad was prepared to take joint action with Ankara against the fighters of the PKK.

The pledge was made at international talks in Turkey on security in Iraq.

Iraq's six neighbours are gathering with diplomats from the UN, G8 and international Arab and Islamic groups.

Attending the talks in Istanbul, Iraqi PM Nouri Maliki said his country should not be used a base for attacks against neighbours.

"We will co-operate with our neighbours in defeating this threat," he said.

'Clearly unacceptable'

Ali Dabbagh was quoted by the AFP news agency as saying: "There are security measures being taken, the checking of any suspect officer of the PKK in the Kurdistan region and in all Iraq."

"They will be arrested," he added.

Meanwhile, authorities in Iraq closed an office in Irbil on Saturday of the Kurdistan Democratic Solution, a political party which Turkey says is a front for the Kurdish rebels.

Map

The party secretary, Fayaq Gulpi, said: "The security forces in Irbil entered our office, expelled all our party members and our sympathisers then closed the office."

Irbil is the seat of government for Iraq's semi-autonomous Kurdish region, and lies 350km (217 miles) north of Baghdad.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said at the talks in Istanbul that attacks launched on Turkish forces from Iraq were "clearly unacceptable".

"The governments of Iraq and Turkey must work hard to address this challenge and I am confident that a mutually acceptable solution can be found," he said.

Turkey has massed up to 100,000 troops on its southern border for a possible offensive to eliminate Kurdish rebel bases in Iraq.

Threats

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan told the meeting: "Our objective is to have an Iraq that has stability and safety and that does not create threats for its neighbours."

BBC world affairs correspondent Nick Childs says the Iraqi authorities are anxious that Saturday's one-day conference remains focused on broader questions of security and stability in Iraq, and how the outside world can help.

They hope hints of a recent downturn of violence in Iraq may encourage greater outside engagement, says our correspondent.

The first round of talks was held in Egypt in May, when an agreement in principle was reached to forgive Iraq some $30bn (£14.4bn) in debts.

The trouble is many of the participants in Istanbul have different views of how they want to see Iraq develop politically, says our correspondent.

UK foreign minister Kim Howells, right, talks with US Secretary of State Rice in Istanbul on 3 November 2007
Turkey wants Washington to do more to deter PKK activity from Iraq

The Saudis and the Iranians, for example, regard each other suspiciously but they find common ground in not wanting to see Iraq unstable and broken up.

A lot of interest will again be focused on the chemistry between US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and her counterparts from two significant regional players with which Washington is at odds, Iran and Syria.

Those attending the conference include representatives of the permanent members of the UN Security Council, the Arab League and the Islamic Conference Organisation.

Turkey is pressing Washington to do more to stem PKK activity from Iraq, where the organisation is thought to have about 3,000 rebels based.

Foreign Minister Ali Babacan met Condoleezza Rice in Ankara on Friday and the pair are due to hold more talks on Saturday, with Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari also attending.

But analysts expect that any major announcement about the border situation will be kept for a summit between President George W Bush and Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan being held in Washington on Monday.
BBC

ARMY: WE WEREN'T READY FOR IRAQ
SHOCK SECRET REPORT


The first official report by the Army into the invasion of Iraq has damningly concluded that Britain should never have gone to war.

The high-level probe has been conducted with the help of the Army's most senior officers involved in the conflict. Now it is being sent to all defence chiefs - including Army supremo General Sir Richard Dannatt - as "lessons learnt" for future conflicts.

The 16-page "restricted" report from the Army's Land Warfare Centre-leaked to the Sunday Mirror - blasts the Government for "too little planning" and for putting "too few resources" into Iraq's postwar plan. In a stinging reference to Bush and Blair, it says: "In military terms, it is self-evident that leaders should not start an operation without thinking through the options and implications for their plans."

The report revealed that a lack of troops and resources to rebuild Iraq meant Britain may have lost the conflict within the first "100 days" of occupying the country.

Senior Government figures "took some persuading" that Britain would have responsibilities to Iraqis under the Geneva Convention during a coalition's "occupation". British leaders also "accepted uncritically" US assumptions that there would be no insurgency or civil war after the invasion, and troops were not given enough training on understanding Arab people.

Invasion plans were kept secret until three months before the war, meaning officials had no time to make resources available.

An MoD spokesman said: "We do not comment on leaked documents."

Yesterday two policemen died south of Baghdad and a US soldier was also killed. In Afghanistan, a Dutch soldier was killed in Uruzgan.

IRAQ DEATH TOLL

THIS WEEK

Allies 1

Iraqi 86

TOTAL SO FAR

Allies 4,091

Iraqi 81,002

..& AFGHAN TOLL

THIS WEEK

Brits 0

Coalition 1

SINCE 2001

Brits 82

Coalition 620

WHAT WENT WRONG

The evidence shows that too little planning was done for Op TELIC Phase IV, particularly on the non-military side and that too few resources, both human and financial, were allocated to the post-conflict situation

Lack of resources thwarted "occupation"

Lack of improvements to essential services and the standard of living, together with disorder, meant that many locals who were 'sitting on the fence' were not persuaded to support the Coalition.

Leaders failed in responsibilities to people

The unrest and violence following the fall of Saddam were recognised by British officers in mid-2003 as indicators of insurgent activity but it took longer for US commanders to accept this and take measures.

Us assumed there would be no civil unrest

news@sundaymirror.co.uk

The Iraq war has become a disaster that we have chosen to forget


With the media subdued, governments have not been held to account for the biggest political calamity of our time



'You think you are innocent, but you're not," said the British Muslim suicide bomber in the Channel 4 television drama Britz last week. As the compelling actor Manjinder Virk recited her suicide statement to camera, she went on: thousands of women and children are dying every day in Iraq and Afghanistan, and yet the governments responsible have been returned to power.

Her assertion sticks in the mind because it goes straight to the heart of how we choose to forget, choose not to understand; and how from such choices it becomes possible to imagine our innocence.

That's not to say that her own moral choices were defensible - she blew up herself, her beloved brother, fellow Muslims and plenty of women in the crowd - but the challenge even from such a morally flawed character persists. Can we claim innocence of the chaotic violence of Iraq now normalised into the background of our lives? Suicide bombs have long since become routine radio noise. We're numbed to the atrocities; except for some stalwarts, the initial anti-war activism has been crowded out by other responsibilities. Life goes on, even if in Baghdad it frequently doesn't.

And to accompany the indifference is the creeping denial of responsibility. Government ministers now talk of Iraq as a tragedy, as if it was a natural disaster and they had no hand in its making. There's a public revulsion at the violent sectarian struggles best summed up as "a plague on all their houses", as even the horror gives way to exhaustion.

The irony is that in this great age of communications and saturation media, this is perhaps the most important war to become nigh on impossible to report. Unless the reporter is embedded with the occupation forces, it takes either terrifying courage or extraordinary ingenuity to bring images to our screens of those caught up in the awful maelstrom of this imploded country. Without the human stories that bring people and their suffering so vividly to life, there is little chance of public opinion re-engaging with the biggest political calamity of our time.

The Iraq war represents the end of the media as a major actor in war. In Bosnia journalists stirred western Europe's conscience with their vivid accounts; these were people we came to understand, recognise and empathise with, and public opinion forced recalcitrant governments to take note and act. It was a lesson not lost on the Kosovans: they ensured the media saw every atrocity, and the coverage was used to secure a comparable outcome to Bosnia - western governments were forced to act. But in Iraq the number of journalists killed (now at least 138) means that this war is near private - the images and people who might make the horror of this war real don't reach our screens. It's no longer a war that is accessible to public scrutiny or to democratic engagement.

It may have been Iraqi suspicion of western media that ensured this outcome, but it's one that serves US interests nicely. The indifference, the exhaustion and the difficulty of reporting leaves the US forces with arguably a freer hand than they have had in any field of operations for decades. While the Americans and the British keep trying to persuade their public that the war is over - a habit initiated by George Bush himself when he announced his pyrrhic victory on an aircraft carrier in the Gulf in May 2003 - they can carry on fighting it. And there are plenty of people only too eager to hope their political leaders are right and that the whole problem of a country they never knew much about just goes away.

All of which makes the achievement of the few who do break through this news blackout all the more remarkable - Ghaith Abdul-Ahad on this paper, and the Guardian's Emmy-winning film made by an Iraqi doctor on his Baghdad hospital, for example. This week a book is published by another: Dahr Jamail was a mountain guide in Alaska in 2003 who began to take an interest in US foreign policy and ended up picking up his backpack and swapping American mountains for Baghdad and Falluja, driven by a fierce moral imperative that "as a US citizen he was complicit in the devastation of Iraq". After more than three years of reporting he has post-traumatic stress disorder, but has not lost his conviction that "if the people of the United States had the real story about what their government has done in Iraq, the occupation would already have ended".

What is chilling about Jamail's accounts is the routine destructiveness of the US forces; how they demolish nearby homes after a roadside bomb, leave unexploded munitions in the fields of farmers who don't give information, bulldoze orchards. Livelihoods destroyed, families displaced every day, incubating hatred. One of the worst episodes occurred when Jamail's friend was caught by chance at prayer time in a mosque when worshippers were shot dead, with children trapped in the mayhem: a holy place desecrated in a US operation. We may know nothing of such routine details of the prosecution of this war, but these are the stories filling the Arabic media. Across the Muslim world they are taken as irrefutable evidence of the humiliation and persecution of their Islamic faith. We can only pretend we don't understand.

In the meantime, the biggest human displacement crisis in the Middle East for 60 years is unfolding, the fastest growing refugee crisis in the world. One in six Iraqis has now been displaced, 60,000 a month are leaving the country, spilling into Syria (1.4 million) and Jordan (750,000). In an uncanny magnification of our own anxieties about migration and the strain on public services, the capacities of these two Middle Eastern countries to educate thousands of traumatised children or provide basic healthcare have been swamped. The UN's budget for refugees in Syria for 2007 is $700,000 - less than a dollar per person. But this crisis offers no telegenic vistas - people are crammed into the apartments of friends rather than tents on a windy African plain. So it gets even less attention.

Of these millions, Britain confirmed last week that it will take just 500 refugees with a record of having worked for British forces. It drags its feet over offering any more assistance for dispersal, despite requests from the UN; of 123 from Jordan whom the UN have allocated to Britain on tight criteria of having relatives in this country to provide for them, we have so far accepted only three. Britain washes its hands of the consequences of its invasion with the US. There's a horrible contradiction here: those in power accept no responsibility. Those who might have a sense of responsibility feel utterly powerless.

It can take a generation or more for people to grasp the significance and magnitude of historical events. Facts that are infinitely more bizarre and awful than fiction - as Naomi Klein's book The Shock Doctrine documents - take a long time to be fully absorbed. The Iraq war has been about the abject failure of democracy: governments have not been held to account for a war that has squandered lives, billions in public money and the stability of an entire region with reckless criminality.

· Dahr Jamail speaks at War, Truth and the Media, a conference at the London School of Economics, on November 17

m.bunting@guardian.co.uk

I returned after my brother died Sun

Many dead in Afghanistan bombing

More than 100 people have been killed or wounded in a suicide bombing in northern Afghanistan, officials say.

At least five members of the Afghan parliament are among the dead in the town of Baghlan. Other MPs are said to have been hurt.

Reports say the death toll could rise. Reuters quoted a hospital official as saying they had received 90 bodies.

Violence has spread in Afghanistan where thousands of troops are battling the Taleban and their allies.

Bodies

The bomb exploded in the centre of Baghlan town while a delegation of parliamentarians was visiting.

News agencies said a ceremony was being held to re-open a sugar factory.

Among MPs killed was Mustafa Kazimi, a prominent opposition figure, a municipal official told the BBC.

It is not clear how many other members of the delegation might also be casualties, the BBC's Alix Kroeger in Kabul says.

Casualty figures varied considerably in the immediate aftermath of the bomb, and the death toll could rise.

"The bodies of 90 people have been brought to the hospital so far and 50 people have been wounded," Baghlan hospital director Dr Khalilullah told the news agency.

Violence

Until now, most suicide attacks have taken place in the south and east of Afghanistan or, less frequently, in Kabul.

A suicide bomb in the capital in June killed 30 people and there have been 10 such attacks in Helmand province in the past few weeks.

Helmand is the centre of opium-poppy production in Afghanistan and the scene of major clashes between insurgents and Afghan and international forces.

Baghlan Province in the north has until now been relatively unscathed.

Now, it seems the use of suicide tactics is spreading, our correspondent says. BBC