Wednesday, April 15, 2009

Ahmed Chalabi looks back

When Saddam's statue came a-tumblin' down, the TV cameras focused on a group of "Iraqis" waving pictures of Ahmed Chalabi. Although most viewers presumed that those fellows were Baghdad locals, they were, in fact, actors. (Actual Baghdad residents were kept behind barricades.) They were members of Chalabi's CIA-funded exile group, the Iraqi National Congress, imported onto the scene by the American military.

At the time, most actual Iraqis had never heard of Ahmed Chalabi. Those who had, associated him with a banking scandal in Jordan. From Wikipedia:
In a survey of nearly 3000 Iraqis in February 2004...only 0.2 percent of respondents said he was the most trustworthy leader in Iraq... A secret document written in 2002 by the British Overseas and Defence Secretariat reportedly described Chalabi as "a convicted fraudster popular on Capitol Hill".
Obviously, the neocon conspirators who brought about regime change in Iraq hoped to place Chalabi in charge. But his rule was not to be. U.S. solders raided his office after he was accused of passing state secrets to the regime in Iran. He was also accused of counterfeiting and theft of national assets.

For reasons that remain unclear, the U.S. suddenly lost interest in pursuing those charges. Now, he looks back. A few excerpts from his recent interview follow:
Then I went to the University of Chicago in 1965 and got a doctorate in mathematics four years after that.
Ya think he ran into Uncle Miltie? Just asking...
Saddam was the best conspirator and knew about conspiracies. He oppressed the officers of the Iraqi army and bribed them to maintain control of them.
I also worked on the issue of the Italian bank BNL which Saddam exploited as a loophole through one of its small branches in the American state of Georgia to finish the paperwork for importing wheat from the United States. I closed that door in his face.
In other words, Chalabi here takes credit for shutting down the now-forgotten BNL/Iraq-gate scandal, which was all about embezzled funds that went to arms, not food. See here. Alas, you can't find many references to the BNL scandal on the web, even though the Los Angeles Times and other publications had covered it extensively in 1992.
[Al-Hayat]: Do you feel safe in Baghdad or worried?

[Chalabi]: No, I am not worried. I often walk among the people in Baghdad
When asked if he ever wanted to run Iraq, Chalabi answers in the negative: "I hate power. I don't like it."

Uh huh. Yeah.

So, if he hates power so much, then just why were those imported "Iraqi demonstrators" waving around pictures of Chalabi for the teevee cameras? And why was he seated just behind Laura Bush at the 2004 State of the Union? And why (later in the same interview) does he claim to be responsible for CIA chief George Tenet's ouster? Could a guy who "hates power" do a thing like that?
[Al-Hayat]: Do you accuse the Americans of pillaging Iraq?

[Chalabi]: They are the ones who created the culture of organized pillaging in Iraq.
You'll find this bit intriguing:
[Al-Hayat]: If you want to describe George Bush, then how would you describe him?

[Chalabi]: A man with very little skill and knowledge.

[Al-Hayat]: He did Iran a great service by toppling Saddam?

[Chalabi]: Iran benefited from toppling Saddam. Bush didn't mean to do it a favor but it was clear that Iran would benefit from Saddam's fall. I am convinced that Saddam would not have fallen except for an implicit agreement between America and Iran.

[Al-Hayat]: This happened?

[Chalabi]: Yes, of course it did.
Geoge W. Bush conspiring with Iran? An amazing claim, if true. And, of course, we have this:
[Al-Hayat]: It was said that you met with Israelis before Saddam's fall?

[Chalabi]: Yes in America. They were present in research institutes and we met with them, including Israeli professors and some politicians.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Chalabi and "Curveball" are two people the American people don't know nearly enough about.

Anonymous said...

wow, once again big dots are connected, joseph. excellent, lots to think about. thanks.
justus

Eric said...

What does he mean by saying, "Bush didn't mean to do it a favor but it was clear that Iran would benefit from Saddam's fall," with, "I am convinced that Saddam would not have fallen except for an implicit agreement between America and Iran." Is he saying that Bush was hoodwinked by the Iranians? That somebody other than Bush made an agreement with them? And how does it square with the report that Iran was prepared for a "grand bargain" with the United States but the Bush administration brushed them off?

In fact, the Bush administration ignored a 2003 Iranian offer to negotiate a "Grand Bargain" between the Islamic regime and the United States that would have addressed all the outstanding issues between the two countries, including WMD's, terrorism, and relations with Israel.

The idea for a "Grand Bargain" came from the Iranian regime at about the time the United States had successfully overthrown Saddam Hussein. This was before we got bogged down in Iraq, before the Iraqi insurgency coalesced, and before our Iraq policy transformed Iraq from Iran's worst enemy to Iran's Shiite ally. In other words, it was when we still held most of the cards and Iran was nervous.
I guess a different interpretation could be that Iran wasn't nervous, they knew the new Iraq would be dominated by Shiites and friendly to Iran and so proposed the grand bargain as their half of the deal, unaware that Washington wasn't aware there was a deal or that Washington only proposed the deal to prevent Iranian meddling during the invasion and with the thought that Iran was next on the invasion list anyway so it didn't matter if Iran benefited in the long term because they would be gone in the short term.