May 24, 2004

Mark Kleiman's Chalabi quiz:

Mark Kleiman has a Chalabi quiz:

Mark A. R. Kleiman: Chalabi quiz: Which is the most embarrassing element of the Chalabi situation?

1. That we've been paying Chalabi to tell us lies.

2. That Chalabi duped us by spreading the same false intelligence he was peddling to us to foreign intelligence agencies, whose reports when appeared as "confirmation" of his original fabrications.

3. That the original source of the fabrications may turn out to have been the Iranian intelligence service, using Chalabi to induce the U.S. to invade Iraq.

4. That, in return for the disinformation the Iranians were feeding us through him, Chalabi was passing genuine American secrets to Iranian intelligence.

5. That no one in Washington seems to have been authorized to give Chalabi or his crew that sensitive information, raising the specter of possible Espionage Act prosecutions.

6. That Chalabi managed to get himself seated right behind the First Lady for the State of the Union in January.

7. That a number of prominent American neocons have decided to support Chalabi against their own government, using in some cases strikingly anti-American language.

8. That the raid enraged Chalabi against the United States without reducing his ability to damage us.

9. That, after U.S. and CPA officials attributed the raid on Chalabi's house and party headquarters to Iraqis, the Iraqi Interim Governing Council denounced it.

10. That, despite the presence of 100 U.S. soldiers at the raid, the Secretary of Defense denied any advance knowledge of it.

And the answer:

The correct answer is #10:

The most embarassing element of the Chalabi raid is that Secretary Rumsfeld denied any advance knowledge of it, apparently truthfully. As Thomas and Hosenball tell the story in Newsweek, the rage in the uniformed ranks against the DoD top civilian leadership is so profound that the commanders on the ground in Baghdad didn't bother to buck the decision up the line before going along with Paul Bremer's decision to conduct the raid.

If you didn't pick the correct answer, consider finding a handbook of military science and looking in the index under "Command, chain of." If the possibility that the uniformed folks have decided to disregard the wishes of the SecDef doesn't send chills down your spine, then try a political science textbook under "Military, civilian control of."

There's only one saving possibility I can think of: perhaps Rumsfeld had signed off on the decision to crack down on Chalabi, but gave orders ensuring that he wouldn't literally know in advance about the details of the raid to preserve his own deniability in case the thing went wrong and needed to be blamed on Bremer (a lame duck in any case).

But leaving everyone vague about who the soldiers in Iraq report to seems like a very high price to pay for a little bit of political wiggle room.

Posted by DeLong at May 24, 2004 03:48 PM | TrackBack | | Other weblogs commenting on this post
Comments

"...one saving possibility...":

Ah yes, the old "plausible deniability." Well it worked so well with Iran-Contra, you see. It ensured that both Reagan and George HW Bush as vice-president were "out of the loop" from all the shennanigans.

Maybe Rumsfeld is just practicing "not knowing" in case things get to hot with the "systemic" (Taguba's word) nature of prisoner torture all across Donald's realm.

Posted by: baked potato on May 24, 2004 04:29 PM

____

Another possiblity would be that Rumsfeld or someone in his office is under suspicion for being the person who leaked classified material to Chalabi. That was my first guess.

Posted by: Contrary Mary on May 24, 2004 04:59 PM

____

Excellent observation, Mary. Certainly the military in Iraq might have wanted to avoid Chalabi's being warned of the raid and staging a press event, if not a more violent response.

Of course, given reporting that Chalabi's security chief has turned up in Tehran, perhaps word of the raid did leak.

Posted by: Emperor Penguin on May 24, 2004 07:07 PM

____

The really incredible thing, looking at the Iran-Chalabi connection, is that the Irak war seems in retrospect to accomplish so many Iranian objectives. A)Overthrowing Saddam, a geopolitical rival that had initiated a bloody war against Iran B) Replacing him with a friendly regime.It looks probable that the future government will be dominated by Shias (which often have ties with Iran). C) Getting the USA to commit its remaining operational forces in a long, exhausting and demoralizing guerrilla war, weakening the prospect of future American actions in the area.
If the connection is true, it sure looks as one of the most succesful intelligence operations of the modern era.

Posted by: Carlos on May 24, 2004 08:37 PM

____

The really incredible thing, looking at the Iran-Chalabi connection, is that the Irak war seems in retrospect to accomplish so many Iranian objectives. A)Overthrowing Saddam, a geopolitical rival that had initiated a bloody war against Iran B) Replacing him with a friendly regime.It looks probable that the future government will be dominated by Shias (which often have ties with Iran). C) Getting the USA to commit its remaining operational forces in a long, exhausting and demoralizing guerrilla war, weakening the prospect of future American actions in the area.
If the connection is true, it sure looks as one of the most succesful intelligence operations of the modern era.

Posted by: Carlos on May 24, 2004 08:38 PM

____

The really incredible thing, looking at the Iran-Chalabi connection, is that the Irak war seems in retrospect to accomplish so many Iranian objectives. A)Overthrowing Saddam, a geopolitical rival that had initiated a bloody war against Iran B) Replacing him with a friendly regime.It looks probable that the future government will be dominated by Shias (which often have ties with Iran). C) Getting the USA to commit its remaining operational forces in a long, exhausting and demoralizing guerrilla war, weakening the prospect of future American actions in the area.
If the connection is true, it sure looks as one of the most succesful intelligence operations of the modern era.

Posted by: Carlos on May 24, 2004 08:39 PM

____

Sorry for the multiple post.

Posted by: Carlos on May 24, 2004 08:41 PM

____

The withdrawal from Fallujah also gave signs of being an unauthorized initiative by the military or someone in Iraq. I don't believe that it was ever announced who the decision was made by, or when the decision was made, and reports at the time seemed confused.

Posted by: Zizka on May 24, 2004 09:19 PM

____

And just a week or so ago, the anything-is-justifiable war supporters and their hangers-on, the more neo-connish of the liberal hawks, were screeching about the perfidy of the European and UN under the oil-for-food scandal. Which was so obviously manufactured (at least the timing of it, if not the complete substance as I believe).

Why does so much of our media just report the noises that are floating through the air. Without ever asking where it's coming from, and who it benefits to report it thusly. Seriously, if it's obvious to me, just a guy reading the mainstream media, that Chalabi is a liar, there never were WMDs, etc., then:
1) how could our actual intelligence people be fooled (they couldn't)
2) why can't the media ask why?

There has been so much bullshit flying around the past couple years, it's amazing. Obvious bullshit, too. Peddled by, and believed by, supposedly smart people. Fuck the US and half its people. The fucking system is broken.

Posted by: elliander on May 24, 2004 09:48 PM

____

My copy of the handbook has a sub-chapter entitled,
Coup,Military.

Posted by: Brian Boru on May 24, 2004 10:30 PM

____

We shouldn't take too seriously the notion that the involvement of US troops in the Chalibi raid was a local mid-level commander on a "frolic of his own." I'd be surprised if "chain of command" wasn't handled in this case, though perhaps through somewhat unorthodox mechanisms, such as thru Bremer to the Commander in Chief. Bremer has increasingly had a direct reporting relation to the White House, bypassing his paymasters in the Pentagon. Although the decision to remove Gen Sanchez, being reported in the NYT and WaPo today (Tuesday May 25) may indicate that Rummy et al were not amused to find themselves out of a loop they took for granted.

Recall the other Americans reportedly at the Chalibi raid -- CIA and FBI -- and that DIA was the agency disclosing the background for the raid being big-time leaks to the Iranians. If there's really a case for a leak coming out of the highest levels in the Pentagon, isn't it possible that an NSC group (sans OSD representative) that works the Blackwill/Bremer linkup is on the Chalibi watch?

As for the inability to find anyone's fingerprints on the Fallujah climb-down, other than the Marine commander who came up with the Fallujah Brigade solution (and found the first Iraqi to fill the "general" position), I seriously doubt this is a case of the Marines "going native." The idea of turning local security over to a locally-based force, and reasserting local order through joint patrols, handing out cash, etc. was the original well-publicized plan of action when the Marines arrived to take over from the 82nd a week before the place blew up. The return to the original plan was certainly unlikely to have happened without at least a wink from much higher-ups in, at the very least, the field command structure.

The folks running the show in the field and at Centcom have been fully aware since the occupation stage began that they're aggravating anti-Americanism every time they have to resort to a lot of firepower without substantial Iraqi support and, preferably, direct involvement of Iraqi security units. Where they've been able to take a more patient approach, the Fallujah-type confrontation has been avoided. Even the anti-Sadr campaign has been waged in a much more deliberate fashion, and has involved Iraqis in both the anti-Sadrist fighting and the political opposition to Sadr's continued presence in the holy cities.

The military seems to be caught between a rock and a hard place. They have to go along with a pugnacious, if not bellicose, public front, reaffirming that they're not going to back down from the immediate demands that triggered fighting in the first place (turning over the folks who murdered/mutilated the contractors; Sadr turning himself in for trial). But tactically they're focusing on their longer-term objectives of stabilization and getting the Iraqis to take responsibility for local law and order. The higher-ups in the military can't be seen to be contradicting the pugnacious approach voiced by Dan Senor daily -- hence, no fingerprints. But if they wanted things run differently, it wouldn't take long for the local commanders to be marching to different orders in Fallujah or Najaf and Karbala.

I think the more interesting question is for whose benefit the Dan Senor-type posturing is being performed. Is it for Bush, to keep him feeling that we're not backing down? Is it for Bush's electoral base, who want to "win" in Iraq, are disappointed when we leave Fallujah "insurgents" alive to fight us another day, and are willing to destroy the village to save it? Is it the military itself, who believe that a disconnect between words and deeds (and a little active disinformation) is just part of fighting wars and keeping the enemy off balance? Or do they fear that being explicit about change of tactics risks the tactics becoming a political football? Interesting questions for the next round of books.

Posted by: nadezhda on May 25, 2004 12:14 AM

____

SNAFU.
Rummie signs off in 36 days anyways,
then Iraq becomes Powell's albatross.
That will allow Rummie time to rewrite
history, then stand fawning in line for
re-up when Emperor George is re-elected.
By 2006, all these contrarian records
will be sealed secret in DoD archives.
FUBAR.

Posted by: Tante Aime on May 25, 2004 12:17 AM

____

Brad deLong still doesn't have a clue. Here's who Chala Baby really works for, straight from the horse's mouth. So Tel Aviv and Teheran colluded to topple Saddam using the US? So what's new since Iran-Contra?


http://israelvisit.co.il/cgi-bin/friendly.pl?url=May-06-03!XXX

IsraelBehindTheNews.com 6th May, 2003

Saddam's "Successor" Made Secret Visit to Israel
Smadar Peri
Intelligence Correspondent, Yediot Aharonot

For many years mystery shrouded the reasons the Americans regarded Chalabi so warmly. This was explained by his charisma, his ability to impress and links to powerful people, but the real reason was never made public, until today. Chalabi, so it transpires, was pushed into the Americans' arms by Israeli intelligence.
...
Maj. Gen. (reserves) Danny Rothschild, who headed the IDF Intelligence research branch, received Chalabi's telephone numbers in London in 1990 and went to meet him in secret. Only very rarely was IDF Intelligence able to make links to a senior Iraqi exile who displayed such great quantities of good will.
...
This did not prevent Israeli security officials from recommending Chalabi to the American administration and connecting him to senior advisers in the White House, the Pentagon and the CIA. As a result of the recommendations, James Woolsley, the former CIS director, gave him his patronage.

Posted by: Schwartzkommando on May 25, 2004 03:31 AM

____

So it is now starting to look like we were conned into a war by the Iranian atatollahs.

Posted by: spencer on May 25, 2004 05:23 AM

____

It was pretty embarrassing how we raid this guy and then let him go on all the Sunday morning talk shows. What the hell was that?

Posted by: Dimmy Karras on May 25, 2004 06:05 AM

____

Follow the money.

Posted by: nanute on May 25, 2004 11:47 AM

____

America has always done the empire game badly. It used to be a conservative virtue to know this.
I hope they regret the day they fell off the horse of modesty and proportion.

What would be humorous now whould be for the Democratic leadership to start a new committe.
Lets call it HUAC - the house committee on un-american activities.
We can call all the admin neo-cons to the table
"Sir, have you at any time been a neo-con or worked for a neo-con organization"
"Did you pass secrets to the Iranians"
"Do you know of anyone at the American Enterprise Institute who passed secrets to the Iranians"
" Whats that Mr Perle you are invoking your 5th amendment rights?

Ann Coulter, your book titles are more appropriate than you imagine.

TRAITOR! indeed you are my lady.

Posted by: Scott McArthur on May 25, 2004 03:48 PM

____

Lenny Bruce! Where are you when we really need you.

Posted by: Knut Wicksell on May 25, 2004 06:30 PM

____

If Kerry had balls, he'd very casually and off-handedly wonder outloud, why isn't a Grand Jury investigating Rummy?

Reviving the HUAC seems sensible enough to me. America will only be safe again, when these people are not just defeated in a Presidential election, but when they are run out of politics altogether. Turn the Republican Party back over to grown-ups.

Posted by: Brian Wilder on May 28, 2004 09:15 PM

____

That's what happens on election years.

Posted by: cigars on May 29, 2004 11:19 PM

____

yeehh - BRUSSELS, Belgium -- European Union leaders have overcome their differences to agree to the bloc's first constitution and are pushing ahead with their search for a compromise candidate to be the next European Commission president.

Posted by: govard on June 20, 2004 12:59 PM

____

industrial catalogs gas heater b2b supplies business buy industrial catalogs gift box b2b supplies business buy industrial catalogs hand tool b2b supplies business buy industrial catalogs storage container b2b supplies business buy industrial catalogs truck part b2b supplies business buy industrial catalogs water filter b2b supplies business buy industrial catalogs water pumpb2b supplies business buy industrial catalogs b2b supplies business buy

Posted by: business resources on June 21, 2004 04:38 PM

____

Online Casino Directory

Posted by: Online Casino on June 23, 2004 12:10 AM

____

nice site find ipods

Posted by: mp3 player on June 25, 2004 12:17 AM

____

nice site ipod 4gb

Posted by: find ipods on June 25, 2004 11:47 PM

____

heh, A fast-spreading mutant strain of syphilis has proved resistant to the antibiotic pills that are offered to some patients. The increase in the mutant strain was largely among gay or bisexual men with multiple partners.


Posted by: mike on July 12, 2004 01:29 PM

____

dental health is important to dentists and your oral wellbeing and healthy teeth

Posted by: oral health on July 13, 2004 07:06 PM

____

wow thats a surprise.......

Posted by: Beatles Tabs on July 14, 2004 06:38 PM

____

wow thats a surprise.......

Posted by: Beatles Tabs on July 14, 2004 06:42 PM

____

please support your local police

Posted by: police equipment on July 14, 2004 09:08 PM

____

great post, support dental care month

Posted by: dental plans on July 19, 2004 03:49 PM

____

The Statue of Liberty, recently reopened after a two-year closure, stashing a package offers a glimpse into the future. To rent, close and reopen lockers, visitors touch an electronic reader that scans fingerprints.
http://casino.xthehun.com
http://gambling.xthehun.com
http://online.xthehun.com

Posted by: samuel on August 14, 2004 08:40 AM

____

Post a comment
















__