Mediaboss Marketing

Imagine it is February 5, 2003. The US secretary of state is speaking in front of the United Nations, holding your work in his hands, as he calls for a war on another sovereign nation. How would you feel?

Well, it happened to me, and I felt shocked.

That night I was visiting my parents home in Monterey, California, watching Colin Powell present the UN with a montage of satellite photographs supposedly showing weapons of mass destruction, the intercepted calls of an Iraqi officer who was allegedly hiding them and claims that Iraq could weaponise anthrax to carry out a terrorist attack.

Finally, Powell said, I would call my colleagues attention to the fine paper that the United Kingdom distributed yesterday, which describes in exquisite detail Iraqi deception activities. I almost jumped off the velour sectional in my parents living room.

Mom, thats my work he is holding in his hands! I shouted.

Uh huh, she said, fixated on the TV, perhaps not hearing what I had just said.

A day earlier, I had been informed by a Cambridge University scholar that an article based on a chapter of my PhD dissertation I had published online had been plagiarised in an intelligence dossier. The British government was brandishing this document in an effort to rally public support at home for an attack on Iraq. It was also apparently passed on to the Americans.

I went to sleep that evening wondering how, if my mom was not even convinced, would the world ever know about my plagiarised research.

I was woken up at dawn the following day by a phone call from a CNN journalist in London asking, How does it feel to know that the British government plagiarised your research?

To a young, struggling Iraqi-American PhD student at Oxford University, it felt surreal.

The news had broken in London while I was asleep in California in my childhood bed, lying at a diagonal so that my legs wouldnt dangle off the edge. I stared at the model airplanes I built as a teenager, hanging from the ceiling. The real-life versions of those planes would in a few weeks bomb Iraq, and I was unwillingly made part of it.

The article the British government had plagiarised focused on Iraqs security sector the complicated, confusing and convoluted network of secret police, spy agencies and military units that propped up Saddam Husseins rule and his republic of fear.

My research, which focused on Iraqs occupation of Kuwait leading up to the 1990 Gulf War, illustrated the brutality of Saddams regime. Perhaps thats why it was plagiarised by the Brits. But it in no way argued for the invasion of the country by foreign powers.

The authors of the intelligence dossier had changed key words from my article to suggest that Iraq had supported al-Qaeda and then padded the plagiarised material with their own pages that argued for military action.

This act of plagiarism by the British government would propel me on a trajectory of fame and infamy. British media would use my work to point to the flawed intelligence the US and the UK had presented ahead of the invasion. And months later, I would testify before a parliamentary inquiry into the actions of Prime Minister Tony Blairs government.

I would be interchangeably presented by the media as a champion of truth, helping expose US and UK government lies, and as a person who supposedly encouraged the invasion. Some went as far as branding me the man who started the war, as a result of which I experienced a fair share of hostility in my personal and public life.

Indeed, I opposed Saddams regime and its brutality but did not wish for war.

Today, reflecting back on what happened 20 years ago, I feel bitter and traumatised. Studying Saddams Iraq was not easy, but neither was researching the outcome of his removal. It has been deeply distressing documenting what happened to Iraqis over the past 20 years.

In that regard, I also regret that I did not use the media attention I enjoyed in 2003 to offer a stark warning about the chaos the invasion was bound to unleash.

The security services I studied projected fear into the lives of most Iraqis. They were also a huge job provider for those loyal to Saddam. It was clear to me after the 2003 invasion that if the hundreds of thousands of men employed by those security services were not rehabilitated and reintegrated into Iraqi society, they would employ violence to undermine the new state.

Of course, the Coalition Provisional Authority did not have that foresight. It dissolved the security services as well as the entire Iraqi army, which was already estranged from the security sector guarding Saddam.

That decision freed up thousands of Iraqi men, proficient in the use of arms, to join the various insurgencies and armed groups, which wreaked havoc in the country over the following two decades.

Today, the Iraqi state remains weak and does not have a monopoly on the use of force. Despite extensive training and financial support from the US, security forces in Iraq are not as effective as their predecessors in maintaining order, preventing criminal violence against civilians or stopping terrorist attacks. Worse still, they have joined myriad other actors gangs, armed groups, militias, tribes, etc in inflicting brutal violence on Iraqis.

In October 2019, mass protests broke out in Baghdad and other major Iraqi cities. They reflected the society-wide drive and desire for a change of the status quo established by the US after 2003. They demanded not just security, proper services, a dignified life and an end to corruption, but also an Iraqi state that serves Iraqis, not foreign powers.

The protests were brutally suppressed by paramilitary forces, which for months on end continued to threaten, kidnap and kill people associated with this movement for change.

Indeed, Iraq remains a republic of anarchy.

In research articles I published after the invasion, I argued that security sector reform and a truth and reconciliation process would have been a more sustainable way of achieving disarmament and reintegration of the members of the Saddam-era agencies, but neither was ever pursued in Iraq. I would have been happy if those papers were plagiarised, given a wide audience at the UN and ultimately implemented. Alas, they werent.

The views expressed in this article are the authors own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeeras editorial stance.

Read the original post:
My plagiarised work was used to justify the war on Iraq - Al Jazeera English

Baghdad, 23 March 2023 The World Health Organization (WHO), in collaboration with the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), completed a pilot project aimed at enhancing the comprehensive COVID-19 infection prevention and control (IPC) implementation strategy in Iraq.

The project was designed to reduce avoidable morbidity and mortality in Iraq by cutting the transmission chain of COVID-19 and other diseases in health care and construction settings through enhanced IPC strategies, primarily targeting Basrah and Dhi Qar governorates.

"The project's geographical scope was limited to southern governorates, but its success paves the way for future expansion to all governorates in Iraq," said Dr Ahmed Zouiten, WHO Representative in Iraq."Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) remains one of the most important threats to public health in recent history. Yet, with an effective IPC, we not only control diseases but also get closer to reducing AMR countrywide."

The project supported 10 primary health care facilities and two hospitals with comprehensive training in IPC practices, enabling health professionals to better protect patients and staff in the fight against infectious diseases, handling and managing oxygen cylinders for clinical use and peripheral devices, and enhancing their capabilities in providing critical care to patients in need.

The contribution also enabled WHO to procure and distribute essential equipment, including 4 medical waste management devices, 3 anaesthesia devices, and 405 medical oxygen cylinders.

All equipment has been delivered and installed at the project locations. These have enabled thousands of people to benefit from the enhanced capacity of the supported health facilities.

The contribution also enabled WHO to procure and distribute essential equipment, including 4 medical waste management devices, 3 anaesthesia devices, and 405 medical oxygen cylinders

The project team also developed an IPC training manual tailored for pilot construction sites to ensure infection prevention measures are implemented in high-risk environments. This manual is a blueprint for future construction projects to enhance safety and health standards.

As part of the project, WHO conducted a seminar today that brought together stakeholders from various governorates to share the project's achievements and lessons learned from the pilot phase of implementing IPC with relevant stakeholders.

"I am glad to learn that our contribution has enabled the hospitals to strengthen their response to the diseases in Dhi Qar," said Mr Masamoto Kenichi, Charg d'Affaires ad interim of Japan to Iraq. "Japan remains committed to supporting Iraq to make the life of people better and protect the vulnerable."

This project, which was made possible through collaboration with the Ministry of Health and the partnership with JICA, proved that significant accomplishments could be achieved when organizations join forces and work together.

Read the rest here:
WHO and JICA partner to enhance IPC implementation strategy in ... - ReliefWeb

Published

2023-03-20 13:20

1:20

March 20, 2023

pm

Were answering the how and why of military news. Subscribe to our daily newsletter.

Christina Schauer deployed to Baghdad in March 2003 during her sophomore year in college. At age 20, Schauer was part of an 800-member reserve battalion that consisted mainly of engineers, truck drivers, mechanics and a handful of medics like herself, tasked with building up the military bases that are there now. About 10 percent were women, she said.

I joined the military knowing that this was a possibility, but it was surreal, said Schauer, who had enlisted during peacetime in 1999 to help pay for college and nursing school.

For the first couple of weeks, Schauer said, they didnt have tents. They slept outside their trucks and held up curtains when people needed to shower. It took months to set up tents, flooring, electricity and eventually air-conditioning. During her year in Iraq, Schauer said she faced gunfire, exploding mortars and the constant threat of violence. Whether they were gunners or truck drivers, men and women alike engaged in combat roles something that became far more commonplace in the conflict.

I dont think people think of women serving those types of roles in the military, said Schauer, who now leads a military and veteran health care program at a community hospital in Dubuque, Iowa.

In the 20 years since the United States invaded Iraq, over a quarter of a million women have served there, the largest-scale and most visible deployment of women in U.S. history. More than 1,000 women had been injured in combat and 166 killed as of 2017, according to the Service Womens Action Network. The capture and rescue of Pfc. Jessica Lynch made headlines early in the war, and women were among the service members named in the 2004 Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal. The United States formally withdrew its combat forces in 2011, but maintains a military presence.

The increase in women soldiers, and the visibility of their service, was integral to the militarys mission and ultimately led to major policy changes like the removal of ground combat restrictions for women. Still, according to experts, many women veterans of the Iraq War remain invisible and unrecognized among the larger American public.

Rep. Mikie Sherrill, a New Jersey Democrat, graduated from the Naval Academy in 1994 as part of the first class of women eligible for combat on ships. Congress repealed the law banning women from combat aviation and on ships in 1991 and 1993, respectively. The Navy wouldnt reverse the policy barring women from submarines until 2010.

Sherrill served for nearly a decade, including a stint in London when she worked for a Navy fleet commander, overseeing the deployment of troops to Iraq and the logistics involved in creating large tent cities.

The culture for women was not great, Sherrill said. She said she sensed the difference as early in her career as her time at the U.S. Naval Academy. I graduated from a large public high school where girls were treated more fairly, but then youd get to the Academy and slowly there would be an almost inculcation of misogyny. There was this sense that somehow women were lowering standards and that it wasnt fair.

When she was still a naval cadet, Sherrill said she and other cadets including several other women were deployed on a ship that only had enlisted men on it. After some weird interactions, Sherrill learned that the enlisted men had been told not to talk to the women because it would be nothing but trouble.

In Iraq, however, Sherrill said that women service members took on some of the more dangerous roles, gathering intelligence and clearing homes of suspected militants. It became clear as the conflict dragged on that the U.S. military needed to engage with Iraqi women, a job only possible with women specialty combat squads called Lioness Teams. These women Marines and soldiers were encouraged to emphasize their femininity, instructed to take off their helmets, let their hair down and talk about their families or relate to Iraqi women on a more personal level in a way that would have been culturally objectionable if a man had been sent to interview them.

The front lines are no longer as cleanly delineated in war as they had been in the past, Sherrill said. The changes put women in places with more responsibility and risk, but often in a way that wasnt reflected in record-keeping, housing and careers. So you often had women being deployed to places that technically were combat positions or were deployed on submarines where they werent included in the official ships company of submarines. Women were serving in all kinds of combat roles; however, they werent given the billets, the credit or the promotions that often came with those roles. It was always done in this sort of jerry-rigged way.

In 2013, Congress announced the repeal of the combat exclusion policy, though it wasnt implemented until 2015.

After years of fighting in Iraq, you finally saw an acknowledgment that these restrictions were sort of in name only and really punitive to women service members, Sherrill said.

In addition to the repeal of the women in combat exclusion, several other major policy changes have been enacted in recent years, influenced in part by the growing visibility of women in the military and by women veterans who pursued government service in the civilian world. Congress mandated in 2020 that the Marine Corps Recruit Training be gender integrated; the pink tax on military uniforms was eliminated in 2021; and womens military uniforms continue to evolve. And as part of the latest National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, the military authorized increased funding to support military families and reformed how sexual assault and harassment cases were handled in the military justice system.

As a Navy veteran, I love our military and our service members and our veterans, but sometimes it is difficult to make changes, Sherrill said, noting that it took years to get military sexual assault and harassment cases prosecuted outside of the chain of command. I think having women veterans in Congress is a part of that solution. . . . [Former Rep.] Elaine Luria and I had both gone to the Naval Academy, served in the House Armed Services Committee and are in group texts with people whove been assaulted in the military so we understand the issues.

Theresa Schroeder Hageman, a political science instructor at Ohio Northern University who served as a nurse in the Air Force from 2005 to 2010, said that shes noticed that veterans like herself who served during the post-9/11 conflict years dont always claim the veteran status. Schroeder Hageman said she cared for active-duty and veteran patients at one of the countrys largest Air Force hospitals, but she was never deployed overseas.

Sometimes I dont claim the status because I didnt deploy, so I feel less than, which is silly, Schroeder Hageman said. You think, Im not a real vet. Some women who were deployed but didnt serve outside the wire will say theyre not a real vet.

The 19th reached out to more than a dozen women veterans who served in the Iraq War, but the vast majority declined an interview, saying they did not feel comfortable or qualified enough to speak about the veteran experience.

Its this kind of mentality, Schroeder Hageman said, that is fed by and perpetuates broader stereotypes about who a veteran is and what one looks like. Schroeder Hageman described women having to work hard to prove they deserve veterans discounts and services. Some opt to forget about it and blend back into civilian life.

Women are the most visible service members we stick out, everyone talks about us, she said. But we are also the invisible veterans because no one sees you as a veteran or they dont assume youre a veteran.

Lisa Leitz, an associate professor of peace studies at Chapman University, said that although the cultural connection between violence and masculinity is still so strong, theres also a growing awareness that combat in modern warfare is more nuanced. Part of that, she said, means mechanics and cooks are often necessary in combat zones, at the mercy of bombings and violence.

Schnauer recalls that feeling of vulnerability. I remember thinking, Will the other students notice if I dont come back? My first night sleeping outside my truck, I distinctly remember just looking up at the stars and thinking about my family. I thought I was going to die the next day.

Leitz has noticed that the increased visibility of women soldiers has shifted stereotypes both within and outside the military community.

Culturally, I do think that the U.S. is becoming more used to seeing women as veterans or as military members, said Leitz, whose husband served for more than 20 years in the Navy, flying missions over both Iraq and Afghanistan. Its still not uncommon, though, to hear from women that theyve parked in a veteran-designated parking spot and been yelled at.

Schauer, now 40, said she is intentionally trying to be better about claiming her accomplishments and experiences, and encourages her friends to do the same.

I feel like when I got out, I didnt talk about my military service because I felt like I didnt really do anything, she said. I said I just sat around in Iraq for a year and came home, like no big deal. All these other people that did cool things. They deserve recognition, not me.

Its not about seeking praise and glory, Schauer said, but about helping other women veterans feel less alone or raising public awareness to get resources to those that are struggling.

Women veterans in general need to be better about saying, I served too and, My experience matters too. Schauer said. And not just downplaying it because were women or happy to be wallflowers.

According to a 2012 report from Yale University, veterans account for more than 20 percent of the overall homeless population. Of the women who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, 77 percent had post-traumatic stress disorder or a mood disorder. The typical homeless woman veteran was an unmarried Black woman in her 30s who had never been incarcerated, the study found.

We have to stand up and talk about our experiences so we can help those other women be seen because as long as people are still picturing a veteran as a man that is in his 60s or 70s, then these women that are struggling with homelessness and brain health issues arent going to get the help that they need, Schauer said.

See the rest here:
Nearly 300,000 women served during the Iraq War. Two decades later, they remain the invisible veterans. - The 19th*

Iraq war: 20 years on

Yes, mistakes were made, but the invasion is what an ethical foreign policy looks like, argues Nick Martin-Clark. Plus letters from Dave Headey, Dr Jonathan Punt, Paul Tyler and Gregory Stock

Wed 22 Mar 2023 14.32 EDT

Jonathan Freedlands analysis is simplistic (The real lesson of the Iraq invasion? Beware spies and allies who would drag you to war, 17 March). Saddam Hussein had a mothballed weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programme that he fully intended to reactivate once sanctions were lifted.

Sanctions were themselves responsible for great suffering and Saddam himself maintained the illusion that he did possess WMDs because he mistakenly thought this would protect him. Yes, Tony Blair and Alastair Campbell overegged the pudding, but lets not let presentational mistakes get in the way of a true appreciation of the bigger picture. The Iraq intervention set off a wave of hope within the Arab world that was betrayed by the refusal to follow through in Syria.

The Ukraine war shows we need more US engagement, not less, in a dangerous world. Yes, mistakes were made, but the Iraq war is what an ethical foreign policy looks like. History may be kinder to Blair than Freedland allows.Nick Martin-Clark Gex, France

Jonathan Freedland tells us he supported Tony Blairs intervention in Kosovo, but its arguable that without the rapturous welcome he received in Pristina, Blair might not have developed the messianic fervour that gripped him when it came to Iraq. It wouldnt have stopped George W Bushs invasion, but if Blair hadnt been blooded by all that adulation, he might have become the wise counsel that Bush so obviously needed.Dave HeadeyFaringdon, Oxfordshire

Armando Iannucci (The Thick of It was fuelled by my anger at the Iraq war and the way it left truth for dead, 18 March) quotes Tony Blairs speech to the Labour party conference on 28 September 2004, in which Blair addressed issues arising from the Iraq war in words that included the assertion I only know what I believe.

I recall the observation of one professor at my medical school: When someone commences a statement with the words I believe, I know that he is about to say something for which he has absolutely no evidence. Blairs frankly equivocal statement is effectively an acknowledgment that he did not have evidence that Saddam Hussein had WMDs.Dr Jonathan PuntLondon

It was a happy coincidence that the anniversary of the invasion of Iraq (Editorial, 17 March) took place as the Liberal Democrat conference reasserted the partys internationalist commitments and determination to unscramble the worst features of the Brexit deal. Those of us who followed Charles Kennedys lead in voting against the US/UK military action have no regrets, but the real heroes were Robin Cook and Ken Clarke. They defied those who put party unity before principle. In the context of Brexit, where are their successors? Paul TylerLiberal Democrat, House of Lords

One of my proudest moments as a Canadian was when my then prime minister, Jean Chrtien, rose in the House of Commons and declared: We will not participate.

False claims started a war that killed hundreds of thousands of innocents, conducted in the name of human rights. The belated soul-searching is a bit rich. It was not only an obvious catastrophic fools errand from the get-go, it was an abject lesson in how easy it is to manufacture the consent of idiots.Gregory Stock Toronto, Canada

Have an opinion on anything youve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.

{{topLeft}}

{{bottomLeft}}

{{topRight}}

{{bottomRight}}

{{.}}

View post:
History may yet be kind to Blair over the Iraq war - The Guardian

George W. Bush informs Americans in televised remarks on March 19, 2003 that the U.S.-led military intervention in Iraq had begun. Photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images

Two decades after the U.S. invaded Iraq, 61% of Americans do not believe the U.S. made the right decision according to a new Axios/Ipsos poll.

Why it matters: The chaos and destruction that followed the invasion have made a generation of Americans and their leaders more skeptical of the use of military force overseas, in particular in the Middle East. The invasion toppled a brutal dictator but sparked 20 years of instability in Iraq, and damaged America's standing in the world.

Flashback: On March 17, 2003, George W. Bush issued an ultimatum that the U.S. would take military action if Saddam Hussein did not leave Iraq within 48 hours. On March 19, bombs began to fall on Baghdad. On March 20, the ground invasion commenced.

Timeline: U.S. forces took Baghdad in early April. Bush's now-infamous "Mission Accomplished" speech came on May 1, 2003, just five weeks into the war.

The legacy of the war had significant effects on the foreign policies of both administrations.

State of play: Just 31% of Americans think the Iraq War made America safer, while 36% think the U.S. was right to invade, according to the Axios/Ipsos poll published this week.

Methodology: The Axios/Ipsos Poll was conducted March 10-13, 2023, by Ipsos on their online survey panels in English. The poll is based on a sample of 1,018 general population adults age 18 or older, weighted on age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, and location to be nationally representative.

The rest is here:
20 years on, most Americans say Iraq invasion was the wrong decision - Axios