Who Is Conducting the Investigation?
Published in Jame Jam
(Iran) on 21 January 2011
by Qasim Ghafouri (link to original)
As the occupiers of Iraq and Afghanistan continue stabilizing their hold, two points are prevailing in their actions:
First, countries like the U.S. and Britain have reported the constitution of tribunals for soldiers who have evidently taken part in civilian murders, under which framework some soldiers have been tried.
Second, after the release of disputed documents about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, these countries and others, like Australia, have made announcements of investigations concerning those documents.
Although the countries are determined to introduce their actions as a sign of prevailing democracy in their societies and have even called for an imitation of the process by other countries, scrutiny of their positions reveals other facts:
1) Because of both public and government demand in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as the signed agreements, countries like the U.S. and Britain have to execute evacuation plans and interfere less in the internal affairs of the former two countries. Inspecting their excuses to continue occupation, such actions as holding court tribunals for soldiers and investigating WikiLeaks documents pave the way for continued occupation and, under the pretext of ongoing investigations, interfering in Iraqi affairs. Through these actions, they endeavor to diminish public anger aimed at the atrocities of the occupiers.
2) Another important issue is that by creating internal committees these countries actually stop international organizations and other fact-finding groups from inspecting the record of the crimes committed by these occupiers of Iraq and Afghanistan. Thus, only a small fraction of the crimes and goals of countries like Britain and the U.S. in the target countries is disclosed. In other words, those who occupied Iraq and Afghanistan via the plot of preventive strikes are now exploiting the preventive tribunals to cover up their crimes. Thus, through proclaiming the implementation of human rights and preventing creation of international fact-finding committees, they actually commit widespread violations of human rights.
3) One of the issues raised in the constitution of the so-called military tribunals for the crime-committing soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan is to prevent trials of the higher perpetrators of these crimes, i.e. the American and British leaders and their allies in NATO. These countries know the world is demanding trial of the real warmongers; thus, by creating sham courts and trying a few soldiers, they are preventing the implementation of global demand. The important point is that reports such as WikiLeaks' are of use in the acquittal of the leaders of these countries and conviction of few military officials or low ranking politicians.
Considering the above, it may be concluded that both the creation of fact-finding committees and trial of a few soldiers for crimes in Iraq are the continuation of the game played by the occupiers for presence and intervention in the internal affairs of Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition, it is a cover-up for the main perpetrators of atrocities done in Iraq and Afghanistan — a game that is ongoing under the beautiful banner of attempting to implement human rights.
First, countries like the U.S. and Britain have reported the constitution of tribunals for soldiers who have evidently taken part in civilian murders, under which framework some soldiers have been tried.
Second, after the release of disputed documents about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, these countries and others, like Australia, have made announcements of investigations concerning those documents.
Although the countries are determined to introduce their actions as a sign of prevailing democracy in their societies and have even called for an imitation of the process by other countries, scrutiny of their positions reveals other facts:
1) Because of both public and government demand in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as the signed agreements, countries like the U.S. and Britain have to execute evacuation plans and interfere less in the internal affairs of the former two countries. Inspecting their excuses to continue occupation, such actions as holding court tribunals for soldiers and investigating WikiLeaks documents pave the way for continued occupation and, under the pretext of ongoing investigations, interfering in Iraqi affairs. Through these actions, they endeavor to diminish public anger aimed at the atrocities of the occupiers.
2) Another important issue is that by creating internal committees these countries actually stop international organizations and other fact-finding groups from inspecting the record of the crimes committed by these occupiers of Iraq and Afghanistan. Thus, only a small fraction of the crimes and goals of countries like Britain and the U.S. in the target countries is disclosed. In other words, those who occupied Iraq and Afghanistan via the plot of preventive strikes are now exploiting the preventive tribunals to cover up their crimes. Thus, through proclaiming the implementation of human rights and preventing creation of international fact-finding committees, they actually commit widespread violations of human rights.
3) One of the issues raised in the constitution of the so-called military tribunals for the crime-committing soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan is to prevent trials of the higher perpetrators of these crimes, i.e. the American and British leaders and their allies in NATO. These countries know the world is demanding trial of the real warmongers; thus, by creating sham courts and trying a few soldiers, they are preventing the implementation of global demand. The important point is that reports such as WikiLeaks' are of use in the acquittal of the leaders of these countries and conviction of few military officials or low ranking politicians.
Considering the above, it may be concluded that both the creation of fact-finding committees and trial of a few soldiers for crimes in Iraq are the continuation of the game played by the occupiers for presence and intervention in the internal affairs of Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition, it is a cover-up for the main perpetrators of atrocities done in Iraq and Afghanistan — a game that is ongoing under the beautiful banner of attempting to implement human rights.