The new American embassy in Iraq is the largest in the world and is built on a tract of land roughly the size of the Vatican

In my recent Yom Kippur sermon, I linked to an article that explained why, even if Obama did honor the pledge to withdraw US troops at the end of 2011, this wouldn’t be the end of our militarized presence in that country by a long shot.

So now that Obama has formally announced the Iraq withdrawal, just pay close, close attention to the heavily militarized State Department presence that will remain.

From a recent WashPo article:

The list of responsibilities the State Department will pick up from the military is daunting. It will have to provide security for the roughly 1,750 traditional embassy personnel — diplomats, aid workers, Treasury employees and so on — in a country rocked by daily bombings and assassinations.

To do so, the department is contracting about 5,000 security personnel. They will protect the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad plus two consulates, a pair of support sites at Iraqi airports and three police-training facilities.

The department will also operate its own air service — the 46-aircraft Embassy Air Iraq — and its own hospitals, functions the U.S. military has been performing. About 4,600 contractors, mostly non-American, will provide cooking, cleaning, medical care and other services. Rounding out the civilian presence will be about 4,600 people scattered over 10 or 11 sites, where Iraqis will be instructed on how to use U.S. military equipment their country has purchased.

“This is not what State Department people train for, to run an operation of this size. Ever since 2003, they’ve been heavily reliant on U.S. military support,” said Max Boot, a national security expert at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Make no mistake: we’re all going to be paying for Bush’s Folly for a long, long time to come…

US Global Command and Control System

In 2006, I was approached by JRC’s Peace Dialogue task force and asked if I would consider adding something to our Shabbat prayer for peace. Could we, they asked, introduce the prayer by reading the names of three American soldiers, three Iraqi civilians and three Afghan civilians who had been killed in these two ongoing wars?

The reason, they explained, was to remind ourselves that peace is not just an abstract concept. If we’re going to say a prayer for peace, we should own up to the stakes – we should acknowledge that we are citizens of nation at war, that war comes with a very real human cost, and that as American citizens, we are complicit in all actions made by our country.

So for the past five years, that’s how we’ve begun our prayer for peace every Shabbat evening: a JRC member will stand up and bring the names of real people into our sanctuary. Three will invariably be American teenagers or twenty somethings, followed by six Iraqis and Afghans with harder-to-pronouce Arabic names.

One year ago, when President Obama when announced a reduction of American combat forces in Iraq, I was tempted to finally stop reading the names of Iraqi civilians.  It felt to me as if the war effort was finally winding down and transitioning into a fundamentally different kind of operation. I was also eager to shine a brighter spotlight on our war in Afghanistan, which had officially become the longest war in American history, with no end in sight. (Yesterday, by the way, marked the tenth anniversary of that war – a milestone that managed to pass our nation by without much fanfare.)

I ran this idea past several Peace Dialogue members and got different kinds of responses, both pro and con. In the end, I was prevailed upon to continue. After all, Obama himself said that our active combat presence would be maintained until the end of 2011. And as long as this is the case, I realized, we’d be hard pressed to deny that we were still a nation at war.

As I think about my response to Obama’s announcement, I realize, somewhat shamefully, that I had fallen prey to a very convenient form of naivete.  Or at best, wishful thinking. Because the painful truth is that we going to be in Iraq well past even 2011.  The truth is no one really knows when our military is going to leave Iraq, but even when it does, there can be no doubt that we will remain an armed presence in that country for a very long time.

Our government actually makes no secret of the fact that we’re digging in.  All the signs are there, even if they are not widely reported by the media.  Most Americans don’t know, for instance, that the US mission in Baghdad is the world’s largest embassy – built on a tract of land the size of the Vatican and actually visible from space.  Why? Because after the military withdraws, the State Department expects to have 17,000 personnel in Iraq at some 15 sites. If those plans go as expected, 5,500 of them will be armed “security contractors.”  Of the remaining 11,500, most will be in support roles of one sort or another, with only a couple of hundred in traditional diplomatic jobs.

In short, when the military leaves, the US presence in Iraq will shift over to a heavily militarized State Department presence. But make no mistake: we’re in Iraq for the long haul.

And when it comes to our presence in Afghanistan, the news is even worse, I’m afraid. In 2009, President Obama said 2011 would be the “transition point” for bringing the troops home. One year ago, NATO announced that it would be moving the goalposts to 2014. Now just two months ago, we’ve learned that the US and Afghan governments are negotiating an agreement that will allow US military forces to remain in Afghanistan until 2024.

This, even though a new poll shows fewer Afghans than ever support a US presence in the country or believe we are making their country any safer. This, even though a CNN poll earlier this year revealed that 63% of Americans “completely oppose” this war.

The hard truth about all of this – the very hard truth – is that our nation is now essentially entrenched in a permanent state of war: war without end.  It is our new normal.

I find it all the more frightening when you consider the sheer magnitude of this “permanent war condition” – and how far its reach actually extends.  If are to truly gauge our military presence honestly, it does not end with Iraq and Afghanistan. Our nation is also engaged militarily in Libya, Pakistan, Somalia, and Yemen.  The Washington Post reported last year that US has deployed special operations forces in 75 countries, from South America to Central Asia. We are also expanding drone wars throughout the Horn of Africa and the Arabian Peninsula.  And none of these “operations” show any sign of winding down. On the contrary, by all appearances we’re just getting started.

How did it all come to this? Well, students of US history can can surely chart a course leading from the earliest days of manifest destiny to our first overseas military adventures in the 19^th century, through World War I, World War II, the Cold War and now, the huge buildup in the aftermath of 9/11.  In each period of history, our military reach has extended greater and greater across the world. And in each period, our national mission – our sense of our place in the world – has slowly but fundamentally shifted.

It’s not quoted that widely any more, but George Washington, in his farewell address to the nation urged his country to cultivate its own garden and avoid foreign entanglements at all costs. That notion seem utterly quaint today, particularly in the post 9/11 world. Today, America is world’s only superpower – and such we are wielding that power with impunity literally all over the world.

Consider these facts:

- The Pentagon currently spends approximately $700 billion annually – more than the entire rest of the world combined.

- We have approximately 300,000 troops stationed abroad, again more than the rest of the world combined. According to the Department of Defense, we have 761 military bases in foreign countries around the world. (And that number might actually be higher than 1,000, depending on which report you choose to believe.)

- The Pentagon has literally divided up the planet, maintaining armed readiness under what it calls “Unified Commands.” Each command headed by a four-star general or admiral. The “Pacific Command,” which comprises 50% of the earth and more than half its population; the “Central Command” (namely the Greater Middle East); the “European Command,” which was established in Germany following World War II, the “African Command,” created in 2007, which conducts military activities and operations in 53 African countries; the “Southern Command,” which encompasses Central and South America and the Caribbean; the “Northern Command,” namely North America, established in the wake of 9/11; and finally, “Space Command,” responsible for the largest region of all.

While all this information is technically public domain, I wonder how many Americans really know these facts about their country. My suspicion is that we know just bits and pieces of the puzzle, but are simply too overwhelmed by the enormity of it all to contemplate it for very long.  And most of us who do think about it for a second longer generally throw up our hands and say, “Well, that’s just the way of the geopolitical world.”

Of course it’s all well and good when we Americans say things like this. But rarely do we stop to consider how the facts I just listed for you are experienced by the rest of the world’s inhabitants.  I’ll put it plainly: while our pursuit of military entitlement around the world may help us feel safe here at home, it is fueling anti-American attitudes around the world. We know this. Every international poll tells us this in no uncertain terms. And yet the buildup continues.

And that really is the crux of the issue here. For some Americans the most salient lesson of 9/11 was that the world is a dangerous place and we must use military power to mitigate the danger.  I include myself among those who learned a very different lesson: 9/11 taught us that when we intervene militarily abroad, we beget blowback here at home.

Many of us had hope that Obama truly believed this as well – that he would turn back the Bush doctrine and steer our nation’s foreign policy toward a saner course. But as it has turned out, the very opposite has happened. He has embroiled us in even more Mideast wars and has deployed even larger numbers of special operations forces to that region.  He has also transferred or brokered the sale of substantial quantities of weapons to these countries and has continued to build and expand US military bases at an ever-increasing rate.

He also promised to prosecute the so-called “War on Terror” with greater attention to civil liberties, but that hope has been fairly dashed as well.  During his campaign, note what he had to say about this subject:

As president, I will close Guantanamo, reject the Military Commissions Act, and adhere to the Geneva Conventions. Our Constitution and our Uniform Code of Military Justice provide a framework for dealing with the terrorists. Our Constitution works. We will again set an example for the world that the law is not subject to the whims of stubborn rulers, and that justice is not arbitrary.

Well, it’s over two years later and Guantanamo is still open. This past March, the Obama administration announced it would be resuming military tribunals there. And just last week, we learned that our President did something truly unprecedented – our President actually approved the extra-judicial assassination of an American citizen in Yemen.

Now I know there are many out there, including many liberal folk, who aren’t expressing over-concern about this incident. It is certainly true, Anwar al-Awlaki was a radical Muslim cleric, and yes, his language and speeches were incendiary. He may even have plotted against the United States – but we will never know that for sure because he was never indicted for a crime. What we do know is that Yemen experts said he was a minor player – and that he likely had no operational connection to Al Qaeda. But again, we’ll never know that for sure. What we do know is that Mideast extremists now have a new martyr and we have crossed a terrifying Rubicon: our government now openly assassinates its own citizens without due process.

I’m focusing these observations exclusively on our Commander-in-Chief, but of course I realize that this issue is much, much larger than just one man.  I know it’s natural to look to our primarily to our President, but in truth what we call “Washington” is really a massive bureaucracy that includes a myriad of interests. It’s a far reaching power elite that includes not only the federal government but the national security state, as well as the intelligence and federal law enforcement communities. It also includes big banks and other financial institutions, defense contractors, major corporations and any number of lawyers, lobbyists former officials, and retired military officers, all of whom hold enormous influence over our foreign policy.

This, in short, is what empire looks like in the 21^st century. It may differ from empires past, but if you have any doubt, just take a look around: just like all empires, our nation has has positioned itself to fight war without end, and like all empires, we’re starting to buckle here at home under the weight of our own power and ambition.

As I’m fond of pointing out, we Jews actually know quite a bit about empires. Whether it was the Babylonian Empire, the Roman Empire, the Byzantine and Ottoman Empires, we’ve experienced them directly over the centuries. We’ve lived among them, we’ve been oppressed by many of them, but most critically, we’ve seen many a mighty empire rise and fall throughout our history.

As a Jew, I’ve always been enormously proud of the classic rabbinical response to empire. The Jewish people have been able to survive even under such large and mighty powers because we’ve clung to a singular sacred vision.  That there is a power even greater. Greater than Pharaoh, greater than Babylon, even greater than the Roman empire that exiled us and dispersed our people throughout the diaspora. It is a quintessentially Jewish vision best summed up by the venerable line from the book of Zechariah: “Lo b’chayil v’lo b’koach” – “Not by might and not by power, but by my spirit, says the Lord of Hosts.”

Indeed, the Prophets give us a powerful paradigm for understanding these kinds of issues.  In the Hebrew Bible, we read that after the Israelites enter the land, they eventually come to the prophet Samuel and tell him they want a king – to be “k’chol ha’goyim – like all the other nations.” God considers this to be a personal rejection, but tells Samuel to tell the nation, essentially, “Fine if you want a King, I’ll give you a King. But just you wait and see what happens.”

Of course as they come to discover, kingship in Ancient Israel doesn’t go so well for the nation. It becomes focused on militarism, becomes incorrigibly corrupt, splits in two and eventually gets overrun from within and without. During this period, it is only the prophets who speak the hard truth to power, who rail against the toxic ambitions of Israelite empire, who warn that this path will eventually be their downfall. And so it becomes.

Given all this, it would seem to me that as American Jews, we find ourselves in a paradoxical situation. Because for the first time in our history we find ourselves, by and large, as the beneficiaries of empire.  Even more than that, I’d say we American Jews have firmly hitched our wagon to it.  The state of Israel represents our major military proxy in the Middle East and the American Jewish establishment is very well enmeshed in the political power elite of our country.  There is no getting around it, at the dawn of the 21^st century, Jews have firmly cast our lot with empire.

But it’s certainly worth asking: in doing so have made a kind of Faustian bargain? Are we bucking the most central lesson of our survival over the centuries?  We more than most, should understand the limits and dangers of nations that venerate unmitigated power. After all, aren’t we quite literally living proof of this fact? We know full well that although mighty empires will rise, it is not by might and not by power that they will be sustained.

If this is so – if this is truly so – then we of all people should be helping lead the charge for a new direction.  We should be proclaiming the lessons of our own historical experience for all to hear. We’ve seen this before. We’ve seen what happens to powerful nations that depend exclusively upon military might to make them strong. We know what happens to countries that neglect the needs of their own citizens while pouring more and more blood and treasure into foreign wars. We know that when nations attack and occupy other nations, it doesn’t make them more secure. It only isolates them further, creating more enemies than allies in the end.

I know that many feel it is hopelessly naive to say these kinds of things.  Those who challenge the status quo of permanent war today are dismissed as out of touch, over-idealistic or just plain oddball. Anti-war activists are generally treated by the political establishment – by liberals and conservatives alike – with condescension, if not downright contempt. We just don’t understand the way the “real world” works. The real world is a “dangerous place.”  In the real world, things get messy.

But I can’t help but think that as things get messier for us here at home, we might actually start to see a change in this mindset. When it comes to our various wars, the middle class has gotten something of a free ride up until now. The government has gone to great lengths to ensure that we don’t feel the pain of permanent war. We’ve instituted a poverty draft where only half a percent of Americans actually serve in the military. We are outsourcing military service more and more to private security contractors – and are increasingly using drone technology to fight our battles, so that no matter how much violence we mete out, our citizenry experiences war as little more than a video game. All of this has served to anesthetize us. The reality of war is just not that real to most Americans.

But it may get real before too long. As these wars continue to draw out with no end in sight, with no discernible progress – and as economic hardship starts to affect more and more of the middle class – growing numbers of Americans may well start to connect the dots.  The Occupy Wall Street protests forming around the country may represent an early indication of this – the nascent stirrings of a new movement that finally challenges the culture of empire that has been gripping our nation.   If not now, however, it will come. It will come because we are, quite simply, on an unsustainable course. At the end of the day, there really is no such thing as war without end. Sooner or later, something has to give. It is only a matter of  when – and how.

In the meantime, I believe the most important thing we can do is to educate ourselves. To learn, as Americans, the truth about the wars our nation is fighting. To understand the suffering it inflicts on others. To grasp the costs we are paying ourselves here at home in so many unacceptable ways.

And I hope that as Jews, we might at least be able to have this conversation: as citizens of a nation engaged in war without end, how seriously will we honor a spiritual tradition that demands we pursue peace at all costs?  How seriously will we heed a historical legacy that has witnessed all too well the price of empire?  Is this really the kind of Jewish voice, Jewish vision, we want to hand over to the next generation? Or do we want to reclaim our prophetic voice and vision – one that speaks truth to power and points out the hard lessons of history?

All good questions for Yom Kippur.  This is, after all, the season in which we are commanded to ask hard questions together as a community. As American Jews, it seems to me, as members of two communities, we do this twice over.  As Americans, as Jews, how are we betraying the values we hold dear? As Americans, as Jews, how are we accommodating ourselves to a life of war without end? Are we really, truly prepared to bear the consequences of our acquiescence?

This year, let us pursue peace.

At every JRC Shabbat evening service since December 2006, we’ve introduced our Prayer for Peace by reading the names of three American soldiers, three Iraqi civilians and three Afghan civilians who have been killed since these wars began in 2001.

It’s our way of very simply reminding ourselves that we are citizens of nation at war, that war comes with a real human cost, and that war is a terrible and daily reality for real life individuals. And we do it to acknowledge that as American citizens, we are complicit in all actions made by our country.

Exactly one year ago, when Obama announced a reduction of American combat forces in Iraq from 144,000 to 50,000 troops, I was tempted to stop reading the names of the Iraqi war dead during our services – but I was prevailed upon to continue by many JRC members. After all, Obama himself said that our active combat presence would be maintained until the end of 2011. And as long as this is the case, we’d be hard pressed to deny that we were still a nation at war.

And now – surprise of surprises – we’re hearing indications that Secretary of Defense Panetta and others in the Obama administration believe that “some American forces should stay beyond 2011.”

Oh yes, make no mistake: we are still very much at war in Iraq….

Obama campaigned on the promise to end this war. Americans oppose the war in Iraq by an overwhelming margin. Our economy is in crisis and Congress has committed to find $1.2 trillion in savings for the coming year.  It’s time to wake up from our slumber and let our leaders know its time to end this misbegotten adventure as promised.

Rep. Barbara Lee of California is currently sponsoring a bill known as the “Iraq Withdrawal Accountability Act” – legislation that would prohibit funding of troops and military contractors in Iraq past 2011. Please click here and join me in urging your Congressperson to co-sponsor Rep. Lee’s bill.

PS: At the risk of ending this post on an abjectly depressing note, I recently read that regardless of when the American military pulls out of Iraq, our presence there would still not be over by a long shot. Read, if you dare, this piece by ex-foreign service staffer Peter Van Buren, in which he explains what will actually happen when the American presence in Iraq is transferred from the military to the Dept. of State:

(The) State Department hasn’t exactly been thinking small when it comes to its future “footprint” on Iraqi soil. The U.S. mission in Baghdad remains the world’s largest embassy, built on a tract of land about the size of the Vatican and visible from space. It cost just $736 million to build — or was it $1 billion, depending on how you count the post-construction upgrades and fixes?

In its post-“withdrawal” plans, the State Department expects to have 17,000 personnel in Iraq at some 15 sites. If those plans go as expected, 5,500 of them will be mercenaries, hired to shoot-to-kill Iraqis as needed, to maintain security. Of the remaining 11,500, most will be in support roles of one sort or another, with only a couple of hundred in traditional diplomatic jobs. This is not unusual in wartime situations. The military, for example, typically fields about seven support soldiers for every “shooter.” In other words, the occupation run by a heavily militarized State Department will simply continue in a new, truncated form — unless Congress refuses to pay for it.

If you ever needed a reminder of the utter obscenity that is war, just watch this clip.

On July 2007, two American Apache helicopters fired on a group of people in the Iraqi suburb of New Baghdad, killing approximately a dozen and wounding many others, including two children. The background of most of the dead are unknown but we do know that among the dead were two Reuters news employees named Saeed Chmagh and Namir Noor-Eldeen.  Following the incident, Reuters demanded an investigation; US military authorities eventually concluded that the soldiers and pilots involved acted in accordance with the law of armed conflict and their Rules of Engagement.

Wikileaks has now obtained and decrypted a video of the entire incident.  After watching it there can be no doubt that the US military acted counter to its own rules – and that its “investigation” was an utter sham. According the Rules of Engagement, soldiers may only “engage the enemy” after hostile fire – but it is quite evident from the video that this firefight was clearly unprovoked.  At worst some of the men walking in the streets appeared to be carrying weapons. Potentially threatening, perhaps, but not in and of itself cause to open fire without warning.

The images in this video are graphic and disturbing enough, but what I found to be most devastating were the offhand, casual, even mocking comments of the soldiers as they mowed down these individuals in the streets. They might as well have been been playing a video game – and perhaps that is just the point. Among other things, this clip provides sobering testimony to the profoundly dehumanizing effects of war. (For me one of the most sickening moments in the video occurs when you hear one soldier chortling as another drives a  Bradley Fighting Vehicle over a dead body in the street.)

“Collateral damage,” of course, is the euphemistic term for the killing of innocents. Those who advocate for war consider the killing of civilians in wartime to be a regrettable but necessary part of the bargain. No doubt we will hear this justification all the more as modern militaries increasingly utilize drones and other forms of high tech military hardware. The more we turn war into a video game, the more we create an artificial distance between ourselves and the ones with whom we wage war. But rarely do we stop to consider the ripple effects of this “collateral damage:” the untold sorrow and grief it creates, the anger and hatred it unleashes in a population.

I encourage you, after watching the video, to read Israeli blogger Yaniv Reich’s piece in Hybrid States, in which he makes the unavoidable connection between this incident and Israel’s war in Gaza and the Goldstone Report:

Those ideologues who supported Israel’s onslaught against the imprisoned population in Gaza need to spend a few extra minutes watching and digesting this video. What this video shows is the massacre of about a dozen people in Iraq, and it shows how very easy it is for even the mightiest and most technologically advanced military in the world to butcher innocents. But we miss thousands of other such videos, which did not make it to Wikileaks.

The images in this video are extremely graphic and unsettling. But I think we at least owe it to ourselves to bear witness to the carnage we ourselves are enabling through our tax dollars – and our silence.

Occupation and Independence cannot co-exist. Until our troops leave Iraq, until our brothers and sisters come home and we end this grim chapter in our history, Iraq will remain as it is today, four years after its supposed independence: a country wracked with violence where Iraqi civilians and US troops continue to die every day. By continuing to occupy Iraq, we make a mockery of our own history, our own struggle for independence.

The IVAW website has the entire piece.

All the best for a liberating 4th…

Rabban Shim’on ben Gamli’el said, “On three things the world stands: on justice, on truth, and on peace.” Rav Muna said, “These three are one thing: Where justice is done, truth is done and peace is made. Every place there is justice, there is peace.” — Talmud, Derekh Eretz Zuta, Chapter 2

What does it mean to observe Memorial Day if you (along with the majority of Americans) oppose the continuing war in Iraq? How might we honor the memory of the fallen in a war that most of us believe never should have began in the first place?

Here are a few suggestions:

- Visit the powerful traveling exhibit “Eyes Wide Open” which continues to make its way back and forth across the US. If it’s not landing near you any time soon, look through the extensive resources on their website and/or click the trailer above.

- Visit the website of Veterans Against the Iraq War. Read the soldiers’ blogs and learn more about how to support this important organization that supports the troops but opposes the war.

- Check out Veterans for Peace – a veteran’s network that is sponsoring memorials and events across the country. (The VFP recently made the news when it was shamefully denied permission to participate in the upcoming Memorial Day March in Washington DC.)

- Visit the website of Winter Soldier and watch their collection of eyewitness accounts from soldiers, veterans, scholars, and journalists about the reality on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Hope your Memorial Day is more than BBQs and discount sales this year…

As Aryeh Cohen’s comment to my post below points out, my pronouncement of the demise of Jews Against the War was greatly exaggerated. My apologies at the good folks at JAW – and thank you to their Executive Director Sarah Newman for sending me these pix of their recent demonstration in the Pico-Robertson area of Los Angeles.

One who is able to protest against a wrong that is being done in his family, his city, his nation or the world and doesn’t do so is held accountable for that wrong. (Talmud, Tractate Shabbat)

As we are currently marking an Iraq War “double-milestone” of five years and 4,000 American military dead, I decided to click on Jews Against the War – the coalition that was launched exactly one year ago. Much to my dismay, I found that the website no longer existed.

What is sadder is that I’m not that surprised. Why should the Jewish anti-war movement (such as it is) be any different than the rest of the anti-war movement, which is essentially in a shambles? I know that there are many reasons for this. I prefer not to analyze them now. I am just so very sad that this horrible anniversary has passed by with nary an ounce of public protest. While most of us who oppose the war are channeling our energies toward a Democratic victory this November, the truth remains that this war will be with us for some time – unless a mass movement of outrage decides differently.

If you’d like to do something, anything, to mark this anniversary, click here to sign an open letter to Congress, calling upon it to:

- Stop funding the war and give the Pentagon only enough money for the safe and orderly redeployment of US troops out of Iraq

- Support a diplomatic offensive – as recommended by the Iraq Study Group – to build a comprehensive solution involving many countries

- Stop funding the construction of permanent military bases in Iraq and military contractors

- Refuse to fund any permanent “security agreement” between President Bush and Iraqi President Maliki unless first approved by Congress and the Iraqi parliament.

And meanwhile, if you are looking for a little outrage to spark your activist conscience, click above for a recent, spot-on Keith Olbermann commentary.

- Condoleeza Rice on the Bush administration’s Mideast policy (quoted in Newsweek)

As we appropriately remember America’s war dead this Memorial Day (see my earlier post), here’s a plea that we honor the memory of all who have fallen as a result of our nation’s tragic, misbegotten war in Iraq:

For Suhad Shakir, 36, her new job was a dream come true. She had always wanted to work with Americans, and she loved helping people. Last September she quit her post as a journalist at state-owned TV and jumped at an opening with the Iraqi Assistance Center, a Coalition-run office in the Green Zone that works with U.S. and Iraqi agencies to provide social services. It seemed safer than reporting, and it paid better.

On Feb. 4 she was on her way to work, waiting in the queue at a checkpoint near an entrance to the Green Zone which is often targeted by suicide bombers. Shakir was in the slow lane, for Iraqi cars that are subject to careful searches. A convoy of armored vehicles came roaring up and got stuck at the checkpoint. One of the bodyguards in the first vehicle threw a bottle of water at the driver in front of Shakir to signal him to move. The driver panicked and backed into Shakir’s car. She tried to get out of the way but backed into the car behind her. Someone aboard the fourth vehicle in the convoy, seeing Shakir’s sudden move, opened fire, hitting her once. The vehicle slowed and a goateed Westerner in khaki leaned out his window and shot her again in the face at close range. Then the convoy raced off into the Green Zone.

Iraqi cops think Shakir’s killer mistook her for a suicide bomber, but they say they’re continuing to investigate. “It is very important I know why she is killed and who killed her,” said Shakir’s mother, Salima Kadhim, dressed in black a month after her daughter’s death. Like many Iraqis, she still waits.

(Newsweek, April 2, 2007)