The Mystery
Of The Second
Sgrena Video
By Dave Fryett
12 March, 2005
Countercurrents.org
Prime
Minister Silvio Berlusconi delivered a brief speech to the Italian Senate
on the kidnapping of Giuliana Sgrena and the shooting which occasioned
her release. It was the first public pronouncement the Italian leader
made since the attack by American soldiers which left a high-ranking
Italian intelligence officer dead and two others wounded. His remarks
were long on outrage and regret and short on much anticipated specifics.
He did address some of the rumors which surround the incident dismissing
the worst and assuring the people of Italy that the joint Italian/American
investigation would be exhaustive and its findings would "clear
everything up." Berlusconi did however drop one bomb: No ransom
was paid for the release of Giuliana Sgrena.
In doing so Berlusconi cast himself in the heroic light of pugnacious
defiance of the bloodthirsty, terrorist kidnappers and their unsavory
demands. Images of early Soviet paintings and sculptures of Lenin came
to mind as I listened to the Prime Minister laud his own efforts in
the nationally broadcast speech. However, the revelation of this fact
came only after the "leaking" of contradictory information
and the publishing of startling accusations made on an unauthenticated
video tape purportedly from Sgrena's kidnappers.
After a month of
intense negotiations with the kidnappers by National Security Agent
Nicola Calipari, slain in the attack, the Italian government announced
that it had reached an agreement with the insurgents and had secured
Sgrena's release. At this point a video of Giuliana Sgrena prepared
the night before her hand-over was made by the kidnappers. In it she
is seated at a table and standing behind her are hooded insurgents who
read their statement announcing her release. Sgrena makes a statement
saying that she has been treated well and thanks her well-wishers back
home for their support. She then promises her loved-ones big hugs when
she returned home.
Contemporaneously,
a figure of $1,000,000 is leaked to the press as the ransom ammount.
The number circulates for a day or two before Sgrena's release with
not a word of protest coming from Berlusconi's government. The figure
and its payment are debated around Italy with most Italians
being supportive of the move because it secured the release of a beloved
journalist and, undoubtedly, because it was seen as an act of defiance
against American interests in this war which has never been popular
with rank and file Italians.
Then comes the
disputed events surrounding the shooting of Giuliana Sgrena and her
co-passengers as they were on their way to the airport in Baghdad. The
American and Italian governments and their loyal servants and their
respective national media are currently trying to reconcile the conflicting
accounts of the participants, such is the specious nature of the discussion
today, but the truth of what happened there is not relevant to this
discussion. It is what happened immediately thereafter which provides
background to Berlusconi's uncharacteristically frank admission and
his desire to recast the journalist's release in a different light.
As reported by
the Roman daily, La Repubblica
(http://www.repubblica.it/2005/c/sezioni/cronaca/
caliparifune/viderisca/viderisca.html), a second
video emerged after the shooting. It was sent to the paper and it purports
to be from the kidnappers and is a second part to the video made with
Giuliana Sgrena the night before her release. However, in this video
the kidnappers make some stunning accusations which stand the conventional
understanding of the war in Iraq and the nature of the insurgency on
its head.
The kidnappers,
if indeed this video is from them, claim that they never wanted a ransom.
They knew of a CIA plot to kill Giuliana Sgrena and they took her into
their protective custody to prevent her murder. They say they support
the activities of all journalists be they Muslim or not. They imply
but do not say that the attack on Giuliana Sgrena by American soldiers
was premeditated.
They weren't done.
They claim that they, the Islamic Resistence of Iraq, are not guilty
of attacks on innocent Muslims and cite a passage from the Quran which
prohibits such things in addition to the killing of women and children.
Then came the most startling assertion: They accuse the US of deceiving
the world as to the nature of the insurgency in Iraq and the kidnappers
angrily charge that there is an "army of occupation in Iraq under
the name of Al Zarqawi" and that it was sent there to destroy the
Resistence by causing a fratricidal war among them. They did not actually
say, but certainly left open the idea, that Al Zarqawi was Washington's
man.
La Repubblica's
report left many in Italy bewildered. The idea the the US was hostile
to Sgrena came as no shock but the rest seemed so counterintuitive.
Was the video from the kidnappers and if so could their claims possibly
be true? Or were the insurgents trying to exculpate themselves in the
eyes of the world's Muslims from all the horrible violence by blaming
their enemy? If it was true why go public with this now? The timing
seems suspicious. Italian Muslims quickly verified the Quranic passage
cited by the insugents but the Quran is hardly a secret document, what
does the accuracy of the reference prove? And if the video wasn't produced
by the Kidnappers, who did make it? And why aren't the kidnappers refuting
it?
The video was shown
in hospital to the convalescing journalist and she was quite insistent
that the video had been doctored. Viewing the new second part of the
video gives the impression that the later comments were made while Sgrena
was sitting at the table. Sgrena, who speaks Arabic, said categorically
that it did not happen that way. This challenge to its authenticity
apparently was enough to keep media outlets worldwide from reporting
on its existence and sharply diminished the ammount of chatter it got
around the country. People began to speak of it dismissively.
Sgrena did confirm
that she was told of the CIA plot to kill her by her captors, true or
not. And viewing the tape it is not clear, some have said, that the
kidnappers are trying to convince people that the new statements in
it were made contemporaneously to the making of the original tape. This
latter interpretation goes that the kidnappers may have used the tape
because they knew that there was nothing on it which would reveal their
identities or location. It had already been vetted, so to speak. It
was a safe means of distributing their new message.
In any case, the
controversy regarding the mysterious tape was given new life when Berlusconi
confirmed that no ransom was in fact paid. The video was released when
media, including some in the United Staes, were circulating the then
uncontested story of a payment of $1,000,000. The
video makers, whoever they may be, knew that this was not the case.
Does this mean
that the video is genuine? Not necessarily, and even if it is from the
kidnappers it doesn't mean their other claims are true. They might have
meretriciously thrown a fact into the video to lend credibility to what
was otherwise a disinformation effort, perhaps a part of their own fratricidal
war.
And if it wasn't
they who made the tape then who did? It would have to be some person
or group fairly high up on the Italian or American Iraq intelligence
food chain. What was their motive? The most outlandish theory along
these lines is that Berlusconi himself is behind it. Advocates of this
intrigue believe if Berlusconi can provide an face-saving excuse to
withdraw from Iraq he might just be able to save himself from the fate
of Mr Aznar in Spain and win the upcoming election.
Well maybe, but
so far he has been supportive of the Americans warning his people not
to "fall into anti-americanism." If Berlusconi performs a
public seperation ritual from Washington and times the withdrawal of
Italian troops for the election then this interpretation may have some
merit. Right now it seems a bit much, although I do imagine Signor Berlusconi
is tiring of Washington's tough love vis a vis all matters Iraqi.
Does the release of this tape represent a palace revolt in the White
House? This administration has no shortage of in-house enemies. And
if so does it mean that the accusations are true. Again, not necessarily.
The depth of anti-Bush sentiment within the government is high enough
that maybe somebody is running a black-op against him.
The tape was handed over by La Repubblica to the Italian government
and so far they have not said a word about it. What is certain is that
people intimately connected with the Giuliana Sgrena hostage negotiations
have produced a video whose content implies that the government of the
United
States is behind at least some of the terrorist attacks in Iraq. On
the surface it seems too incredible to be true, and may very well not
be, but it does explain some things which have thus far appeared anachronistic.
For instance, it has been generally acknowleged that from day one of
the invasion the American military has been extremely lax in securing
military sites. This is made all the more disturbing when one considers
that the stated reason for the war was to find weapons of mass destruction.
The US left armories unguarded and allowed the Iraqi army to melt back
into the civilian population. It strains credulity to its limits to
think that the folly of this passed undetected in Washington. US postwar
policy was a recipe for insurgency.
But why? If Bush's intention was, as many have speculated, to establish
permanent military bases in the oil rich region then a strong insurgency
would justify a continued American presence until such time as the Iraqi
situation passed from the public's gaze and the US military could quietly
take up permanent residence. Also, the atrocities committed by the insurgents
such as the beheadings continue to bolster Bush's idiotic claims about
fighting "evil" in his global war on terror. It simply would
not do to have an orderly, international law-abiding insurgency which
never targeted civilians while the US military went around using DU
and other chemical weapons and torturing innocents in prisons like Abu
Gharaib. The allegations made by the people behind the video may not
be as preposterous as they first appear.
I don't know what to believe but what is undeniably true is that the
existence of this tape is the best kept media secret in the world. Even
La Repubblica has let the story pass from its pages. Why?