C.I. noted:
With this one, I was going for frazzled and had watched the film The Firm the day I drew it. I was trying to have an 'angle' on this one. In The Firm, the shots are from above.
That's what I tried.
I think I got frazzled well but I also think it's the worst Barack drawing I ever did.
Thursday, February 13, 2014. Chaos and violence continue, the assault
on Anbar continues, the UN expresses concern over the assault, Nouri's
military again attacks a hospital in Anbar, we look at the Kurds and the
way the US government repeatedly mistreats them, the US Ambassador to
Iraq prepares to field questions, and much more.
Iraq is, at best, in a state of flux.. Do you have a question on that?
Or maybe on one of the many current crises in Iraq? If so, an
opportunity comes calling your name:
Are you curious about the political/economic relations between the U.S.
and Iraq? Do you want to know more about cultural and educational
programs?
Well, here’s your chance! Post your questions to Ambassador Stephen Beecroft on our Facebook page or send them to USEmbassy2014@gmail.com.
The deadline for submitting your questions is March 1, 2014. We will
post the Ambassador’s answers to the most popular questions on the
Embassy’s Facebook page and Youtube channel.
March 1st is the deadline.
World Bulletin News reports
on the forming of the new government in the Kurdish Regional
Government, "In the new government, there will be two deputy prime
minister's, with
one of them being from the Goran Movement. The positions of finance
minister and parliament speaker will also go to the Goran Movement.
However, the position of interior minister will not go to the Goran
Movement after the YNK opposed it."
Chair Ed Royce: There is just one more issue that I meant to raise
with you and that's just turning for a moment to discuss inclusion of
the Kurdish Democratic Party and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan in
the PATRIOT Act's Tier III designation -- terrorist designation. My
understanding is that this has become a sort of catch-all designation
that has inadvertently mislabeled the KDP and the PUK as terrorists even
though they have been a stabilizing force in the region and
consistently loyal to the United States for decades. As al Qaeda and
other groups expand across the Middle East and beyond, it seems like a
good time to take count of our remaining friends in the region and maybe
take a look at this inappropriate designation and recognize that that's
harming our very important relationship with the Kurdish people. So
would the administration be supportive of a legislative solution to this
issue that would exclude these Kurdish groups from the Tier III
designation
Brett McGurk: Uh, Mr. Chairman, thank you for asking that question
and for allowing me to put our response on the record. Uhm, as you said,
the Kurdish people -- the PUK, the KDP -- have been among our closest
friends in the region going back decades. We think they should be
removed from this list as soon as possible. We think it is an
imperative. Uh, we understand that it requires a legislative fix.
There is nothing we can do by executive action alone. And therefore we
are 100% supportive of an immediate legislative fix to this problem and
we look forward to working with you and the relevant Committees in
Congress to get that done.
That exchange is from last week when the House Foreign Affairs Committee
held a hearing on Iraq. Appearing before the Committee was the US
State Dept's Deputy Assistant Secretary for Iraq and Iran Brett McGurk.
We've covered the hearing in the
February 5th Iraq snapshot,
February 6th Iraq snapshot and
February 7th Iraq snapshot. as well as "
Prashant Rao's naive and Hannah Allem's got a grudge to f**k"
which details the main themes of the hearing (and how Rao was terribly
naive to believe Hannah Allem's hideous Tweets which were nothing more
than her working her grudge against the Ashraf community). We'll return
to the hearing two more times in this snapshot.
Right now, we're focusing on the Kurds.
From From
Monday, February 3rd's snapshot:
Friday's snapshot
noted US Vice President Joe Biden's phone call to KRG President Massoud
Barzani, carried the White House statement and I pointed out, "It's a
shame that they [the White House] have more concern over pleasing Nouri
than they do over the safety of the Iraqi citizens." Today Rudaw reports:
Kurdistan
Region President Massoud Barzani has postponed a planned visit to
Washington this week because of other commitments, said his chief of
staff, Fuad Hussein.
“President Barzani told Joe Biden (the US vice president) that
because of some other commitments he couldn’t visit Washington at this
time,” Hussein told Rudaw. “That is why the visit was postponed.”
That's only surprising if you weren't paying attention. In 2012,
Barazni made clear his opposition to the US giving Nouri F-16s. And
today? Not only are those going to be handed over, helicopters and
Hellfire missiles are being provided to Nouri. And on top of all of
that, Joe Biden wants to hold Nouri's hand and reassure him while
telling Barzani that concessions (to Nouri) need to be made.
President Massoud Barzani is a much admired figure in the KRG and he's a
leader on the world stage but Biden wants to treat like an errand boy
and hand him a grocery list?
Of course, Barazni's insulted. And that's before you get to the White
House's historic betrayal of Baraniz on the 2010 US-brokered Erbil
Agreement that they used Barazni's name and reputation to sell and then
refused, after everyone signed the contract, to stand by it. Yeah, it's
about time Barzani put some distance between himself and the US
government.
Maybe even a brief spell will force the White House to take Barzani a little more seriously?
February 6th,
Ayub Nuri and Rudaw became the first to address the topic everyone else tried so hard to ignore:
Many
people were baffled this week by the sudden news that Kurdistan Region
President Massoud Barzani was not going to Washington. Barzani’s
supporters said it was the Kurdish president who had cancelled the
visit. Others laughed and said, “Who could cancel on the president of
the most powerful country in the world?” From the US there was no
explanation, and out of Kurdistan only came conflicting reports.
But who snubbed who isn’t really the issue. The real question is: How do the Kurds see America today.
Ten years ago the Kurds saw America as an ally, and America regarded
them as friends. The Kurds joined America’s war and contributed to
Saddam Hussein’s downfall. Kurdish Peshmarga and security forces offered
the Americans intelligence, advice and guidance. Kurdish politicians
and ministers went to Baghdad and put into service their two decades of
experience to rebuild the Iraqi government.
What did they expect in return? A democratic Iraq that America had
promised everyone. But ten years on, not only have the Kurds not seen a
democratic country that respects their rights, they in fact feel it is
often America -- not Baghdad -- that is acting against them.
The White House and the State Dept have seriously injured the
relationship between themselves and the Kurds. They've yet to
demonstrate that they care about that damage or that they're interested
in repairing what they've damaged.
In that regard, the current administration is a great like Tricky Dick's
administration oh, so many decades ago. Then-President Richard Nixon
and War Criminal Henry Kissinger pretended to be the Kurds friends,
pretended to care what happened to them, but they were just using them
as pawns.
That is not my opinion. That is what the US Congress found in the Pike Report. February 16, 1976,
The Village Voice published Aaron Latham's "Introduction to the Pike Papers." Latham explained:
In 1972, Dr. Henry Kissinger met with the Shah of Iran, who asked the
U.S. to aid the Kurds in their rebellion against Iraq, an enemy of the
Shah. Kissinger later presented the proposal to President Nixon who
approved what would become a $16 million program. Then John B.
Connally, the former Nixon Treasury Secretary, was dispatched to Iran to
inform the Shah, one oil man to another.
The committee report charges that: "The President, Dr. Kissinger and
the foreign head of state [the Shah] hoped our clients would not
prevail. They preferred instead that the insurgents simply continue a
level of hostilities sufficient to sap the resources of our ally's
neighboring country [Iraq]. The policy was not imparted to our clients,
who were encouraged to continue fighting. Even in the context of
covert action, ours was a cynical enterprise."
During the Arab-Israeli war, when the Kurds might have been able to
strike at a distracted Iraqi government, Kissinger, according to the
report, "personally restrained the insurgents from an all-out offensive
on the one occasion when such an attack might have been successful."
Then, when Iran resolved its border dispute with Iraq, the U.S.
summarily dropped the Kurds. And Iraq, knowing aid would be cut off,
launched a search-and-destroy campaign the day after the border
agreement was signed.
A high U.S. official later explained to the Pike committee staff: "Covert action should not be confused with missionary work."
That is the history. That is the root. Deception on the part of the
US. And as the Kurds disrespected and lied to today, the dishonest root
of the original relationship becomes all the more telling.
When Iraqi President Jalal Talabani was the highest ranking Kurd, it
really didn't matter. The disrespect, the labeling two political
parties as 'terrorists' (Talabani heads the PUK and Barzani heads the
KDP). But Jalal's not running anything these days. December 2012,
Iraqi
President Jalal
Talabani suffered a stroke. The incident took place late on December
17, 2012 following Jalal's argument with Iraq's prime minister and chief
thug Nouri al-Maliki (see the
December 18, 2012 snapshot). Jalal was admitted to Baghdad's Medical Center Hospital.
Thursday, December 20, 2012,
he was moved to Germany. He remains in Germany currently.
In 2012, KRG President Massoud Barzani was already outshining Jalal on
the international stage -- long before Jalal's stroke. And Barzani has
never been as weak as Jalal.
Jalal was happy to dismiss thoughts of an independent Kurdistan ever
happening. He was willing to dismiss that despite the fact that Kurds
fought for years to get to where they are now, in the KRG, three
semi-autonomous provinces. Jalal destroyed his own reputation over and
over and was happy to dance for the US government.
Barazni wanted -- maybe still does -- a relationship -- a solid one --
with the US government. But in 2010, after Nouri's State of Law lost
the parliamentary elections to Ayad Allawi's Iraqiya, the US government
used the Kurds -- lied to them and used them. US President Barack Obama
wanted Nouri to have a second term. To go around the votes and the
Constitution and the will of the Iraqi people, the White House came up
with the idea of a legal contract among the political blocs which would
circumvent the Constitution. In order to get the others to sign on,
they knew Nouri would have to offer them concessions in writing. The
US-brokered Erbil Agreement couldn't be sold on the US alone. It needed
the backing of a group and the White House used the Kurds and their
relationship with the Kurds. They had Barzani sell the agreement. He
never would have done that without promises from the White House that it
was a legal and binding contract that had the full support of the White
House.
Nouri used the contract to get his second term but refused to honor any
of the promises he made in the contract (such as implementing Article
140 of the Constitution). And when the Kurds took their issues public
and joined with cleric and movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr and Iraqiya
in the summer of 2011 to demand The Erbil Agreement be implemented, the
White House played dumb, pretended they knew nothing, pretended they had
never promised that the contract had their full backing.
This was harmful for everyone but especially upsetting to Kurdish
leadership because not only was the contract not implemented but they
were used -- and lied to -- by the White House. The White House used
the Kurds' standing and image to sell a contract that was worthless.
In 2012, Massoud Barzani made a public plea, even took it to US soil,
that the White House not supply Nouri with F-16s. That's been blown off
as well.
And then there's the issue of the oil. Under existing laws, the Kurds
can do whatever they want with the oil in the KRG. That's because there
is no national oil & gas law. Nouri al-Maliki promised the US
government in 2007 that he would propose a national oil and gas law and
get it passed shortly. Seven years later and he never did.
So it ticks off the Kurds when the White House and the State Dept attack
the KRG for attempting to sell its own oil even as the White House and
the State Dept lie that they won't take sides and they're only
interested in the law.
There is no national law. The Kurds actions are completely legal but,
over and over, the White House rushes to satisfy Nouri al-Maliki.
This has seriously harmed the relationship between the US government and
the Kurdish government. And Vice President Joe Biden who once had such
a great relationship with Barzani (and Talabani) is no longer believed.
They're generous. The KRG government leadership doesn't call Joe a
"liar," they just argue that he does not have any power in the White
House and can't keep the promises he makes.
And now Barazni won't even visit the US.
Is there anything in Iraq that the White House hasn't made worse?
UPI reports:
The growing number of dead men found in the streets and canals of
Baghdad, mostly shot in the head, some bearing the marks of torture, is
stirring fears Shiite death squads who slaughtered hundreds, possibly
thousands, of Sunnis during the dark days of Iraq's sectarian bloodbath
are back in business.
And Nouri's arming them. The Shi'ite militias were reported on by
Tim Arango (New York Times) back in September. Arango
noted:
In supporting Asaib al-Haq, Mr. Maliki has apparently made the risky
calculation that by backing some Shiite militias, even in secret, he can
maintain control over the country’s restive Shiite population and,
ultimately, retain power after the next national elections, which are
scheduled for next year. Militiamen and residents of Shiite areas say
members of Asaib al-Haq are given government badges and weapons and
allowed freedom of movement by the security forces.
And despite that, the White House is arming him. Despite that, despite his assault on Anbar Province. The
United Nations Assistance Mission in Iraq issued the following:
UN Envoy Concerned about Deteriorating Situation in Fallujah, Calls for Unity and Political Engagement
Baghdad, 13th February 2014 - Since the beginning of the fighting
in Anbar Province over 63,000 families have been registered as
internally displaced. Although many have fled to other parts of the
country, including Karbala, Baghdad and Erbil provinces, others have
sought safety in outlying communities in Anbar Province or are unable to
flee the fighting. Their condition remains precarious with food stocks
and potable water running low, poor sanitation and limited access to
health care.
In a joint relief operation to assist the Government’s response to
the crisis, the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) has so far distributed
approximately 2,453 kits of core relief items; and the UN Children’s
Fund (UNICEF) approximately 11,500 hygiene kits and various
water/sanitation supplies. The World Food Programme has handed out 4,650
Food Parcels, and the International Organization for Migration 1,415
non-food items . The World Health Organisation distributed 2 surgical
kits covering 1,000 beneficiaries and medical supplies for 10,000
beneficiaries.
"Since the first days of January the UN continues to work with the
government, local authorities to provide aid to those affected by the
fighting in Anbar. Although the conditions remain extremely difficult,
with access roads often blocked by fighting, we will continue to
cooperate with people on the ground to deliver assistance tot hose in
need” Mr. Mladenov added.
“I am particularly concerned about the rapidly deteriorating
conditions in Fallujah where many residents are caught up in the
fighting. The UN continues to urge for humanitarian access to the city.
Recent reports that the Fallujah General Hospital may have been used as
headquarters for armed groups and also targeted by shelling are very
worrying. Hospitals and medical facilities should be protected by all”
Mr. Mladenov said.
Mr. Mladenov further reiterated his call for a political solution to
the crisis that would allow all Iraqis to "unite against terrorism,
which is affecting all segments of society”.
"I call on all sides to address the causes of violence through
dialogue and the political process and to help rebuild Anbar" he
concluded.
Back to last week's Congressional hearing on Iraq.
US House Rep Ted Yoho: What are our military assets in Iraq and are
they purely advisory? And if so, how many? Can you divulge that or --?
Brett McGurk: We have, under our embassy, under the Chief of Mission
and Ambassdor [Stephen] Beecroft, uhm, the Office of Security
Cooperation which works very closely with the Iraqi military. The
numbers ebb and flow but it's about 100 personnel. Uhm, and they do
everything from advising to running the FMS programs, making sure that
that's running efficiently. And a very small contingent of half-a-dozen
or so of our Special Operators who train some of the higher end Special
Operators as the training component. But that's all done under the
Embassy Chief of Mission and the Office of --
Yoho interrupted McGurk at that point. We bring it up now because
All Iraq News reported today that the US Embassy in Iraq's Assistant Director of the Joint Security
Cooperation William Bell Binder issued a statement today noting that
"the first batch" of F-16 war planes "was delivered to Iraq" and that
"[d]uring the past two weeks Iraq was delivered large amount of weapons
and ammunitions." And
All Iraq News also reported:
The US Embassy denied the existence of any military trainer in Iraq.The
Assistant Directorate of the Joint Security Cooperation of the US
Embassy, William Bell Binder, stated in a statement received by AIN
''Iraq subjected a request to train the security forces in the field of
combating terrorism and we are waiting to concluded an agreement between
Iraq and Jordan where the training will be on Jordanian territories
since there is not nay convention that grants the US troops the legal
immunity in Baghdad.''
So Congress was told trainers were already in Iraq -- because they are
and have been even after the drawdown billed as a 'withdrawal' -- but
the US Embassy is telling Iraqis there are no US military trainers in
Iraq?
It's this sort of nonsense lie that makes the US government look so ridiculous.
Well this and backing Nouri al-Maliki.
Washington Post correspondent Liz Sly Tweets:
Indeed. And thank goodness Sly has a memory -- no other reporters
currently covering Iraq appear to have memories or be able to offer
context. They just repeat Nouri's claims that he will absorb the Sahwa
into the security forces and fail to note that this promise didn't pan
out before.
So many failures, you really have to pick and choose you review Nouri's failures as prime minister. The editorial board of
Arab News notes Nouri's failures:
Far from seeking a national consensus that could build a united front
against the terrorists, Al-Maliki continues to alienate the Sunni
community. Without the restraining influence of President Jalal
Talabani, a Kurd, who has suffered a severely debilitating stroke,
Al-Maliki’s relations with the increasingly independent-minded Kurds in
the north of the country, continue to decline.
The National Unity
government he is supposed to be leading is a farce. Virtually all Sunni
politicians have been driven from Parliament. Kurdish legislators hardly
bother to involve themselves in the political process in Baghdad. The
government neither seeks nor welcomes dialogue. There is however a
permanent welcome mat for Iranian diplomats and politicians. The visits
are rarely high profile. More often it is Al-Maliki or his people who
travel to Tehran. But it is hard to fathom the sort of advice the Iraqi
premier is being given, let alone taking. Is he really being encouraged
to let his country fall apart and into the hands of extremists? Are the
Iranians setting up this most inept of politicians, so that Iraq will
once again become an urgent regional security issue?
Yesterday,
Nouri had his Bully Boy Bush moment as he declared victory in his assault
on Anbar Province. It's a a shame he didn't have the banner BBB stood
under in 2003, the one proclaimed "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED."
Victory claims were a bit premature.
ABC News Radio observes,
"There were more signs of Iraq's security deterioration Wednesday as
the
United Nations reported that upwards of 300,000 people have been
dislodged from their homes in the volatile western province of Anbar."
And that's not the only thing preventing Nouri al-Maliki's victory
march.
Al Bawaba reports rebels "seized part of
Sulaiman Bek
town and nearby villages in northern Iraq on Thursday, Agence France
Presse reported local officials as saying. This is considered to be the
latest instance of authorities losing ground to militants,
who have held all of the city of Fallujah and parts of provincial capital Ramadi for weeks."
Anadolu Agency adds, "Clashes are still going on and ISIL militants have not been repelled
yet according to reports which claim that the militants gained control
of Kirkuk-Baghdad route. A curfew has been established in
Sulayman Beg. Eye-witnesses say that they cannot go out and they can
hear the sounds of bullets and bombs."
IANS offers, "The security forces could not stand long in front of a large number of
gunmen who spread out on the streets of the town, Mustafa said, adding
that in the morning the gunmen took control of several suburbs and
villages around the town."
Through yesterday,
Iraq Body Count counts 348 violent deaths for the month thus far.
Today's violence?
Bombings?
National Iraqi News Agency reports a
Qarma air strike left 2 people dead,
2 Shorja bombings set a building on fire leaving 1 person dead and nine more injured (an
update notes sixteen were injured),
2 Abbarah bombings left 2 people dead and eight more injured, and a
Kirkuk roadside bombing left 1 Iraqi military officer dead and six more military personnel injured.
Reuters adds,
"Twin bombs went off inside a building comprising perfume stores in
Baghdad's largest shopping district of al-Shourja on Thursday, killing
at least six civilians and wounding 16 others, police sources said."
Xinhua notes, "Furthermore, two people were wounded when a roadside bomb detonated in Doura district in southern Baghdad, the source added."
And let's
really emphasize this:
A security source told the reporter of the National Iraqi News Agency /
NINA / that"a number of artillery shells of army forces stationed
outside the city fell on the building of Fallujah hospital, wounding / 9
/ workers, including / 3 / Indian doctors and two nurses from
Bangladesh as well as four Iraqi employees. "
These are War Crimes. You are not allowed to target hospitals.
Shootings?
National Iraqi News Agency reports a
Hawija home invasion left 1 soldier and 1 Sahwa dead and two more people injured, an
armed confrontation in Riyadh left 1 Iraqi soldier dead and another injured,
security forces shot dead 1 person in Qaim, an
armed battle in Ramadi left 3 Iraqi soldiers dead and four more injured,
1 police officer was shot dead on Baghdad Street in Mosul, 1 civilian was shot dead outside his Mosul home, and an
armed confrontation in Mosul left 3 rebels dead,
Joint Operations Command shot dead 1 suspect in Mosul,
2 brothers were shot dead near their Aziziya home.
Corpses?
National Iraqi News Agency reports
the
corpse of a woman in her thirties (strangled, bruised from beatings)
was discovered dumped "in Husseiniya area northeast of Baghdad."
On the issue of violence, remember how on Monday you had an
assassination attempt on the Speaker of Parliament and a bombing that,
the Iraqi government insisted, was terrorists training other terrorists?
And remember how outlets like The NewsHour (PBS) rushed for the
'giggle' over the claims of the Iraqi government but ignored the attempt
on Osama al-Nujaifi's life? Well
Press TV notes:
Iran’s
Majlis Speaker Ali Larijani has slammed the recent assassination attempt
on his Iraqi counterpart Osama al-Nujaifi, saying combating terrorism
requires regional cooperation.
The condemnation of Monday’s terrorist move against al-Nujaifi and
his brother came in a Wednesday message from Larijani, in which he also
expressed relief that the terror act had failed.
That's right. Even the Speaker of Iran's legislative body showed more maturity than PBS and other news or 'news' outlets.
Dropping back one more time to the US Congressional hearing on Iraq.
US House Rep Doug Collins: I want to turn back, it was asked a
little bit earlier about the elections and really, from serving in Iraq
back in '08 as my colleague has as well, I understand the relationship
between the Sunni and the Shia is something -- is, I think there's a
huge mistrust, it goes back generations. It's a multitude of issues
there. And it looks like the current government has done very little to
really relate with that -- or work on that issue. Experts in Iraq have
talked about al Qaeda in Iraq, Islamic State of Iraq, and increasingly
building alliances with Sunni tribal leaders and suggest to this mess,
in 2013, to try to win more Sunni support. How would that translate into
the next round of Iraq elections? Can we -- can we really see a move
from Shia to Sunni? And what does that mean for the region? And answer
that and then I want to talk about Iran's possible influence as well.
Just speak to the elections at this point.
Brett McGurk: Uh, thank you. First, Congressman, thank you for your
service. And it's a very important question and an insightful
question. This election coming up is going to be pivotal and also
extremely interesting. The first national election, December 2005,
there were really three main lists, people to vote for. There was a Shia
bloc, a Sunni bloc and a Kurdish bloc. Uhm, the 2010 elections, there
was a little bit more choice: really two Shia blocs, the Sunni parties
were under one main list also with some Shias -- a kind of
cross-sectarian list -- and then the Kurds. This election, everything
is really fractured so you have about four Shia lists, three Sunni lists
and even the Kurds are running on four different lists. So what's
going to happen out of those results is going to be a number of
different permutations in terms of forming governments uh-uh coalitions.
So the hope is that this election will give rise to the possibility of
more cross-sectarian, more issue-based politics emerging. As difficult
as that is going to be, if you look at the candidate lists and the
coalitions, there is that possibility there. But as I mentioned
earlier, what al Qaeda does very effectively is targets the fault line
which has existed for 1400 years -- targeting symbolic areas and trying
to increase fear in particularly the Shia population which just rises
the sectarian debate and discourse in the country. So on the positive
side, you have an election that's shaping up with a number of different
choices, a number of different lists which will allow for
cross-sectarian coalitions. On a negative side, you have extremists who
are trying to incite and inflame the sectarian dimensions in the
country.
We'll pick up on that tomorrow. We're going to squeeze in one last
thing. Yesterday, Senator Tom Udall's office issued the following:
WASHINGTON - Today, U.S. Senator Tom Udall spoke on
the Senate floor about a bipartisan bill he introduced with Senator Dean
Heller (R-Nev.) to address some of the biggest barriers to health care
for veterans in rural communities. To illustrate the need for the bill,
Udall told the stories of many rural New Mexico veterans who have
struggled to access health care - traveling long distances and enduring
high turnover among doctors and staff at rural VA clinics, among other
problems - and discussed how his
Rural Veterans Improvement Act would help improve care.
While
traveling throughout New Mexico, Udall has spoken with veterans about
their frustrations with accessing care. In his speech, Udall told the
story of one veteran who traveled over three hours each way, multiple
times per week for two years, to receive essential mental health care
that likely saved his life. He also discussed a veteran in Carlsbad who
spends the entire day traveling to appointments in Albuquerque, and
another in Chama who must travel 80 miles through the mountains to reach
a clinic - a trip that can be impassable during the winter.
In
response to their frustrations and concerns, Udall took a four-pronged
approach to improving rural veterans' health care. His bill would:
-Expand
mental health services by providing better access to treatment and
including alternative therapies, as well as traditional Native American
healing methods.
-Expand transportation grants to include rural
communities to help ensure rural veterans can get a ride to far-away
doctors' appointments.
-Help retain and recruit staff to work at
rural clinics through increased financial incentives, medical training
programs geared toward preparing doctors and nurses for work in rural
communities, and streamlined hiring of military medical professionals
into the VA system.
- Create tools for the VA and Congress to more
effectively prioritize expansions and improvements of VA clinics in
rural and highly rural areas by requiring a comprehensive review of
those clinics.
"Rural veterans should not be left behind. They
should get the care they need and deserve," Udall said in his speech.
"Our bill is a step forward for the health and well-being of our
veterans. This is about essential care, about access, and about honoring
our commitment to the men and women who have sacrificed so much for our
country."
The following are Udall's remarks as prepared for delivery on the Senate floor. Click
here for video and
here for audio.
Madam President, I rise today to talk about health care for rural
veterans. This is a critical issue. Too many veterans are left behind.
Too many are not getting the care they need.
But first, Madam President, I want to say how important it is
that we have reached an agreement to restore the cut to pensions for
working-age military retirees. The cut in cost-of-living adjustments for
this group of veterans never should have been made.
The bipartisan budget agreement was critical for New Mexico and
our nation, because it rolled back damaging sequestration cuts-cuts that
hurt our military and military families. But working-age military
retirees should not have to bear the burden. Many of these men and women
have given decades of service to our nation. They were willing to give
everything for us. They should get the benefits they earned.
I have been working from the beginning to restore this cut to
their COLA benefits. I'm very happy that we have a bipartisan agreement
to move forward, and ensure we keep our promise to them.
Now, Madam President, I have come to the floor today to talk
about the Rural Veterans Improvement Act. I was proud to introduce this
bill with Senator Heller earlier this week, because when it comes to
veterans' health care, we know there are challenges. We know we can do
better, and we know we have to.
Over 6 million veterans live in rural areas, including about one
third of those who fought in Afghanistan and Iraq. Three million of
those rural veterans receive care through the VA. Our veterans have
fought half way around the world for our freedom. We should go the extra
mile for them. Senator Heller and I both come from rural states. We
know the difficulties veterans face when distances are too far, and
choices are too few.
Our bill will do four things: Improve access to mental health
services, expand transportation grants, hire and retain more medical
professionals in rural areas, and give Congress and the VA improved
tools to improve the quality of rural facilities.
First, mental health care is crucial. Veterans are struggling
when the help they need is not available, or is very far away. One of my
constituents lives in a rural area in northern New Mexico. He fought in
Vietnam, and was diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress. He required
therapy two full days a week for two years-vital care that probably
saved his life. The VA was there for him, and he is grateful. But he had
to drive to Albuquerque-over three hours away-to get that essential
care.
The veterans in my state are clear. They need better access to
treatment and more mental health options. One size does not fit all.
Conventional therapy does not work for everyone. Veterans groups like
the Wounded Warrior Project have long supported alternative treatments
and more holistic methods. Tribal governments are also working with the
VA to use traditional Native American healing techniques, helping their
veterans with PTSD or other diagnoses.
These veterans are in pain. They are at increased risk of
suicide. Help has to be there when they need it. Our bill will enable
the VA to work with non-VA fee-for-service providers-for veterans with
service-connected mental health issues when conventional treatment is
not available, or where alternative treatment is not an option.
Second, even the best health care is useless if you can't get to
it. I have talked with many veterans in my state about this and it is a
big problem across the state. Veterans in Carlsbad face a six hour drive
to the VA Hospital in Albuquerque-300 miles one way. One such veteran
fought bravely in World War II. He is in his 80s now. He has to get up
at 5 a.m., make the trip to Albuquerque to see medical specialists.
Sometimes he doesn't get home until midnight. Thanks to great volunteer
drivers-at the Southeast New Mexico Veterans Transportation Network-he
is able to get there, but it is an exhausting day.
One of my constituents recently retired to Chama, a rural
community in northern New Mexico. He and his wife built a home there,
looking forward to retirement. The VA outreach clinic was nearby, but
its contract was not renewed and it closed. His only option now is the
VA clinic in Espanola-80 miles each way through the Southern Rockies.
And when winter storms come-as they do in northern New Mexico-he may not
be able to get there at all.
The VA offers transportation grants to help, but only for
veterans in highly rural areas with fewer than four people per square
mile-not for those in rural areas. In small towns like Chama in New
Mexico, and in Nevada, and so many other states, they need help too. The
miles are just as long. The journey is just as hard. Our bill will help
by expanding VA transportation grants to include rural communities. And
it will not require matching funds for grants up to $100,000, making it
easier for these communities to apply for assistance.
Third, rural VA clinics, like their private counterparts, have
trouble getting staff and keeping staff. This is not news to veterans
who see constant turnover of doctors, nurses, and other health
professionals. Or who have to travel long distances just to see anyone
at all. Our bill will establish a VA training program, working with
university medical centers to train health care professionals serving
rural veterans at outpatient clinics. Those who complete the program-and
a three-year assignment-will receive a hiring preference for jobs with
the Veterans Health Administration.
We also propose a pilot program for housing incentives for
healthcare professionals to work in rural VA facilities. And we are
proposing that the VA streamline the hiring of military medical
professionals transitioning to the civilian world into the VA system.
Rural VA health centers have a big job. They do their best. We have to
do all we can to help them to get staff and to keep staff-with
incentives, with training, with innovation. It isn't easy, but it is
essential.
Fourth, we call for a full review of VA community based
outpatient clinics in rural and highly rural areas, so we can prioritize
expansions and improvements, making sure dollars are well spent, and
resources go as far as possible.
We also call for a report to Congress on whether to add
polytrauma centers in rural areas to help veterans from Iraq and
Afghanistan recover from multiple major injuries like serious burns and
traumatic brain injuries.
Every day, America's service members wake up far from home. And
every day, they stand the watch. They do the job they promised to do,
and not only if it's easy, or only if it's convenient. We owe them the
same promise. Rural veterans should not be left behind. They should get
the care they need and deserve.
I want to again thank Senator Heller for working with me on this
bill. He understands the problem and he is committed to finding
solutions. Our bill is a step forward for the health and well-being of
our veterans. This is about essential care, about access, and about
honoring our commitment to the men and women who have sacrificed so much
for our country. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
iraq
national iraqi news agency
alsumaria
all iraq news
al bawaba
anadolu agency
richard a. oppel jr.
stephen farrell
the new york times
abc news radio
iraq body count
the new york times
tim arrango
press tv
the washington post
liz sly
Liz Sly
