Talk:Abd al-Karim Qasim
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
||
 |
This article is supported by the Politics and government work group. | ||
Contents |
[edit] assassination or show trial?
In the article, it says: "Another assassination attempt, motivated by suspected pan-Arabist influence and state control over the petroleum sector, was carried out with the backing of the British government and the American CIA in on February 9, 1963. Qasim was killed after a show trial on February 9, 1963." I think these two are mutually exclusive. You can't get killed after a show trial, by assassination, can you?
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 134.130.57.172 (talk) 15:30, 14 March 2007 (UTC).
[edit] revealed British & USA backing for the coup
Declassified UK cabinet papers of 1963 printed in The Guardian on 1 January 1994, p5 revealed British & USA backing for the coup which removed Abdul Karim Qassim. AllanHainey 12:01, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Move?
Would anyone object to a move to Abd al-Karim Qasim, which is a more accurate form as well as that used in academic works such as Hanna Batatu's Old Social Classes and Charles Tripp's A History of Iraq? Palmiro | Talk 17:21, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
- It is also the spelling in the Encyclopedia Britannica, and the Library of Congress catalog. Another vote for a move. --Cam 16:10, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
- Nobody has objected in more than a year, so I did the move. Please inform me if I did anything wrong etc. --Magabund 16:36, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] British & USA backing for Qasim coup in Guardian
AllanHainey the article you mention:
"Declassified UK cabinet papers of 1963 printed in The Guardian on 1 January 1994, p5
In which you wrote:
revealed British & USA backing for the coup which removed Abdul Karim Qassim." does not seem to exist.
I did a Lexis-Nexus search and this is the closest I could find to what you explained:
| January 1, 1994 page 5
CABINET PAPERS 1963: IRAQ: MINISTERS EAGER TO SELL ARMS TO NEW RULERS AFTER BLOODY COUP EVIDENCE of the British government's strong support for the first Iraqi government led by Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath Party is revealed in the enthusiasm with which Macmillan's cabinet secretly agreed to arm the new Baghdad regime, writes Seumas Milne. The Ba'athist overthrow of General Kassem in February, 1963, in a bloody anti-communist coup backed by the CIA, was accompanied by the killing of about 5,000 communists and supporters of the dead leader. Less than two months later Edward Heath - then Lord Privy Seal - gave a sympathetic report to cabinet on an Iraqi request for military aircraft and armoured personnel carriers. "If these inquiries reflected a disposition on the part of the new government of Iraq to reduce their dependence on the Soviet Union, we should seek to take advantage of it," the future prime minister said. The only worry was that British equipment might be used to attack Kuwait, but the government pressed ahead with the arms supplies anyway. By June, there was some ministerial nervousness at the "ruthless methods" being used by the Baghdad regime against the Kurds. Lord Home, then foreign secretary, warned that the government might be criticised if British weapons were used to repress the Kurdish community. The cabinet slowed the flow, but in September military supplies were again sharply stepped up. They included 16 Wessex helicopters, 20 training aircraft, small arms, mortars, ammunition, Saracen carriers and 3,000 rockets. "These arms are wanted urgently by the Iraqis for operations against the Kurds . . . our interest lies in a gradual supply of arms to meet Iraqi requirements," one minute to Macmillan reads. "I agree," the prime minister has scribbled across the bottom, asking that the matter be "pushed forward energetically". Duncan Sandys, the colonial secretary, reported to cabinet in May that the Iraqi government had "found it necessary to imprison a number of supporters of President Nasser and to execute certain adherents of the previous president." He said the agreement to supply military equipment would increase British influence in Iraq. |
More articles:
04:27, 30 September 2005 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by travb (talk • contribs).
[edit] POV Tag
Many sections of this article express POV, such as the following snippet:
- "Qassim’s accomplishments are too many to include here in memory of his death. His accomplishments did not only include those in relation to politics and economy, but they covered a large range of improvements with regard to social services, legal system, agriculture, health and education, construction and the arts. Considering the short term of his leadership (four and a half years) and the youngest experience in the life of the Iraqi Republic, Qassim’s era brought the highest number of accomplishments and positive changes to Iraq compared with eras that preceded and followed him."
The claims made in the sections "Death," "After Death" and "Accomplishments" should be more precisely stated and qualified. Regardless of their accuracy, they lack citation and are written in such generalities that they constitute POV. In addition, the aforementioned sections contain several grammatical and spelling errors. Since the sections require revision in the first place, however, I did not fix these errors. Thucydides411 07:42, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
- I agree. In its current form, this article is definitely not up to Wikipedia standards. Chrisahn 23:18, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] US support for Baathists ?
What are the sources that show the US supported the Baathist coup ? The first source is an essay without citations created in 97, the second source also is without any citations. 7 December 2005 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.68.95.200 (talk • contribs).
- To my knowledge, most of it is recollections by individuals who claim to have been involved. I really don't know the extent of CIA involvement, as there's never been anything official declassified. Given that, I'm somewhat skeptical of how deeply they were actually involved. It's quite probable that they handed off lists of Iraqi communists, but other than that, there's really know way to know anything with certainty. Mattm1138 01:02, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- This seems like historic revisionism considering the U.S. and Western attitudes towards Baathist Party and the position of the Baathist Party towards regional ally Israel. Furthermore the Baathist PArty of Iraq supported nationalization and increased involvement in anti-western movements as well as a non-aligned position that allowed them to have close ties to the Soviets while not becoming a sattelite. 21 November 2006 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.66.237.41 (talk • contribs).
[edit] Removed the following to talk
Unreferenced material:
- He is still praised for his unselfishness by the Iraqi people: It is said that he died without owning anything, that he slept in his office in the Ministry of Defense and he used to give half his salary to his sister to cook lunches for him. During his rule he started many very serious attempts to develop the country and to improve its infrastructure.
Unreferenced POV:
- His accomplishments did not only include those in relation to politics and economy, but they covered a large range of improvements with regard to social services, legal system, agriculture, health and education, construction and the arts. Considering the short term of his leadership (four and a half years) and the youngest experience in the life of the Iraqi Republic, Qassim’s era brought the highest number of accomplishments and positive changes to Iraq compared with eras that preceded and followed him.
Original research:
- A source in the First Branch of Iraq’s Directorate of Security told this writer in 1967 that some 340 Communists died at the time. A well-placed foreign diplomatic observer, who does not wish to be identified, set the total death toll in the neighborhood of 1,500. The figure includes the more than one hundred soldiers who fell inside the Ministry of Defense and “a good lot of Communists.”
Unreferenced POV:
- He left Kafr Qasem with the reputation of a disciplinarian, meticulous and honest.
Confusing paragraph, not sure what writer is refering to:
- The Iraqi Communist Party championed Qassim throughout his rule, despite the steps he took against it, he tried to make a national government without any political influence from any party. It later appeared that Qassim's move against the Communist Party was his biggest mistake, since he was left with no means to mobilise ordinary people to defend his regime when the Ba’ath Party launched a coup in 1963.
- Qassim succeeded in the struggle against Egypt's Nasser. Gamal Abdel Nasser stated, “No doubt the fact that he had incurred my displeasure weighed against his position. But in the direct contest I was thwarted; I grudgingly acknowledged my defeat, just as I have since acknowledged defeat against other opponents in the Middle East arena.”
POV tone:
- Qassim had the very difficult mission of steering Iraq through that era when pro-Arab nationalism was at its peak of power in the Arab world, especially after the formation of U.A.R between Egypt and Syria under the leadership of Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt.
Best wishes, Travb (talk) 03:45, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
