Posted by Benjamin on: 04.20.2007 /
I was completely outraged today to learn that I am going to miss out on an opportunity to hear Dr. Riyadh Lafta, who teaches medicine at Al-Mustansiriya University’s College of Medicine in Baghdad. Dr. Lafta is perhaps most well known as the co-author of this article published late last year in which he and four other researchers used vigorous research methods to show that if one compares pre and post war death rates in Iraq, there were 650,000 more deaths in the 42 months following the U.S. led invasion in March 03 than there were in the 42 months prior to that invasion. It seems to me that this makes sense if you think about it. Pre invasion, the infrastructure of the nation was more or less intact, whereas post invasion it has been less and less intact. So people who wouldn’t have otherwise died did die because of lots of simple things quite outside all the violence, like roads, electricity, water, hospitals, etc. etc. not working. The research is actually quite fascinating and very approachable. I recommend reading the whole article.
That paper was co published by the John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and The School of Medicine at Dr. Lafta’s University. Dr. Lafta was scheduled to speak at my very own university, the University of Washington, tonight, Friday the 20th of April, as part of a collaborative research project documenting elevated levels of pediatric cancer in Basra, Iraq. Although he applied for a visa 9 months ago, he was denied, according to this articlein the UW daily. the article continues
After being denied a U.S. visa, the doctor’s colleagues at Simon Fraser approved a plan to host Lafta and set up an interactive video conference to be broadcast this Friday at Kane Hall. Lafta’s Canadian visa was issued within one week of application.
Stuck in Amman, Jordan, Lafta learned late Tuesday that the trip to Vancouver would not happen either, because he was denied a transfer visa by the British government. His itinerary required a four-hour layover at London’s Heathrow Airport.
“This was clearly meant to deny the free flow of academic freedom and the exchange of ideas and information,” (spokesman for U.S. Congressman Jim McDermott,) Mike DeCesare said. “When that free-flow can’t happen, it’s a very scary day.”
According to Lafta’s colleague and Simon Fraser professor Dr. Tim Takaro, the letter Lafta received from the British government cited Iraq’s inclusion to the terrorist watch list since 1993 as the primary reason for the transfer visa’s denial.“That’s ludicrous, because two years ago he got into the U.K. and gave lectures there,” said Takaro.
. Read the rest of the article
Here’s an article written popularly supporting the research methods used
And here’s an article leaning from a more academic perpective which critiques the research method used.
Leave a Reply
Comment by: Janice
1 04/20/07 8:37 AM | Comment Link |I haven’t read the articles yet Ben, but thanks for linking to them and broaching this topic. . . I’d never heard of Lafta before but will look forward to reading the articles and any of his other writings I may be able to find. And I agree with you, it makes sense the death toll is higher 42 mos post from a purely academic standpoint, but what a tragedy - any loss of life. I wonder what the numbers will look like 5 years down the road or ten…ten years pre and 10 years post. Would be nice if Lafta could do a podcast or webcast or something from wherever he is or was.
Janice
Comment by: Benjamin Ady
2 04/20/07 1:12 PM | Comment Link |Janice, I added a couple more article links at the end which speak a bit more to the validity or lack thereof of the 650,000 figure.
Comment by: Doreen
3 04/21/07 8:41 AM | Comment Link |We dispute the number of deaths in Iraq, but we certainly cannot dispute the censorship. I thought the images from Vietnam had a lot to do with the war resistance, but now I wonder, are we so immune to violence that even if we saw what was happening in Iraq and Dover, DE, would it move us to more action?
Comment by: JG
4 05/6/07 9:49 AM | Comment Link |I write this as someone who with hindsight certainly believes the invasion of Iraq was a huge mistake and who at the time had very major misgivings about it.
I think there are circumstances in which it may be right to invade another country in order to avoid a catastrophe. The problem is that practicalities usually rule out such an option. I don’t think these circumstances existed in Iraq and for that reason think the invasion was a mistake. More harm than good has been done as a result of the invasion.
But take Rwanda. If world leaders had known in advance what was going to happen and there had been a way of invading Rwanda in order to prevent the massacre that took place there, I believe it would have been right to do so.
Cynics would say Iraq has oil but Rwanda does not. I’m not sure that is altogether fair but there is a basis for such a view. The Bush administration is not one individual but a collection of individuals all with different motives, different agendas. People with good intentions can be manipulated by others who are utterly cynical. And individuals themselves often have mixed motives. We can do something intending to do good but are our motives always completely clearcut even to ourselves? Don’t we act with a mixture of motives and even, dare I say it, with an element of self deception. Do we do something genuinely to help the other person or because it makes us feel good? I would argue it is usually a mixture of both. But which is the dominant motive? If we are honest with ourselves, I think we have to say we don’t really know.
If it was right to invade Iraq in order to remove “an evil dictator” who was causung suffering to his people and threatening world peace through WMD (none were found after the invasion) then what should have happened was massive investment in Iraq post completion and massive aid for the Iraqi people. Instead it comes across to me that the Bush adminstration are happy to leave Iraq and Afghanistan as weak countries in turmoil rather than be strong Middle East countries without western democracy. That may be unfair and I don’t really know enough to comment but that is my perception. That is what I really struggle with rather than the invasion itself.
Returning to the original issue. I’m not sure you can simply look at pre and post invasion. I think you really need to compare what has actually happened with what would have happened if the invasion hadn’t taken place. That can only be speculation and death rates pre invasion should certainly be considered.
But take the Rwanda example. Say Rwanda had been invaded and the massacre avoided. But there may well have been many more deaths post invasion than in the years prior to invasion. But that would not mean it was wrong to have invaded Rwanda.
Comment by: Rachel
5 05/6/07 7:46 PM | Comment Link |Welcome, JG! It’s good to have you back in the OTM blog “neighborhood”!
I definitely agree with your observation that most of what we do is with mixed motives, both as individuals and as nations. And I also agree that IF the use of military force is ever warranted, it would be in situations like Rwanda, and now Darfur.
Personally, I feel very conflicted over this issue. I’ve just started reading the book Just Peacemaking: Ten Practices for Abolishing War - I’ll report back on what I learn…
Comment by: Benjamin ady
6 05/7/07 12:29 AM | Comment Link |JG,
also welcome back! I was amazed this last week to learn about some of the work Bill Clinton is doing, along with Paul Farmer, in Rwanda, in part because, as he says, he feels respnsible at some level for failing to prevent the tragedy there during his presidency. Keep your eyes peeled for a post about this on Tuesday this week.
Comment by: JG
7 05/8/07 5:41 AM | Comment Link |Rachel and Benjamin, thanks for your comments.
Have had no direct involvement with Rwanda myself but someone I work with spent a significant part of his sabbatical out in Rwanda helping build huts etc and then did a presentation at work when he came back talking about his trip. Very thought provoking.
What has particularly struck me is how when you see survivors interviewed in documentaries, how acepting they are of the situation and simply making the best of things despite their circumstances eg a woman with aids who has lost her husband and all her children in the genocide.
And we sometimes think we have it tough!
Comment by: Benjamin Ady
8 05/10/07 10:15 PM | Comment Link |JG,
Indeed. This is one of the many evidences of the near impossibility of transcending time and place. It’s hard for Megan and I to maintain an attitude of gratitude living relatively near the city center is a smallish 3 bedroom with a yard, and not having car, when we are so constantly surrounded by people who live in bigger places with 2 cars etc. etc. But in Tokyo, or in London, for instance, you just couldn’t find a place this big anywhere remotely close to the center, and practically nobody has a car. So we remind ourselves of these things. Or how lots of people have no car and live in a place with *no* public transport at all. and we moan about how slow the buses are. etc etc. can’t get away from time and place. Alas. Must continue to work on it.
Comment by: JG
9 05/11/07 4:52 AM | Comment Link |Ben,
Can really identify with your comments. We do have a car but it is 20 years old, leaking oil and the last service ending up costing twice as much as the car is worth. Can’t really afford to replace it, particularly having just paid out for that service which ended up being much more than we expected.
Whereas everyone else around us appears to own brand new cars!
BUT I have to say that although this is a huge generalisation and I know of many many people who this does not apply to, there does seem to be a general principle at work that the more you own, the more miserable you are.
I say this because my observation is that most of the most contented people I know are those who have very little or nothing. That in no way justifies leaving people with nothing, far from it.
But we do deceive ourselves in the West when we say that wealth, a well paid job, the latest in TV and computer technology etc will give us the happiness we desire.