Flashpoints originated while founder and Managing Editor, James Mattil was living in Belfast, Northern Ireland, during the late 1990's. A recent IRA cease-fire had ended and violence resumed as peace negotiations sputtered along.
Life in Belfast afforded Mattil an opportunity to meet and interview people and activists from different factions, which provided rare insights into the goals, aspirations, fears and hatreds driving the conflict.
Mattil later traveled to Spain and Morocco, met with Basque dissidents and disgruntled Muslims, finding striking similarities to Ulster. He realized how little outsiders, especially Americans, really know about Ireland's "Troubles," or about other violent political conflicts. The realities on the ground and in the streets have little in common with the ivory tower posturing and propaganda that passes for public diplomacy.
Returning to the US in 1998, Mattil launched Flashpoints: Guide to World Conflict. The award-winning website has attracted millions of visitors and, hopefully, has helped increase understanding of political violence.
After launching a companion website, "Global Focus: Open Source Intelligence," in 2005, Mattil went to Iraq where he worked for several months on contracts with the US State Department and MNC-I. His generally negative experience in Iraq reinforced his commitment to informing others about the causes and effects of violent political conflict.
In autumn 2006, Mr. Mattil returned to Iraq as Chief of Staff of the Office of Accountability & Transparency (OAT) with the US Department of State at Embassy Baghdad. OAT's missionwas to train and assist the Government of Iraq (GOI) agencies responsible for fighting corruption and establishing the "Rule of Law."
Three years after the US invasion, Iraq's government was ranked as the third most corrupt in the world.
In September 2007, Mattil returned to the US on leave and while on vacation in Maine "everything blew up" after a series of news stories were published about OAT and the state of corruption in Iraq. The Iraqi official, commissioner of in charge of GOI anti-corruption activities (Judge Radhi Al-Radhi, Commissioner of Iraq's Commission on Public Integrity or CPI) was forced to seek political asylum in the US. Judge Radhi alleged that Prime Minister Al-Maliki was complicit in attempts to block corruption investigations of high GOI officials. Al-Maliki fired back with charges against Al-Radhi.
As an advisor to Judge Radhi, Mattil was swept into a political maelstrom of conflicting agendas between US agencies and GOI. He was asked by Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) to testify at the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. After a closed interview, the State Department "unofficially" transferred Mr. Mattil back to Washington and directed him to avoid any further contact with Al-Radhi. In October, his employment was terminated.
The Waxman Oversight committee then subpoenaed Secretary of State, Condolezza Rice and others to testify to explain matters raised during congressional interviews with Mattil and Al-Radhi. Sec. Rice responded by retroactively classifying previouslt unclassified reports from OAT and issuing a gag order establishing "red lines" to block State Department officials from giving "assessments" of the state of corruption in Iraq.
On October 11, 2007, the U.S.House of Representatives passed H. Resolution 734, demanding recission of Sec. Rice's orders obstructing the U.S. Congress. Appearing as a "former State Department official, Mattil was featured on CBS News 60 Minutes and tetsified at a Senate hearing dealing with corruption in Iraq.
He has never spoken out to explain the circumstances behind the political turmoil or to provide a public assessment...until now.
Starting in January 2009, Mr. Mattil plans to post a series of reports on the state of corruption in Iraq, explaining how corruption funnels money to insurgents and terrorists and revealing the political disarray and infighting at Embassy Baghdad.
To Contact by E-mail
Click Below:
Featured Links |
|
 |
|
Editors Perspective
All governments claim a monopoly on violence that empowers them to field police forces and armies. When non-government actors resort to organized violence against a state, it's usually condemned as terrorism. Contrary to the coventional wisdom there are two types of political violence: state violence and non-state violence.
It rarely matters which comes first; one leads to the other, as people instinctively opt to fight fire with fire. But neither side can ultimately win be defeating its adversary by force alone. They may win a temporary victory, but unless the underlying causes of distress are addressed, violence will re-emerge.
It's called the cycle of violence and it's as predictable as any other natural cycle. "Adressing underlying causes' sounds vague, nebulous and obscure, but what it means is providing a form of governance that the overwhelming majority of citizens accept as legitimate. A simple majority - majority rule - isn't enough, especially where the majority population uses its political mass to exploit or repress the minority. That has never worked and it never will.
This doesn't mean that people won't keep trying to find ways to impose their will on others and to use political control to their own advantage. It seems to be the way of the world.
-James F. Mattil
Managing Editor
Open Source Inetlligence
GLOBAL FOCUS
Open Source Inetlligence