Los Angeles Times
The Friend We Betrayed
Max Boot
April 7, 2005

In 1987, after he was exonerated of corruption charges, former Secretary of
Labor Raymond Donovan issued the classic plea of the wronged man: "Which
office do I go to to get my reputation back?" Whichever office it is, Ahmad
Chalabi may want to apply there as well.

The leader of the Iraqi National Congress has been the most unfairly
maligned man on the planet in recent years. If you believe what you read,
Chalabi is a con man, a crook and, depending on which day of the week it is,
either an American or Iranian stooge.

The most damning charge is that he cooked up the phony intelligence that led
to the invasion of Iraq. In the words of that noted foreign policy sage
Maureen Dowd: "Ahmad Chalabi conned his neocon pals, thinking he could run
Iraq if he gave the Bush administration the smoking gun it needed to sell
the war."

Such calumnies are so ingrained by now that La Dowd published that sentence
on Sunday, three days after the release of the Robb-Silberman report that
refutes it. The bipartisan commission headed by Chuck Robb and Laurence
Silberman did not give Chalabi a totally clean bill of health. It found that
two INC-supplied defectors were "fabricators." But it also determined that
the most notorious liar popularly linked to the INC - a defector known as
"Curveball" who provided false information on Saddam Hussein's biological
weapons - "was not influenced by, controlled by, or connected to the INC."

"In fact, over all," the Robb-Silberman report concluded, "CIA's postwar
investigations revealed that INC-related sources had a minimal impact on
prewar assessments." Translation: The CIA's attempts to scapegoat Chalabi
for its own failures won't wash.

This is only one of many unsubstantiated accusations against Chalabi. Last
August, for instance, an Iraqi judge issued an arrest warrant for Chalabi
and his nephew, Salem Chalabi. Ahmad was supposedly guilty of
counterfeiting, Salem of having an Iraqi official murdered. Within weeks the
bizarre charges were dropped for lack of evidence.

Unfortunately, no court of law has examined the accusations made by
anonymous U.S. spooks that Chalabi told the Iranian government that one of
its codes had been broken by the United States. U.S. officials claimed that
they found out Chalabi was the source of the leak because they were able to
decode a message to that effect to Tehran. But why would Iranian agents use
the compromised code to transmit that information? And how would a foreign
national such as Chalabi get access to secret intercepts? Guess we're
supposed to take the U.S. intelligence community's word for all this, even
though its judgment has been discredited in every outside inquiry.

Then there's the charge that Chalabi was guilty of fraud at a Jordanian bank
he once owned. A secret Jordanian military tribunal convicted him in
absentia in 1992. Chalabi argues that this was a frame-up by Jordanians
eager to seize his assets and curry favor with Hussein. The truth may come
out in a lawsuit that Chalabi has filed in the U.S. against the Jordanian
government. In the meantime, claims that he's a swindler must be treated
with skepticism.

This man risked his life and his fortune to overthrow one of the worst
tyrants of the 20th century. He deserves better. More important, the U.S.
would have done better in Iraq if it had been listening to Chalabi as much
as conspiracy buffs claimed.

In early 2003, the Bush administration ignored Chalabi's warnings that
liberation should not be allowed to turn into occupation. Chalabi wanted to
set up an interim government right away. The administration refused on the
grounds that exiles had no standing in Iraq. So instead that well-known
Iraqi, L. Paul Bremer III, was anointed potentate. His mistakes, which
Chalabi criticized, resulted in a critical loss of momentum. A year later,
the U.S. finally appointed a government headed by Chalabi's cousin and
rival, Iyad Allawi. If an exile could be appointed in 2004, why not in 2003?

But don't worry about Chalabi. Unlike Secretary Donovan, he's done just
fine. Contrary to CIA reports that he had no constituency, he has positioned
himself at the center of Iraqi politics. He was a leading candidate for
prime minister and will probably get a Cabinet post.

On second thought, Chalabi is better off not getting his old reputation -
that of a U.S. ally - back. Being reviled in Washington may be the best gift
that any Iraqi politician could receive.

Max Boot is a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Reply via email to