Peace & War: U.S. foreign policy |
|
HEADLINES
1/5/09 The "anti-democratic" character of U.S. policy towards Latin America has a long history:. This was the assertion of a book by Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman, written but suppressed in the 1970s, in a history going back to George Kennan's bald statement in the 1950s that U.S. economic exploitation of Latin America would have to be accompanied by turning a blind eye to issues of authoritarianism and human abuses in these countries. These views are discussed by Herman in a recent Z-net interview. http://www.zmag.org/zvideo/2962
Websites:
Anti-war.com: http://antiwar.com/ Information Clearing House: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/ Arab News: coverage of Middle East News from Saudi Arabia: http://www.arabnews.com/ Dawn: Pakistani English language daily, much news on Middle East and India: http://www.dawn.com/2006/01/17/index.htm Foreign Policy in Focus: http://www.fpif.org/ Focus on the Global South: http://www.focusweb.org/ Middle East Report: http://electroniciraq.net/news/
Analysis & views: 1/6/09 Gaza and the Bay of Pigs: Can you spell fait accompli?: Barack Obama may need not only to learn to spell it but to deal with the consequences of the lame duck actions of an outgoing Republican administration that has created a "fact on the ground" of a U.S.-sponsored invasion of dubious legality and lack of prospects for success, just as JFK "inherited" the Bay of Pigs fiasco from a lame duck Eisenhower. Michael Carmichael says that the invasion of Gaza by Israel with U.S. support and military personnel has the same capacity of derailing the Obama administration before it starts that the Bay of Pigs operation had in 1961. Was this the existential challenge to a young Obama administration foretold by the Prophet Biden? http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article21646.htm FOR A SIMILAR VIEWPOINT, SEE http://sunstateactivist.org/ssablog/?p=131 1/5/09 The "anti-democratic" character of U.S. policy towards Latin America has a long history:. This was the assertion of a book by Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman, written but suppressed in the 1970s, in a history going back to George Kennan's bald statement in the 1950s that U.S. economic exploitation of Latin America would have to be accompanied by turning a blind eye to issues of authoritarianism and human abuses in these countries. These views are discussed by Herman in a recent Z-net interview. http://www.zmag.org/zvideo/2962 1/3/09 "Strategic partnership" between India and the United States is likely to be re-evaluated as new governments take office in both countries. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/JL25Df02.html. 12/18/08 U.S. seeks UN approval to make Somalia a "free-fire zone" in the "war on piracy.": Chris Floyd so describes the effort to elicit UN sanction for other countries, with "Somalia government approval" to conduct raids against piracy "hang outs" in Somalia. Being that the "Somali government" (what is left of it) is U.S. backed (through its Ethiopian surrogate), this approval should be no problem. Main stream media and even the "progressive blogosphere" have generally failed to inform the public on the U.S. role in creating the very "piracy" activities that the U.S. is now so eager to suppress. http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=11375 SEE ALSO: http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=935&Itemid=1 12/13/08 Some Arab countries see delpoyment of anti-piracy navies of the coast of Somalia as a trojan horse threatening Arab national security: At a Cairo meeting, countries in the Red Sea area plan their own anti-piracy measures, while concern is expressed that U.S., Indian and other foreign vessels operating in the area may be there as a pretext to assert foreign dominance over Arab affairs. http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=44897 12/12/08 "Unclear at best" Writer for AntiWar.Com posts this tag on the reported intention of President-elect Obama to provide a "nuclear umbrella" for Israel, promising a "devastating" nuclear attack on Iran should that country launch a nuclear attack on Israel. Even Israeli leaders are said to be "puzzled" by the offer, since Iran has no immediate such capability, Israel has sufficient weapons itself to launch a retaliatory attack and the umbrella seems merely a "bellicose" gesture at odds with Obama's promised emphasis on diplomacy in dealing with Iran http://news.antiwar.com/2008/12/11/obama-to-offer-nuclear-umbrella-to-israel/ 12/10/08 "Even the short man can see the sky; when will the international community see what's happening in Somalia?" A Somali peace activist is so quoted in an Amnesty International report. "What is happening" is that there is a brutal Ethiopian occupation there, supported if not instigated by the United States that, in the name of fighting terrorism, has terrorized the people and contributed to their starvation. What is happening is also that the "international community" has been using Somali coastal waters as a dumping ground for toxic wastes. Sadia Ali Aden sees U.S. policy toward Somalia as a "litmus test" of the commitment of an Obama administration to a truly "humanitarian" (as opposed to an imperialist) effort to allow the people of Africa to see the sky (and see more than Blackhawk helicopters.) http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=922&Itemid=1 12/8/08 Obama to Iran: Do you want to do this"the hard way or the easy way?" In a Meet the Press interview described as the President-elect having delivered "mixed signals" to Iran, he holds out the possibility of diplomatic talks (the easy way) or tighter sanctions (the hard way) that might be used by the U.S. in regard to Iran's alleged threat to develop nuclear weapons. http://news.antiwar.com/2008/12/07/obama-attempts-to-clarify-iran-position/ 12/7/08 BREAKING U.S. SANCTION AGAINST TECHNOLOGY EXPORTS TO IRAN WITHOUT BREAKING U.S. LAWS. A number of multi-national corporations like the oil tool manufacturer Schlumberger are able to carry on operations in Iran which critics say involve risk in technology transfers that could be used by Iran to develop nuclear weapons. Lawyers for these firms say, apparently correctly, that they are operating in conformity with."all applicable (U.S.) laws and regulations." A Boston Globe special report. 12/7/08 Will next State Department be a "team of rivals" or "Hillary-land"? Apparently it will be the latter as Clinton accepted the nomination on condition of being able to select her own staff and advisers. So far she has tapped personal loyalists for her "kitchen cabinet" and officials from the Bill Clinton adminstration for under-Secretary positions. (For an old H. Clinton imagery, she may be baking cookies with friends in Foggy Bottom.) http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article5299035.ece 12/7/08 "I'm the Senator from Illinois, not the Senator from Kogelo.". Barack Obama's statement during a 2006 visit to Africa. It symbolizes the dilemma of Africans who believe and/or hope that the presence in the White House of a man with immediate African roots will promote African interests in U.S. foreign policy. The problem, says Kenyan poet Mukama Wa Ngugi, is that Obama will have to be responsive to U.S. political pressures, and may disappoint Africans on such matters as support of AIDS eradication, U.S. imperialism in Somalia and the development of an African military command. It comes down, he says, to whether Africans will be able to pressure Obama to be responsive to their expectations. (Again, the idea of power from the grassroots; or should we say veldt-roots?) http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/19869 12/5/08 Pirates of Somalia may be "blessing in disguise" for U.S. foreign policy:. Mike Whitney describes a plan underway for the U.S. Navy to begin patrolling the waters off Somalia, ostensibly to control the "piracy" there, but also to prop up U.S. and other foreign interests in maintaining control over Somalia after the U.S.-backed Ethiopian occupation leaves the country. This control involves the continued plundering of fishing stocks off the Somalia coast as well as the dumping of toxic wastes in the area by several foreign countries. (Are you listening, Larry Summers?) http://www.counterpunch.org/whitney12032008.html 12/3/08 As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton will face a tall order of expectations if she is to implement Obama's campaign promises for improvement of Latin American relations, especially in light of some her somewhat contrary record in that regard. http://narcosphere.narconews.com/thefield/welcome-secretary-clinton-obamas-promises-be-kept 12/2/08 While many in Israel hail Obama's nomination of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, there is skepticism in the Arab world that her nomination signals no likely change in the pro-Israeli policy of the Bush administration. http://wiredispatch.com/news/?id=472437 12/1/08 Hawks expected to make a "soft power" nest in Obama administration:. The expected announcement today of Obama's "security team"---Hillary Clinton, Robert Gates, James Jones---will bring to the fore people noted for their emphasis on strong military action. Still, people in the transition team suggest that their appointment will coincide with a "sweeping shift" of U.S. foreign policy away from large scale military operations like those in Iraq and Afghanistan and toward operations that involve more emphasis on diplomacy and preventing conflicts before they occur. Among other things, the new policy would alter the ratio between soldiers and foreign service workers, a ratio that Obama described as saying the military has more members of its marching bands than personnel available to do the soft power work of winning hearts and minds. The focus of these conflict-preventing efforts will be the "failed states" of the world. (Footnote to all this: Gates has been saying this for some time and it has been Bush's idea as well; so the "sweeping shift" may be more rhetorical than real: "change we can talk about." For one thing, foreign services officers have been notably reluctant to being assigned to "failed states" like Somalia.) http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/01/us/politics/01policy.html?_r=1&hp 11/28/08 Barack Obama, you're no John F. Kennedy (or are you?): Gareth Porter sketches out a parallel between the situations in which the two Presidents come into power, with intentions in both cases to end an unpopular military conflict. JFK's intentions for Viet Nam withdrawal were frustrated by the resistance of his Generals and Admirals in the field, though both his Secretary of Defense (McNamara) and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (Maxwell Taylor) were supportive of his policy even as his National Security Advisor (McGeorge Bundy) opposed it. In Obama's case, with the prospective retention of Robert Gates as Secretary of Defense and appointment of General James Jones as National Security Advisor and Admiral Mike Mullen likely to continue as chairman of JCS, his three closest military advisers will be men who have generally opposed a timetable for Iraqi withdrawal. With the same reluctance of General Petraeus and other military leaders in the field to support timetables, Obama may face an even stronger case of internal resistance to his foreign policy by his military aides than did JFK. http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=44888 11/27/08 Will George Bush's war on Somalia become Barack Obama's war on Somalia?: This question is posed by Glen Ford of Black Agenda Report in reviewing the history of the U.S. intervention in Somalia: its support of an Ethiopian invasion that dislodged the Islamic Courts government, which provided the only semblance of order in the country in its recent history; and its own military actions from off-shore bases. With rising Islamic resistance and flagging Ethiopian will to continue the operation, Obama is likely to have to decide whether to continue yet another "war" that the U.S. cannot win. http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=906&Itemid=1 11/25/08 "The American elections were important for Israel. The Israeli election will be important for America, too.": " The first proposition is self-evident from the extensive coverage of the U.S. election in Israeli media. The second is less so, as American media gives little attention to the Israeli national elections slated for February 2009. Uri Avnery notes that the hawkish Likud party has forged a substantial lead in the polls and, given that party's refusal to consider the Saudi peace proposal of 2002, suggests a "dilemma" for the next President: if he makes any serious effort at putting contending parties back on the road to peace, he may find himself in conflict with the Israeli state, an uncomfortable if not unthinkable situation for a U.S. President. http://www.antiwar.com/avnery/?articleid=13809 11/24/08 The long shadow of President Bill Clinton could fall over a secretary of State Hillary Clinton in matters of Latin American policy: . A writer for Narco-News notes President Clinton's cozy relationship with "free trade" and human rights violation forces in the hemisphere and his "golden tongue" after he left the presidency by virtue of which he brought into his and Hillary's family income some $2 million in fees for speaking to the business oligarchies of Latin America. 11/17/08 Hillary Clinton as Obama's secretary of state? Would that mean Bill Clinton on steroids in U.S. foreign policy?: Justin Raimondo argues that this appointment would be fatal to the fulfillment of Obama promises to lighten the hand of American imperialism in foreign policy. As first lady and as a presidential candidate, she out Bill Clintoned-Bill Clinton in her support of Israel and in the Slavophobia that produced the dysfunctional Yugoslav war and could ignite a volatile U.S. relationship with Russia. Her appointment, Raimondo says, would create a "co-presidency" with a person whom the voters rejected as President in the primary elections. http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=13774 11/16/08 Less stick, more carrot: In formulating his policy toward Iran, President-elect Obama might want to listen to Scott Ritter: The former UN weapons inspector, noted for his opposition to the "intelligence" that asserted Iraq's WMD possession, says Obama must be ready from "day one" of his administration with coherent and rational policies in U.S. dealings with Iran, Pakistan, Iraq and Russia. In this first installment of a series he focuses on Iran, noting that early in the presidential campaign Obama took a nuanced approach toward Iran as a threat to world peace, then moved toward a "tougher" stance in response to pressure first from Hillary Clinton and then John McCain. Now, with that "pressure" off him, he might hopefully return to his original stance (though his first post-election press conference was not encouraging), recognizing the cause and effects between Iranian intransigence and its threats from Israel and the U.S., and perhaps re-focussing from Iran's unlikely (too expensive) pursuit of nuclear enrichment and toward the program of its more likely development of missile delivery systems. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article21223.htm 11/10/08 What did the U.S. gain from its cross-border raid on Syria?: Very little, really, as it represented an attack on a country that had been exercising a stabilising influence on conflicts in the Middle East. Its effect, clearly, was to inflame further world public opinion against the U.S., as the hypocrisy of the U.S. outrage against Russia for violating Georgian sovereignty is somehow put to rest when it came to U.S. violation of Syrian sovereignty. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article21184.htm 11/9/08 Ivan Eland: "Muscular liberals" try to muscle their way into control of U.S. foreign policy: Will Obama as President act on his "instincts" and try to "retract the empire" by withdrawing from unsustainable military and imperialist adventures abroad in light of domestic economic crisis? Or will he allow a group of "muscular liberals" the like of Susan Rice, Madeleine Albright and Richard Holbrooke to maintain and expand foreign interventions like Darfur for "humanitarian" reasons? Eland hopes for the former, fears the latter. http://anti-war.com/eland/?articleid=13736 11/8/08 As Obama transition "vets" the next members of their presidential administration, Indian writer Vijay Prashad vets a member of the transition team:, Sonal Shah, who now works for Google on its "global development strategy" but is associated as well with transition team head's John Podesta of the liberal (neo-liberal?) think thank, Center for American Progress, is the target of Prashad's interest. He notes particularly her associations in her native state of Gujurat, India, which gave Ghandi to the world but is now the epicenter of a "Hindu right" movement that is sharply anti-Muslim and anti-Christian and the recipient of much support from the Shah family, including Sonal. When the phone rings at 3 A.M. for another Obama appointee, will Sonal Shah be picking it up? http://www.counterpunch.org/prashad11072008.html 11/7/08 The American Empire: Bush almost killed it," but Obama seems to be resurrecting it: The view of sociologist Pablo Ouziel, noting with some dismay the tendency of leading "intellectuals" to abandon their role as critics in favor of offering their intellectual support to a wave of nationalist fervor that seems to be sweeping across the country in the wake of Obama's election. http://www.countercurrents.org/ouziel061108.htm 11/3/08 Will the next U.S. President be able to forge "grand bargains" that will reduce conflict in the Middle East?: Jim Lobe assesses this possibility as a contrast to Che Guevara's long-ago prediction of the demise of U.S. world power as the country became bogged down in "one, two and three Vietnams." With U.S.-involved conflicts raging from Pakistan to Somalia, Lobe raises the counter possibility that "grand bargains" among the various belligerents in the area can be achieved by vigorous diplomatic effort, the kind of activity in which Saudi Arabia is already playing a role of leadership. (Hear that, Obama, McCain? Better get yourself a hell of a Secretary of State.) http://www.antiwar.com/lobe/?articleid=13708 11/1/08 Is George W. Bush plannig a "parting gift " to his successor in office? Jonathan Freedlander speculates on this question in the aftermath of the cross-border raid on Syria by U.S. forces. Is the action designed as a "souvenir" of his administration's emphasis on pre-emptive violence as a first solution to international problems? We don't know but, based on past historical examples of such "gifts," the period of transition that follows this week's election may be fraught with many dangers of unchecked exercise of presidential powers. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article21126.htm 11/1/08 Without consideration for humanity or decency: International law prohibits any intrusions on the sovereignty of a nation that are not motivated by such "considerations." The raids by U.S. forces across the border from Iraq to Syria, which violate decency and humanity by their brutal assaults on civilians, are "plausibly denied" by official U.S. military since they are carried out by "Special Forces" that notoriously operate without sanction from their nominal commanders. http://www.counterpunch.org/cloughley10312008.html 10/25/08 Will Dennis Ross be a ket foreign policy advisor in an Obama presidency? If he is, says Ira Glunts, the world may be in for some trouble. A Middle East "diplomat" from the Clinton era, Ross was then and continues today as he campaigns for Obama to be an unswerving supporter of Israeli foreign policy. He, as well as Obama, have given signals in their public utterances that the next administration cannot or will not restrain an Israeli attack on Iran if Israel deems such an attack as necessary for its "security." 10/24/08 An international conference of donor nations decides it must give humanitarian aid to the country of Georgia for the destruction wrought in its conflict with Russia, even though Georgia's government was primarily responsible for that destruction. The U.S. agrees to kick in $1 billion for this "bailout" with motives having to do with protection of western oil interests as well as a geo-political challenge to Russia in its "near-abroad" area. http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=13667 10/23/08 The Right Wing is beginning to show some "Obama love." Margaret Kimberley notes the recent conversion to Obama support by such right-wing luminaries as William Buckley's son Christopher and Christopher Hitchens, a sometime-liberal writer and an early Obama critic who has now come around to his support for the same reason as Buckley: Obama's evolution as a staunch world imperalist and his appeal to the "soft" form of white racism which sees Obama as a comfortable answer to an otherwise "dangerous" black population. It appears that Obama is indeed "reaching across the aisle." http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=843&Itemid=1 10/20/08 From reluctant warriot to interventionist: The evolution of John McCain: McClatchy newspaper article traces in some detail the GOP presidential contender's change from an earlier "maverick" with reference to U.S. military adventurism to ardent support of the Iraqi War and an advocate of regime change in other "rogue states." The sea change in this evolution toward interventionism came with his assumption of the leadership of the New Citizenship Project, a neo-conservative entity. (The article fails to mention that McCain has been chairman of the Board of International Republican Institute, an "interventionist" arm of the GOP that matches the Democratic one that has been chaired by Madeleine Albright.) http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/54379.html On International Republican Institute: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Republican_Institute 10/19/08 "The noteworthy thing about this national defense strategy statement is that it says nothing directly about American national defense.": William Pfaff's observation about the National Defense Statement issued in June, which is all about the "Bush doctrine" of spreading democracy and combatting "extremism" wherever it rears its ugly head in the world. Our military effort is described as an effort to prevent other world forces from interfering with our interventions throughout the world in pursuit of this "doctrine." Pfaff speculates on why such a statement would be issued 6 months before the retirement of the aforementioned Bush, and suggests that it may foretell the continuation of this interventionist foreign policy in the next administration, be it Republican or Democrat. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article21048.htm 10/11/08 Between Obama and McCain, who owuld be tougher on Iran and more friendly to Israel? Israeli newspaper Haaretz describes a stand-off between them on this question as both pledge unswerving support for Israel; on Iran, Obama threatens "dire consequences" of Iran's acquiring of nuclear weapons, while McCain says he would not wait for UN approval to launch an attack on Iran if American interests seemed to require such attack. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1027578.html 10/5/08 U.S. Navy may be mucking in provocative behavior in Black Sea off the coast of Georgia: Georgia officials claim, without U.S. verification, that Georgian coast guard personnel have boarded a U.S.destroyer, the U.S.S. Mason, for "training" purposes. This activity is expected to be an irritation to Russia, already upset by what it claims is the U.S. use of "humanitarian" cover to give military supplies to Georgia which has vowed to "reclaim" its breakaway provinces. http://wiredispatch.com/news/?id=407496 10/5/08 Iraq and Afghanistan you say? Didn't you hear? The U.S. has been occupying another country since 2004: That would be Haiti, which got a "regime change" under U.S. sponsorship in 2004 and remains in what amounts to a colonial relationship with foreign political and economic domination, as it undergoes the "shock therapy" of IMF-imposed privatization and elimination of social services that keep the country's people in a dire strait of poverty. http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/10/haiti-in-solidarity-with-its-five-freedoms/ 10/1/08 Lion and the fox: In the first presidential debate, it was "Obama the cerebral calculator of interests versus McCain the passionate warrior.": This is the way Ira Chernus describes the contrasting "narratives" in a debate that was supposed to have been focussed on foreign policy. McCain's focus on "victory" and "national pride" contrasts with Obama's determination to be "smarter" about the wars we fight and how we fight them. On Chernus' view, McCain's is the politically winning narrative, as people will choose passion over intellect. The ultimate outcome may depend on whether foreign policy or the U.S. economy is the ultimate determining issue because in the latter area, Obama "wins" with the American electorate. http://www.commondreams.org/view/2008/09/30 9/30/08 The "foreign policy" presidential debate: Good for Obama but was it good for the country? Kevin Zeese notes that, a dozen times during the September 26 debate, Barack Obama expressed his "absolute agreement" with John McCain on points of foreign policy and displayed an affable and "agreeable" personality in sharp contrast with McCain's barely-concealed disdain for him. While the "nice guy" approach worked politically as Obama enjoyed a substantial post-debate bounce in the polls, Zeese wonders whether a "debate" that excluded voices of policy difference like those of McKinney, Nader and Barr really served well the need for a presidential campaign to put forward policy alternatives for the voter. http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/09/%e2%80%9csenator-mccain-is-absolutely-right%e2%80%9d/ 9/28/08 INn Friday night's debate, "Obama was the young hawk trying to 'out-hawk' the old uber-hawk.." This assessment from a leading light of "Progressives for Obama," Nation editor Katrina vanden Heuvel. While it disappointed the "progressive" supporter, she admits that Obama was not courting her vote (he already has that in his pocket) but that of "swing" voters who are apparently responsive to the "hawk" position in foreign policy, shown by the fact that such voters tended to believe that Obama had "won" the debate http://www.thenation.com/blogs/edcut/365135 9/19/08 U.S. air strikes in Pakistan: Defense secretary asserts a "right;" CIA head describes them as a "tickle:". In BBC interview, Robert Gates asserts the right of the U.S. to engage in these raids when necessary to "protect American troops" in Afghanistan. Michael Hayden says that the raids are useful as a "tickle" to test the responsive force of the militants. Amidst these tickles and assertions of right, Pakistani civilians continue to be killed and the country's leaders and people are outraged at these assaults on their country's sovereignty. http://news.antiwar.com/2008/09/18/gates-defends-right-of-us-military-launch-attacks-into-pakistan/ 9/16/08 The U.S. "defense of democracy...in Georgia:. VP Cheney, on a visit to the country of Georgia, pledges to help rebuild Georgia's military after its defeat by Russia and also supports the country's application to join NATO. NATO says wait a minute. Georgia, the "fledgling democracy" that the U.S. pledges to support, is not "democratic" enough to join NATO, citing the government's crackdown last year on opposition forces. NATO's Secretary-General is also upset about a EU-brokered peace deal that left substantial numbers of Russians in South Ossetia, and he may well have been influenced as much by the spectre of world war if Georgia carried out its announced intention to recover its "break-away" provinces, and NATO, with Georgia as a member, might be obliged to go to its military assistance. 9/9/08 U.S. decides on a "soft power" approach to Russia on its Georgian invasion:. After speaking toughly about possible economic sanctions and even military action, the Bush administration seems now prepared to adopt the stance of most of the rest of the world: to condemn Russian actions without taking substantive retaliatory measures. In this they are said to wish that "the European Union had been willing to take firmer action than issuing tepid statements criticizing Russia's conduct." Such "tepid statements" for the moment seem to be the hallmark of U.S. policy as well. (But look out for the anti-Russian stances by both major parties' presidential candidates, which may amount to something a little warmer than "tepid" as each party may challenge the "toughness" stance of the other.) http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/09/washington/09policy.html?th&emc=th 9/7/08 (B)illions for defense; not one dime for Georgia:. Michael Collins for "Scoop" Independent News paraphrases the old saw about funding defense versus paying tribute. He reviews the history of the conflict between Russia and Georgia that culminated in the war in South Ossetia and focuses particularly on the U.S. plan to provide more than $1 billion to Georgia's defense: a move that Collins sees as likely to recycle funds back into the same U.S. financial interests that backed the "rose revolution" of 2003 by means of which the current Russia-hating government of Georgia came into being. http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0809/S00087.htm 9/5/08 Joe Biden: "No daylight" between the U.S. and Israel? A self-professed Zionist, the Vice Presidential nominee has made that "no daylight" statement as an assurance of total U.S. support of Israeli actions and they include support for Obama's call (since retracted) for an "undivided" Jerusalem under Israeli control. Still, says a Palestinian writer, Biden has "shivered the spines" of Israelis by some indications that he, unlike all U.S. Presidents since Jimmy Carter, is open to making some demands on Israeli in the direction of conciliation with the Palestinians. http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/18681 8/31/08 A new Cold War led by a younger generation of political leaders? This is the perspective of a British writer, reflecting on a "generation gap" between older leaders who urge caution in returning to an era in which only the threat of "mutual destruction" stands between war between Russia and the West. Actually this new generation of hawks is led by a decidedly older figure, Dick Cheney, who makes a visit to Georgia this week to re-iterate a hard-line U.S. stance against Russian aggression against countries on its border, while older skeptics warn that any move to include Georgia in NATO would already have precipitated a world war against Russia as it was pursuing its own "realistic" actions on its own borders. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/new-kids-on-the-bloc-cold-warriors-913936.html 8/31/08 Palestinian writer gives U.S. Secretary of State a grade on her efforts at a "two-state solution" to the Israel/Palestine conflict: A fat zero: As Rice babbles about "staying the course" on a "peace process," she is mouthing platitudes in U.S. foreign policy that allow the Zionist consolidation of its control throughout Palestine and its genocidal operation against Gaza to continue without fear from an American government which promises it would never force Israel to do anything (like rein in its settlement projects) that the country does not want to do http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/08/the-farce-continues/ 8/30/08 “There are reasons why we did a military lead, as a matter of foreign policy." This statement was made a "senior U.S. official" to the Baltimore Sun. He refers to the prominence of the military in the "humanitarian" relief effort taking place in war-torn Georgia. Russia has accused both the U.S. and NATO of the "foreign policy" aim of using the Georgian emergency as a pretext for countering Russian influence in the area. http://news.antiwar.com/2008/08/29/relief-agencies-furious-as-us-military-takes-over-aid-operations/ 8/30/08 Power of the Israel lobby in U.S. politics? Just ask Jimmy Carter:. The former President was essentially "dissed" at this week's Democratic National Convention, as the DNC was fearful that any enthusiastic convention embracing of a public figure openly critical of Israeli policy might alienate Jewish voters. His "appearance" was the "bare minimum" that could be provided an ex-President, involving a walk across the stage and a video clip showing his work in post-Katrina New Oreans. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20649.htm 8/29/08 August surprise in U.S. presidential election?: Russian President Vladimir Putin suggests that the White House may have "stirred up" Georgia to attack a dissident part of its country in an effort to help a "candidate" (presumably McCain) in the November election. “They needed a small victorious war,” says Putin. (The alleged operation seemingly did not work, as Georgia was anything but "victorious" in the war, and Obama managed to put himself on the same side as McCain and the White House, choosing Joe Biden as his running mate after Biden's friendly visit to the U.S. Georgian "ally," insuring that the candidate of "change" would not change the anti-Russian and pro-Georgian policy of the United States.) http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/29/world/europe/29putin.html?th&emc=th 8/27/08 Russia to the west: You supported Kosovo's independence of Serbia; we can certainly support the "breakaway" areas of Georgia:. Russia's recognition of the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia raises diplomatic hassles around the world and is sure to promote Russia-baiting in the U.S. presidential election, but the Russian President insists their military and diplomatic actions in support of those areas is necessary to save the lives of Russians there and anyhow, didn't the West similarly support the breakaway republic of Kosovo? http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/27/world/europe/27russia.html?th&emc=th 8/26/08 With Joe Biden set to be nominated for Vice-President this week and having just returned from a trip to the country of Georgia to bolster Obama's anti-Russian credentials, the "sitting" Vice-President follows suit with a trip to promote Cheney's "war hawk" stance on providing more military aid to the "fledgling democracy" of Georgia. While Cheney's views have not prevailed in the Bush administration policy, this may yet change as the U.S. goes into a campaign season in which "toughness" over Russian "aggression" in Georgia may lead to an (ahem)-waving contest between the candidates. 8/22/08 According to U.S. envoy to NATO, the U.S. warned Georgia not to invade South Ossetia earlier this month lest it provoke Russian retaliation, Georgia invaded anyway, Russians retaliated with counter-assault, leaving U.S. politicians of both parties spluttering about how you can't invade other countries in the 21st century. http://wiredispatch.com/news/?id=308844 8/21/08 As "speculation centers" on Joe Biden as Obama's running mate, Glenn Greenwald focuses on his record as a "war hawk." Proceeding from an observation that an American President must "start a war almost as an initiation ritual," Greenwald finds Biden may just fit the bill as a Vice-Presidential running mate who will hold out the promise of Obama as still another President who will practice that "ritual." http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/08/19/rice/index.html 8/19/08 South Ossetia 2008 is not Czechoslovakia 1968 : U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice so equates the Russian invasion of Georgia in 08 with the Soviet Union's invasion of Czechoslovakia in 68. She adds ominously that Russia will not "get by with" the kind of aggression they unleased in the earlier invasion. John Taylor notes that there is a world of difference in the two situations, including that Russia is no longer the aggressively communist entity that was the Soviet Union and that in fact the U.S., which along with Israel armed the Georgian attack on the "breakaway" province that precipitated the Russian response, is more like Soviet Union today in having an ideologically aggressive foreign policy, except that now it's "democracy" rather than "communism" that is used to justify empire-driven international aggression. http://www.antiwar.com/taylor/?articleid=13321 8/15/08 U.S. government officials, from the UN Ambassador to the President, wax indignant about Russian violation of Georgian sovereignty after it responds militarily to Georgia's siege of Ossetia. An Antiwar.com columnists notes the utter hypocrisy of this with a brief review of the sordid history of the numerous assaults on other nation's sovereignty by the U.S. itself, in operations ranging from the very clandestine to the very open. http://www.antiwar.com/bandow/?articleid=13300 8/13/08 "In (Bill Kristol's world, Putin's Russia is stalin's USSR, and poor, doe-like little Georgia - a bastion of freedom - is is in danger of being devoured by the insatiable Russian bear.": Justin Raimondo attempts to explode this myth of Russian evil and Georgia innocence, which seems to be motivating GOP foreign policy, as it plays out in a media environment that ignores the "Menchevik" origins of the dictatorial Georgian government, a viewpoint shared by Kristol and by one of Georgia's most famous/notorious citizens, Josef Stalin. Caveat: Raimondo's piece winds up as a funds appeal for antiwar.com as one of the few news agencies battling the neo-conservative tendency of world media coverage of current events. http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=13292 8/11/08 A Truthdig article by Chris Hedges, reproduced on Common Dreams, assesses the consequences of any U.S. and/or Israeli attack on Iran, which he sees as including the collapse of the U.S. and world economies, as well as the consolidation of fascist control of America. In an extraordinary thread of comments on the Common Dreams page, contributors enter into thought-provoking dialogue on the consequences of such attack for the presidential election, how, whether and even if such calamity can be avoided and whether the country's two-party political system can muster the will or resources to avert it. (This was published a week ago, but it's one that progressives "can't miss.") http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/08/04/10790/ 8/10/08 Does the U.S. have a horse in the current conflict between Rusia and Georgia? The U.S. is strongly betting on and supporting Georgia, says a columnist for Prison Planet. Ever since clandestine U.S. operations helped bring in the anti-Russian government in the "rose revolution" of 2003, Georgia has been a "client state" of the U.S., carrying the water of U.S. geo-political strategy (opposing Russian power) in the area, as well of the neo-conservative global agenda of dominating oil resources. http://www.prisonplanet.com/us-attacks-russia-through-client-state-georgia.html SEE ALSO: 8/8/08 "IFf we wish to find our prophetic voice, we must learn to speak about the crimes of our leaders and also look at ourselves honestly in the mirror.": To a Unitarian Universalist meeting in Texas, Robert Jensen delivers, in the spirit of a biblical prophet, a Jeremiad of condemnation of all Americans, not just their criminally guilty leaders, for the imperialist sins perpetrated against the rest of the world. Not a comfortable message, but comfort has never been the office of the prophet. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20450.htm 8/7/08 President Bush's farewell address to Asia, delivered in Thailand, raises questions about the U.S. support of the 2006 military coup in the country that replaced a democratically-elected Prime Minister. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/JH08Ae01.html 7/25/08 Obama, while in Israel, "clarifies" his position of willingness to talk to Iran:. According to Israeli newpaper Haartz, he explains to PM Olmert that these talks would be to give Iran a "clear ultimatum" after which, if Iran failed to "co-operate" with efforts to stop its nuclear development, "action" against the country could legitimately be undertaken. (History has seen this kind of pre-war "diplomacy" before.) http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1005286.html 7/17/08 "Everybody who wanted to elected or re-elected to any office came to see and be seen" is Uri Avnery's description of a spectacularly successful meeting of the U.S. Israel lobby group AIPAC, at which all major presidential candidates and many members of Congress appeared to praise AIPAC's agenda of supporting Israel's demands for sanctions against Iran and U.S. approval if not active involvement in an Israeli military strike. One product of that meeting was the drafting by AIPAC of House Resolution 362, demanding just such sanctions. http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9590 Text of H.R. 362: http://bluelight.ru/vb/showthread.php?t=384508 7/16/08 Washington consensus working again on Iran: An influential Republican (Shelby) and Democrat (Dodd) on Senate Banking Committee agree to take up proposal for expanded sanctions against Iran in an effort to change that country's "behavior." http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/07/15/national/w095830D40.DTL 7/16/08 Crack in the Washington consensus: Dennis Kucinich condemns anti-Iran resolution in House: The resolution, Kucinich asserts, uses the pretext of condemning an attack on a Jewish embassy in Argentina in 1994 to make undocumented assertions about continued threats from Iran and elsewhere that he feels may be used as justification for a strike on the country. Rather, Kucinich believes, Congress should be demanding of the President that he wage an aggressive campaign of diplomatic negotiation with Iran. http://www.commondreams.org/news2008/0715-16.htm 7/13/08 “Poorly conceived, poorly timed, and potentially dangerous." Three retired U.S. military leaders so characterize a proposal in Congress that would encourage a more belligerent U.S. actions toward Iran, especially an embargo that would force Iranian shipping to submit American inspections. The "potential dangers" they cite include the potential disrupting oil shipment that would raise the price of oil, and a complication of U.S. military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. (Actually the "timing" may be rather inspired, as members of Congress in re-election campaigns may want to display to the voters their "tough" credentials on Iran.) http://www.commondreams.org/news2008/0711-04.htm 7/6/08 Born on the Pariser Platz:. Opened to fanfare on July 4 in a U.S.-owned plat of land near the Brandenberg Gate in the heart of Berlin, the massive new structure is treated with disdain by Berliners as a "triumph of banality" for its mental hospital appearance and as a symbol of U.S. influence in the "new" Germany that many Germans don't care to acknowledge. http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0704/p04s01-woeu.html 6/30/08 When Seymour Hersh speaks... In an article in the current issue of The New Yorker magazine, Hersh again displays his familiarity with behind-the-scenes maneuvering within the Bush administration, in this case the continued and escalated effort, described in a "Presidential Finding," of U.S. clandestine efforts against Iran, designed both for "regime change" and to disrupt the country's supposed effort to develop nuclear weapons. A focus of the article is the relation between this activity and the so-called "Gang of Eight" in Congress, including Democratic leaders, who have attempted to exercise some restraint and some of whom feel the Administration has made promises in that direction that have not been delivered. http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/07/07/080707fa_fact_hersh?currentPage=all 6/29/08 Should U.S. government intervene in Zimbabwe to save the people of that country from the Mugabe regime?: No, says co-founder of a libertarian website, noting the woeful history of invasions and sanctions in U.S. foreign policy. Rather, he says, Americans should be allowed as individuals to support the people of Zimbabwe in their struggles for freedom, and the borders of the U.S. should be thrown open to refugees from conflict in that or any other country http://www.fff.org/blog/jghblog2008-06-26.asp 6/26/08 Israel to U.S.: Let's have you go bomb Iran:. Military consultant to CBS News says that Israel is "pressuring" a U.S. raid on Iran before Bush leaves office, fearing that his successor might be less Israeli-friendly. Their further message to the U.S. is: if you don't do it, we will; and their preparations on the ground indicate this intention, though they lack an air force to carry out the raid. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/24/eveningnews/main4206201.shtml 6/19/08 Venezueala may be in process of being added to the "axis of evil" in U.S. war on terrorism: U.S. Treasury department freezes the U.S. assets of two Venezuelans, a diplomat and a travel agent, accused of having provided financial assistance to Hezbollah. An assistant Treasury Secretary says: "It is extremely troubling to see the government of Venezuela employing and providing safe harbor to Hezbollah facilitators and fundraisers," The travel agent calls the allegations "pure lies" and denies that he even knows Hezbollah. http://wiredispatch.com/news/?id=218147 6/19/08 "Reports of the death of the Monroe Doctrine are greatly exaggerated": History professor writes of the history of thinking of the "liberal establishment" on the relationship between the U.S. and Latin America. The Council on Foreign Relations, a linchpin of that "establishment" had, in the 1970s, urged a modification of the Monroe Doctrine insistence on U.S. monopoly of power in the region. More recently, the CFR has issued far more belligerent statements toward Venezuelan and other Latin American "threats" and Barack Obama seems on the verge of resurrecting the supposedly dead Monroe Doctrine with an "Obama Doctrine" that looks at Cuba, Venezuela and other leftist countries as threats to U.S. interests that must be "dealt with." http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/17881 6/17/08 Remeber when Nikita Khruschev punded his shoe on a table and screamed "we will bury you!"?Now George Bush, in Britain on the last legal of "farewell tour" of Europe, keeps his shoes on but notifies Iran that the U.S. is keeping the possibility of military action against the country "on the table." 6/16/08 Obama's foreign policy: In the "great tradition" of Democratic Party presidents: :. John Pilger anticipates that, as President, Barack Obama would follow the lead of Presidents Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter and Clinton in an aggressive foreign policy that insists on maintaining and enhancing American power around the world. http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9338 6/12/08 Did Barack Obama make a "right turn" on foreign policy with his AIPAC speech? Did he use his turn signal? Stephen Zunes, in an article in Foreign Policy in Focus, joins Uri Avnery in the indignation of both that, as they feel, Obama betrayed his progressive supporters by what they see as a pandering appearance between the Israeli lobby group on the day after he attained the majority of delegates for the Democratic Party nomination. Some commenters on the Common Dreams reprint of the article share this sense of betrayal, but others say he had signalled a militaristic position long before this speech. http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/06/11/9558/ 6/12/08 Libyan leader Gaddafi weighs in on U.S. presidential election, blasting Barack Obama for his pro-Israeli stance, suggests an "inferiority complex." http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7450000.stm 6/7/08 "American want their country to stop being the neighborhood bully and instead be a good neighbor": John Pfeffer of Foreign Policy in Focus attempts to define a U.S. policy in which progressives can believe and actively promote during the current political campaign season. http://www.yesmagazine.org/article.asp?id=2680 6/5/08 Hey, Barack Obama, you just won the Democratic presidential nomination; What will you do now? "I'm going to AIPAC World!": Hours after his nomination was secured in Tuesday night primaries, Obama went to the conference of the Israeli lobbyist group, following on the heels of pro-Israel "tough guy" presentation by John McCain and Condoleezza Rice's veiled jab at him as being in favor of negotiation with Hamas. As Robert Scheer says, Obama's appearance follows a 54-year period of extremely pro-Israeli speeches at these conference, and he "wowed" this "tough" crowd. (Wow for AIPAC may mean woe for Gaza.) http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20080604/cm_thenation/1096326710 TEXT OF OBAMA SPEECH: http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/06/04/prepared-remarks-obama-at-aipac-policy-conference/ 6/4/08 What are prospects that a President Obama would be influenced by the Palestine-sympathetic words and actions of former President Carter? Not good, says SSA Editor Jerry Rose, who notes the likelihood that Carter will join such other personages as Obama's grandmother, pastor and fund-raiser who will be cast aside as embarassing or inconvenient to his race-neutral, ethics-assertive and pro-Israeli campaign. http://www.countercurrents.org/rose030608.htm 6/4/08 America's chief "diplomat, Condoleeza Rice, sounds off against Iran at AIPAC meeting: Secretary of State says that talks with Iran are "pointless," so long as (she says) the country continues to pursue its effort to develop a nuclear weapon. She "stops short" of endorsing VP Cheney and Israeli PM Olmert's calls to keep military action against Iran "on the table." (Another Obama visit to "reassure" the AIPAC crowd may be in the offing, maybe even the occasion for his throwing the would-be Hamas negotiator, Jimmy Carter, under the bus at the same time he rattles his own sabre against Iran). 6/3/08 A moment of sanity in U.S./Israel/Palestine relations. Last week the State Department informed 7 Gazans already selected for Fulbright grants for study in the United States that their grants would be withheld because the Israeli government would not give them visas to leave the besieged Gaza. Faced with "outrage" among some political leaders in both the U.S. and Israeli, the U.S. embassy in Jerusalem now informs these people that their grants will be honored, provided the Israeli government gives them the necessary "security" clearances, which it promises to try to do. (A moment of sanity...this too will probably pass.) http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/02/world/middleeast/02fulbright.html?th&emc=th 6/3/08 On kicking ass and the U.S. presidency: Is George W. Bush a practitioner of the "madman" theory of international relations articulated by Richard Nixon during the Viet Nam conflict? Like Henry Kissinger in an earlier day, Colin Powell more recently was taken with Nixon's suggestion that, if the country's enemy believes the U.S. President is a madman who will "do anything," it will give the U.S. greater leverage in negotiation with that enemy. This is one interpretation of that "Doctor Strangerlove" moment described by General Richardo Sanchez in his Iraqi war memoir when he tells of the surreal "kick ass pep talk" that Bush delivered to U.S. troops by teleconference prior to the devastating assault on Fallujah in 2004. (If the Nixon "theory" is that of a mere "bluff" in international relations, the world could breathe a little easier about the possibility, for example, that a U.S. President would literally "do anything" like an "insane" nuclear invasion of Iran. As the actual siege of Fallujah and numerous other extreme measures in Irag and elsewhere indicate, such actions by Bush or a future President Strangelove may be all-too imaginable; think Hiroshima/Nagasaki). http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/06/02/9354/ 5/27/08 Jimmy Carter at Hay-on-Wye: The quartet is singing way off key on Gaza and the U.S. is the errant director of its discordant noises: The former President appears at a small Welsh town and drops some bombshells of opinion and asserted fact: that the other 3 members of the "quartet" of powers (UN, EU and Russia) supporting Israel in the Gaza blockade are "supine" behind a misguided U.S. policy, that Fatah in Palestine should share power with Hamas rather than trying to destroy it, that Israel possesses 150 never-acknowledged nuclear weapons, that the U.S. should withdraw from the Iraqi occupation completely and immediately. (The appearance is mixed news at best for Barack Obama, as Carter urges Clinton to get out of the primary races and "all but" endorses Obama. However, Obama has already done a "Jeremiah Wright" job on Carter by denouncing his efforts to negotiate with Hamas and, in his current mode of "courting" the Jewish vote, may need to throw Carter "under the bus" with that growing number of "embarassing" supporters). http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19985.htm 5/22/08 Obama backs off oin pledge to talk to Iranian leader:. As McCain has hammered Obama as an "appeaser" for his promise to talk with "leaders" of Iran, his campaign now indicates that such talks would only be done after "diplomatic preparation" and would not necessarily be with the rabid anti-Israeli Ahmed Ahmedinejad. His foreign policy advisor, Susan Rice (called "our" Dr. Rice in the campaign) says that: "He hasn't named who that leader will be. It may, in fact be that by the middle of next year, Ahmadinejad is long gone." (And today Obama speaks at a Jewish synagogue in Boca Raton.) http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/may/22/barackobama.usforeignpolicy ON FLORIDA JEWS' "DOUBTS" ABOUT OBAMA: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/22/us/politics/22jewish.html?th&emc=th 5/21/08 Barack Obama and the "serious anti-imperialist left": Gary Leupp visits once again the issue of the response of Obama to Jeremiah Wright, and finds in his condemnation of his former pastor a symbol of the general incapacity of Americans "liberals" to mount an honest critique of the history of American imperialism that Wright articulates in his sermons. "Serious" anti-imperialists are about as well received as were the unpopular "Jeremiads" of the biblical prophet. http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/05/%e2%80%9cthe-fruit-of-the-way-they-think%e2%80%a6%e2%80%9d/ 5/17/08 Israeli tail wags the U.S. dog again: After President Bush makes a belligerent anti-Iranian speech to the Israeli Knesset, Iraqi official says that Israel expects the U.S. to take "tangible action" with military force option "on the table" to stop Iran's nuclear development. Meanwhile, the U.S. announces support for nuclear energy development for "peaceful purposes" of its client state, Saudia Arabia. http://wiredispatch.com/news/?id=171756 5/11/08 John Negroponte's speech to Pakistan forum of National Endowment for Democracy presages a Pakistani operation to add to the legacy of the NED as the "handmaiden" of U.S. policy in different regional power struggles. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/JE10Df01.html 4/22/08 Twisting the tiger's tale: 21st Century style: In old style Chicago politics, a man would run for Mayor by telling voters he'd like to "punch King George in the nose," a play for Irish votes since U.S./British foreign relations were obviously not relevant to Chicago government. In a contemporary update, Hillary Clinton, campaigning in Pennsylvania ahead of today's primary, similarly "talks tough" about Iran, saying that the U.S. could "obliterate" Iran if it engaged in nuclear attack against Israel (though it has no such weapon or means to deliver it). Perhaps she has an eye on the critical vote of Philadelphia Jews, many of whom are attracted to her opponent by his own ringing endorsement of our "staunch ally," Israel. http://abcnews.go.com/WN/Vote2008/story?id=4698059&page=1 4/8/08 Carnegie Endowment writer wants U.S. "democracy promoting" overseas put on a "better track" by the next presidential administration: The "track" to which he is referring is the runaway proclivity of government-related agencies to interfere with if not manipulate other countries' elections. With former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright the chair of the National Democratic Institute, a prime one of those "democracy-promoting" agencies and a leading foreign policy advisor for Hillary Clinton, the prospect for such track-changing may not be all that bright. (see attached comment). http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/04/07/8133/ 3/31/08 Whether it's President McCain, Obama or Clinton, Israel will have no problem with the next U.S. president:All three candidates seem safely pro-Israeli in taking the country's side in the Palestinian conflict. The candidate of "change," Obama, made a fleeting expression of compassion for the Palestinians, and Israel lobby outrage led him to "clarify" that their suffering results from the misbehavior of their own Hamas leadership. http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/17011 3/23/08 Colombia under Uribe is (to quote Hugo Chavez) the "Israel of Latin America": (Like Israel, Colombia is a long-term client state of the U.S., its aggressions against its neighbors supported and applauded by the American political establishment, including its recent cross-border military incursion in Ecuador to assassinate a FARC leader who was involved in a humanitarian effort to try to release Ingrid Betancourt, an operation that had the desired effect of neutralizing the influence of Venezuela on the region's international relations. The author of this article, James Petras, might have added, based on information contained herein, that the FARC guerillas are the "Hamas of Latin America," diplomatically isolated by the "reconciliation" of Columbia with Venezuela and other South American governments following the incident, and by their efforts to negotiate peace with the Colombian regime, only to have their efforts repulsed by the U.S.sponsored desire to keep the conflict going for its own geo-political interests in the region. http://www.counterpunch.org/petras03222008.html 3/23/08 Cheney says the U.S. will place no "pressure" on Israel that might threaten that country's "security." http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7310012.stm 3/21/08 Dick Cheney's current tour of the Middle East suggests he is trying to stir up support for an assault on Iran, as he speaks of the grave threat of an Iranian "process by which they're trying to enrich uranium." Isn't this deja vu Iraq, in which we went to war over an alleged Iraqi process of trying to produce WMD's? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/21/wiran121.xml 3/20/08 The devil is in the details of "The Speech" by Barack Obama:. Obama has his "Houston moment" of a speech in which he tries to address "head on" the unspoken influence of race on the presidential campaign. In "distancing" himself from the views of his own pastor, this is the way he characterizes one of these views: "a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam." This and other views ascribed to Pastor Wright are actually the views of a majority of black Americans, says Black Agenda Report editor Bruce Dixon, and he wonders why the expression of that view should be banished from a campaign that, as Dixon sees it, is an effort by a black man to garner support from blacks on their "nationalistic" desire to have one of their own as President, leaving him free to court white voters by his resistance to supposed black "extremism." http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=562&Itemid=1 3/13/08 Is Fallon's resignation the "Oh, shit" moment with regard to Iran? David Lindorff evokes the os moment from horror films, that moment when innocents realize the mad killer is in the room and just about to strike and when they are helpless to prevent it. As Admiral Fallon resigns as commander of CENTCOM after his objection to bellicose U.S. moves toward Iran and as other military moves suggest heightened alert for possible attack, it may be time for the nervous world to cover its collective face and yell "oh shit!" (If you think Lindorff is an off-the-wall fool on this, read some of the numerous comments attached to this article.) http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/03/12/7638/ 3/11/08 404 members of Congress live in an Orwellian world in which "history never happened."." Last week the House of Representatives passed 404-1 (Ron Paul the single negative vote) a resolution condemning Hamas for its "relentless" rocket attacks on Israel. It did this without the slightest effort to put the condemned behavior in any kind of historical context, any recognition of the long history of Israeli suppression of Palestinians and the vast disproportion between the amount of state violence against the people in the open air "prison" which Gaza has become and that exercised by Hamas insurgents. http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/03/wake-up-time-from-orwells-nightmare/ 3/8/08 U.S. said to be deeply involved in a Colombian raid into Ecuador in which a FARC leader was killed Raul Reyes had been negotiating for release of hostages held by FARC, with assistance of Venezuelan and French leaders. In what Bill Van Auken calls a "preemptive strike," forces trained and equipped by C.I.A., with U.S. intelligence information from an intercepted phone conversation (or was it an e-mail? see accompanying headline) between Reyes and Chavez, used "smart bombs" to strike a FARC camp inside Ecuador in which Reyes and around 20 of his comrades were killed. The U.S. involvement is said to be motivated by desires to isolate Chavez diplomatically and to give a "hands off" message about French meddling in South America, the "backyard" of the U.S. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19475.htm 3/8/08 About that email from Reyes to Chavez that was used to "justify" the Colombian incursion on Ecuadorian territory: Greg Palast says it's a "fake": U.S. intelligence conflated a reference to the number 300 into the totally evidence-lacking assertion that the Venezuelan President was sending (by Reyes) $300 million to the FARC for them to buy uranium to make WMDs. In praising the operation, President Bush, with no challenge from U.S. media, says it was justified by the "terrorist" threat of FARC. In Palast's view, both Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama justify the charge against them of being foreign policy "amateurs" for quickly endorsing Colombia's action in terms of the country's "right to defend itself." (Sound like justification for Israel to invade Lebanon or Gaza?) Au contraire, Mr. Palast, Clinton and Obama may be demonstrating their bona fides as authentic professionals in the world of U.S. imperialism. http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/300-mllion-chavez-farc-fake 3/4/08 U.S. democracy-spreading in action in Kurdistan:. Grassroots activist describes the penetration of American and multi-national influence in both the Turkish and Iraqi Kurdish regions. This is accomplished to some degree by funding of local NGOs by U.S. agencies like the National Endowment for Democracy. They thus gain local voices for foreign interests like the head of the Kurdish Human Rights Project, who writes and speaks in support of the U.S. invasion of Iraq and even conditionally an invasion of Iran if that were in the U.S "interest." http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/16742 3/1/08 U.S. diplomacy is trying to convince China and India of the necessity of their cooperation in the rivalry of all three countries with Russia. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/JC01Df02.html 2/25/08 An "independent" Kosovo will apparently be anything but idependent of U.S. control: With quick recognition of the break-away country from Serbia, the U.S. violates the agreement to respect the "territorial sovereignty" of Serbia and prepares to install a Paul Bremer/Iraq style viceroy government in which all "independent" action will be subject to approval of a caretaker associated with U.S.-based International Crisis Group, funded by George Soros money to promote U.S. economic imperial expansion and on whose board sits Zbigniew Brezezinski, Barak Obama's foreign policy "guru," and Wesley Clark, the commander of the Yugoslavian "humanitarian intervention." http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/02/washington-gets-a-new-colony-in-the-balkans/ 2/23/08 U.S. to Serbia: We just wanted to be your friends and you couldn't even protect our embassy: Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice blames Serbian government for failing to thwart attacks on U.S. embassy in Belgrade in reprisal for U.S. support of Kosovo's declaration of independent. She says, rather petulantly, that the U.S. is only in the NATO force in Kosovo for the benefit of Serbia itself. http://wiredispatch.com/news/?id=56521 2/22/08 "Milosevic is dead", says a Serbian commentator; but Serbian nationalism is not:. That is one interpretation of the violence that has swept through Serbia as street mobs have attacked the U.S. embassy among other "foreign" businesses like Nike and McDonald's in protest of U.S. and E.U. support of Kosovo's declaration of independence. In the New York Times report on the situation, it is suggested that the great majority of Serbs are supporters of the "moderate" pro-Western government, and only 10% are willing to go to war over the matter. The violence is said to be limited to a small number of "losers of the transition" from the nationalist agenda of Milosevic who fell from power 8 years ago, those unable to take advantage of the glories of a new (western-oriented) "democracy." So, as in the U.S. street riots of the 1960s, in Serbia it's "burn baby" as authoritative figures characterize the violence as reflecting not general alienation in the black (in this case Serbian) community but that of a tiny "hoodlums and radical" component of that community. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/22/world/europe/22kosovo.html?th&emc=th 2/20/08 What will U.S. policy toward Cuab be as Fidel Castro steps down ? Wait 'til November (maybe a tad longer) to see.:. Although President Bush makes tough noises about how Cuba "must" move toward democracy, officials say review of policy really awaits outcome of November's election and the policies of the next President. Of the three leading candidates, McCain's reaction is close to that of Bush while Clinton and Obama make typically ambiguous statements. Obama's position seems most open to Cuban detente, but a political analyst notes that the Democratic nominee, whoever it may be, is likely to "veer to the center" on the issue, as he or she is faced with the political necessity to win Florida's electoral votes, which may require accommodation to the visceral anti-Castroism of much of the Cuban-American electoral constituency http://www.antiwar.com/lobe/?articleid=12392 2/20/08 Miami Herald weighs in with assessment of Fidel Castro'slong political career in Cuba:. The Herald's long practice of negative coverage of events in Castro Cuba continues in its coverage of the President's decision to resign. Almost pointedly disappointed in the tepid Little Havana street responses to the news, the Herald publishes a column which describes Castro as essentially a "wily survivor" and cites various Cuban-American "experts," nearly all of whom agree with the one whose assessment closes the piece: that Castro is leaving Cuba "in a mess." http://www.miamiherald.com/457/story/425623.html 2/19/08 Muted reactions noted among Cubans in Miami's Little Havana in response to news of Fidel Castro's resignation of the Cuban presidency. http://www.miamiherald.com/news/breaking_news/story/424373.html 2/18/08 "Humanitarian intervention ": The hook that activates the "liberal" side of a neo-con/liberal popular front:As Kosovo declares its independence with likely U.S. approval, Justin Raimondo notes the similarity in U.S. military intervention in allegedly "genocidal" situations from Yugoslavia to Iraq. The country's attacks on the Serbs were based on the same exaggerated reports of "atrocities" that were instrumental in getting "liberal hawk" support for the invasion of Iraq. As this pattern continues, who knows what further humanitarian aggression lies ahead. Darfur, any one? http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=12378 2/13/08 Neo-conservatism and U.S. foreign policy in the next presidency: "Just like old times, only better " Justin Raimondo's assessment of the "change" that will come after November's election, whether it results in the election of President McCain, Clinton or Obama. Raimondo unearths the "monster" that many had left for dead after its having been discredited over the misbegotten Iraqi adventure, but in fact it has only been sleeping or hiding in dark alcoves (like the World Bank?), ready to emerge again. With McCain already one of neo-conservatism's most reliable fellow-travellers, the prospect of a Democrat as President is not much more daunting, as the movement's ability to contain investigation of its Iraqi capers by a Democratically "controlled" Congress shows that they have nothing to fear from a Senator Obama or a Senator Clinton presidency. Plus ca change, plus e'est la meme chose. 2/11/08 U.S. and Russian "nuclear deal" has Iran sputtering on the sideline. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JB09Ak03.html 2/1/08 "Despots Masquerading as Democrats." Title of an essay in a Human Rights Watch report describing the tendency around the world---from Pakistan to Egypt---for autocratic governments to wrap themselves in the mantle of democracy by holding sham elections and engaging in un-democratic abuses of people's civil rights. The so-called "democracies" of the world---from the E.U. to the U.S.---encourage these shams by giving the stamp of approval to these leaders---as when Bush praised Pakistan as being "on the road to democracy" after he suspended the country's judiciary becuse their dissent from his actions. http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=41021 1/30/08 Straight-talking John McCain says "There's going to be more wars"...and Pat Buchanan expresses concern that, if he is elected President, "more wars" are going to be the result as McCain has a career record of being "in everybody's face." http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7924 1/29/08 Norman Podhoretz takes another bite at the apple of bombing Iran. Having made the "case" for that action in a Commentary article a year ago, the guru of neo-conservatism comes back to re-iterate that position in a fresh article in the same journal. He argues that Iran represents such a "threat" to the lives of millions of people (in and outside of Iran) that a pre-emptive bombing to avert the country's development of nuclear weapons is fully justified. He admits "consequences" like retaliatory Iranian action against Israel and a huge spike in the price of oil, but says that Bush (or his successor) must have the courage to take this action. Did we mention he's a Rudy Giuliana campaign adviser? The article: SCOTT MACCLEOD'S CRITIQUE: http://time-blog.com/middle_east/2008/01/bombbombbomb_bombbomb_iran_1.html 1/19/08 Bush does a scimitar dance with the King of Saudi Arabia while the Middle East burns around them:. Robert Fisk so describes the scene in Damascus as the U.S. President brings billions of U.S. dollars to the Kingdom, receives an "Order of Merit" from the King and indulges in elaborate celebratory rituals that bear no relation to what Fisk calls the "bloody reality" of the carnage in the region. http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/01/18/6450/ 1/16/08 Evidence grows that Strait of Hormuz "provocation"was a Pentagon-orchestrated effort toinfluence world opinion against Iran: Inter Press Service analyst assembles the pieces of a puzzle showing how a "routine" confrontation between U.S. shipping and Iranian patrols was escalated into a "crisis" that would be useful to Bush on his Middle East trip which included an agenda of rallying Gulf Arab countries' action against Iran. http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=40801 1/14/08 George Bush's excellent day in the United Arab Emirates:. On his "legacy-making" tour of the Middle East, the President "gently nudges" his UAE hosts and other authoritarian Arab leaders toward greater democracy, takes off his gloves in denunciation of the Iranian "threat," visits a desert encampment to play with a Crown Prince's falcons, then returns to his opulent suite in one of the world's most expensive hotels. Oh what a day! http://wiredispatch.com/news/?id=3643 1/14/08 Meanwhile, back in the sheikdom, was Bush listening to himself?? Folks in that row of turbaned Arab leaders who listened impassively to his speech in the United Arab Emirates were distinctively "cool" in their responses to that speech. Noting that he called for Arab states to practice more democracy and to join the U.S. in "isolating" Iran from the international community, critics said he missed a couple of things. He missed the fact that the U.S. has allowed only a tenuous democracy in Iraq with an elected government which, ironically, turns out to be closely allied with Iran. And he missed the fact that, unlike the U.S., Arab states are largely able to attain the "prosperity" he praised them of enjoying by maintaining close economic ties with Iran. http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/24721.html 1/14/08 Iranian spokesman says U.S. has "lost face" over the incident in the Strait of Hormuth and should apologize to the world and the region. In the Oriental and Islamic (not to mention the U.S. where sports teams compete for "bragging rights") worlds of emphasis on face, them are fightin' words, mister http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080113/wl_mideast_afp/iranusmilitarybush 1/14/08 And no, Virginia, there's no Santa Claus in the form of Dmocratic opposition to Bush's Middle East policies:. Writer John Mearsheimer, who got in much hot water with a co-authored book on the influence of the "Israel lobby" in the U.S., notes that there is hardly a peep of opposition among "serious" candidates of either party to Israel's tail wagging the dog of U.S. policy, whether it concerns Israeli's harsh policies in the West Bank and Gaza or that country's insistence on the existential "threat" of Iran. http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/01/13/6349/ 1/12/08 Was "Filipino Monkey" the voice behind the recent "Iranian" threa tto U.S. shipping in Persian Gulf area? People familiar with shipping activity in that area cite long-standing experience with a person or persons of that moniker who are electronic "hecklers" who insert their comments, often aggressive and obscene, into ship-to-ship communications. This intepretation is consistent at least with the peculiarity of the "threat" at the Strait of Hormuz which promised to blow up an American ship and which precipitated new U.S. claims about dangers from Iran. http://www.navytimes.com/news/2008/01/navy_hormuz_iran_radio_080111/ 1/11/08 But that's yesterday's news; Remember the U.S. Navy saying it "almost" fired on Iranian patrol boatsafter it got a threat from them to blow up a ship? After Iran releases a video with a contradictory version of the communications between U.S. and Iranian officials, the Navy admits that the threatening message could have come from somewhere else, but that the behavior of the Iranian patrol boats was still "provocative" in some unspecified way, perhaps that they came at the U.S. vessels in a "swarm." http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23036718-5005961,00.html 1/10/08 Iran releases its own video with a very different version than the Pentagon of the "confrontation" of American naval vessels with Iraqi patrol boats in Strait of Hormuz. 1/9/08 Israeli PM Olmert states the obvious on Bush trip to Israel: U.S. President is Israel's "strongest and most trusted ally." 1/8/07 Imperialist U.S. foreign policy rides tall in the saddle at New Hampshire presidential debates:. Unless Ron Paul is elected President, any of the candidates, Republican or Democrat, who participated in the NH debate can be counted upon to extend the aggressive foreign policy of the Bush administration. http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/jan2008/deba-j07.shtml 1/8/07 What happened in the Strait of Hormuz? A confrontation between U.S. naval vessels and a number of Iranian small patrol boats at the entrance to the Persian Gulf is described by Iranian government and FARS news agency as an "ordinary occurrence" while Pentagon describes the situation as anything but ordinary, an extremely "provocative" threat from one of the boats to "blow up" a naval vessel in the course of which the U.S. ship "almost" fired on the provocator. The ghost of the Gulf of Tonkin lingers about the affair. http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080107/wl_mideast_afp/usiranmilitarynavy_080107195429 12/22/07 "Liberal imperialists" like Peter Beinart seems to be "launching a search for another folksy Arkansas governor to put in the White House": Abetted by pundits from the neo-conservative side of the political spectrum, people like the New Republic editor are pronouncing another "it's the economy, stupid!" scenario for the 2008 presidential campaign. In this dubious "paradigm" for the election, people are "tired of" U.S. involvement in other peoples' troubles and want their leaders to deal with bread-and-butter domestic issues like the sub-prime mortgage meltdown or rising gas prices. While this paradigm might seem to indicate a rising star for foreign policy "rookies" like Obama or Huckabee and a setting one for foreign policy tough guy/girl candidates like Clinton and Giuliana, it may seriously overestimate the public's sharing with these pundits the view that Bush administration "success" in the Middle East and in the war on terror are real enough that the country's leaders can safely retreat to the nation's internal economic problems...as if these problems were somehow divorced from war and rumors of war around the world. http://www.antiwar.com/hadar/?articleid=12094 12/22/07 U.S./India nuclear deal generates headaches for Indian politicians and symbolizes a growing political and cultural connection between the two countries. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/IL22Df01.html 12/17/07 Hold your horses: John Bolton says Bush needs to "rein in" Condoleeza Rice: The former (unconfirmed) UN ambassador tells Der Spiegel in an interview that Rice is the mouthpiece of "liberal career diplomats" in the State Department whose agenda is counter to that of neo-conservatives like themselves. http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,22934959-5005961,00.html 12/17/07 For thousands of Hmong tribesmen in Laos, the Vietnam War never ended: The CIA hired and trained Laotian civilians, mostly Hmong, to carry on guerilla operations against the government. With a communist government still in power, these former allies of the U.S. find themselves relentlessly purused and persecuted without any remnant of U.S. support. Is this a portent of what will occur after U.S. withdrawal (or is already happening) to Iraqis who in any way supported the U.S. invasion or occupation? http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/17/world/asia/17laos.html?th&emc=th 12/12/07 Is the world ready for peace to break out? William Blum describes the "close call" in the U.S. and Israel of peace breaking out following the NIE indication that Iran is no imminent nuclear threat. As Uri Avnery in Israel says, what one might think would be a day of celebration following this news was more like a day of national disaster, as leaders in this country as in the U.S. rushed to assure their people that the threat of Iran remains undiminished. As Blum says, we need our enemies, and not toothless tiger ones at that. http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2007/12/the-threat-of-peace/ 12/12/07 George Bush and German Chancellor Angela Merkel have become "best friends" as Germany and the U.S. have found convergence on many aspects of foreign policy, and observers say the relationship seems to be one of "personal warmth." Maybe Chancellor Merkel wasn't as offended by last year's shoulder rub as current photographs seemed to suggest. 12/11/07 Israeli "opposition" leader Benjamin Netanyahu visits French President Nicolas Sarkozy and the two leaders ignore the NIE report in the U.S. to reaffirm the danger of Iran's nuclear ambitions and in support of UN sanctions against the country. This will be news to some Israeli peace activists, but Netanyahu says there is no "opposition" in Israel to the government's stance on the issue of Iran. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/933153.html 12/11/07 "Twisting the tiger's tale"; Miami-Cuban style: Years ago, you could get elected Mayor of Chicago by attracting the Irish vote with strident anti-English statements, though they were irrelevant to Chicago political issues, a practice called "twisting the tiger's tail." In 2007 Florida, GOP presidential candidates McCain, Romney and Hukabee are stumping the state promising to re-open a case dear to the hearts of Cuban exiles, indicating that, as President, they would seek indictments of Fidel and Raul Castro for their alleged role in downing the 1996 flight of an exile project, Brothers to the Rescue. The political relevance of these campaign tactics is questioned in a Miami Herald article. http://www.miamiherald.com/979/story/340004.html 12/10/07 New Israeli ambassador to Britain says war with Iran may be "unavoidable." He disdains the recent NIE report in the U.S. downplaying Iran's nuclear threat and insists that international military action will be unavoidable unless Iran "co-operates" with efforts to restrain its nuclear ambitions. With Israel being the tail that seems to wag U.S. foreign policy, this may portend more U.S. involvement in that war than the NIE report would seem to indicate. http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1196847289613&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull 12/10/07 China sees in U.S. intelligence report which downplays Iran's nuclear threat an opportunity to improve its chances of thwarting international sanctions against Iraq. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IL07Ak02.html 12/9/07 Arab Gulf states leaders clash with U.S. Defense Secretary Gates over issue of U.S. support for Israel's nuclear weapons. http://www.bahraintribune.com/ArticleDetail.asp 12/7/07 Not to be deterred: U.S. secretaries of defense and state press on with their campaign for international sanctions against Iran: In a "regional security" conference of Gulf states, Defense Secretary Gates chides Iran and its sympathizers in the Arab world for "cherry picking" the findings of the National Intelligence Estimate which downplays the "nuclear threat" of Iran, while they reject the NIE claim that Iran is helping to arm the insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan. Deja vu the shifting "explanations" of why we went to war with Iraq? http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071208/ap_on_re_mi_ea/gates_iran 12/7/07 "Split-second decision making that can affect the lives of millions of people: Hillary Clinton's characterization of the U.S. presidency, used to disparage the qualification of one of her opponents to make those decisions. A blogger says that, in contrast, this description should lead to a re-assessment of U.S. power on the world stage, a power that allows the country's leader to "take out a village" and then forget that he had even made that "decision," as Gerald Ford once told the blogger he had forgotten whether he had authorized Indonesia in "taking out" villages and people in East Timor. http://www.newsc.blogspot.com/ 12/7/07 U.S. agenda for "democracy spreading" gets a United Nations cover:. A new UN "Democracy Fund" is established with much of the personnel and all of the ideology of U.S. groups like the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), an "arm" of the U.S. Democratic Party which "intervened" so creatively in the effort to topple Hugo Chavez in Venezuela as well as in the Orange, Cedar and Rose revolutions in Ukraine, Lebanon and Georgia. With the UN agency now gearing up, we may expect international intervention in elections around the world to reach a new level of intensity and legitimacy. http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=11&ItemID=14457 12/7/07 French and German leaders vow to "keep up the pressure" on Iran despite U.S. intelligence report downplaying nuclear threat from the country. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/07/world/middleeast/07iran.html?th&emc=th 12/6/07 On diminshed Iran threat: What did Bush know and when did he know it? After National Intelligence Estimate drastically downplayed the likelihood of Iran developing nuclear weapons, the President says that he didn't know the substance of this assessment until a recent "briefing." Amy Goodman interviews investigative report Gareth Porter, who finds that statement "absolutely incredible" since Bush also says that the Director of National Intelligence, Michael McConnell, told him in July about impending changes in the intelligence assessment. http://www.democracynow.org/2007/12/5/what_did_bush_know_on_iran 12/5/07 “We should all look under the hood fo these intelligence reports" ...says a Republi |