Nice title for Juan Cole’s new book. It’s something we’ve done a horrible job doing since 9/11. But the timeliness takes on new importance when looking through the prism of the Freeman withdrawal for NIC. Cole’s assessment on President Obama is stark, the review devastating:
Israeli Apartheid will continue unabated under Obama. – Juan Cole
Meanwhile, the Washington Post editorial today embarrasses the paper and everyone who trusts it, labeling Chas Freeman’s rhetoric as “crackpot tirades.” But the worst aspect of the editorial is that they naively believe that the campaign against Freeman manifested out of thin air. Labeling what happened to Mr. Freeman as a “reasonable” approach to asking if Freeman was right for the job is down right ludicrous.
The blundering silence of the Obama administration during the Steve Rosen and friends assault (Rosen is now suing AIPAC for defamation – oh, the irony), has hurt President Obama, of that there can be no doubt. How much is not yet known, though anyone can sympathize with Juan’s pessimism.
Scott Horton interviews Juan about his new book, asking him six questions. Here’s one small portion regarding Pakistan, which is always on my radar, especially these days when the major parties look like they’re about to wage political civil war:
As for Pakistan, the demand that the government exert control over the Federally Administered Tribal Areas is frankly daft. I’ve been through that territory. You might as well demand that we exert control over all the rattlesnakes in New Mexico. And the conviction that the security of the U.S. mainland depends on the urban Pakistani government regimenting those rural clansmen makes no sense to me. Rugged areas where the government is weak are obviously possible havens for terrorists, but they also typically lack the infrastructure to enable major operations to be conducted directly from such territories. We’d be better off working with Pakistan to put in better airport security and computer tracking of people flying in and out. The Pakistani military has been fighting hard in Bajaur, one of the tribal agencies, against the Pakistani Taliban since August. They have had some success, but displaced 300,000 Pashtuns from their homes. That is going to settle the Pashtuns down?
Then there is Iran, which includes Israel and the entire Middle East mess, the biggest area of possible breakthrough for which President Obama could be known. That is if the Obama administration doesn’t kowtow to the Israel Lobby. Right now there is no indication they have the courage to stand up to them, but since this is urgent and Obama understands this, as does Clinton, I remain in the camp that believes the Administration will find a way through, though I fully admit this is out of necessity of the situation, not any evidence coming from the Administration.
The U.S. relationship with Iran is the most perilous area of U.S. foreign policy going forward. But there are actually only two bilateral issues between Washington and Tehran that put that relationship on the front burner. They comprise, first, Iran’s civilian nuclear enrichment program, which the U.S. fears could veer toward dual use and result in a nuclear weapon. Second, Iran’s rejectionist stance toward U.S. ally Israel, and its support for the Lebanese Hezbollah and, allegedly, for Hamas in Gaza, are highly objectionable to the United States.
[...] As for the Iranian involvement in the Levant, it is the Israelis who give the ayatollahs that opening and they could easily close it off. If they just gave back the Golan Heights to Syria in exchange for a Camp David-style peace treaty with Damascus, and gave back the Shebaa Farms occupied territory and made peace with Lebanon, they would deny Hezbollah its pretext for remaining armed and remove a key Hezbollah patron, Syria, from the equation. If they stopped blockading and half-starving the Gazans, ceased colonizing the West Bank and granted the Palestinians a state, Sunni, Christian, and secular Palestinians would not want or need Iranian money and arms. …











Intelligence Pick Blames ‘Israel Lobby’ For Withdrawal
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/11/AR2009031104308.html?hpid=topnews
that’s different than the editorial Taylor.
Yes, I read that, GeoT, as should everyone. It’s the story I wrote about when it happened, linking to Pincus’ previous piece.
I understand we must engage better with the Muslim world, but tell me when is there going to be a Muslim world to engage with?
Saudi bankrolls the Taliban
Pakistan tolerates ISI inspired mayhem and then there is the Pak/Afghan Border
Iran, feeds the crazies in Iraq
I mean where do we start
Jordan?
I think we start engaging w/ the Muslim world by stopping the Saudis from bankrolling the crazies…
just saying