TM Connect


Use "My TM" for log in & register.

Taylor Marsh has been writing on line since 1996, with the archives provided here a representation of that work.

Tag Archives | Saudi Arabia

Clinton Won’t Move if Palin President

Let’s have some fun. (After all, it’s Mardi Gras!) Clinton sure did when the question about Sarah Palin came out of the blue.

And as expected, a few Tea Party activists will meet with Michael Steele.

Speaking of the Tea Party, they got a big write up in the New York Times today. It wasn’t all good either:

Urged on by conservative commentators, waves of newly minted activists are turning to once-obscure books and Web sites and discovering a set of ideas long dismissed as the preserve of conspiracy theorists, interviews conducted across the country over several months show. In this view, Mr. Obama and many of his predecessors (including George W. Bush) have deliberately undermined the Constitution and free enterprise for the benefit of a shadowy international network of wealthy elites.

Loose alliances like Friends for Liberty are popping up in many cities, forming hybrid entities of Tea Parties and groups rooted in the Patriot ethos. These coalitions are not content with simply making the Republican Party more conservative. They have a larger goal — a political reordering that would drastically shrink the federal government and sweep away not just Mr. Obama, but much of the Republican establishment, starting with Senator John McCain.

I’ve had a long work day, as I’m sure many of you have had too. So let’s just have some fun tonight. Whatever’s on your mind, let ‘er rip.

…and if you haven’t sent your shout out to HRC about DADT, here’s my two cents as part of John Aravosis’ campaign to get Pres. Obama to act.

Read full story · Comments { 25 }

Barack Obama Wins the Nobel Prize for Peace

expanded edition cross-posted at Huffington Post

The Nobel Committee announced Friday that the annual peace prize was awarded to Barack Obama, just nine months into his presidency, “for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.” The award cited in particular Mr. Obama’s effort to reduce the world’s nuclear arsenal. “He has created a new international climate,” the committee said. – In Surprise, Nobel Peace Prize to Obama for Diplomacy

obama_sasha-JeffersonMemorial
Barack Obama with Sasha at
Jefferson Memorial.

Robert Gibbs had the common reaction: “wow.” It is a huge surprise. The White House says Pres. Obama wasn’t even aware he’d been nominated.

The Nobel awarded through an international eye on world events, having nothing to do with U.S. domestic affairs. The Nobel committee looking not just at achievements, which clearly was not the measure here because Pres. Obama has just begun, but something more foundational.

Pres. Obama should thank Dick Cheney and his sidekick George W. Bush, because it’s obvious after this announcement that never has an international community looked to America for a change in direction more than they did in last year’s election. Longing for something beyond fear, the “axis of evil,” preemptive foreign policy, smaller yield nuclear weapons, and that all time Bush-Cheney favorite, “war on terror.”

This is going to put Rush, Sean, Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly and the conservative townhall brawlers right off their weekend. Cue up the “Yasser Arafat won it too” brigade, which is exactly what the UK Times did; but considering they’re also the outlet that used our soldiers for their own purposes yesterday I’m not surprised. Ignorance is seldom gracious. Mickey Klaus already saying Pres. Obama should turn it down. This insulting right wing post mild compared to what we’ll hear on wingnut radio. Michael Steele being, well, Michael Steele: ‘What has Pres Obama actually accomplished?’

For Pres. Obama’s outreach to the Muslim community, which is nothing less than historic, especially looking through the prism of Bush-Cheney; when you look at his preliminary preparations for Middle East dialogue; when he took the bold step to demand a freeze in Israeli settlements. Barack Obama foreshadows what could be if partners come forth, even if nothing concrete has manifested. In Afghanistan, his determination to help the Afghans help themselves, but particularly the women of that country rise up.

From Foreign Policy, “Dangerous Prize,” an article revealing the mixed blessing of Obama’s award:

The Nobel Peace Prize’s aims are expressly political. The Nobel committee seeks to change the world through the prize’s very conferral, and, unlike its fellow prizes, the peace prize goes well beyond recognizing past accomplishments. As Francis Sejersted, the chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee in the 1990s, once proudly admitted, “The prize … is not only for past achievement. … The committee also takes the possible positive effects of its choices into account [because] … Nobel wanted the prize to have political effects. Awarding a peace prize is, to put it bluntly, a political act.”

It’s a huge honor of hope and promise given to a man who represents the best of America in his rise to the presidency. But with Nobel Prize for Peace also comes expectations that have not yet been met. I just hope it becomes something Pres. Obama utilizes to push harder and farther, with more energy than he is currently expressing. Because there are enough challenges Pres. Obama is facing that we can all hope this will give him new energy to face them all.

The American jury is still out.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Obama Teases Print Media Bailout

Mr. Obama said he noted the trend. “I am concerned that if the direction of the news is all blogosphere, all opinions, with no serious fact-checking, no serious attempts to put stories in context, that what you will end up getting is people shouting at each other across the void but not a lot of mutual understanding,” the President said. “What I hope is that people start understanding if you’re getting your newspaper over the Internet, that’s not free and there’s got to be a way to find a business model that supports that.” – Newspaper journalism gets words of praise Print media’s role vital, Obama says

Memo to President Obama.

There are blogs. Then there is new media. I’ve talked about the difference before. Huffington Post, Politico, Marcy Wheeler, Spencer Ackerman and many others who not only offer context and opinion, but do important reporting. Marc Lynch, Laura Rozen, two of the most important writers on foreign policy. And remember Nico Pitney’s contribution during the Iranian election “green wave” uprising?

I do opinion, but I also cover news stories, focusing on foreign policy, offering political analysis as well.

Where would the Israel – Palestinian conversation be without new media?

A conversation the New America Foundation’s Daniel Levy arranged that included Ms. Aida Touma-Sleiman, in which I participated, is a prime example. Talking about the plight of women amidst Israel’s actions:

My question was on Arab-Israeli challenges for women under a Netanyahu-Lieberman government. Mr. Zahalka quickly mentioned that they made history this last election with Haneen Zoubi being the first Arab female ever elected to the Knesset. This quote from her is priceless (photo via):

“I don’t want to become the Knesset address for Arab women’s issues. I need to raise the interest of the men in my party on women’s issues, not allow their interest to wane because they can dump the issue on me.” – Knesset Member, Hannen Zoubi

Zahalka then continued, saying that women’s equality is struggling; main problems for Arab-Israeli women is participation of work for them, which “is very, very low. … Without work you can’t have independence.”

Ms. Touma-Sleiman, answering my question, says the biggest challenges are: 1) women living in militaristic state; 2) part of Palestinian minority discriminated against; 3) “our own society.” Extremism and racism make it “more difficult” to pay attention to other cycles of discrimination. Threats in the public discourse make it more difficult to communicate “feminist discourse” and get the attention to women. … .. Low level of employment; other problems… “I could speak to this for three or four hours… (laughter)…” on the issue of women.

Remember the pre-election Iran polling? Something I covered, where facts led in live reporting (as it happened). Context offered via a post on Huffington Post.

Covering an event at the Cato Institute entitled “Can the Pentagon be Fixed?”, I reported the facts as presented by experts that included Tom Ricks, as well as Winslow Wheeler, Danielle Brian, and Col. McGregor.

Covering the U.S. – Saudi conference, hosted by New America Foundation earlier this year, facts led. Few reporting on the off the record kerfuffle between State’s Burns and the Saudis over Israel.

Remember the Dipnote fail? It wasn’t earth shattering, but that the State Department’s blog never mention the Iranian election explosion sure seemed noteworthy to me.

I don’t have a fraction of the budget of Politico, an understatement, but I get out there whenever possible on important stories, usually things that are under-reported. New media isn’t free either, though many readers, unfortunately, think it is. I do this on a shoe string budget, with advertising (thankful for the Obama health care ad), but also contributions, which are few and far between right now, but come from people who believe new media and what I do is important. Funding, unfortunately, kept me from attending WJC’s CGI conference in New York this year, which will include a focus on aiding women around the world, something that is a main focus of my work right now, but I simply couldn’t afford. Watch to see who reports on this and then decide how important it is to support new media people like myself.

Pres. Obama aids the false notion that newspapers and their employees have a monopoly on reporting and offering what’s important when he reduces new media to only blogs that are “all opinions, with no serious fact-checking, no serious attempts to put stories in context.”

It would be insulting if it weren’t so ignorant, but more than that, it is infused with self-interest.

Imagine the health care debate without blogs like Open Left, Firedoglake, Digby, Down with Tyranny’s Howie Klein, a man who does more for the progressive cause than you can possibly imagine.

Craig Crawford is correct about what bailing out the newspaper business would mean.

Putting aside the cost in these times of rising federal debt and the public’s growing fatigue with bailouts, it’s a dicey concept because newspapers that owe their lives to the government are probably not worth having. The potential for politicians to directly or indirectly influence coverage would not exactly build reader confidence.

[...] There was already a hint of an agenda in Obama’s remarks about a bailout. As newspaper readership declines, he expressed concern about “the direction of the news” and the loss of “journalistic integrity, fact-based reporting, serious investigative reporting.”

Also a noble cause, but insisting on quality journalism in exchange for federal support raises questions about how that would be guaranteed and who gets to define what it means.

The importance is funding vital news organizations, including new media, so that foreign policy issues can be covered, along with domestic. Foreign policy is still something the print media still does much better than new media.

However, it won’t keep me from working diligently to get a project funded that allows me to put myself in far off places where I can report on important issues, while simultaneously trying to keep a viable commercial new media company in the black. It’s the ultimate juggling act. Stay tuned.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Women and Girls Can Save the World

Photobucket

If you read one thing today this is it, “The Women’s Crusade.” No, it’s not about U.S. health care reform. It’s about something even more important, which is close to blasphemy to say these days but it’s true, because it’s about saving the world.

…Yet if the injustices that women in poor countries suffer are of paramount importance, in an economic and geopolitical sense the opportunity they represent is even greater. “Women hold up half the sky,” in the words of a Chinese saying, yet that’s mostly an aspiration: in a large slice of the world, girls are uneducated and women marginalized, and it’s not an accident that those same countries are disproportionately mired in poverty and riven by fundamentalism and chaos. There’s a growing recognition among everyone from the World Bank to the U.S. military’s Joint Chiefs of Staff to aid organizations like CARE that focusing on women and girls is the most effective way to fight global poverty and extremism. That’s why foreign aid is increasingly directed to women. The world is awakening to a powerful truth: Women and girls aren’t the problem; they’re the solution.

And if you haven’t read the interview with Sect. Clinton, take time to, but only after you’ve read the first article above.

And if you haven’t read this article, read that too, but only after you’ve read the first article above.

But by all means read this article, if you haven’t already, about the only female leader on the continent of Africa, President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf. But again, only after you’ve read the first article at the top.

Why do you think we’ve never had a female president in the United States?
I have to ask you that question. You’ve got to vote for her.

All of this in The New York Times Magazine today. Take a day off to see what’s happening around the world. It’s important.

On a different note and as an extra task, count how many women you see today on the Sunday shows. Not just on panels, but as headline guests. Experts being asked their opinion on politics and policy. One good development is that Christiane Amanpour will soon anchor her own Sunday show, which will air after GPS with Fareed Zakaria. That’s something, especially on Sunday.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Downplaying Settlements

The constant drumbeat in the American press is that Israelis don’t like Obama, don’t trust him. They want him to speak to them and tell them his plan. According to the New York Times, a media campaign is about to begin.

… In coming weeks, senior administration officials said, the White House will begin a public-relations campaign in Israel and Arab countries to better explain Mr. Obama’s plans for a comprehensive peace agreement involving Israel, the Palestinians and the Arab world.

The campaign, which will include interviews with Mr. Obama on Israeli and Arab television, amounts to a reframing of a policy that people inside and outside the administration say has become overly defined by the American pressure on Israel to halt settlement construction on the West Bank.

“We’re at a crucial moment now,” said Martin S. Indyk, a former ambassador to Israel and peace negotiator in the Clinton administration. “There are only so many visits George Mitchell can make.” …

Reach out is necessary, including to the Israelis. Especially since some Israelis and American Jews are suggesting a more formal speech from Obama. I think they’re a bit envious about Obama’s Cairo speech, also not having listened to his commitments to Israel that were within. It may have been a speech made in Cairo, but it had messages to everyone, though I still contend Obama feel far short of address the abuse of women, as I said at the time. But we can’t get caught up in that, now can we?

But the analysis of the Times goes a bit haywire here: In the Arab world, there is little evidence of a change of heart toward Israel.

This is not very good analysis. Over the last months since moving the D.C., I’ve been to innumerable events featuring Arabs and non Jews, as well as read news reports from the well sourced, talking about Middle East “peace”. Most in the Arab world are ready, many already talking continually about how Middle East equilibrium has a very short window of time to manifest, otherwise we’re likely to see a new round of bloodshed.

“Incrementalism and the step-by-step approach have not, and we believe will not, achieve peace,” the Saudi foreign minister, Prince Saud al-Faisal, said after meeting Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. “Temporary security, confidence-building measures, will also not bring peace.”

Prince Saud al-Faisal has been saying this since the Saudi-US forum I attended back at the end of April:

9:41:38 AM: Al-Faisal: We don’t need more plans from Obama. “We need implementation.” (via live reporting Twitter feed)

Zbigniew Brzezinski has been even more forceful, as have others.

“One of the public misimpressions is that it’s all been about settlements,” Mr. Mitchell, the administration’s special envoy to the Middle East, said in a rare interview Friday after six months on the job. “It is completely inaccurate to portray this as, ‘We’re only asking the Israelis to do things.’ We are asking everybody to do things.”

In the quote above from the Times, Mitchell makes a point of saying that everyone is being asked to do things, while trying to downplay that “it’s all been about settlements.” The reality is that we shouldn’t even be having this discussion, because as Hillary Clinton said a while back, that issue is closed. A settlement freeze has been something Israel agreed on since back when Mr. Indyk was involved during the Clinton administration. From his most recent book, Innocent Abroad, which ironically gets its title from something Ronald Reagan said.

On the second level, both sides were supposed to implement their Road Map commitments under the watchful eye of an American general.*

*Among other obligations, Israel was supposed to freeze all settlement activity and dismantle illegal settlement outposts while the Palestinian Authority was supposed to end incitement and violence as well as begin dismantling the infrastructure of terror.

The first sentence leads to the footnoted section, which is noted at the bottom of page 386 in Indyk’s book.

Now, we can all pretend that settlements are not an issue, but that won’t get us any closer to equilibrium than when George W. Bush hurriedly whipped up instant peace negotiations hoping something would stick before he road back to Texas on the same ass he road in backwards on when first coming to Washington.

Of course it’s not just about settlements. But that we’re even talking about them at this point isn’t because of Obama.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Silence Over Saudi Abuse A Western Priority

Photobucket

A woman is threatened with death, but the UK won’t openly acknowledge the claims for asylum, because after all we wouldn’t want to openly criticize the House of Saud.

What kind of rubbish is this? The human rights abuse kind.

A Saudi Arabian princess who had an illegitimate child with a British man has secretly been granted asylum in this country after she claimed she would face the death penalty if she were forced to return home. The young woman, who has been granted anonymity by the courts, won her claim for refugee status after telling a judge that her adulterous affair made her liable to death by stoning.

Her case is one of a small number of claims for asylum brought by citizens of Saudi Arabia which are not openly acknowledged by either government. British diplomats believe that to do so would in effect be to highlight the persecution of women in Saudi Arabia, which would be viewed as open criticism of the House of Saud and lead to embarrassing publicity for both governments.

This has particular significance for me, because every time I point to these types of things, American friends of the Saudis respond by saying King Abdullah is doing more for women than any other Saudi in his position has done.

It’s important to point out that perhaps, even as we maintain our important relationship with the Saudis, who are critical to any movement between Israel and the Palestinians, we should not hide our criticism of real issues where women are concerned. The barbarism of the Saudis shouldn’t be excused, nor should the West shy away from telling it like it is for fear the House of Saud won’t like it.

The other side of the coin is who is always waiting in the wings if King Abdullah acts too moderate, appearing to act against Islam. That’s his problem, not ours. …and before you say it could become our problem if the House of Saud fell, I don’t believe for one moment we’d let that happen.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Biden Statement Unleashes Nervous Nellies

“Whether we agree or not. They’re (Israel) entitled to do that. Any sovereign nation is entitled to do that. But there is no pressure from any nation that’s going to alter our behavior as to how to proceed. What we believe is in the national interest of the United States, which we, coincidentally, believe is also in the interest of Israel and the whole world. And so there are separate issues. If the Netanyahu government decides to take a course of action different than the one being pursued now, that is their sovereign right to do that. That is not our choice.” – Vice President Joe Biden

Translation is obviously required, but I frankly don’t know why.

Except that our Middle East policy has been tied to the hip of Israel’s for so long people can’t accept when someone is saying bluntly that we do not control what Israel does. The Obama administration will continue on our own course, believing our policy is in everyone’s best interest.

However, if you want to see how treacherous the mine field around stating the obvious about Israel in regards to Iran is all you had to do is read the responses after Vice President Biden was on “This Week” with George Stephanopoulos. First the sequence of statements by Obama’s veep:

The United States, Mr. Biden said in an interview broadcast on ABC’s “This Week,” “cannot dictate to another sovereign nation what they can and cannot do.”

“Israel can determine for itself — it’s a sovereign nation — what’s in their interest and what they decide to do relative to Iran and anyone else,” he said, in an interview taped in Baghdad at the end of a visit there.

…If Mr. Biden’s comments on Israel and Iran were perhaps off the cuff, he did not back away from them when given a chance to do so.

George Stephanopoulos, the program’s host, asked: “But just to be clear here, if the Israelis decide Iran is an existential threat, they have to take out the nuclear program, militarily the United States will not stand in the way?”

And Mr. Biden replied: “Look, we cannot dictate to another sovereign nation what they can and cannot do when they make a determination — if they make a determination — that they’re existentially threatened and their survival is threatened by another country.”

First, there are no “mixed signals” on Iran.

The U.S. cannot dictate to sovereign nation their actions to protect their own country, whether we’re talking Iran or some other country. This is news?

Yes it is for people who haven’t shaken off the Bush-Cheney neocon lock step theory of Israel is joined at our hip foreign policy strategy.

Newsflash: Israel is not under our thumb and shouldn’t be.

Israel decides for herself what is in the country’s best interest and we don’t determine what that is. Again, the Bush era of driving U.S. Middle East policy through Israel is over.

If any message should be sent to Arab nations this one is it.

It’s preposterous to take away from what Biden says that we’re somehow giving Israel a green light to hit Iran’s nuclear facilities.

In fact, what Biden is actually doing is what the U.S. should have done a long time ago. Separate our foreign policy towards Iran from Israel, sending a message that whatever Israel does is on Israel. That we have nothing to do with their foreign policy decisions, even if we’ve also sent every signal that any strike on Iran would be destabilizing, as Adm. Mullen reiterated on Fox yesterday.

It’s not often I think it wise to disagree with Marc Lynch, but this is one of these times. He goes on to cite the “poorly sourced” Times of London piece about some Saudi nod as evidence of making things more dangerous, as well as unhelpful, let’s just say, after Yosemite Bolton’s recent op-ed.

As for interpretation, well, that’s the problem here. Almost everyone is running around with their rhetorical reaction on screech. It illustrates the nervous Nelly syndrome of most people on the Middle East, even when the Administration’s vice president states the obvious.

Haaretz picks up on Biden’s statement.

JPost.

Israel is her own guide.

The U.S. has no business inside Israel policy. Besides, we’ve made our feelings very clear. Adm. Mullen:

Asked about Biden’s comments, Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Sunday the U.S. position on Iran and a military strike involves a “political decision.”

“I have been, for some time, concerned about any strike on Iran. I worry about it being very destabilizing, not just in and of itself but unintended consequences of a strike like that,” Mullen said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.”

“At the same time, I’m one that thinks Iran should not have nuclear weapons. I think that is very destabilizing,” he said.

It’s long past time to separate U.S. policy from whatever Israel thinks they need to do on Iran.

Meanwhile, engagement is our policy, if Iran accepts the invitation. That’s a pretty clear message to Israel as well.

So what’s the problem? There is none.

Read full story · Comments are closed

News Around the World

–updated–

An eerie stillness has settled over this normally frenetic city. … “People are depressed, and they feel they have been lied to, robbed of their rights and now are being insulted,” said Nassim, a 56-year-old hairdresser. “It is not just a lie; it’s a huge one. And it doesn’t end.” – In Tehran, a Mood of Melancholy Descends

Photobucket

Iran remains in limbo, with people facing a regime that offers no out, no way forward, only more walking into the past. As the regime crushes all dissent, they’ve created much bigger problems for themselves than citizen protests, as the Guardian lays out:

The power struggle inside Iran appears to be moving from the streets into the heart of the regime itself this weekend amid reports that Ayatollah Hashemi Rafsanjani is plotting to undermine the power of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Rafsanjani’s manoeuvres against Khamenei come as tensions between the speaker of the parliament, Ali Larijani, and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad also appeared to be coming to a head.

One very disturbing development is that @persiankiwi has gone silent. Her/his tweets have been instrumental in this fight. Sullivan notices it as well. Nico Pitney has much more.

Another potentially history changing story comes from the Middle East in the voices of the women. It’s inspiring, but more importantly, it’s a potential crack in the dynamics, a new way forward if it’s supported and protected. Obviously, that’s a big if.

… “This is our time, women’s time,” said Khoulod Al Fahed, a Saudi businesswoman and blogger. “It is the time for women to speak up and demand the rights that have been stolen from us in the name of religion and culture.”

Middle Eastern women have long played active roles in the struggle for democracy and human rights. In recent months, women have won small yet unprecedented victories. In Kuwait, four female lawmakers were elected to parliament last month, the first time women have won seats in the nation’s legislature. In Egypt, election law was recently changed to give women a quota of 64 parliamentary seats. Palestinian women have launched protests to free prisoners held by Israel, while Egyptian women have organized labor and pro-democracy strikes in recent years.

Iran’s making the thugocracies sweat:

Out of fear that history might repeat itself, the authoritarian governments of China, Cuba and Burma have been selectively censoring the news this month of Iranian crowds braving government militias on the streets of Tehran to demand democratic reforms.

Between 1988 and 1990, amid a lesser global economic slump, pro-democracy protests that appeared to inspire and energize one another broke out in Eastern Europe, Burma, China and elsewhere. Not all evolved into full-fledged revolutions, but communist regimes fell in a broad swath of countries, and the global balance of power shifted.

Jose Maria Aznar weighs in very critically on Obama regarding Iran.

Delayed public displays of indignation may be good for internal political consumption. But the consequences of Western inaction have already materialized. Watching videos of innocent Iranians being brutalized, it’s hard to defend silence.

In Afghanistan, a new U.S. policy on opium.

At home, the climate bill inches forward, with a push from Pres. Obama, as well as this from Al Gore:

The American Clean Energy Security (ACES) Act is one of the most important pieces of legislation Congress will ever pass. This comprehensive legislation will make meaningful reductions in global warming pollution, spur investment in clean energy technology, create jobs and reduce our reliance on foreign oil.

The next step is passage of this legislation by the Senate to help restore America’s leadership in the world and begin, at long last, to put in place a truly global solution to the climate crisis.

We are at an extraordinary moment, with an historic opportunity to confront one of the world’s most serious challenges. Our actions now will be remembered by this generation and all those to follow – in our own nation and others around the world.

CQ Politics has the party vote breakdown. Rep. Boehner was reduced to ineloquence.

Included in the news unfolding around the world is the drama of Michael Jackson’s death, which continues to play out. The doctor, who has retained counsel, which is prudent in a case like this, is getting some scrutiny.

With Jackson’s death Thursday at age 50, investigators have turned their attention to a new figure in his life, cardiologist Conrad Murray of Las Vegas, whom Jackson called his personal physician. Murray was in Jackson’s rented mansion at the time he collapsed from an apparent heart attack.

People can argue with each other about what news isn’t getting covered, but the truth is that many people care more about this story than anything else. The magnitude of MJ’s passing has rippled across the world, shocking many who just didn’t get what he meant to so many, but also the impact of his stratospheric talent, which is bringing a flood of sales to the Jackson estate.

In honor of Stonewall, Frank Rich has written a piece that I’ll let you judge for yourself. Rich long ago lost me.

UPDATE: Military coup in Honduras.

Read full story · Comments are closed

New Media is Different from Blogging

Photobucket

The fundraiser is going great.

But I still haven’t met the goal. We’re stuck on $300 still needed in order for me to break even up to this point in 2009. Thanks to the amazing people who have jumped in, many first time financial supporters.

The last inch is always the hardest. But I need to get over this line, because I’ve still got the reality of my financial nut going forward.

NEW MEDIA is having a tough time this year. The economy has hit traditional media hard, so you can imagine how it’s hit NEW MEDIA.

To make an important point by way of a distinction, there is blogging and then there is NEW MEDIA. What’s the difference? Your sister might have a blog, which is important to you and her world, as well as her readers, all of which matter, no doubt about it. NEW MEDIA does reporting on events that have a wider impact and we devote our life to this purpose, and independent NEW MEDIA outlets like mine don’t have a base of financial support, except through you, the reader, and advertisers. As a way of thanks, I am so grateful for the people at Common Sense Media (and regular advertisers like SEIU, as well as Al Gore’s climate group, to name just two). Because BlogAds isn’t exactly successful when it comes to drumming up any advertising at all. I cannot thank the people at Common Sense Media loudly enough.

Everyone needs to consider sites that offer valuable reporting and other critically important news coverage that only NEW MEDIA provides worthy of financial support. It’s tough because we started out on a free information platform, so getting people to see us as requiring the same financial support that, say, a monthly or weekly subscription supplies isn’t easy. That includes advocacy groups and politicians who want to reach the activist base of the Democratic Party. Don’t just invite us to events to cover, support your issue by reaching our audience through advertising. Don’t tease us with access, then make us pay for the privilege when you’re also asking us to cover your issue through making us foot the bill; when you’re not reaching out to our readers through advertising yourself that helps us pay for expenses, including trips to do the reporting you want done. Make it possible for us to cover important news that the traditional media ignores.

Like any subscription to a newspaper or magazine, like paying for cable, NEW MEDIA sites can’t succeed without financial support.

Other sites have obviously done amazing work too, like Firedoglake’s coverage, to name one.

And just look at the foreign policy live reporting I’ve done, taking the Twitter posts as just one example: covering an important Saudi Arabia forum, the Middle East (covering it like few others), invite only meeting with David Miliband, journalists on Afghanistan-Pakistan, lunch with Mustafa Barghouti, even Cuba, Iran pre election polling, and a CATO event on whether the Pentagon can be fixed. …and that’s just a brief summary of what’s been going on around here since I moved to Washington. Sorry to bore regulars around here, but many don’t know what’s been going on.

Here’s the mailing address people have asked me to post:

Taylor Marsh LLC
P.O. Box 8303
Alexandria, VA

(Also see the “support independent journalism” donate button below the ad box up on the right that is always there.)

So please donate and support NEW MEDIA. We earn it.

Read full story · Comments are closed

For Obama in Locked Down Cairo, Honor Killings Don’t Exist

–updated below–

“Culturally sensitive” is how Bob Shrum judged Pres. Obama’s historic speech in Cairo, as he pronounced “a new beginning,” which was the foundation of his speech.

I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles – principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings. (transcript)

However, let’s not kid ourselves, shall we? The site of Pres. Obama’s speech could not have been worse. In the place where he will lift everyone up, Mubarak continues the practice of keeping his people down.

The capital is under occupation. Security troops are deployed in the main public squares and metro stations. Citizens were detained en masse and shops were told to close down in Bein el-Sarayat area, neighboring Cairo University, where Obama will be speaking. In Al-Azhar University, the co-host of the “historical speech,” State Security police raided and detained at least 200 foreign students, held them without charges in unknown locations…

The stage is set.

Standing in the heart of the Arab world, Pres. Obama didn’t give an inch on his Middle East policy, stating bluntly inside this world that the habit of acquiescing to Israel on all things is over.

At the same time, Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel’s right to exist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine’s. The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop.

Israel must also live up to its obligations to ensure that Palestinians can live, and work, and develop their society. And just as it devastates Palestinian families, the continuing humanitarian crisis in Gaza does not serve Israel’s security; neither does the continuing lack of opportunity in the West Bank. Progress in the daily lives of the Palestinian people must be part of a road to peace, and Israel must take concrete steps to enable such progress.

Stunning coming from an American president and also proof that at the dawn of the 21st century there is a dramatic new policy in place, one with the intention of changing the status quo. As this is a topic on which I am focused, it was heartening, but the hard work lies ahead.

Haaretz reports protests in Israel by one lone group, proving that Obama’s words are not going down well in Netanyahu’s country, with today’s language setting a hard line that Israel now must know will not be moved.

On Iraq and torture:

Let me also address the issue of Iraq. Unlike Afghanistan, Iraq was a war of choice that provoked strong differences in my country and around the world. Although I believe that the Iraqi people are ultimately better off without the tyranny of Saddam Hussein, I also believe that events in Iraq have reminded America of the need to use diplomacy and build international consensus to resolve our problems whenever possible.

… I have unequivocally prohibited the use of torture by the United States, and I have ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed by early next year.

Words that needed to be said, but over here there still isn’t transparency on Guantanamo, with most of us not sure what the hell to make of detainee photographic records protection provision, tucked deep inside the Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2009. Glenn talked about this on Monday.

For me, however, that’s nothing.

It was on women’s rights that Pres. Obama sought to truly, as Mr. Shrum said, show cultural sensitivity, completely and totally ignoring the horrific issues women face in Muslim and Arab countries across the world. That is the threat of death if they do not kowtow to the men who make the rules and enforce them through beatings, rapes, honor killings and all manner of abuse, mostly in the name of religion. It is a cause I have fought for since the 1990s, when Mavis Leno took up the charge of Afghan women under the Taliban. But today, Pres. Obama chose instead to respect the cultural differences that are not only dangerous for women, but deny them basic human rights. When it comes to violent extremism towards the populace, talking about an older woman getting blown up was okay, but acknowledging the wholesale violence against women and girls, Obama offered an American shrug in reaction to what women in Arab and Muslim countries have to endure. Mentioning that was just too much. Instead, Pres. Obama focused on, unbelievably, hair and traditional coverings of Muslim women. As for a 13 year-old-girl stoned to death, that was just too much.

… Moreover, freedom in America is indivisible from the freedom to practice one’s religion. That is why there is a mosque in every state of our union, and over 1,200 mosques within our borders. That is why the U.S. government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab, and to punish those who would deny it. [...]

[...] The sixth issue that I want to address is women’s rights.

I know there is debate about this issue. I reject the view of some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal, but I do believe that a woman who is denied an education is denied equality. And it is no coincidence that countries where women are well-educated are far more likely to be prosperous.

Now let me be clear: issues of women’s equality are by no means simply an issue for Islam. In Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia, we have seen Muslim-majority countries elect a woman to lead. Meanwhile, the struggle for women’s equality continues in many aspects of American life, and in countries around the world.

Our daughters can contribute just as much to society as our sons, and our common prosperity will be advanced by allowing all humanity – men and women – to reach their full potential. I do not believe that women must make the same choices as men in order to be equal, and I respect those women who choose to live their lives in traditional roles. But it should be their choice. That is why the United States will partner with any Muslim-majority country to support expanded literacy for girls, and to help young women pursue employment through micro-financing that helps people live their dreams. [..]

What Peter said.

It’s hard to worry about literacy when the basic rights of women are ignored, held hostage by the whims of fanatics in a place where tyranny towards them reins.

Ah, yes, one speech cannot change everything, as Pres. Obama said. But if the American president doesn’t lead on calling the horrendous treatment of women out who will? Obama ducked his responsibility on this, choosing instead to have “a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world,” which didn’t include calling out the barbarism perpetrated against women across the world.

Patrick J. Buchanan judged Pres. Obama’s policy a new direction for which he offers approval.

Bob Shrum talked about “cultural sensitivity,” which reminded me of Speaker Pelosi going to China to talk about global warming, but not feeling compelled to say anything about women’s rights, the forced abortion, and human rights.

It’s the new Democratic Party diplomacy, as we not try to stray too far into another country’s business, because we “do not presume to know what is right for everyone.” On diplomacy, it is not our business to tell countries how they should operate. But it should always be our duty to stand up for the oppressed, the beaten, the raped, those killed in 19th century murder called “honor killings” and say this is not only wrong, but immoral and against the cause of human rights. That doesn’t mean we can stop the behavior of nations, or hold our diplomacy hostage to their barbarous ways, but they sure need to know we’re watching, see what’s happening and condemn what they do. We should never stand silently as Pres. Obama did today.

Pres. Obama is always eloquent. Repeating his policy on Israeli settlements was so very important, as he also honored our abiding friendship with Israel that is “unbreakable.” It gave new hope that something may yet crack in the equilibrium stalemate, which is the Palestinians only chance, but also of Arab Israeli women as well.

But under the Obama administration, as the President made his first and most important outreach to the Arab and Muslim world, he pulled up short on fundamental human rights as it applies to women. But Obama will be hailed across America and the globe, no doubt, even as he gave the speech in a city under absolute lock down, while women were relegated to fashion items and talks of “education,” even if they have to risk their lives to get it.

UPDATE: Some are bristling that I dare to mention women’s rights and the importance of calling out Pres. Obama on this subject. I’ll offer here what I said in the comments “In the News.” It begins with one small step, no lectures or insults. This could have been simply to begin with saying “honor killings” are wrong, immoral, choose your language. I never expected Obama to go down the line on all the issues facing gender equality in the Arab and Muslim world. I’ve studied this subject for years, so I know better. But because there is vast agreement on “honor killings” across the Arab world this was such a great place to begin. It was important and could have been done with one line: It is never honorable to kill a woman. That it wasn’t was a choice.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Red Meat for the Right

Photobucket

On the wings of ABC’s article on Obama’s Muslim roots, we get an idea of what this week will be like for the Obama White House. No matter how successful his outreach is received in the Arab world, the juvenile center of the Republican right intends to run Robert Gibbs around the track. Segue to Pres. Obama’s statement on French TV, as reported by the Jeff Zelney of the New York Times, that has the right blogsphere in a tailspin.

The White House has a full translation of the interview (video). An excerpt:

OBAMA: …What I want to do is to create a better dialogue so that the Muslim world understands more effectively how the United States but also how the West thinks about many of these difficult issues like terrorism, like democracy, to discuss the framework for what’s happened in Iraq and Afghanistan and our outreach to Iran, and also how we view the prospects for peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians.

Now, the flip side is I think that the United States and the West generally, we have to educate ourselves more effectively on Islam. And one of the points I want to make is, is that if you actually took the number of Muslims Americans, we’d be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world. And so there’s got to be a better dialogue and a better understanding between the two peoples. ..

It will be telecast in a wide variety of languages on our White House Web site, whitehouse.gov. And my hope is, is that as a consequence you start seeing discussions not just at the presidential level, but at every level of life. And I hope I can spark some dialogue and debate within the Muslim world, because I think there’s a real struggle right now between those who believe that Islam is irreconcilable to modern life and those who believe that actually Islam has always been able to move side by side with progress…

Greg Sargent attempts to explain how the statement was made and what it meant, with Steve Benen joining in on the task. This exercise only matters in America, where the defensive crouch on all things Muslim and Islam, especially where Barack Hussein Obama is concerned, is always on a hair trigger. A liberal attempt at translation just comes off as defensive. It’s also not required, because last time I looked Mr. Obama is doing just fine over there.

In the Arab world, as well as in France where there is a significant Muslim population, Pres. Obama’s message was far simpler than is being described. It’s at its core a reach out saying that American Muslims are alive and well and Pres. Obama welcomes them, because they’re a significant force, also stating the broader population in this country needs educating on Islam.

As if to prove his point, the right wing circus kicked into action immediately (via Memeorandum).

Power Line: “Robert Gibbs Call Your Office… In what sense can any rational person consider the United States to be a Muslim country?

Gateway Pundit: It seems like it was just yesterday that Dr. Dobson was attacking Dear Leader for his “fruitcake distortion of the Bible.” Now we know why.

Roger L. Simon completely cracks over it, trying his own hand at translating Obama: We also know what dhimmi law is… and taqqiya. For those of you who have missed it, here is a definition of taqiyya – again from Wikipedia: The word “al-Taqiyya” literally means: “Concealing or disguising one’s beliefs, convictions, ideas, feelings, opinions, and/or strategies at a time of imminent danger, whether now or later in time, to save oneself from physical and/or mental injury.” A one-word translation would be “dissimulation.” The WikiIslam defines it as “sanctified hypocrisy.” That is Barak Obama to a T.

“The Astute Bloggers,” a name that is the essence of oxymoronic goes full tilt wacky with a photo on this occasion.

America for all its glory isn’t very cosmopolitan. If the last eight years have taught us anything, in fact, it’s that parts of our citizenry revel in ignorance, in the elitism of Americanism or bust. It’s what led to 9/11; this ignorance of how we impact the world and how our western tunnel vision no longer serves this nation in the 21st century.

As a side note, it’s not an accident that the moment Pres. Obama touches down in Saudi soil we hear from Osama bin Laden. The timing reveals the real fire inside this mass murderer, which begins in Saudi Arabia, the home country that exiled him, where the grudge he carries has flared again on the occasion of the American President’s trip. He’s irrelevant.

Instead of explaining Pres. Obama, just wait and see.

Read full story · Comments are closed

‘There Is This Very Pious Jew Named Goldberg…’

Marty Peretz needs to hear Thomas Friedman’s joke, even though I doubt he’ll get it.

There is this very pious Jew named Goldberg who always dreamed of winning the lottery. Every Sabbath, he’d go to synagogue and pray: “God, I have been such a pious Jew all my life. What would be so bad if I won the lottery?” But the lottery would come and Goldberg wouldn’t win. Week after week, Goldberg would pray to win the lottery, but the lottery would come and Goldberg wouldn’t win. Finally, one Sabbath, Goldberg wails to the heavens and says: “God, I have been so pious for so long, what do I have to do to win the lottery?”

And the heavens parted and the voice of God came down: “Goldberg, give me a chance! Buy a ticket!”

Drum riff here.

But seriously, what Friedman is saying while riffing on a conversation he had with Pres. Obama is simple when boiled down:

“Stop saying one thing behind closed doors and saying something else publicly.” – Barack Obama

Israeli leaders don’t seem to care what they say in public, because they have no intention of buying a ticket. The truth is that they’re so accustomed to getting free rein, with a shrug from the U.S. no matter what they do, that it never dawned on them that the tide could shift.

Shift it has.

But the opening will be short, as we saw recently when House Dems decided to get their AIPAC on after being shocked that people were starting to get seriously tough on Israel. Barack Obama, with a no daylight voice coming from Hillary Clinton as well, are the ones providing the cover, giving rational people space to step up and say what’s true and needed to be said.

The Arabs need to invest in the Palestinian state, not just talk, which means putting their money where their grievances lie.

Then there is Obama’s comment to Friedman on Iran that goes like this: “There are a lot of Arab countries more concerned about Iran developing a nuclear weapon than the ‘threat’ from Israel, but won’t admit it.” At the Saudi conference I attended, Turki al-Faisal admitted that if Iran goes nuclear the country most in danger is Saudi Arabia. But that was mentioned only once. It coincides with the fears of Shia dominance in the region as well. However, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict was mentioned time after time after time by the Saudis and other Arabs that day. Far be it from me to argue with the President who has the Arabs’ ear, but I’m not buying his quote or the rationale behind it. Mainly because it was begun from Netanyahu’s mouth.

When Pres. Obama speaks in Cairo there will be a lot of young minds listening, young men especially. The best news about this is that they won’t be hearing the American voice through George W. Bush or Dick Cheney. Instead, we will be heard through a man whose name is Barack Hussein Obama and whose heritage gives him a vein or two that includes the Muslim world.

Don’t expect a sea change from Obama’s speech. But again, it is a shift.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Obama Remains Adamant on Israel and Settlements

Being “honest” with Israel, how revolutionary. And as Michael D. Shearer notes, Pres. Obama even gives Dick Cheney grace. On the eve of his visit to Saudi Arabia, then Egypt, where he will give his outreach speech to Muslims and Arabs, Obama reiterates his Israeli policy regarding settlements.

Via NPR, which has the transcript and the audio.

“I don’t think we have to change strong support for Israel,” Obama said during an interview with NPR hosts Michele Norris of All Things Considered and Steve Inskeep of Morning Edition.

“We do have to retain a constant belief in the possibilities of negotiations that will lead to peace,” Obama said. “And that’s going to require, from my view, a two-state solution.”

… It will also require, he said, a freeze on Israeli settlements, including expansion to accommodate successive generations of settlers, and for Palestinians to make progress on security and end “the incitement that understandably makes Israelis so concerned.”

The president also suggested that the United States’ special relationship with Israel requires some tough love. “Part of being a good friend is being honest,” Obama said. “And I think there have been times where we are not as honest as we should be about the fact that the current direction, the current trajectory, in the region is profoundly negative, not only for Israeli interests but also U.S. interests. And that’s part of a new dialogue that I’d like to see encouraged in the region.”

Israeli’s Netanyahu remains belligerent, saying that what Pres. Obama asks equals “freezing life.”

Pres. Obama also weighs in to say Dick Cheney’s analysis is “flawed,” but that he doesn’t doubt the former vice president’s motives in wanting to protect this country.

This is one of the flaws of our current president. Giving quarter to people who have only one interest at heart: destroying his presidency.

It doesn’t mean Pres. Obama has to go out of his way to castigate Dick Cheney. But giving him respect is something, given his record, Mr. Cheney has not earned. On Israel, the Bush-Cheney administration did nothing to promote equilibrium. Then there is Iraq, but also Afghanistan. So it really doesn’t matter the motives of Dick Cheney, because the outcome of what his rhetoric and actions have wrought deserve condemnation and nothing less. Something Obama can offer simply by saying they had their chance and couldn’t move the ball, with much left in his lap to do, because of what Bush-Cheney’s foreign policy philosophy left undone.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Saudis Deliever Ultimatum to Traveling Press Corps

TM NOTE: Scherer has an update at the link below–

From Michael Scherer of Time:

The Saudi government is permitting journalists accompanying President Obama entry into the country without a visa or the usual customs procedures. While in Saudi Arabia, therefore, journalists are expressly prohibited from leaving the hotel or engaging in any journalistic activities outside of coverage of the POTUS visit. Those who do so risk arrest and detention by Saudi authorities.

This is not exactly helpful in pushing the case that the Saudis should be major partners in pushing Middle East equilibrium forward.

The section on “freedom of speech and press” from the State Department human rights report is a classic:

According to the Basic Law, the media’s role is to educate the masses and promote national unity. Media outlets can legally be banned or publication temporarily halted if they are deemed to promote “mischief and discord, compromise the security of the state and its public image,” or if it “offends a man’s dignity and rights.” The government continued to restrict freedom of speech and press by interrupting publication and dissemination of news sources critical of the royal family or of Islam. Authorities prevented or delayed distribution of foreign print media, effectively censoring these media and publications. …

Read full story · Comments are closed

World News Blast, and Podcast

New podcast is up. Features include: Hot Topics (Susan Boyle, McAuliffe); Hunting Sotmayor; Petreaus on Gitmo – Torture; Israel, Obama, Saudis, Egypt.

In other news today, Newt keeps pushing, now calling Judge Sotomayor “un-American” in an email blast. Michael Scherer at Time has the whole email. Not even reading it is believing.

You read that right — Judge Sotomayor said that her experience as a person of a particular sex and ethnic background will make her a better judge than a person of another sex and a different ethnic background!

When did that view become acceptable?

If Civil War, suffrage, and Civil Rights are to mean anything, we cannot accept that conclusion. It is simply un-American. There is no room on the bench of the United States Supreme Court for this worldview.

Moving on to Pakistan. Your must read comes from Ahmed Rashid, who is always in that category.

The Pakistani army is reportedly in “complete control” of Mingora, the Swat Valley’s main commercial area.

LWJ covers a fight with Afghan Army and Coalition Forces fighting the Taliban.

In the in case you missed it file, what would we ever do without a super embassy in Pakistan?

Segue to the Saudi royal family, where the Justice department is supporting the claim that they cannot be sued via a 9/11 lawsuit.

In a barbaric act of despicable force, the Saudis behead and crucified a convicted man who reportedly molested a man’s son, then murdered him.

To cleanse the Sunday palate of that disgusting item, Pres. Obama took the First Lady to a Broadway show, a place that’s been very hard hit by the recession. Mrs. Obama’s dress was drop dead gorgeous. As a serious supporter of all things Broadway, I applaud the date night choice.

A post on the Kilcullen Doctrine (h/t Small Wars Journal).

And it seems Netanyahu is pining over the Bush-Cheney days, wishing for their return. Israel is “disappointed” that Obama is not playing fairy godfather to their fondest wishes.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Obama to Stop in Saudi Arabia Before Egypt

Photobucket

Playing out this week, before Pres. Obama travels to the Muslim world, is Mahmoud Abbas coming to the White House. Eric Alterman talks about the weakness of Abbas, which is an understatement. But considering Israel has done all they can to weaken him it’s no wonder. Bush was no help either. Pres. Obama would do well to strengthen Mr. Abbas’ credibility, which is part of what’s going on today. It’s actually in Israel’s interest too, something they should have thought about a long time ago.

As for Pres. Obama’s trip next week, it now looks quite different.

Obama will stop first in Saudi Arabia, not Egypt, with Cairo the next stop where he will give his speech, the actual location supposed to be a secret, with Cairo University looking like the place. But as for Saudi being Obama’s first stop, this is a big development.

Marc Lynch:

The Arab media is buzzing today over the announcement that President Obama will travel to Riyadh before arriving in Cairo for his big address to the Islamic world. Why the late addition to his itinerary?

… The Egyptians had been making much hay off of Obama’s choice of Cairo for the speech, arguing that this vindicated Egypt’s (deeply unpopular) foreign policy and signaled Egypt’s return to the forefront of Arab leadership. This seeming support for Egypt’s (deeply unpopular) foreign policy was one of the reasons for my reservations about the choice of locale in the first place, although as with everything it depends on whether Obama endorses or challenges that approach in his speech. With the Saudis now the American President’s first port of call, the Egyptian claim to renewed leadership is weaker.

After that inter-Arab rivalry business, Arabs are trying to puzzle out the greater political significance of the trip. …

Could it be that Pres. Obama listened to Zbigniew Brzezinski and others like him? People who have been talking a lot about the importance of having Saudi Arabia as a major player in any Middle East process.

Mr. Brzezinski said in the Saudi conference I attended that an alliance with Saudi Arabia is critical to Middle East equilibrium. From the live Twitter reporting at that event:

9:33:10 AM: Zbig: We need a real US/SA alliance for peace. –applause in the room–

9:35:43 AM: Zbig: two parties can’t solve MidEast peace; US needs to frame, w/ SA, who can help. Window is closing.

From what I can discern from the experts, people who have traveled in the region and know it extensively (yes, I’m jealous of that status), Saudi Arabia’s role in moving the Israeli-Palestinian issue forward cannot be underestimated.

Looks like Obama’s not only getting it intellectually, but is willing to put his clout forward in political capital, spent through picking his spots very strategically.

Read full story · Comments are closed

North Korea’s Nukes

North Korea threatened a military response to South Korean participation in a U.S.-led program to seize weapons of mass destruction, and said it will no longer abide by the 1953 armistice that ended the Korean War. – Bloomberg

Secretary Clinton weighed in this past hour: “North Korea has made a choice. It has chosen to violate specific language, UN Security Council Resolution 1718… It has abrogated its obligations it entered into through the six-party talks and it continues to act in a provocative and belligerent manner to its neighbors. There are consequences to such actions.” She continued, saying the U.S. and a “unified community,” including China and Russia, are working on what steps will be taken going forward. Then Clinton underscored our commitments to “the defense of South Korea and Japan,” which is “part of our alliance obligation which we take very seriously.” The intent being to “rein in” the North Koreans and bring them back into a “framework of discussion” towards “denuclearization” that will “benefit the people of North Korean, the region and the world.”

If you’ve been reading my posts on the heavy nuclear breathing coming from Iran you know that I believe there is little the U.S. or the world can do to stop Iran from going nuclear. North Korea is a model that proves this point even more strongly. World leaders, no matter whom or where, have really missed the mark on what’s been developing over the years we’ve been trying to think small, incremental and one nation at a time, thinking disrespecting mad men and tyrants will make them more logical. Maybe we had a chance at the end of the Cold War to muster forces for a new non-proliferation coalition that actually meant something, but we didn’t think broadly enough. We simply didn’t have the imagination to envision a world at zero. We still don’t, because if we did we’d understand that the entire world has to buy in. That means everyone.

Now we’ve got North Korea making everyone nervous. Tom Ricks says ignore them. Well, they’re not going away, nor is the prowess they now have achieved going to do anything good for the region. But still we ask, How do you stop him?

.. Ed Friedman, a specialist in Asian international relations at the University of Wisconsin, was not optimistic. “The continuing development of nuclear weapons and missiles to carry them by North Korea … has large and dangerous consequences,” he said by email.

“Evidence suggests Chinese analysts have concluded that little can be done to stop either North Korea or Iran from going nuclear.”

Friedman worries Japan might ultimately go nuclear to defend itself, and that this would heighten tensions in the region – especially between Tokyo and Beijing.

Exactly. We can’t. So, now what?

Conservatives like to argue whose fault it is that North Korea went nuclear.

First, on the political front, North Korea’s Kim Jong Il has challenged President Obama more in four months than he did President George W. Bush in eight years. Since Obama has taken office, North Korea has kicked out UN nuclear inspectors, launched both short- and long-range missiles and tested a nuclear weapon.

If not this, it’s Iran must be stopped at all cost, including military action, which is the dumbest suggestion since preemption on Iraq, with neocons still believing in a strategy called regime change. It’s the Don’t Blame Us, You Talked to Them diplomatic bankruptcy that led to our current dilemma. But whether the U.S. can get beyond this juvenile political dialogue is doubtful given that this is what drives our critical media.

While Obama is tinkering in Iraq and Afghanistan, the importance of both not in doubt, an even more serious situation beckons beyond and I’m not talking just about Pakistan. It’s a world with Iran and North Korea both nuclear nations, Japan turning nuclear provoking China, with a wider Middle East escalation incubating as well, while loose nukes remain a big threat to U.S. security.

Smarter minds than mine aren’t offering up any solutions, let alone definitive strategies. But it seems to me that someone has to suggest a “Zero Nuke Summit” or something less threatening, bringing all players to the table, including those we don’t want to engage or admit are serious players. That means it would include Russia, Israel, Iran, North Korea, India, Pakistan, etc., but also Egypt and Saudi Arabia, because beyond Israel, no one has a bigger stake in Iran not going nuclear than the Saudis.

Will this happen? When pigs fly. There’s no conversation among the “experts,” let alone intellectual or media pressure coming from anywhere demanding it. Not the traditional media, including cable or network news, so dealing with the nuclear world rumblings and escalation threats collectively remains a far off conversation that amounts to talking to yourself.

We simply can’t continue to pretend this is going to go away. … Well, we can (and have), but it’s not.

Read full story · Comments are closed

CIA Director Sent to Israel

The person referred to earlier this week by Haaretz as being sent to Israel was CIA Director Panetta. According to The Times:

America’s spy chief was sent on a secret mission to Israel to warn its leaders not to launch a surprise attack on Iran without notifying the US Administration.

…The Israeli leader is expected to insist that the US stays focused on Iran, rather than tackling stalled talks with the Palestinians.

Mr Netanyahu has held meetings with Arab leaders this week, including President Mubarak of Egypt and King Abdullah of Jordan. Both Sunni leaders share Israel’s fears of a resurgent Shia Iran.

If Netanyahu is betting that Iran is of more importance to the Saudis and Egyptians than Middle East peace he’s going to come up empty.

Read full story · Comments are closed

The Trouble with Saudis

Photobucket

Earth to Saudis, get a grip. Oh, but not on your woman.

Arab News, a Saudi English-language daily newspaper based in Riyadh, reported that Judge Hamad Al-Razine said that “if a person gives SR 1,200 [$320] to his wife and she spends 900 riyals [$240] to purchase an abaya [the black cover that women in Saudi Arabia must wear] from a brand shop and if her husband slaps her on the face as a reaction to her action, she deserves that punishment.”

Women in the audience immediately and loudly protested Al-Razine’s statement, and were shocked to learn the remarks came from a judge, the newspaper reported.

Regular readers know about the conference I attended on US/Saudi relations recently. An attempt to begin to get a clue about the most important Arab leaders in the region, though as a modern American woman it’s tough, very, very tough.

After the conference I talked about the importance of the Saudis when it comes to Middle East talks and trying to get to equilibrium. The challenge being that Saudi pr in the United States is awful and it’s not just about 9/11. In fact, I talked to Lucien Zeigler of the Committee for International Trade (Council of Saudi Chambers of Commerce & Industry), who sponsored the conference along with the Saudis (and the New America Foundation), about their pr problem, particularly among one specific group of voters who aren’t going to give the Saudis a pass for obvious reasons. It’s one thing to have religious differences that make customs diametrically opposed to our nation. It’s quite another to condone violence against women, which the Saudis clearly do.

This is my pet peeve with the Saudis, even as they step up in the Middle East. They set themselves up for failure, which can blow back on Obama at a cost. Not the least of which is because a leading demographic in this country think they’re no good. Part of the Saudi story lies buried because many in the U.S. don’t want to hear it, which is understandable. Gates on the Saudis:

“The relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia has been one of the mainstays of stability in the Middle East for more than 60 years,” he said at the Eskan Village military base outside the Saudi capital.

“Saudi Arabia continues to be an important partner for the US in counter-terrorism and a range of other issues.”

How the Saudis hope to get credit or support for anything they do in the Middle East as long as stories like the wife slapping come out of Saudi Arabia is beyond me. You’d think the Saudis would look at the bigger Middle East picture when these stories come out of Arabia. It won’t help us solve issues in the Middle East.

If we don’t the region is headed for another war, as King Abdullah of Jordan has said before, but reiterated again in an interview with The UK Times.

The Obama Administration is pushing for a comprehensive peace agreement that would include settling Israel’s conflict with the Palestinians and its territorial disputes with Syria and Lebanon, King Abdullah II told The Times. Failure to reach agreement at this critical juncture would draw the world into a new Middle East war next year. “If we delay our peace negotiations, then there is going to be another conflict between Arabs or Muslims and Israel in the next 12-18 months,” the King said.

The Saudis are so incredibly tone deaf on pr they never move fast enough on stories like the one above making any U.S. partnership, even for the good of the Middle East, impossibly complicated for Obama. How can Americans who only think of Saudi Arabia in terms of 9/11 possibly cut them slack, even when they’re doing good? They can’t and won’t, because the Saudis are just too easy to hate.

Why do I care?

Because women matter in the Middle East. Like the reality of Arab Israeli women, who can’t work and have no independence, as Knesset Member Jamal Zahalka said on a media conference call I was on recently when I asked about the challenges of Arab Israeli women: “… the main problems for Arab-Israeli women is participation of work for them, which ‘is very, very low. … Without work you can’t have independence.’” They stand beside Afghan women, who stand in front of Saudi women, who stand in front of Pakistani women… not to mention Egyptian, Iranian… As women are treated in countries, so goes that country’s stability, which is very much an American interest, especially in the Middle East.

Are you hearing me now?

Read full story · Comments are closed

Round the World, and a Saudi Demand

Photobucket

Nobody really pays enough attention to our relationships with the Saudis. But if we want anything done in the Middle East, especially since Egypt and Hamas don’t exactly play well together, according to all the experts I’ve been listening to recently, the Saudis will have to play, perhaps, the major role, beyond the U.S. It’s interesting to note as well, that regardless of all the Saudi bashing they take, which after 9/11 was understandably deafening, with the Saudis having much to answer for on women’s rights, though they contend (as they did last week) that women have high positions in universities, for instance, so things are moving in the right direction (child brides would be evidence to the contrary). Their pattern of torture also having a bright spotlight shown on it last week as well. However, speaking in terms of the Middle East, I just wish their pr outreach was better here and people understood how much we need the Saudis. They sure don’t make it easy. But the Saudis rarely push back on any negative incoming they receive from whatever quadrant of the U.S. delivers it.

So, regarding the under the radar kerfuffle between the Saudis and something US Under Secretary for Political Affairs William Burns said at the US/Saudi conference I attended last Monday. I believe it happened during an off the record back and forth, which was obviously meant not to be covered in the press. That’s why I can’t go to any notes, because it was agreed that this particular Q&A not be public (so after a full day of note taking, I was glad for the break, though I won’t do that again, if simply for cases like this one). Steve Clemons made a point of stressing this fact so that Burns could be completely candid. I’ve got an email out for confirmation on this, but haven’t received a response as yet (after all, it is Sunday). So, providing I’m correct and the back and forth did come during this exchange, the Saudis were peeved enough to go public anyway, demanding a clarification from State. But even if the segment wasn’t part of the off the record session, it seems rather extraordinary to me for the Saudis to make such an adamant public demand:

An unnamed Saudi official, quoted by the state-run SPA news agency, said that the claim made by US Under Secretary for Political Affairs William Burns is “completely false and fabricated.”

The US State Department must “deny the claim and provide clarification for the reasons behind such fabrication that does not serve the relations between the two friendly countries.”

Burns was corrected at the time of his statement by a gentleman in the audience, but the Saudis took it further anyway. No one really paid any attention to this, but since I witnessed it and wondered at the time what might develop from the back and forth when Burns made his statement, it’s interesting the fierce push back from the Saudis over a bilateral meeting with Israel that they say never happened, talking tough for obvious reasons. State responds:

… In a press briefing on Thursday, Wood said, “What I understood was that there was no bilateral meeting between the two (the King and Peres).”

The Saudi official source, quoted by the SPA news agency, had said that the State Department must “deny the claim and provide clarification for the reasons behind such fabrication that does not serve the relations between the two friendly.

Next up… In Iraq, of turncoats and traitors.

And, as expected, Karzai’s competition can’t muster a serious challenge.

What if Zardari’s government falls? Next Stop, Gen. Ashfaq Kayan.

You have to love this quote, compliments of The Cable:

Tonight comes word from the Hill that Holbrooke has had to postpone his rescheduled testimony on U.S. policy to Pakistan before the Senate Foreign Relations Commitee slated for next week until mid May.

“Ridiculous,” one Hill foreign policy hand grumbles. “Only Holbrooke can string along the Committee in this fashion.”

Holbrooke’s pomposity continues to be a driving element in his narrative.

But it’s obvious Pres. Zardari can’t handle the situation in Pakistan. Looks like George W. Bush’s “Musharaff policy” is going to unfold out on to the next Musharaff policy, with the military eventually taking over. At least that’s what I’ve been seeing as the likely end game here. Ackerman concurs.

Petraeus thinks it’s down to the wire:

Gen. David Petraeus, commander of U.S. Central Command, has told U.S. officials the next two weeks are critical to determining whether the Pakistani government will survive, FOX News has learned.

[...] Petraeus made these assessment in talks with lawmakers and Obama administration officials this week, according to individuals familiar with the discussions.

They said Petraeus and senior administration officials believe the Pakistani army, led by Chief of Staff Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, is “superior” to the civilian government, led by President Ali Zardari, and could conceivably survive even if Zardari’s government falls to the Taliban.

George W. Bush’s notion of viral democracy, especially in this part of the world, was a sign of his ignorance as much as his arrogance. Just look where it has led us.

On the Israeli-Palestinian front:

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is considering the possibility of asking a former Hamas representative to head a new PA government in the West Bank, a PA official in Ramallah revealed over the weekend.

The official said that Mahmoud Habbash, who broke away from Hamas several years ago and is currently the minister of Social Welfare in the government of Salaam Fayad, was Abbas’s favorite candidate for the premiership.

“President Abbas will first ask Fayad to head the new government,” the official said. “But if Fayad turns down the offer, the president will ask Habbash to form the government.” Unlike Fayad, Habbash is a leading religious figure and a devout Muslim. His appointment would be seen as an attempt on the part of Abbas to win the sympathy of Hamas and Islamic Jihad supporters. …

Peres to the U.S., which has the Palestinians anything but pleased.

As was rumored recently, Michael Oren is official.

Wanted to also share some testimony that could be very important, especially since it came from someone who some believe may be a candidate to replace Sect. Gates when the time comes. Dr. John J. Hamre (pres. & CEO of CSIS) testified on the defense budget recently. The video offers a lot more than his statement, for you milnerds out there.

Turning to the domestic… Edwards under federal campaign inquiry. God speed, Jack Kemp, a very nice man, from all accounts. Oh, and everyone calm down about the H1N1 virus. Hysteria is the real danger. Seriously, some of the reactions have been alarmist in the extreme, not the least being what came out of Vice President Joe Biden’s mouth. Enjoy Clinton’s first 100 days.

To end, Sen. Patrick Leahy’s op-ed on holding the torture policy creators accountable.

Lifting the Bush-era veil of secrecy
On US torture, we need to find out what happened – and why

… I still believe my proposal for a Commission of Inquiry remains the best way to move forward with a comprehensive, nonpartisan, independent review of what happened. Torture was and is against the law. Condoning it puts the men and women who bravely serve in our own armed forces at risk. It disregards the values that make this country great. Torture is illegal, immoral, and wrong. That is why Obama ended these practices.

Let us reaffirm our guiding principles as a nation by joining together to come to a shared understanding of what happened and why. The risk of failing to learn from our mistakes is that they will be repeated.

Oh, and I almost forgot, Biden and Kerry, among many others, are scheduled to speak at AIPAC tomorrow.

Busy week for President Obama, as Karzai and Zardari both hit town.

Read full story · Comments are closed