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 | WMDs

Obama and the Boiling Middle East

“So what do we do? Well, faced with a neutered Security Council, we have to redouble our efforts outside of the United Nations with those allies and partners who support the Syrian people’s right to have a better future. We have to increase diplomatic pressure on the Assad regime and work to convince those people around President Assad that he must go, and that there has to be a recognition of that and a new start to try to form a government that will represent all of the people of Syria,” [Secy. Hillary Clinton] said. – Josh Rogin

It’s no secret I was against the Libya bombing and remain so. Watching the carnage in Syria reveals the flaws in the Obama administration’s strategy, as much as there was one. The unspeakable, which Josh Rogin said outright last night, is civil war in Syria. Even as Secy. Clinton worked the Arab League hard to make the NATO mission feasible, regime change looks differently once it’s over and the fallout begins.

See Egypt, where Americans are reportedly to be tried, including Secy. Ray LaHood’s son. Our so-called relationship today in that country as bad as it’s been in decades, which Josh Rogin explained with Chris Hayes last night. No doubt Secy. Clinton’s first instinct to bolster Mubarak came from this dreaded place. However, the truth is wider and deeper, of an American policy supporting dictators who are our allies in torture and rendition, as both Mubarak and Assad have been, while the people suffer.

The Arab Spring has unleashed a lot of energy, none of which Pres. Obama can predict, contain or manage very easily, but considering we engaged in the contagion to try and impact it, he’ll have to take ownership of something that is uncontrollably unpredictable.

Stephen Walt offers some thoughts on Syria, after the Libyan NATO mission.

One can argue that this was the right course of action anyway, because getting rid of a thug like Qaddafi was worth it. That’s a debate for another day, although I would note in passing that post-Qaddafi Libya remains deeply troubled and the collapse of the regime seems to be fueling conflicts elsewhere. But what if the Libyan precedent is one of the reasons why Russia and China aren’t playing ball today? They supported Resolution 1973 back in 2011, and then watched NATO and a few others make a mockery of multilateralism in the quest to topple Qaddafi. The Syrian tragedy is pay-back time, and neither Beijing nor Moscow want to be party to another effort at Western-sponsored “regime change.” It is hardly surprising that Russian U.N. Ambassador Vitaly Churkin condemned the failed resolution on precisely these grounds. In short, our high-handed manipulation of the SC process in the case of Libya may have made it harder to gain a consensus on Syria, which is arguably a far more important and dangerous situation.

Also read Marc Lynch on what a horror it is that the U.N. failed, which no doubt is making the neoconservatives gleeful.

I wrote about this just a few days ago, but if you count Iran and Israel, the economy may be the least of Obama’s worries, with the Middle East possibly throwing a curve to all the prognosticators.

With Pres. Obama’s foreign policy credentials including ordering the slaying of Osama bin Laden, there is no sense whatsoever that Mitt Romney can make a serious challenge to Pres. Obama if the Middle East goes south.

What that means to Republicans picking a nominee is anyone’s guess. It also could be why Newt Gingrich has seduced himself into thinking the race isn’t over.

Read full story · Comments { 11 }

Israel’s ‘False Flag’ Op, Posing as C.I.A.

President Barack Obama talks on the phone with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel in the Oval Office, Jan. 12, 2012. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

The most interesting article you’ll read today is my must read for Saturday.

It comes from Foreign Policy’s Mark Perry:

Buried deep in the archives of America’s intelligence services are a series of memos, written during the last years of President George W. Bush’s administration, that describe how Israeli Mossad officers recruited operatives belonging to the terrorist group Jundallah by passing themselves off as American agents. According to two U.S. intelligence officials, the Israelis, flush with American dollars and toting U.S. passports, posed as CIA officers in recruiting Jundallah operatives — what is commonly referred to as a “false flag” operation.

The memos, as described by the sources, one of whom has read them and another who is intimately familiar with the case, investigated and debunked reports from 2007 and 2008 accusing the CIA, at the direction of the White House, of covertly supporting Jundallah — a Pakistan-based Sunni extremist organization. Jundallah, according to the U.S. government and published reports, is responsible for assassinating Iranian government officials and killing Iranian women and children.

But while the memos show that the United States had barred even the most incidental contact with Jundallah, according to both intelligence officers, the same was not true for Israel’s Mossad.

As a follow up, read Daniel Drezner.

Juan Cole is always an important read on these subjects.

I wonder if Bret Baier will ask the Republican candidates on Monday what they think about these allegations? Ron Paul’s answer would be illuminating, no doubt.

With Mitt Romney being endorsed by John Bolton, it’s not hard to surmise where he’d come down. The question is what is he prepared to do about it? Like Pres. Obama, that answer is an easy guess.

Read full story · Comments { 1 }

Iranian Students Take British Embassy


From the BBC:

Protesters in the Iranian capital, Tehran, have broken into the UK embassy compound during an anti-British demonstration, reports say.

Militant students are said to have removed the British flag, burnt it and replaced it with Iran’s flag. State TV showed youths smashing embassy windows.

The move comes after Iran resolved to reduce ties following the UK’s decision to impose further sanctions on it.

Read full story · Comments { 0 }

Senators Merkeley & Udall: ‘Let’s Not Linger in Afghanistan’

As a liberal who supported Pres. Obama’s Afghanistan plan when he first began it, I simply do not understand how anyone can support it today, at least not when judging what’s in U.S. interests.

From their New York Times op-ed today:

Nineteen months ago the president announced the surge strategy in hopes of stabilizing Afghanistan and strengthening its military and police forces. Today, despite vast investment in training and equipping Afghan forces, the country’s deep-seated instability, rampant corruption and, in some cases, compromised loyalties endure. Extending our commitment of combat troops will not remedy that situation.

Sometimes our national security warrants extreme sacrifices, and our troops are prepared to make them when asked. In this case, however, there is little reason to believe that the continuing commitment of tens of thousands of troops on a sprawling nation-building mission in Afghanistan will make America safer.

National security experts, including the former C.I.A. director Leon E. Panetta, have noted that Al Qaeda’s presence in Afghanistan has been greatly diminished. Today there are probably fewer than 100 low-level Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan. Al Qaeda has a much larger presence in a number of other nations.

Our focus shouldn’t be establishing new institutions in Afghanistan, but concentrating on terrorist organizations with global reach. And our military and intelligence organizations have proved repeatedly that they can take the fight to the terrorists without a huge military footprint.

It’s easy to understand why our troops being in Afghanistan is good for the Afghans, because Pres. Karzai simply isn’t doing his job and there’s no evidence he will. Women continue to suffer in Afghanistan, an issue to which Karzai is indifferent, even as real progress has been made, because the women and girls had only one way to go and that’s up.

In the past, I’ve argued with people over staying in Afghanistan, but after herculean efforts on the part of our troops, it’s simply not worth one more life, not one. I feel the same way about Iraq, too, but I felt that way from the beginning the Bush-Cheney misadventure that distracted the U.S. from getting bin Laden.

It’s also not as if we won’t continue to be involved in Afghanistan, because they’re sitting next to Pakistan in an important region. This begs the question of when regional powers, including India, China and Russia, will start doing their part? The U.S. is leaving Afghanistan, so they’d better step up.

Senators Merkeley and Udall are correct, Pres. Obama should change course, but he won’t because he’s prosecuting this war like a Republican, which is one reason why Afghanistan is starting to look like a bigger disaster than ever, because the same stubbornness that kept Bush in Iraq is keeping Obama from drawing down faster in Afghanistan.

Read full story · Comments { 3 }

9/11 Responders Squeezed, SALT Treaty Ratified

The bill passed after Senate Democrats struck a deal Wednesday with Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., who agreed to drop his objections when the cost of the bill was reduced by about $2 billion. The Oklahoma Republican had come under withering criticism for opposing the bill on the grounds that it provided “overly generous funding” and included “unnecessary and duplicative compensation funds.” – Oklahoma Senator Allows Vote After Bill To Care For Responders Is Cut to $4.2 Billion

At a time when Pres. Obama didn’t pay attention to the people, instead caving to Republicans on economics, it’s fitting that Sen. Coburn won, too. Yes, he gave in finally, but that’s because he got the 9/11 heroes and responders bill cut by $1.5 in benefits and $2.7 in compensation. This schmuck voted yes for the mill-billionaires tax cuts, exempting them from the estate tax, as well as capital gains goodies, but it’s wasteful to give 9/11 responders their due. The fund will also extinguish after five years. So all you 9/11 heroes, get sick now and get well quick, because your benefits and compensation turn into a pumpkin in five.

Indecision Forever, has the perfect headline: Senate Republicans Reluctantly Agree to Maybe Throw a Few Coins at Sickly First Responders.

But that’s the conscience of a conservative for you. They don’t have one.

Meanwhile, the good guys won on START. That doesn’t include many, many Republicans.

Danger Room has a good rundown on the new nuclear arms treaty, but suffice to say that Republicans were made to look like fools when Admiral Mullen, who’s been a keen, cagey and very important political figure recently, urged passing of the new START Treaty. From Spencer Ackerman:

The headlines first: New START caps strategic nuclear warheads at 1,550 on each side. (According to the nuke wonks at the Ploughshares Fund, the Russians have 2,600 strategic nuclear weapons and the United States has just under 2,000.) The intercontinental ballistic missiles, subs and bombers that deliver them have to be capped at 800 deployed and non-deployed launchers.

By most arms-control experts’ accounts, these are pretty modest cuts, still allowing each side to incinerate the Earth several times over.

Additionally, every year, each side will conduct 18 on-site inspections at places where those warheads and delivery vehicles are stored. That’s 10 annual inspections fewer than under the old treaty, but more data is extracted from each inspection.

The treaty does not deal with missile defense, a favorite Republican toy. More from Ackerman:

The closest it comes is to bar each side from converting its intercontinental and sub-launched ballistic-missile launchers into delivery mechanisms for anti-ballistic-missile interceptors.

It’s amazing what can happen in a lame duck session, isn’t it?

Big Loser award: Sen. John McCain.

Read full story · Comments { 5 }

Because Dick Morris is a Jackass

The fact that this current State Department covert operation was initiated under Secretary Rice does not lessen Hillary’s guilt for having pursued it. Mrs. Clinton, not Miss Rice, has run for president and is presumed to continue to be interested in the job. Her addiction to spies, dumpster divers, sleuths, and negative research operatives has always been a cause for concern. – “Up to her old tricks,” Dick


Sect. Hillary Clinton is having a very rough week.

It’s a great thing she’s in Central Asia, with others handling the announcement of a security crackdown at State, because she’d be subjected to all manner of media inanity if she weren’t. Granted, the security tightening is a long time coming and should have been done under Pres. Bush, but it wasn’t.

Makes you wonder what kind of diabolical diplomacy Henry Kissinger was doing behind and before the technological barrier was broached, now doesn’t it?

Never mind that the State Dept. was more likely a “letter carrier for the intelligence community.”

No one should be shocked that it was Dr. Rice who initiated the diplomatic covert actions, at least as recent times goes. But as you see with Morris above, he doesn’t care what she did, because it’s all about Hillary and a possible, who knows and perhaps presidential run, circa 2016. Morris on Hannity Tuesday wouldn’t get off his Hillary talking points, dredging up absolute rubbish about his hallucinations about Hillary’s “secret (broad) police” during the ’90s, which remain a figment of Dick’s delusions.

There’s no doubt that the Wikileak diplomatic document dump has been a disaster for State all around. But mostly because it’s brought out Sect. Clinton’s enemies, beginning with the particularly loathsome foot fetishist, Dick Morris, Slate’s Jack Shafer, but also David Corn, one of the most obnoxious pissants on the Left side of the dial, who wants Hillary “grilled” on Capitol Hill. Bring it on, big boys, because she’d toy with the Republican rabble like a kitty cat playing with a big fat mouse.

After the Democratic midterm catastrophe everything is going to get tougher for Sect. Clinton. It began with Sen. Kyl’s nonsensical stalling on the new Start Treaty, but it won’t end there that’s for sure. As MJ Rosenberg writes, Wikileaks has also helped drive the neocon war with Iran meme.

The Wiki-revealed knowledge that the Israelis and the Saudis are tacitly working in concert against Iran would only make things worse, given that among most Arabs and Muslims, the Saudi regime is only a little more popular than the Netanyahu government. A US/Israeli/Saudi tripartite alliance against Iran could be America’s Suez, and could finish us off in the region the way the United Kingdom and France were finished by their anti-Egypt alliance with Israel in 1956.

In addition, of course, no one believes a strike on Iran would eliminate its nuclear facilities.

As for shutting down Wikileaks, the Pentagon could have used Cyber Command, which I brought up previously (also at Huffington Post), to do it a long time ago. They decided it wasn’t warranted.

Being Secretary of State under Pres. Obama is a hell of a lot of work and it just got a lot harder.

Read full story · Comments { 17 }

Wikileaks Diplo Docu Dump



Italy’s Foreign Minister Frattini called the Wikileaks release the “Sept. 11 of world diplomacy.”

Republicans are jumping on the leak, as expected, because transparency scares the bejeezus out of the Right. Rep. Pete Hoekstra using hyperbole to say what allies might ask, “‘Can the United States be trusted? Can the United States keep a secret?’”

Americans have grown accustomed to being kept in a state of permanent stupid on foreign policy. That’s how Iraq happened, but it’s also how dangerous moves in the Middle East towards Iran can be sanctioned through a simple sound bite.

Few news organizations bother to cover the Mideast, which is one reason I hailed Al Jazeera English when it came available in the Beltway area some time ago. Years of covering Israel without any way objectivity, along with Iran, has left Americans with a stilted view of American foreign policy. What’s worse is that the collective American ignorance about other countries and our involvement in their inner workings has given neoconservatives and traditional hawks the playing field, because our foreign policy is always presented as militaristic movements being strong, diplomacy is weak. When you have people like Rep. Eric Cantor making religious based Middle East foreign policy pronouncements, as well as people like Sen. Jon Kyl inventing the Cold War 2.0, circa 21st century, it shows just how vulnerable our foreign policy is to tilts in presidential domestic power, especially when Democrats don’t fight on their own ground.

Unclassified and not marked secret, 251,287 cables were provided to The Times by “an intermediary on the condition of anonymity.” Below are some stand out elements of what was released, with a fascinating look into Saudi King Abdullah’s advice to Pres. Obama equally interesting. However, the first standout element of the documents take us to Israeli and Saudi worries about Iran, but also fuller information about the Iranians long-range missile capacity.

There was little surprising in Mr. Barak’s implicit threat that Israel might attack Iran’s nuclear facilities. As a pressure tactic, Israeli officials have been setting such deadlines, and extending them, for years. But six months later it was an Arab leader, the king of Bahrain, who provides the base for the American Fifth Fleet, telling the Americans that the Iranian nuclear program “must be stopped,” according to another cable. “The danger of letting it go on is greater than the danger of stopping it,” he said.

His plea was shared by many of America’s Arab allies, including the powerful King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, who according to another cable repeatedly implored Washington to “cut off the head of the snake” while there was still time.

The cables also contain a fresh American intelligence assessment of Iran’s missile program. They reveal for the first time that the United States believes that Iran has obtained advanced missiles from North Korea that could let it strike at Western European capitals and Moscow and help it develop more formidable long-range ballistic missiles.

The Right is making a lot of ruckus about the Saudi comments while pointing fingers at Arabists utilizing the See Even Saudi Arabia Wants To Strike Iran. The Right’s anti Arabist sentiment is what scuttled Chas Freeman’s possible appointment. However, the Shia v. Sunni dynamic has been an amped up challenge ever since Pres. Bush let the neoconservatives run things, which began with the disastrous preemptive attack on Iran that altered the balance of power in the region. With shifts in Lebanon, the Shia state rising has as its most important godfathers George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, intended or not, something that has been forgotten. But the dynamics being used right now to make the case for Iran action aren’t a sudden revelation with these leaks, though that’s what’s being talked about on the Right.

From The Times:

¶ A dangerous standoff with Pakistan over nuclear fuel: Since 2007, the United States has mounted a highly secret effort, so far unsuccessful, to remove from a Pakistani research reactor highly enriched uranium that American officials fear could be diverted for use in an illicit nuclear device. In May 2009, Ambassador Anne W. Patterson reported that Pakistan was refusing to schedule a visit by American technical experts because, as a Pakistani official said, “if the local media got word of the fuel removal, ‘they certainly would portray it as the United States taking Pakistan’s nuclear weapons,’ he argued.”

¶ Thinking about an eventual collapse of North Korea: American and South Korean officials have discussed the prospects for a unified Korea, should the North’s economic troubles and political transition lead the state to implode. The South Koreans even considered commercial inducements to China, according to the American ambassador to Seoul. She told Washington in February that South Korean officials believe that the right business deals would “help salve” China’s “concerns about living with a reunified Korea” that is in a “benign alliance” with the United States.

¶ Bargaining to empty the Guantánamo Bay prison: When American diplomats pressed other countries to resettle detainees, they became reluctant players in a State Department version of “Let’s Make a Deal.” Slovenia was told to take a prisoner if it wanted to meet with President Obama, while the island nation of Kiribati was offered incentives worth millions of dollars to take in Chinese Muslim detainees, cables from diplomats recounted. The Americans, meanwhile, suggested that accepting more prisoners would be “a low-cost way for Belgium to attain prominence in Europe.”

¶ Suspicions of corruption in the Afghan government: When Afghanistan’s vice president visited the United Arab Emirates last year, local authorities working with the Drug Enforcement Administration discovered that he was carrying $52 million in cash. With wry understatement, a cable from the American Embassy in Kabul called the money “a significant amount” that the official, Ahmed Zia Massoud, “was ultimately allowed to keep without revealing the money’s origin or destination.” (Mr. Massoud denies taking any money out of Afghanistan.)

¶ A global computer hacking effort: China’s Politburo directed the intrusion into Google’s computer systems in that country, a Chinese contact told the American Embassy in Beijing in January, one cable reported. The Google hacking was part of a coordinated campaign of computer sabotage carried out by government operatives, private security experts and Internet outlaws recruited by the Chinese government. They have broken into American government computers and those of Western allies, the Dalai Lama and American businesses since 2002, cables said.

¶ Mixed records against terrorism: Saudi donors remain the chief financiers of Sunni militant groups like Al Qaeda, and the tiny Persian Gulf state of Qatar, a generous host to the American military for years, was the “worst in the region” in counterterrorism efforts, according to a State Department cable last December. Qatar’s security service was “hesitant to act against known terrorists out of concern for appearing to be aligned with the U.S. and provoking reprisals,” the cable said.

¶ An intriguing alliance: American diplomats in Rome reported in 2009 on what their Italian contacts described as an extraordinarily close relationship between Vladimir V. Putin, the Russian prime minister, and Silvio Berlusconi, the Italian prime minister and business magnate, including “lavish gifts,” lucrative energy contracts and a “shadowy” Russian-speaking Italian go-between. They wrote that Mr. Berlusconi “appears increasingly to be the mouthpiece of Putin” in Europe. The diplomats also noted that while Mr. Putin enjoyed supremacy over all other public figures in Russia, he was undermined by an unmanageable bureaucracy that often ignored his edicts.

¶ Arms deliveries to militants: Cables describe the United States’ failing struggle to prevent Syria from supplying arms to Hezbollah in Lebanon, which has amassed a huge stockpile since its 2006 war with Israel. One week after President Bashar al-Assad promised a top State Department official that he would not send “new” arms to Hezbollah, the United States complained that it had information that Syria was providing increasingly sophisticated weapons to the group.

¶ Clashes with Europe over human rights: American officials sharply warned Germany in 2007 not to enforce arrest warrants for Central Intelligence Agency officers involved in a bungled operation in which an innocent German citizen with the same name as a suspected militant was mistakenly kidnapped and held for months in Afghanistan. A senior American diplomat told a German official “that our intention was not to threaten Germany, but rather to urge that the German government weigh carefully at every step of the way the implications for relations with the U.S.”

Pres. Obama is up against it politically right now, no doubt about it. His reelection map, with his support in the industrial Midwest wiped out, leaves him vulnerable in ’12, though no one should count him out. When Americans hear the Right saber rattling once again it will correctly make them revisit memories of Bush-Cheney and their disastrous foreign policy. But starting in the New Year the difficulty of Obama’s battle is immense compared to anything he’s ever faced before.

When you read about the leaked documents then think about a Republican in office, the possibilities on what could happen with a reflexive neoconservative in the White House should be a sobering thing to contemplate. If that person is a neophyte on foreign policy, which includes everyone running except Newt Gingrich, the dangers for this country jump exponentially. Just listen to the comments you’re hearing on Fox News, which is foreshadowing of more to come as the 2012 campaign on the Right revs up.

Read full story · Comments { 23 }

Sect. Clinton Announces Middle East Talks

UPDATE via AP: Iranian and Russian engineers began loading nuclear fuel into Iran’s first atomic power plant Saturday amid international concern that the Islamic Republic is seeking a nuclear weapon. State television showed what appeared to be fuel rods being loaded into the core of the reactor, which is on the shores of the Persian Gulf near the town of Bushehr. The plant is one of the first tangible results of Iran’s controversial nuclear program, which has been the target of increasingly tough international sanctions….

Amidst a very hard push on the right about Israel striking Iran, which was forwarded by Jeffrey Goldberg’s recent ramblings, good news comes today that the Obama administration has pushed back hard, convincing Israel the Iran is still at least a year away from going nuclear. That’s a concrete plus as we sit here looking out on what is coming in September.

With the partnership of Pres. Obama and Sect. Clinton, which is unmatched, the much anticipated news on talks was announced, though it’s getting drowned out by mosque mania. But before you think this is huge news, as it stands now it is more theater than anything else, which isn’t bad either. The trouble is that everyone is coming to Washington for different reasons, with no common denominator on which to begin.

Regardless of the lack of good faith that may come from the Netanyahu government, with the PM already having rejected the language of the Quartet statement, which David Ignatius mentions also, or skepticism from Abbas and the Palestinians, forging ahead is what the Obama administration must do, because this long after his Cairo speech, Pres. Obama hasn’t accomplished much of anything.

Meanwhile, looming in the near distance is the settlement agreement expiration, with no one knowing what will happen afterward or if Netanyahu will agree to extend it (even as settlements continue). With Obama in a weakened position domestically, and elections on the horizon, it’s not the strongest hand.

Sect. Clinton’s remarks, excerpted (video):

Since the beginning of this Administration, we have worked with the Israelis and Palestinians and our international partners to advance the cause of comprehensive peace in the Middle East, including a two-state solution which ensures security and dignity for Israelis and Palestinians. The President and I are encouraged by the leadership of Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Abbas and fully share their commitment to the goal of two states – Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security.

After proximity talks and consultations with both sides, on behalf of the United States Government, I’ve invited Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority President Abbas to meet on September 2nd in Washington, D.C. to re-launch direct negotiations to resolve all final status issues, which we believe can be completed within one year.

President Obama has invited President Mubarak of Egypt and King Abdullah of Jordan to attend in view of their critical role in this effort. Their continued leadership and commitment to peace will be essential to our success. The President will hold bilateral meetings with the four leaders followed by a dinner with them on September 1st. The Quartet Representative Tony Blair has also been invited to the dinner in view of his important work to help Palestinians build the institutions of their future state, an effort which must continue during the negotiations. I’ve invited Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Abbas to join me here at the State Department on the following day for a trilateral meeting to re-launch direct negotiations.

As we move forward, it is important that actions by all sides help to advance our effort, not hinder it. There have been difficulties in the past; there will be difficulties ahead. Without a doubt, we will hit more obstacles. The enemies of peace will keep trying to defeat us and to derail these talks. But I ask the parties to persevere, to keep moving forward even through difficult times, and to continue working to achieve a just and lasting peace in the region.

As we have said before, these negotiations should take place without preconditions and be characterized by good faith and a commitment to their success, which will bring a better future to all of the people of the region.

Pres. Obama needs this theater, which will come as his speech to the United Nations General Assembly nears.

Read full story · Comments { 3 }

Wikileaks Digested

Whatever side someone is on about the dumping of 90,000 Afghanistan documents by Wikileak one thing is clear. New media has now vaulted into traditional old media territory. I’m not going to tell you what the document dump means, as you need to read and digest the information as citizens. But you should know that anyone weighing in telling you how it is has a stake in what you think. Where someone sits on the war in Afghanistan colors how they feel about the Wikileak document dump. Consider it in everything you read and know the stance of the author or outlet weighing in.

Transparency during wartime is expanding faster than government can keep up with it because of new media’s independence. Old traditional media never had this aspect, no matter the outlet. In a world where war is becoming too expensive for everyone, in lives and in treasure, but also diplomatic reputation because of the nakedness of knowing the details of what is done in the name of a country’s “good deeds,” it’s a tectonic shift in what the public can know. If it makes us think twice before venturing into militaristic adventures without a way through or out that’s a good thing. None of this will stop the government from screaming “danger, danger, exposure of tactics will endanger lives,” but maybe it will think about making the American public a bigger partner in these wars.

If our country is going to continue in these foreign adventures of militarism, some politician should stand up and propose a draft. It won’t get any traction, but the reason we’ve had mission creep from our initial attack on Afghanistan after 9/11 to Bush’s neglect of the country, then into nation building is that people don’t have to pay attention, because it’s not their son (or daughter) who is dying. When you’ve got them by the family jewels, the heir(s), their attention will follow. Then maybe we’ll quit having wars like Iraq, or idiocy from the Tea Party that we should attack Iran. That’s said by people who thank the troops while knowing it’s not their son or daughter being put in harm’s way.

Andrew Exum.

Jay Rosen: The Afghanistan War Logs Released by Wikileaks, the World’s First Stateless News Organization.

The New York Times, who served up Judith Miller’s stenography, says Wikileaks hurts the war effort.

Pakistan is pissed. Shocking, I know.

The New Yorker:

This stash will be compared to the Pentagon Papers, and in some ways that’s right—WikiLeaks, like Daniel Ellsberg, has been accused of ignoring the national interest. (An unfair charge, unless by “national interest” one means the political interests of a particular Administration.) But the Pentagon Papers were a synthetic analysis, a history of the war in Vietnam. WikiLeaks has given us research materials for a history of the war in Afghanistan. To make full use of them, we will, again, have to think hard about what we are trying to learn: Is it what we are doing, day to day, on the ground in Afghanistan, and how we could do it better? Or what we are doing in Afghanistan at all?

A profile of Julian Assange of Wikileaks.

An interview on NPR’s Fresh Air with investigative reporter Philip Shenon.

It’s a circular firing squad with the people for transparency about war in the post-Bush era, an administration that lied us into Iraq, standing up to and against the infrastructure that thinks the people who fund the war, taxpayers, shouldn’t know what’s going on.

Read full story · Comments { 5 }

Sarah Becomes a Player… but Mitt Raises More

Most of their reports are due this week, though a spokesman said Pawlenty’s Freedom First PAC raised more than $700,000, while Romney’s field-leading Free and Strong America PAC, which reports monthly, had raised more than $1 million in April and May alone. Of the bunch, only Barbour had filed a second quarter report, which showed that one of his committees, a Georgia state committee called Haley’s Leadership PAC quietly created late last year, pulled in nearly $70,000 from April through June, largely through a fundraiser last month that drew some big Republican names to a trendy restaurant in Washington’s Glover Park neighborhood. – SarahPAC steps into the big leagues

Sarah Palin continues pummeling Obama, tweeting yesterday that “he’s got most disconnected, backasswards plan ever imposed on the country we love.” Unfortunately, Sarah also lays down another preposterous fear phrase, ‘The System is Going Bankrupt’, which mimics her “death panel” shriek last August. Though everyone should remember she started a Tea Party riot with “death panel.”

As for SarahPac’s huge financial gains in the last quarter, the payouts are the story.

For instance, at the time of the Southern Republican Leadership Conference, Palin forked over cash for gift bags, caribou jerky and other items, beginning to woo the GOP establishment who hold sway over who wins the nomination. But Politico also reports Palin spending $154,000 to HSP Direct, taking a page from Karl Rove, who was a direct male believer. Palin is no longer relying on Facebook and online fundraising.

HSP’s campaign for SarahPAC, which started in earnest in April, sent glossy fundraising solicitations to more than 500,000 conservative households, asking them to help the PAC support conservative candidates in 2010, according to SarahPAC treasurer Tim Crawford. Through the direct-mail campaign and its continued online fundraising, SarahPAC added about 8,000 new donors in the second quarter, bringing its total contributors to more than 25,000, said Crawford, adding the PAC also has more than 200,000 emails on its list.

Palin continues to pay $10,000 to former John McCain foreign policy adviser Randy Scheunemann for her foreign policy and national security talking points, with screenwriter Rebecca Mansour of Conservatives4Palin, new to the political game but jumping in at the right moment, continuing to be on the Palin payroll as well.

Meanwhile, Mitt Romney plugs along raising funds and keeping his head down for now. He did get some fierce incoming lately from Sen. Richard Lugar over Romney’s overblown rhetoric over Obama’s new START. Never fear though, because NRO has the Mittster’s back.

The dull political season of summer before the fall mid-term extravaganza allows for a little attention to what will be in full swing this time next year. On the right, it’s the usual suspects so far. But the latest fundraising and focus of Sarah Palin should disabuse anyone that she’s not considering a run.

With her latest SarahPAC numbers, there’s really no reason she shouldn’t.

Read full story · Comments { 11 }

Mitt Romney, the Anti-Reagan

…and the 2012 positioning has begun, as the right-wing hyperbole goes where Ronald Reagan never went before. Otherwise known as the day Mitt Romney drew a new cold war line in the sand.

Too bad he didn’t do his homework. Ronald Reagan wouldn’t embrace Romney’s “worst foreign policy mistake” nonsense any more than the Republicans should. Hey, but in the era of the Tea Party extremists, let the civil war begin.

Romney today:

… Despite all of this, the president’s New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New-START) with Russia could be his worst foreign policy mistake yet. The treaty as submitted to the Senate should not be ratified.

New-START impedes missile defense, our protection from nuclear-proliferating rogue states such as Iran and North Korea. Its preamble links strategic defense with strategic arsenal. It explicitly forbids the United States from converting intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) silos into missile defense sites. And Russia has expressly reserved the right to walk away from the treaty if it believes that the United States has significantly increased its missile defense capability. [...]

Also see Wonk Room.

It further proves today that Ronald Reagan couldn’t be elected RNC chairman, let alone the nominee of today’s Republican Party.

Read full story · Comments { 4 }

The Most Provocative Post You’re Going to Read on Iran

It comes from former U.S. Amb. to Morocco Marc Ginsberg over at Huffington Post.

[...] Iran has been relatively successful maintaining its vital export markets with the very countries we need to turn the sanctions tourniquet tighter. By any measure, American-led efforts to economically isolate Iran have achieved important victories, but on balance, insufficient ones. In fact, Iran continues to export its goods relatively unhindered particularly to the very nations the U.S. is counting on to support sanctions; namely Japan, the EU and India. Moreover, the Sunni Arab states most concerned about Shiite Iran’s nuclear and regional ambitions, namely Kuwait, Oman and the UAE, have not done nearly enough to end Iran’s access to their exports. A few weeks ago, while in Oman I personally witnessed a flotilla of zodiac boats overflowing with camouflaged goods zipping across the Arabian Gulf to Iran from the port of Khosab. …

[...] Secretary of Defense Robert Gates recently wrote a three-page memorandum to NSC Advisor Jim Jones warning that the U.S. had no clear contingency policy in place should sanctions fail to deter Iran from reaching a “threshold” capacity to construct a nuclear weapon. …

[...] Iran’s rulers may suffer from a bad case of misbegotten uber confidence. But on balance Iran’s counter-containment policy has achieved impressive results. How impressive? Obviously, time will tell. But by its words and deeds Iran’s bravado has the telltale hallmark of nation increasingly convinced that rather being contained, it is the nation that is doing the containing.

The reality has always been that the U.S. and allies cannot stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, even if the facts of whether they’re working on it remain elusive, while weaponizing nuclear material is a whole different subject.

The Israeli government is determined to keep Iran from obtaining nuclear weaponry in a way I don’t see the U.S. getting involved: militarily. If Israel feels its sovereignty is threatened, whether it makes things more difficult for the U.S. or not, the Netanyahu government must defend its people.

As for the dreams of a non-nuclear Middle East, as Queen Noor said softly but bluntly on one of Bill Maher’s last shows, it cannot happen without Israeli transparency on their nuclear weapons arsenal. The double standard must end, though there is no evidence it will.

Frankly, the United States is in a box, which is one reason former Pres. George W. Bush chose to ignore the issue, that is, after he helped get Hamas elected in Gaza by insisting on elections when Palestinians weren’t ready. It remains to be seen if this box we’re in is actually also helping Iran contain the U.S.

Juxtapose this against a new Pew Poll (also see secyclintonblog’s diary “In the News”) which finds most of the world is in favor of using military action to keep Iran from getting the bomb.

Among the nations surveyed, there is widespread opposition to Iran acquiring nuclear weapons and considerable support for tougher economic sanctions against the Islamic Republic. For instance, more than three-quarters of those who oppose the Iranian nuclear program in Spain (79%), Britain (78%), Germany (77%) and France (76%), as well as 67% in Russia and 58% in China, approve of tougher sanctions. Many are also willing to consider using military force to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear capabilities, including about half of those who oppose Iran’s program in Poland, Germany, Spain, and Britain, and roughly six-in-ten
in France.

Pulling the trigger is a lot different from public opinion, especially considering Obama’s duel wars in Afghanistan and Iran. It’s hardly practical.

There is more:

Global opinion of Barack Obama’s dealing with world trouble spots parallels general opinion of U.S. policies in these areas. With regard to Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran, the polling found as many countries approving as disapproving of his handling of these issues. However, the American president gets his worst ratings for dealing with another world problem for which the U.S. is often criticized: the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Of 22 nations surveyed including the U.S., in only three nations do majorities approve of Obama’s handling of the dispute: France, Nigeria and Kenya.

However, it reminds me of a similar situation where the U.S. is powerless: moving Netanyahu on Israeli settlements. Everyone knows that the path to peace will requires their dismantlement, as well as a Jerusalem-sharing agreement. But on the game goes.

It’s wonderful news that Israel has eased the Gaza blockade, but let’s wait to see how it’s implemented, because the devil will be in those details.

In a vague statement of principle last Thursday, Israel said it was ready for “adjustments” in its Gaza policy. But the language of the announcement on Sunday suggested a possibility of more sweeping change. Israel said it would expand operations at the land crossings already operating to enable processing of “a significantly greater volume of goods” and “the expansion of economic activity.” It spoke of opening more land crossings in the future.

It also said it would “streamline the policy” on the entry and exit of Palestinians for humanitarian and medical reasons, and on movement of employees of international aid organizations. “As conditions improve,” it added, Israel would consider “additional ways to facilitate the movement of people to and from Gaza.”

A lot of moving parts.

But even after Israel’s announcement, with fingers crossed, I still come back to Amb. Ginsberg’s opinion piece. The implications are sobering.

Read full story · Comments { 9 }

What Israeli Actions have Wrought

It is time Israel realized that it has obligations to the United States, as well as the United States to Israel, and that it become far more careful about the extent to which it test the limits of U.S. patience and exploits the support of American Jews. This does not mean taking a single action that undercuts Israeli security, but it does mean realizing that Israel should show enough discretion to reflect the fact that it is a tertiary U.S. strategic interest in a complex and demanding world. – Israel as a Strategic Liability?, by Anthony Cordesman

It’s getting louder and coming from all quarters.

You don’t have to go back further than Lebanon 2006 (though you could), then walk forward.

Gaza attack without end, followed by an unending continuing humanitarian crises.

Settlements… continuing, then announced yet again when V.P. Biden is in Israel.

That’s before we even get to a shared Jerusalem.

The recent flotilla raid was just too much for many. This isn’t about IDF soldiers. Tzipi Livni is right. It’s about the Netanyahu government giving the order and knowing the situation, but doing it anyway and falling into a trap that has ensnared us all.

The are many reasons for not revisiting history. It’s just not helpful. Everyone realizes the horrible violence that has been delivered on Israel by bombs and attacks. But it now stands as backdrop to what we’re seeing happening in the present, especially in Gaza.

Andrew Sullivan proves the point about history today. Richard Cohen’s column from 2006 is Sullivan’s starting point.

The greatest mistake Israel could make at the moment is to forget that Israel itself is a mistake. It is an honest mistake, a well-intentioned mistake, a mistake for which no one is culpable, but the idea of creating a nation of European Jews in an area of Arab Muslims (and some Christians) has produced a century of warfare and terrorism of the sort we are seeing now. Israel fights Hezbollah in the north and Hamas in the south, but its most formidable enemy is history itself.

Sullivan’s recent essays, beginning with his “Israel Derangement Syndrome,” illustrate the cumulative cost of Israel’s actions during recent historical times. Israel may have provoked another point of no return with the Gaza flotilla fiasco. Sullivan today:

I’m not going to go into the long and awful history of the way in which the Arab world has treated Israel from the get-go, but I am saying that to add to the original proposition an ongoing, unstoppable colonization of a further swathe of land won in wartime is obviously against the interests of the Jewish state, and compounds and deepens the resentment from 1948 and 1967 and 1974. Not to see this context, indeed to claim that any and all grievances against Israel’s existence – and, much more significantly, ongoing expansion – are entirely a function of Jew-hatred is to lose any nuance in diplomacy or human relations.

That’s where the Israelis have lost me and some others. It was revealed first by how petulantly even the Kadima-led government responded to Obama’s election. The Gaza war, conceptually defensible, was practically gruesome (Hamas and Israel share that blame), but the unapologetic, almost triumphalist and revengeful manner in which it was conducted and defended was and is shocking, as is the contempt for the wounded and dead on the Mavi Marmara. When your heart is hardened against the corpses of children buried in rubble, it is hardened too much. And the job of a real friend is to point this out, not to enable it.

There is no longer one side against the silent. There are two sides, both wanting to save Israel from herself, but it’s getting increasingly hard to do. Because if you’re friends can’t tell you when you’re screwing up so that you’ll listen and change, it’s likely your enemies will let you know in a way you won’t soon forget.

We’re entering a new moment in political analysis and rhetorical criticism where Israel is concerned and they brought it on themselves. We won’t see any courage in Congress for a while, but eventually that rock will be moved. The times and circumstances have changed and demand it.

The first action should be transparent declaration of Israel’s nuclear arsenal. You can’t have a nuclear-free Middle East, let alone hold Iran accountable, if a major player in the region is held to a different standard.

Read full story · Comments { 13 }

The Water-Boarder in Chief Speaks

To the international community and many Americans it’s a war crime.

From the Texan who gave the order to have it done it evidently was simply an answer he got to his prayers. In Grand Rapids he was feeling very comfortable, with the picture saying it all. The smug arrogance remains.

“Yeah, we water-boarded Khalid Sheikh Mohammed,” Bush said of the terrorist who master-minded the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on New York and Washington. He said that event shaped his presidency and convinced him the nation was in a war against terror.

“I’d do it again to save lives.”

After what we lived through with Pres. Clinton, I never wanted to see another impeachment. You’ll never convince me that Congress and the FBI being trained on Clinton’s zipper didn’t cost us, including 9/11.

However, if ever anyone deserved to be investigated for the lies his Administration perpetrated in the name of “national security” it was George W. Bush. From WMD lies, to subverting intelligence and the press, Democrats simply failed in performing the duties necessary to hold the Bush administration accountable. If the situation was reversed, Republicans would have delighted in doing to a Democratic president what should have been done to George W. Bush.

In fact, I’ve thought for a long time that Republicans taking over the House could portend a nightmare for Pres. Obama. Not because of any just reason, but because hunting Democrats is what Republicans do.

Read full story · Comments { 21 }

Longing for an Honest Broker

Diplomacy takes a hit.

Meanwhile, Rep. Barney Frank calls for a probe of the raid, also saying “as a Jew” Israel’s action “makes me ashamed that there would be Jews that would engage in that kind of victimization of a minority.” What courage that took. It’s a remarkable statement.

So is the one made by Vice Pres. Joe Biden, playing pitbull for Israel.

“[The Israelis have] said, ‘Here you go. You’re in the Mediterranean. This ship — if you divert slightly north you can unload it and we’ll get the stuff into Gaza.’ So what’s the big deal here? What’s the big deal of insisting it go straight to Gaza? Well, it’s legitimate for Israel to say, ‘I don’t know what’s on that ship. These guys are dropping eight — 3,000 rockets on my people,’” Biden said.

Turkey is also not at all pleased with Pres. Obama’s response so far to the Israeli violence. But given Steny Hoyer’s adamant statement that the Administration and Congress “are determined to prevent condemnation of Israel at the UN Security Council,” I doubt if anything will change the status quo. You know, because it’s worked so well over the years.

Laura Rozen on the likelihood that the Iran sanctions vote will be pushed:

The Obama administration had been planning to bring a new Iran sanctions resolution to a vote at the UN Security Council on Thursday, but diplomatic sources said the vote is no longer likely to take place this week. …

… But Turkish officials made no secret of their fury at the Israeli raid on the Gaza aid flotilla that killed four Turkish citizens early Monday, and their irritation at the Americans for their muted reaction to the incident. Turkey is among the ten non-permanent members of the Security Council. [...]

“We would like them to issue a condemnation of the attack, and to show solidarity with the people who lost their lives,” Davutoglu said. “Israel is isolating themselves from all of their friends. … With each of these actions, [Israel] is saying they are above the law, and ‘we are not accountable,’” he continued.

[...] Sources close to Ankara said a meeting between Davutoglu and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Tuesday did not go very well. …

This gave Elliott Abrams a chance to unleash a stem winder of an article that spews venom towards Pres. Obama at every paragraph. Abrams is also upset that the Administration joined the Security Council’s condemnation of the “the acts leading to this tragedy,” which doesn’t mention Israel specifically, but keeps it broad to include all parties.

Abrams even goes so far as to fantasize the flotilla aggression as Israel’s “Blackhawk Down,” one of the most preposterous comparisons I can imagine making. That is until Abrams suggests that because of Obama it’s “open season” on Israel.

Israelis see clearly the problems they face when the United States is calling for another international investigation and will not defend Israel. They understand that no one is going to investigate Turkey and its role, nor investigate the pro-terror groups on board those ships—not if the United States fails to insist on it. They realize that, thanks to the Obama policies, it is now open season on Israel in Europe and at the UN. They speak candidly (Israelis of the left, center, and right, not just Likud supporters) in private about all these problems, but they cannot speak openly about them, not when they may have the Obama administration to deal with for six and a half more years. They wonder most about whether their friends see their predicament, and will speak up for them even when they must—to retain a working relationship with the White House—remain silent or speak very carefully. So this crisis is not only a test for Israel, which faces difficult weeks ahead, and for the Obama administration, which in fact has already failed. It is a test for Israel’s supporters, facing the combined onslaught of the news media (from BBC coverage to New York Times editorials), scores of governments, UN bureaucrats, and a White House that views excessive solidarity with Israel as a diplomatic inconvenience. The United States abandoned Israel in the United Nations and in the NPT Conference in the course of one week. Israel’s friends in the United States should say so, say it was shameful, and gear up for a long fight.

This is the kind of drivel we get coming from the Middle East studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.

MJ Rosenberg has it right when he says “the Israel-can-do-no-wrong crowd is on overdrive defending the operation.”

If only defending Israel was their only goal. They hope to use their propaganda to take Pres. Obama down as they do it.

Read full story · Comments { 46 }

Pres. Obama and Sect. Clinton, National Security as Good as It Gets

[...] Wars over ideology have given way to wars over religious, ethnic, and tribal identity; nuclear dangers have proliferated; inequality and economic instability have intensified; damage to our environment, food insecurity, and dangers to public health are increasingly shared; and the same tools that empower individuals to build enable them to destroy. … – Obama’s National Security Strategy.

The view of Pres. Obama’s National Security Strategy, that it’s “Bush lite” opposed to “real change,” seems totally misguided. I certainly never heard Mr. Bush talking about making sure we live up to America’s values. Climate change? Never. Dr. Susan Rice is no John Bolton, with Sect. Clinton an engaged force of change for State. DemocracyArsenal has more here and here.

The story late yesterday of Clinton calls for unified national-security budget is more of what’s different about the Obama-Biden era compared to Bush-Cheney. Sect. Clinton’s modus operandi is that with this strategy Congress can’t pick it apart to starve what they don’t want to fund. For too long military has had the most money, with other aspects of our national security structure going without. Remember during Pres. Bush? State was a step child. Not so under Sect. Clinton.

“We have to start looking at a national-security budget,” Clinton said at the Brookings Institution Thursday. “We cannot look at a defense budget, a State Department budget, and a USAID budget without defense overwhelming the combined efforts of the other two, and without us falling back into the old stovepipes that I think are no longer relevant for the challenges of today.”

Clinton made all the usual arguments for why State needs more money, including the need to be present everywhere and the increased role diplomats and civilian advisors are playing in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. She also pointed out that even top Pentagon leaders are arguing for full funding of the State Department’s budget request, which faces a lot of congressional scrutiny this year in light of the constrained fiscal and economic atmosphere.

[...]“Part of the reason I brought [Lew] in is because I knew when Jack headed OMB during the Clinton administration, State would come in with their budget, and AID would come in with their budget, and OMB would always play them off of each other,” she said. “It was the easiest thing in the world to get money out of the 150 account [the international affairs budget]. They would come in and say ‘Oh no, diplomats!’ and then ‘Oh no, development!” and OMB would go, ‘Great, take it and give it to someone else.’ We are trying to avoid that.” …

More on Pres. Obama’s National Security Strategy (via Laura Rozen).

[...] Our country possesses the attributes that have supported our leadership for decades—sturdy alliances, an unmatched military, the world’s largest economy, a strong and evolving democracy, and a dynamic citizenry. Going forward, there should be no doubt: the United States of America will continue to underwrite global security—through our commitments to allies, partners, and institutions; our focus on defeating al-Qa’ida and its affiliates in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and around the globe; and our determination to deter aggression and prevent the proliferation of the world’s most dangerous weapons. As we do,we must recognize that no one nation—no matter how powerful—can meet global challenges alone.

As we did after World War II, America must prepare for the future, while forging cooperative approaches among nations that can yield results. Our national security strategy is, therefore, focused on renewing American leadership so that we can more effectively advance our interests in the 21st century. We will do so by building upon the sources of our strength at home, while shaping an international order that can meet the challenges of our time. This strategy recognizes the fundamental connection between our national security, our national competitiveness, resilience, and moral example. And it reaffirms America’s commitment to pursue our interests through an international system in which all nations have certain rights and responsibilities. …

Next week, as June begins, Pres. Obama will welcome Prime Minister Netanyahu, sort of a re-do after the last visit than ended up with everyone looking petty. Then on June 9th, Pres. Obama will greet Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas at the White House. Look for photo ops on both of these, as Rahm Emanuel is driving the make-up session between the White House and Israel, whose relationship has been uneven, at best. The visit of Mr. Abbas should remind everyone that there are two equal partners in the Middle East process talks, which neither party is working to forward beyond process to actual manifestation of a Palestinian state on the road to peace.

Read full story · Comments { 16 }

Obama Administration Reacts to Iran ‘Fuel Swap’ Deal

“Of course they are not thrilled,” Leslie Gelb, president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations and a former Pentagon official, said of the administration. “They thought [the Brazilian-Turkish diplomatic effort with Tehran] was going to fail and didn’t stop it, or couldn’t stop it. It looks like it undercut their diplomacy. – President Obama’s nuclear headache

They had to act, so they did.

“Today, I am pleased to announce to this committee we have reached agreement on a strong draft with the cooperation of both Russia and China,” Clinton told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee today. “We plan to circulate that draft resolution to the entire Security Council today.” … “I think this announcement is as convincing an answer to the efforts undertaken in Tehran over the last few days as any we could provide,” Clinton said. – The New York Times

China welcomed Iran’s “fuel swap” deal with Turkey, which brought the issue of sanctions against Iran into question by some. They went even further in a statement: “I think this will slow down talk of sanctions,” said a former Chinese diplomat to Iran.

China and Iran got the answer today, though now Turkey and Brazil, non-permanent members of the Security Council, will undoubtedly vote against sanctions. Nine members are needed to pass the sanction agreement, which shouldn’t be hard to get.

Whether sanctions will have the intended outcome is another story entirely.

Read full story · Comments { 8 }

Israeli Govenment Denies Entry to Noam Chomsky

–updated–

Mr. Chomsky is not my brand of intellectual, but if this order came down from on high, based on Chomsky’s political beliefs, Israel just kissed their democratic credentials good-bye. It’s a huge mistake on every level.

According to Haaretz and the Jerusalem Post, Chomsky was turned back at the Allenby Bridge border crossing on his way to speak at Bir Zeit University. According to reports, the Israeli government will send the reason denying Chomsky entry to the American Embassy.

Moustafa Barghouti has denounced the action, according to Raw Story, via YNet News (also see SCB’s In the News diary).

Chomsky, who is in his 80s, speaks with a voice of a man who has nothing left to lose. A speech at BU caused quite a stir in March.

With references to “slaughter” in Gaza and Israel’s successful efforts (with U.S. complicity) to quell protest and expressions of sympathy among Palestinians in the West Bank, Chomsky returned often to the apartheid theme. At one point he described Gaza’s living conditions as being worse than the bantustans, the so-called homelands of apartheid South Africa. He later referred to Israel’s actions in sealed-off Gaza as a campaign of extermination.

His comments were punctuated by his familiar refrain that the United States and Israel are “rogue states.” With few exceptions, U.S. support of Israel has been unflagging, he said.

“The world works like the Mafia, and we’re the don,” Chomsky said. “You do what we say or else.” Israel is on its way to becoming a pariah state, he continued, yet like South Africa, it receives increasingly lonely U.S. support.

Jewish identity or not, it’s clear that if this reported action by Prime Minister Netanyahu’s government was based on Chomsky’s criticism of Israel, Israel is about to make even more enemies than they had before, something that benefits no one still hoping for a two-state solution.

Meanwhile, Rahm Emanuel told rabbis that they’ve “screwed up the messaging” over the last years, but that the Obama administration is doing the right thing on policy regarding Israeli. Does this policy include a caveat for Israel when it comes to a nuclear-free Middle East?

The Obama administration has “screwed up the messaging” about its support for Israel over the past 14 months, and it will take “more than one month to make up for 14 months,” White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel said on Thursday to a group of rabbis called together for a meeting in the White House.

[...] Dennis Ross, who runs the administration’s Iran policy, tried to allay fears during the meeting that by calling for a nuclear-free Middle East, US policy regarding Israel’s alleged nuclear capabilities was changing.

Since 1995, Ross explained, the administration’s policy, supported by Israel, was to push for a nuclear-free Middle East in conjunction with comprehensive peace. Emanuel, according to a participant in the meeting, said, “We understand Israel’s full layer of deterrence.” …

The shoring up of Jewish support for 2012 has begun.

Read full story · Comments { 48 }

Nukes, Nuts, and Denial

We therefore face a stark, unattractive reality. There are only two options: Iran gets nuclear weapons, or someone uses pre-emptive military force to break Iran’s nuclear fuel cycle and paralyze its program, at least temporarily. There is no possibility the Obama administration will use force, despite its confused and ever-changing formulation about the military option always being “on the table.” That leaves Israel, which the administration is implicitly threatening not to resupply with airplanes and weapons lost in attacking Iran—thereby rendering Israel vulnerable to potential retaliation from Hezbollah and Hamas. [...] – Get Ready for a Nuclear Iran, by John Bolton

Good for our side. Walking out on Ahmadinejad was a good way to start the week. I only wish Harry Truman was still alive to give that raving megalomaniac a history lesson about the war against Japan. Maybe HBO should send the Iranian thug a copy of “The Pacific,” you know, just to get him started. But Ahmadinejad lecturing Barack Obama to join the “humane movement” should come with a laugh track.

But contrary to John Bolton’s blathering, Israel can attack Iran with their conventional force, a mighty machine, if threatened. Israel also has nukes, which Bolton conveniently blocks from his brain, adhering to the U.S. secrecy pact we’ve had with Israel, which has never rendered the obvious a secret. I guess Mr. Bolton has also forgotten Bush 41′s reaction when Israel built settlements in 1991 (he denied loan guarantees, and received anti-Semitic letters as a result.). Of course Israel’s Netanyahu must protect his nation. Nobody should argue otherwise. However, Israel and the U.S., which will supply $2.7 billion of military aid to Israel this year, also have separate priorities in the Middle East, which while making us allies in many areas, also puts us at odds on other issues.

Sect. Clinton is in an unenviable position right now. She’s leading the U.S. delegation to the review conference for the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which started today. Egypt is putting forth a proposal for a nuclear-free Middle East. Hard to get there if Israel won’t even publicly admit they have nuclear weapons, with the U.S. supporting this adolescent posturing through grandfathered policy.

From Eli Lake:

[...] For 40 years, the United States has been a partner in Israel’s nuclear opacity as well. In a deal fashioned in 1969 between President Nixon and Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir, the United States does not pressure Israel to join the treaty, which would require the Jewish state to give up its nuclear weapons. Israel, in turn, does not acknowledge it has the weapons.

The Egyptian working paper of March 2010 on the nuclear-free Middle East threatens to upset this secret understanding. Specifically, it would require member states of the NPT to “disclose in their national reports on the implementation of the resolution on the Middle East all information available to them on the nature and scope of Israeli nuclear facilities and activities, including information pertaining to previous nuclear transfers to Israel.”

The Egyptian working paper also calls for a conference by 2011 on making the Middle East free of nuclear weapons and a special envoy to coordinate such a conference. [...]

Israel has every right to not sign the NPT, as well as continue with their nuclear weapons program, which Amb. Michael Oren was forced to number by Fareed Zakaria last year. Israel isn’t fooling anyone with their silence, nor is the U.S. by abetting it, and since Israel believes their security depends on nukes they should defend their right to their arsenal, let the world’s condemnation fall where it may.

In fact, Israeli transparency might even lead the way to real negotiation and diplomacy that actually means something, instead of smoke and mirror gamesmanship while everyone pretends there’s a reason for continued Israeli stonewalling on what everyone knows.

Let’s just quit playing these silly games that Israel should be held to a different standard on transparency than every other nation around the globe, minus India, Pakistan and North Korea (which withdrew from the NPT in 2003).

Again from Lake’s article:

The official Israeli statement, for example, from the International Atomic Energy Agency conference in September endorsed the long-term goal of a nuclear-free Middle East.

It also said, “in our view, progress towards realizing this vision cannot be made without a fundamental change in regional circumstances, including a significant transformation in the attitude of states in the region towards Israel.”

A “transformation of attitude” is needed in the U.S. as well, though I’m not holding my breath. Sen. Chuck Schumer illustrates the infantile thinking of the political class in this country where Israel is concerned. Mr. Schumer revealed that there is no criticism allowed towards Israel, regardless of whether it’s well directed or not. Any politician daring to separate United States interests when necessary, even though many of our goals align with Israeli goals, is destined to find him- or herself unemployed.

Israel needs to become transparent about their nuclear arsenal, and the U.S. has to help our friend and quit accepting the double standard that allows Israeli opacity, which is no longer serving them or us, let alone peace across the greater Middle East.

Read full story · Comments { 31 }

Facing Reality on Iran Going Nuclear

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has warned in a secret three-page memorandum to top White House officials that the United States does not have an effective long-range policy for dealing with Iran’s steady progress toward nuclear capability, according to government officials familiar with the document. – Gates Says U.S. Lacks Policy to Curb Iran’s Nuclear Drive

Talk about catnip for the right. They’re absolutely salivating over this one, which will be teed up further on wingnut radio tomorrow. But it’s not like Bush had a plan in place for Iran either, unless you call belligerent bombast and diplomatic freeze-out a strategy.

And why do we not have a long-range plan to deal with Iran going nuclear? Because as I’ve been saying for a very long time, the U.S. cannot prevent Iran from going nuclear, even if they cannot successfully weaponize their technology for a while. But also because no president, White House strategist, or national politician, is allowed to utter anything beyond We will not allow Iran to get a nuclear weapon, something everyone who studies the issue knows is absolute rubbish.

A nuclear capable Iran inevitably leads towards Israel in U.S. political minds, with no person capable of strategizing on U.S. Middle East policy without thinking of our fried first. It paralyzes policy makers.

People have been whispering about a nuclear Iran reality for a very long time. It’s why diplomatic engagement and deterrence is the policy of the day, post Bush’s preemptive doctrine, which was far too nebulous to do anything but stir up more trouble.

The reality is that there is no way to prevent Iran’s steady march to nuclearization, going beyond domestic capabilities.

Meanwhile, the Netanyahu government brays that they won’t allow a nuclear Iran and the United States shouldn’t either. Pushing the U.S. to realize and visualize the day after Iran inevitably goes nuclear. What’s next?, our friend asks, as if Pres. Obama hasn’t thought about the answer, even if there isn’t a good one.

Expect this conveniently leaked news to escalate the drumbeat against Iran, which will soon become the national security political issue for the elections to come.

Read full story · Comments { 51 }