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 | women

Round the World, and a Saudi Demand

By on 03 May 2009
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

Dear David Gregory

By on 02 May 2009
Photobucket

Oprah? Seriously, David? She’s your dream guest? For ratings, maybe, and having women on “Meet the Press” would be shocking, because you sorely need a Sunday game changer. But you’ve got bigger problems than worrying about snagging Oprah.

So you knew this was coming, right? The obligatory Tim Russert’s mystique still dogs David Gregory byline. Not to worry, because the trouble isn’t all you.

It’s the format.

It’s the static background.

It’s the 1950′s feel.

NBC has to find the courage to throw it all away and start over in a 21st century setting that also has you doing something besides sitting behind a desk trying to look, sound and be someone you’re not.

I know it’s blasphemy at NBC to consider such a move. Do it anyway. It’s time to exorcise the ghosts of the long and storied ‘Meet the Press’ past.

Oh, and by the way, get a new booker. Someone who doesn’t continually recycle the same blathering faces that we’ve seen over and over and over again, though I’m not sure Oprah is the avenue.

But It’s a new day. It’s your show. Act like it.

Oh, and by the way, Fareed Zakaria has Sect. Gates on for the hour. It’s the only must see hour on these days.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Imagine Justice Hill

By on 02 May 2009
Photobucket

This is perfect.

Dear Ms. Scovell:

My mother would have warned me against answering your e-mail and participating in the kind of “devilment” you are up to. ( read more)

Brilliantly delicious. Machiavellian.

What’s not to love?

Read full story · Comments are closed

Culture Break: ‘Brand Obama’

By on 01 May 2009

Not since Jacqueline Kennedy redecorated the White House and used it as a showcase for arts and culture, which helped create the Camelot mystique, has a first family so captured popular fascination, first-lady historian Myra Gutin says. – WSJ.Magazine

Besides being drop dead gorgeous, Desirée Glapion Rogers has a job fit for the gods. Social secretary to the Obama administration, Ms. Rogers is profiled in the WSJ Magazine, in an article that is as fascinating as it is revealing. No spoilers her, just read it.

Unlike previous administrations, which have kept the East and West Wings separate, Rogers and her five-person staff are a vital part of its political operation, according to a White House aide. Every morning at 8:15 a.m., Rogers strides from the East to West Wing, where she attends a meeting with Mr. Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, top Obama aide David Axelrod and other senior White House officials. Letitia Baldrige, social secretary to Mrs. Kennedy, says the policy makers in the West Wing “always wanted to take over the social events” during the Kennedy administration. She says she advised Rogers “to fight back tooth and nail.”

It’s here I must insert a bit of reality. Mrs. Kennedy and Letitia Baldrige fought constantly, with the first lady continually going AWOL when Baldrige believed she should be on duty. Like when Jack was navigating the Cuban Missile Crisis, and Jackie was off fox hunting. (A scene which made it into my 2005 one woman show.) Ms. Baldrige didn’t have the access or the respect that Ms. Rogers obviously has accumulated over the many years she has known the Obamas.

On the opposite side of this story we have a tacky attempt to take down Mrs. Obama, which because of Ms. Rogers’ work will not catch wind, except in wingnut quarters, of course.

The case of the expensive shoes.

Any woman who has ever balanced fashion desires knows one thing. Sometimes you have to choose where your money goes. Of course, Mrs. Obama can buy whatever she wants any time she wants. But considering she’s been seen in off the rack threads from the start, this latest story will bring a collective yawn. But it isn’t surprising to me at all to see this purchase by the First Lady. It’s a classic fashion imperative: great shoes, expensive shoes, even.

As any former beauty queen knows, you can be seen in an inexpensive outfit, but the shoes simply cannot be cheap. It was the first advice I got, which happened to come from a man in the pageant syndicate, when I was 13 years-old and trying to find a way to accumulate enough money to put myself through college. It’s also the law of women’s fashion. You can rarely tell the cost of an outfit, especially worn by a woman as pedigreed as Mrs. Obama, but also as slim and fit, which goes a long way to helping you get away with anything. But cheap shoes can be seen a mile away.

Ms. Rogers’ Obama brand magic has been solidified, so attacking the First Lady’s hot French sneakers is just an attack by the mob who can’t seem to land an insult that will stick. Just wait until someone makes a knock off; they’ll sell like inauguration tickets.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Souter Ready to Retire

By on 30 April 2009
Photobucket

President Obama has his first chance to shape the Supreme Court.

Via NPR:

… Souter is expected to remain on the bench until a successor has been chosen and confirmed, which may or may not be accomplished before the court reconvenes in October.

… Now, according to reliable sources, he has decided to take the plunge and has informed the White House of his decision.

Mr. President, the court needs another woman.

Read full story · Comments are closed

The Obligatory First 100 Days Review

By on 29 April 2009

This day is going to be interminably long.

It’s going to be redundant on so many levels.

It’s also going to be gratifying for Democrats, while only adding to Republican depression. The one real issue in question being Obama’s resolve and his willingness to confront. One review says the window is the auto crisis. I think it’s another, one that doesn’t lead to something so sure.

Photobucket

Among what Obama has done is an Af-Pak strategy; strong Administration push on an early Middle East presence; engaging with leaders Bush wouldn’t (Chavez, etc.); while promising more with Ahmadinejad, which is where we’ll pause for just a moment.

The Iranian president has an election coming up on June 12th, so he’s campaigning. So you need a slogan, right? He’s evidently found one:

Obama’s signature campaign slogan, Yes We Can, has been replicated by the Iranian president in a promotional video issued for Iran’s presidential poll on 12 June, when Ahmadinejad is seeking re-election. The video features a cover picture of Ahmadinejad wearing his trademark white jacket and pointing to the Farsi phrase Ma Mitavanim (We Can) on a blackboard. The film is aimed at students and capitalises on his former status as a university lecturer.

It leaves you speechless.

Obama has also gotten his stimulus passed, expanded SCHIP, reversed the Gag Rule, stem cells, budget done, ethics, Lily Ledbetter, announced yesterday that officials will once again have to consult agencies on rulings that might impact endangered species, among other things, and planted a White House garden to boot.

Photobucket

But if you look back on other presidents, the first 100 days doesn’t tell you how it will all end. So while the review is obligatory, it’s going to tell us nothing, unless you use a different criteria than the usual laundry list, which everyone is trying to do. Find a new way to judge the first 100 days. For instance, danger signs.

WJC got to work on the deficit, aid to Russia, and more, but who could know that in 1994 a simple move to reactivate the special counsel statute would change the first paragraph of his presidential biography forever? You decide if there was a hint it would in the first 100 days.

In George W. Bush’s presidency, something happened at the beginning of his administration that would actually reveal a lot, as far as I’m concerned. Bush demoted the terrorism czar position from cabinet level to staff position, ignoring Bill Clinton’s warnings about al Qaeda. Now this wasn’t an item on Bush’s 100 day list, but looking back it’s one of the most consequential. However, nothing in the first 100 days prepared us for the type of president Bush would be after 9/11, except if you weigh Richard Clarke not being able to get anyone’s attention on the threat until it was too late.

So after weighing Barack Obama’s accomplishments, one of which is turning the right track numbers on their heads from where they were with George W. Bush. Does anything stand out that has the potential to rock his presidency, even as today we evaluate Mr. Obama with superlatives, minus the “state secret” privilege claims, which is a window, but not the nut of what could end up dogging Pres. Obama, much like his predecessors had their own moment when something shifted.

In life, it’s often your strengths that can be your blindside, because that’s where the ego resides, especially for politicians. Not that doing what’s right isn’t laudable, but Obama’s core message, his theme, has always been bringing people together, not confronting them. Once again I go back to that interview with George Stephanopoulos: “I think that I have the capacity to get people to recognize themselves in each other. I think that I have the ability to make people get beyond some of the divisions that plague our society and to focus on common sense and reason and that’s been in short supply over the last several years. …that you make progress by sitting down listening to people, recognizing everybody’s concerns, seeing other people’s points of views and then making decisions.” – Barack Obama (on ABC’s “This Week” – May 2005)

Photobucket

The release of the OLC memos has changed this dynamic. It’s unleashed a fury on the right, leaving Obama in a seemingly confrontational position, which is not his natural comfort zone, as has been witnessed by his “no one will be prosecuted” stance that shifted to Justice, while letting it be known that he doesn’t want an accountability or truth commission on torture. He’s besieged on the right, but also on the left, for diametrically opposed reasons. He’s gotten himself caught between his promise for transparency and his penchant for bringing people together in consensus.

Looking back, Bush releasing the terror czar, even after warnings about Al Qaeda, is a hint to his asleep at the wheel reality we faced after “Bin Laden determined to attack inside US.” But it didn’t tell us we’d walk down the torture lane.

So, after all the publicity and stories about Obama’s first 100 days, most of them laudable, and after looking at other presidents, I’ve come to the conclusion that what we should look at is the signal that something might lead us down a path that would change the presidency of Barack Obama. That one moment is the release of the OLC memos, which has twisted the Obama administration into knots. It has exposed Obama’s discomfort with confrontation, something that at his core Mr. Obama is not exactly good at navigating.

Photobucket

But it is this confrontational nature that Pres. Obama will need going forward as he addresses the most important foreign policy area, the Middle East. It’s his stretch moment, to which if he cannot rise he could see a myriad of other issues unable to solve. Because if he doesn’t stand firmly and decidedly in front of PM Netanyahu on the two-state solution, getting something concrete implemented, the Saudis and other important Arab allies, as well as the EU, are less likely to listen to him as readily on Central Asia. Then the next sound you’ll hear is kaboom, with Obama’s presidency changed forever, because bringing people together on the issues he faces today takes skillful confrontation, the bookend of successful leadership.

So the first 100 days tells us something, but only if you look at it through the lens of what the 100 days exposes might be President Obama’s Achille’s heel and the early signs of how well he navigates this personal challenge to his presidency. We all know he can bring people together, but can he confront on issues and push forward implementing what’s needed? His behavior after the OLC memos were released is the window. You decide what you see.

____________________
“Delivering Change” photos compliments of the White House, available on flikr.

Read full story · Comments are closed

BUSH-CHENEY TORTURE: Democrats Play Good Cop, Bad Cop

By on 24 April 2009
Photobucket

The good news is that Holder and Craig seem to know what they’re doing, as the debate raged inside the Obama administration.

Now, Pres. Obama and Sen. Harry Reid are standing together against any official congressional inquiry into the Bush-Cheney torture policies. Senators Patrick Leahy and Russ Feingold, along with Speaker Nancy Pelosi, stand on the other side, which is the side of transparency and truth. Though Obama and his administration have smartly given their opposition the ammunition to move forward. With A.G. Eric Holder standing in the middle.

Now the ACLU won yet another victory under the FOIA, when a court ruled yesterday that 21 photos depicting treatment of detainees by the U.S. be released. These photos from Iraq and Afghanistan, where Bagram is still a PR problem waiting to explode for the Administration, will land like a thud in the middle of this argument of accountability.

The American public is about to get another shocker, which may bolster their feelings on holding Bush-Cheney accountable: Almost four in 10 favor criminal investigations and about a quarter want investigations without criminal charges. One-third said they want nothing to be done. (source) However, 70% believe waterboarding is torture. That’s because it is.

Sen. McCaskill, a former prosecutor, stating on MSNBC that there will be some form of congressional investigation is heartening (partial transcript via The Hill).

“I think there are enough members that want to make sure the information is all on the record, that we have certainly looked behind every nook and cranny to see exactly what happened,” she said. “So I’m sure there’ll be some form of investigation in Congress.”

The Missouri Democrat said that Justice Dept. lawyers shouldn’t get off for approving the controversial tactics, breaking with the Obama administration, which has indicated a preference that there be no criminal investigations.

“I think giving these lawyers a pass is a big problem because when you’re a lawyer, your job is to show what the law is, not to give somebody the political answer they want,” McCaskill said this morning during an appearance on MSNBC.

McCaskill opened the door to lawyers potentially being disbarred for the legal advice they provided Bush administration officials, as well.

“It may be malpractice, and they maybe should have their tickets pulled as lawyers because you are supposed to tell, when you’re asked, what the law is, not what your bosses want to hear,” she continued, adding that she’s “anxious” to read the outcome of an investigation into the memos by the Office of Professional Responsibility.

For now, however, Pres. Obama, along with other Democrats, look tentative about any inquiry at all. But don’t be confused by the good cop (Obama, Reid), bad cop (Leahy, Feingold, Pelosi) realpolitik playing out. Eric Holder has a job to do and no one should keep him from doing it, especially the President of the United States, who has no say in prosecuting the law.

This is a real spine test for the Obama administration. That it’s going to play out slowly works in their favor, as does the new ruling of photos being released. As Sect. Gates recently said, to think this stuff is going to stay under wraps is a fantasy. It’s bound to come out eventually. Surely Obama knows this, because he’s a very smart man. Getting on the side of the angles is the only place the President should want to be.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Clinton on Pakistan: Zardari Abdicating to Taliban and Extremists

By on 23 April 2009
Photobucket

Tough talk from Secretary Clinton yesterday, which is well placed.

“I think that the Pakistani government is basically abdicating to the Taliban and to the extremists…” She added that the deterioration of security in nuclear-armed Pakistan “poses a mortal threat to the security and safety of our country and the world.”

Zardari has now sent special police into the area.

Joint Chiefs Chairman Mullen is traveling to Islamabad, obviously because the Obama administration is freaked about the Taliban’s continued push to Islamabad, something that’s been happening at a steady pace. Buner (pronounced boo-NAIR) takeover is the latest disaster for Zardari’s government, with the Pakistani army not having a presence, while police have little pay and no equipment, according to reports.

The collapse of Zardari on sanctioning sharia law in the Swat region has been a disaster.

Ask the citizenry, who also agree with Clinton:

A local politician, Jamsher Khan, said that people were initially determined to resist the Taliban in Buner, but that they were discouraged by the deal the government struck with the Taliban in Swat.

“We felt stronger as long we thought the government was with us,” he said by telephone, “but when the government showed weakness, we too stopped offering resistance to the Taliban.”

The shrine of the Sufi saint Pir Baba is now controlled by extremist thugs, whose presence has scared the women off the streets.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Congratulations to Eugene Robinson, but…

By on 21 April 2009

I thought all morning about this one. It doesn’t come easy, believe me. Mainly because this whole thing is so over. I’m so very satisfied that Barack Obama is the man for the times, which has been proven already, in my estimation. And I wouldn’t have said a word about any of this if Mr. Robinson hadn’t leveled, yet again, his signature cheap shot towards WJC today. I didn’t want to talk about this, but that’s when, as a political writer, you know you must.

“…Two sons of the south talking, for example, about what was actually being said in South Carolina, as opposed to what Bill Clinton claimed he was saying, and all of that and it worked it’s way into the column. …” – Eugene Robinson on “Morning Joe”

Not that Bill Clinton is perfect or always helped Hillary during the primaries, taking his comment in South Carolina for example. But on receiving the Pulitzer Prize you’d think Eugene Robinson would exhibit more class. Instead, he used his award today on “Morning Joe” to get in one last cheap shot at the Clintons.

We’ve got a terrific president and I’m proud to have voted for Barack Obama. I’m behind him 111%, even amidst my harsh disagreements on torture investigations. He’s the right president for this moment, that much is clear.

Eugene Robinson helped him get there, for which he, too, should be proud.

Basking in the glory of a Pulitzer is Mr. Robinson’s right and he’s more than entitled to it, because he earned it. But the title of sore winner comes to mind after this morning.

Let’s also not pretend we all don’t know Mr. Robinson’s role. As rightful congratulations were extended on “Morning Joe,” Robinson felt the need to revisit Bill Clinton’s South Carolina moment, filled with all the pompous know-it-all bluster of a man who’s still nursing a grudge. Not even a Pulitzer can soothe Eugene and the memory of what so many harbor; what they believe Bill Clinton did on that day. No doubt it will be second to Ms. Lewinski when former President Bill Clinton’s final story is written, especially if Eugene Robinson writes it. That’s a lesson to us all of how deeply a throw away line can be thrust, with no single moment hurting WJC more, or the people who took it in a way that cannot possibly be known it was meant. As Robinson and Scarborough laughed today, southern boys knew the meaning. Well, I grew up amidst racism in Missouri, but I didn’t get it at the time and still don’t see it. I guess it all depends what side your primary prejudice fell, though that would never be something Mr. Robinson would admit, which was part of the problem during the primaries, for more people than just Eugene.

For anyone, a Pulitzer Prize is a remarkable achievement. But to win it for writing about the first African American president must really be something for Mr. Robinson. Congratulations certainly due. But a walk down primary lane doesn’t exactly do journalism proud, Pulitzer notwithstanding, where Hillary Clinton is concerned. Mr. Robinson was yet another member of the hack pack press who never saw or admitted bias, but delivered it all the same, often with prejudice.

Hillary as Shark Keeps Moving, by Eugene Robinson.

As for this next one I picked below, we could also ask what would have happened to Hillary if she’d shown up a junior senator from Illinois…. well, you know the rest. The double standard for women, well, the sexism thing, you all know the drill, though some people still deny it existed. That was the problem with the primaries, which we’ll all get to revisit next month when Eric Boehlert’s book comes out. So many analysts didn’t declare, keeping their biases tucked in, of which Mr. Robinson was the leader.

As for Eugene Robinson’s part in the primaries, he played a huge role, not only in columns, but in analysis on MSNBC.

Like I said, I would never have written about this one, but Mr. Robinson had to get in one more shot. That he went to WJC’s South Carolina comment made it all the more cheap. You’d think the Pulitzer Prize would be enough, the honor and glory of something so prestigious the final victory. But he couldn’t resist. That was the hallmark of all his columns during the primary season in 2008. But at least he’s got the Pulitzer to show for it. Too bad it obviously isn’t enough.

If Obama went 0-for-10, by Eugene Robinson.

The Baggage Hillary Carries, by Eugene Robinson.

A Problem Like Bill, by Eugene Robinson.

A Hand the Clintons aren’t Showing, by Eugene Robinson.

What Hillary Wants, by Eugene Robinson.

If Clinton had won, which was clearly not going to happen when we all found out that Mark Penn had no post Super Tuesday plan, but if she had, you’d have to look very hard for a Pulitzer to award. First African American president is an historic milestone, no doubt about it. The possibility of the first female president, not so much (especially if her last name is Clinton). The traditional media just wasn’t on it. That goes double for Mr. Robinson, who never missed a moment, even all these months later, to take a shot at anything Clinton.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Roxana Saberi’s Father Speaks Out

By on 20 April 2009

Andrea Mitchell interviewed Mr. Saberi on her show today. A day when Aghmadenejad called for a review of her case in the midst of nations protesting his harangue against Israel at the U.N. meeting. A lot of attention on the Iranian leader these days.

While Sect. Clinton made yet another public statement about Saberi, with all the pressure the world can apply important. After all, Ahmadinejad has an election coming up.

I am deeply disappointed by the reported sentencing of Roxana Saberi by the Iranian judiciary. We are working closely with the Swiss Protecting Presence to obtain details about the court’s decision, and to ensure her well being.

Ms. Saberi was born and raised in the United States, yet chose to travel to the Islamic Republic of Iran due to her desire to learn more about her cultural heritage. Our thoughts are with her parents and family during this difficult time.

We will continue to vigorously raise our concerns to the Iranian government.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Two Faces of Ahmadinejad

By on 20 April 2009

As Afghanistan looms large, with the election closing in, Iran’s Ahmadinejad stepped in to ask for a reexamination of Roxana Saberi’s harsh prison sentence and a review of her case. Now an Iranian judge has done just that.

Juxtapose this against what was quite a spectacle at the U.N. council on race, as the Iranian president lashed out at Israel in a rant that provoked a walk out.

Dozens of Western representatives at the UN-sponsored Durban II conference against racism walked out during Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s address to the forum on Monday.

The diplomats rose from their chairs and walked out of the hall in Geneva as Ahmadinejad launched a tirade against the Israeli government. The Iranian leader also blasted the United States for its invasion of Iraq.

Ahmadinejad on Sunday branded Israel a “racist government,” seemingly living up to concerns that the United Nations conference on racism which he was addressing would turn into a forum to vilify the Jewish state.

In Trinidad yesterday, Pres. Obama spoke emphatically about Saberi’s situation:

“She is an American citizen, and I have complete confidence that she was not engaging in any sort of espionage,” Mr. Obama said, adding that the United States would ask Iran for “a proper disposition of this case.”

Secretary Clinton recently said that this is the sort of thing that needs to be resolved before the U.S. and Iran can have real dialogue.

It sets up a moment where Iran’s president can act, looking as if he has intervened on behalf of an American, provided the Iranian court obliges, while he continues to rail against the U.S., but especially Israel, proving he can walk and chew gum at the same time.

Still railing against Israel, playing Netanyahu against Obama, the Iranian tries to help save an American woman, no less. That Ahmadinejad guy, at least he helped free an American.

If it’s in U.S. interests, it’s good.

Read full story · Comments are closed

As Goes Punjab, So Goes Pakistan

By on 19 April 2009

Another drone attack in Pakistan.

A suicide bomber kills at least 20 security forces personnel and policemen in Islamabad.

Meanwhile, leading Red Mosque Islamic cleric Aziz, fresh from a two-year house arrest, calls for sharia law in Pakistan.

While the world joins in at a donor’s conference, pledging $5 billion to keep Pakistan from falling to Islamic extremists, though we’ll have to monitor the money like a hawk, that’s for certain (with Kerry and Lugar promising more). A first, it seems the world has awakened, finally, to the thoughts of Islamic extremists dancing in their heads, all armed with nuclear weapons.

Call this the last, dying result of Bush-Cheney’s “Musharaff policy,” as Biden called it last year, likely as disastrous as what unfolded because of funding started under Carter, but made worse through a sideshow battle against the former Soviet Union under Reagan. It is the unraveling of Pakistan through U.S. policy begun under C.I.A. chief William Casey, continued through many presidents, both Democratic and Republican, which now has come to a head.

Fareed Zakaria’s GPS focused on this subject today. Ahmed Rashid lives in Lahore, and has written several books on the region that are must reads for anyone wanting to try to understand what we’re facing.

Almost a month ago, David Kilcullen had an interview in the Post, one that is worth pointing to today.

Carlos Lozada: What is the real central front in the war on terror?

KILKULLEN: Pakistan. Hands down. No doubt.

Carlos Lozada Why?

KILKULLEN: Pakistan is 173 million people, 100 nuclear weapons, an army bigger than the U.S. Army, and al-Qaeda headquarters sitting right there in the two-thirds of the country that the government doesn’t control. The Pakistani military and police and intelligence service don’t follow the civilian government; they are essentially a rogue state within a state. We’re now reaching the point where within one to six months we could see the collapse of the Pakistani state, also because of the global financial crisis, which just exacerbates all these problems. . . . The collapse of Pakistan, al-Qaeda acquiring nuclear weapons, an extremist takeover — that would dwarf everything we’ve seen in the war on terror today.

So, what to do? Drone attacks are incensing the populace and especially the extremists who are gaining ground. But seriously, considering our investment, is anyone to believe that if we discontinue all drone attacks, especially those that are suggested through good intel, that Pakistan will stabilize all on its own, with extremists finally giving up? That is simply not a credible argument, though it’s being made, though every anti involvement in Afghanistan or Pakistan doesn’t seem to have any clue of an alternative. As for the military side, no doubt John Bolton will soon suggest U.S. military action here as well as Somalia. That will not happen, because Obama has not lost his mind, so he won’t mimic a militaristic madman strapped on the end of a nuclear missile.

Holbrooke continues donor efforts to bolster Pakistan’s horrific economic crisis, but after 8 years of more and more military investment without accountability, Musharaff left the country a mess, with his successor Pres. Zardari weak and disrespected, and his enemies know it.

Meanwhile, the Taliban is on the march.

[...]The Taliban “have now become a self-sustaining force,” author Ahmed Rashid, an expert on the insurgency, told a conference in Washington on Wednesday. “They have an agenda for Pakistan, and that agenda is no less than to topple the government of Pakistan and ‘Talibanizing’ the entire country.”

The U.S. intelligence official, however, said that Pakistan’s elite, dominated since the country’s independence in 1947 by politicians, bureaucrats and military officers from Punjab, have failed to recognize the seriousness of the situation.

“The Punjabi elite has already lost control of Pakistan, but neither they nor the Obama administration realize that,” the official said. “Pakistan will be an Islamist state — or maybe a collection of four Islamic states, probably within a few years. There’s no civilian leadership in Islamabad that can stop this, and so far, there hasn’t been any that’s been willing to try.”

Several U.S. officials said that the Afghanistan-Pakistan strategy that President Barack Obama unveiled last month is being called into question by the accelerating rate at which the insurgency in Pakistan is expanding.

With Pakistan militancy rising, so goes Punjab, so goes Obama’s Af-Pak strategy.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Clinton Statement on Saberi’s 8-year Prison Sentence

By on 18 April 2009
Photobucket

Lesson: Don’t try to buy a bottle of wine in Iran, especially if you’re a woman. That’s what Roxana Saberi was reportedly doing when she was originally detained.

Tried in secret behind closed doors, Roxana Saberi will now spend 8 years in Evin prison for allegedly spying. Abdolsamad Khoramshahi, her attorney, will appeal, but what good that will do is through the act alone.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s statement on Saberi:

I am deeply disappointed by the reported sentencing of Roxana Saberi by the Iranian judiciary. We are working closely with the Swiss Protecting Presence to obtain details about the court’s decision, and to ensure her well being.

Ms. Saberi was born and raised in the United States, yet chose to travel to the Islamic Republic of Iran due to her desire to learn more about her cultural heritage. Our thoughts are with her parents and family during this difficult time.

We will continue to vigorously raise our concerns to the Iranian government.

“This charge is baseless and it’s without foundation,” Robert Wood, State Department spokesman, added.

Saberi has dual citizenship, with her father in Iran trying desperately to help her. Via NPR:

In an interview with Weekend Edition, Saberi’s father, Reza Saberi, said she was coerced into making incriminating statements and that Iran’s Revolutionary Court has not released any evidence of espionage. He said he was not allowed in the courtroom nor was Saberi’s lawyer allowed to ask the court about bail.

“She is quite depressed about this mater, and she wants to go on hunger strike,” he said. “And if she does, she’s so frail, it can be very dangerous to her health.”

What a nightmare for this woman. A reporter for NPR, but also the BBC, she had her press credentials revoked in 2006, according to all reports.

Secretary Clinton’s diplomatic and hardball skills are surely going to be put to the test on this one.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Tip O’Neill Time, with Sarah Palin Posturing on the Side

By on 17 April 2009

So many emails going around on this clip. There was no question about what music to pick for tonight. Susan Boyle, let ‘er rip, lady. For everyone who ever had a dream and refused to say die, Susan is singing for you (and me).

It’s perfect for cocktail time whether you’re talking online or sitting around with friends chewing over the week.

It’s a Friday night free for all for those around who want to chat about nothing in particular, maybe even leaving politics to the side for the night.

I’d just like to offer one news item tonight that I think is so deliciously and nakedly craven that one just can’t resist shining a light on it. The most calculated move from a politician I’ve seen since Mitt Romney decided to move right to win over the right-wing radio crowd. These two are made from the same cloth. A story that has Sarah Palin revealing, in a political confession, that she considered abortion for a split second when she found out she was pregnant with Trig. This woman’s deviousness knows no bounds. You’ve got to admire such blatant opportunistic maneuvering so far out from 2012. It’s going to take a long time to move her from where she began, hanging over the wingnut cliff way over on the far side of right.

In her first out-of-state political appearance since last fall’s presidential election, former GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin confided to 3,000 at a right-to-life event here that she had “just for a fleeting moment” contemplated seeking an abortion after learning she was pregnant with her son Trig, who will turn 1 on Saturday.

Got to hand it to her, at least she knows her audience, offering a little moralizing and self-aggrandizing ego all mixed up in a speech to the faithful.

Comments are open for the evening if you want to dish, or you can post items “In the News,” as usual.

Salut!

Comments are now closed

Read full story · Comments are closed

Afghan Women Confront Top Shiite Cleric

By on 15 April 2009

–updated–

This is as in your face as you can get in Afghanistan. Sometimes pictures say it all. Ayatollah Asif Mohsini didn’t know what him, because it’s never happened before.

Responding to the outcry, Mr. Karzai has begun looking for a way to remove the most controversial parts of the law. In an interview on Wednesday, his spokesman, Homayun Hamidzada, said that the legislation was not yet law because it had not been published in the government’s official register. That, Mr. Hamidzada said, meant that it could still be changed. Mr. Karzai has asked his justice minister to look it over.

… The women who protested Wednesday began their demonstration with what appeared to be a deliberately provocative act. They gathered in front of the School of the Last Prophet, a madrassa run by Ayatollah Asif Mohsini, the country’s most powerful Shiite cleric. He and the scholars around him played an important role in the drafting of the new law.

“We are here to campaign for our rights,” one woman said into a loudspeaker. Then the women held their banners aloft and began to chant. [...]

Their lives are at stake, so the bravery of the women of Afghanistan who protested Karzai’s rape law really is stunning. By confronting the most powerful Shiite cleric in their country, not only have they made sure their voices are heard, but they’ve moved Afghanistan another step away from the Dark Ages.

Only 10% of the population by most accounts, Shiite women in Afghanistan have a long way to go, with many of their sisters oblivious to women’s rights. As much as the Taliban hate the Shiites, you can only imagine the special intensity for Shiite women who act up, shall we say.

Time for Secretary Clinton to stand up and applaud these women. I’ve got a request in for a statement on this story. Given the risks to their life they need all the international support and light on them we can provide.

UPDATE II: Another statement specifically on Karzai’s rape law can be seen in this video, which is part of a larger interview given back in early April.

UPDATE: A response from Clinton’s office at State offered her statement back in March at The Hague.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, there’s a continuing commitment to women and girls, to their well-being, to their education, their healthcare, to their full integration into society that I am very committed to, as is President Obama. So this is an area of absolute concern on the part of the United States. We’re looking for ways that can produce even more opportunities for women and girls in Afghanistan.

I’ve briefly met with some of the women parliamentarians who are here at the conference. And my message is very clear: Women’s rights are a central part of American foreign policy in the Obama Administration; they are not marginal; they are not an add-on or an afterthought.

I believe, as does President Obama, that the roles and rights of women in any society is a key indicator as to the stability and potential for peace, prosperity, and democracy of that society. So I would be committed to women’s roles and rights because of my lifelong concern about women. But as Secretary of State, I am equally committed because it’s absolutely the smart strategy for the United States and other nations to pursue.

You cannot expect a country to develop if half its population are underfed, undereducated, under cared for, oppressed, and left on the sidelines. And we believe strongly that that’s not in the interests of Afghanistan or any country, and it certainly is not part of our foreign policy or our strategic review. So we will continue to work very hard on behalf of women and girls in Afghanistan and around the world.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Easter in the Nation’s Capital

By on 12 April 2009
Photobucket

Whether you believe in something greater than your physical self or not one thing is certain. To be part of the journey of It is to embrace doubt, because what is part of discovering is personal, private, and cannot be proven.

Be Infinitely Patient… Being infinitely patient means having an absolute knowing that you’re in vibrational harmony with the all-creating force that intended you here. You know that everything will happen at just the right time, at just the right place, with just the right people. – Dr. Wayne Dyer

Daily meditations have been a way of life for me for too many years to count.

Organized religious participation and I have an even longer history, though as a liberated, modern female it’s impossible to reconcile some of the tenets of The Church, except, that is, of those of the Episcopal faith. For instance, the Vatican weighing in on Mrs. Caroline Kennedy, or Notre Dame’s leaders trying to block Mr. Obama from giving a speech, all seem utterly ridiculous to me. As if the Catholic church has any moral authority on which to block these people. It’s like the Southern Baptist convention telling women to genuflect to their husbands. The Taliban yet another step beyond, many religions keeping women away from our rightful place, which is anywhere a man can be, including leading the church and its followers. We aren’t even represented on the Sunday shows when religion is the topic, men still being seen as having the magic key and wisdom, something that is wholly hypocritical considering what man has wrought.

For evangelicals, Christ is risen today, which is the only thing that matters.

For atheists, all of this is just silly.

For people who find solace in the traditions of church, but who adhere closer to the energy and purpose of what Dr. Wayne Dyer and others of his calling attest, well, it’s a day to hook into a powerful energy vibrating that is Easter to raise your own level of possibility. After all, moving matter isn’t just a myth. It’s a state of mind.

After many years, I will be attending service at the National Cathedral (Twittering perhaps, as I do on the weekends these days; who knows who will attend). Tickets purchased weeks ago, I can only imagine the masses, the traffic, the fashion. Yes, Easter brings its own trappings, of course. But as I endeavor to place my traditional religious upbringing amidst my modern meditative awakening about the power and energy of attracting, I only hope that everyone can take a moment to connect to whatever is beyond their own mortal being to something larger. Not some guy in the sky to whom you ask favors, but to something within you ignite that leads you to greater possibilities.

Blessings at Easter to you all.



–comments are closed–

Read full story · Comments are closed

‘Peace Deal’ in Swat Region Called Off

By on 09 April 2009

First I’d have to ask if you can call anything a “peace deal” if it sacrifices women on its altar. You know my answer to that one.

Secondly, if you break your promises of “peace” through kidnappings, police murders and general civic mayhem, why should anyone care if you call of the “peace deal”? Then there’s the whole problem with breaking the “truce”. Via GeoTV:

A Frontier Corps commander and his four guards have gone missing in Kambar area of restive Swat valley on Sunday.

Sources quoted Malakand Commissioner saying that he was in contact with Sufi Muhammad in this connection.

Five persons, including District Commander Ahsam-uddin, had gone missing, sources said.

Besides, how are Islamic courts in the Swat Region of Pakistan going to help Obama route out extremism? That’s a serious question.

Squeezing Zardari, who’s got a weak hold on things as it is, these fundamentalist clerics promise peace, brutalize the populace who don’t fall in line, and end up keeping their weapons and violent extremism intact, while helping their allies in other regions.

Case in point is the Swat Taliban kidnappings that happened in February 2009 (h/t Long War Journal).

Desperation to stop violence shouldn’t seduce weak leaders (see Karzai and Zardari) into making deals with extremists who aren’t going to change, but hope that “peace deals” to push Islamic law will enable them to cement spots across the country where they can operate and work diligently with other factions in squeezing the ends against the middle.

Let’s also not forget that Pakistan has WMD.

–comments are closed–

Read full story · Comments { 1 }

Iran Overtures as American Roxana Saberi Charged with Espionage

By on 08 April 2009

Joining in on nuclear discussions with Iran is now a reality. This has been coming since Richard Holbrooke had the recent exchange. Since tomorrow is Iran’s “National Nuclear Day”, the irony on this one is thick.

The Obama administration said Wednesday that the United States for the first time would participate regularly with other global powers in negotiations with the Iranian government about its nuclear program. …

Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is responding in kind, showing willingness to engage. That’s rich, especially since he doesn’t make the decisions in Iran, but has to wait until Ayatollah Ali Khamenei weighs in. The Ayatollah wants to see if Obama is “honest,” while admitting the Iranians don’t know him yet, so there’s a wait and see.

Photobucket

But the plot has thickened, as they say.

All of this comes at the moment when the Iranians have charged Roxana Saberi with espionage. Since Iran doesn’t recognize dual citizenship, she’s being treated as an Iranian spying on her own government.

On Monday, her parents were allowed to visit her in Tehran’s notorious Evin prison, where she was sharing a cell with three others. They said she seemed to be in relatively good health.

Iran does not recognise dual citizenship and legally she is regarded as Iranian. “Saberi has an Iranian citizenship, passport and an Iranian national identity card,” Mr Haddad said. “She has entered Iran as an Iranian citizen and if she has another citizenship, we are unaware of it and it has no effect on how we will proceed with her case.”

One can only wonder what “relatively good health” means.

Clinton recently said that issues such as Saberi’s arrest would have to be cleared out because they post “problems between us.” Since Ms. Saberi has now been officially charged with espionage, I would expect the Obama administration to treat this situation as even more of a problem that it was before, especially since there are other Americans whose whereabouts in Iran are still unknown.

Oh, and the picture is Roxana Saberi with former Iranian President Mohammad Khatami. It might be time for her family to give him a call.

–comments are closed–

Read full story · Comments are closed

Conversation with Daniel Levy, Amjad Atallah and Guests

By on 07 April 2009

At a New America Foundation event a couple of Fridays ago, Daniel Levy warned this was coming, even when no media outlet was covering it. Well, it landed with a bang today on CNN international:

For five hours, investigators asked Lieberman about suspicions of money laundering, fraud and breach of trust in a corruption investigation that dates back several years, police spokesman Mickey Rosenfeld said.

Lieberman was also questioned by the Israeli National Fraud Investigation Unit for several hours on Thursday and Friday.

The interrogation was “under warning,” which means that anything he discloses in the interviews may be used as evidence if he is charged.

The allegations include receiving a bribe via his daughter Michal’s consulting firm. [...]

This leads me to the media call today on the Middle East, compliments of Steve Clemons and the New America Foundation, which included Daniel Levy and Amjad Atallah, of course, with guests Knesset Member Jamal Zahalka and Aida Touma-Sleiman, both addressing the Netanyahu-Lieberman government. As usual with these interpretations, they are my analyses, so any misinterpretation that develops should be put on me, not the person to whom I am equating the analysis; noting that opinion from me is not present, except where openly stated, in the interpretations of what was said, which is offered below.

Mr. Zahalka described Arab-Israelis as being “minority oppressed,” while stating: “We are trying our best to improve our situation. … full equality and full citizenship for Palestinians…” Making the point that this can only happen if Israel is not a “Jewish or Zionist state.”

Ms. Aida Touma-Sleiman joined in, saying all the world recognizes Israel as a Jewish state. The question is whether there will be a Palestinian state, with the chances diminishing, as she sees it. Ms. Aida Touma-Sleiman, a former Nobel Peace Prize nominee and Arab-Israeli feminist, sees the “Zionist left” as losing its power; as the Israeli gov. is “moving more and more to the right…” As she sees it, and I analyze what she said on the call, there are three main dangers for Arab-Israelis today: 1) extremism higher as reflected in elections, as well as the behavior of the ministers in right-wing; 2) Lieberman is a reincarnation of what’s come before; legitimacy of this type of racist language is being seen in talk shows & media: 3) “worried” that this kind of racism is going from institutions to ordinary people and private sector, impacting workers, with attacks rising against Palestinians. “In my opinion, this is very dangerous,” she continued. It gets down to, Touma-Sleiman says, “Israel has to deal with the internal challenge of their minorities and democracy, and the level of democracy…”

On Lieberman, Mr. Zahalka: “I don’t think that Mr. Lieberman will have a significant affect on decision making…” But he also stated that the Israeli government is trying to impose a “deligitimization” of the Arab-Israelis.

One question pertained to what the questioner believed was Hillary Clinton being very pro-Israel during the primary season. Zahalka was blunt, stating that Mrs. Hillary Clinton… should look to American interest, not Israeli lobby..

As an aside, that could be said about any American politician today, even those who are more even handed behind closed doors, but never speak openly for fear of the American Likud lobby in this country. Chas Freeman’s swiftboating is a case in point, with few in the Obama administration showing any moral courage at all, except for Adm. Blair.

Ms. Touma-Sleiman on the Jewish lobby, which she sees as having been influential on the Admin., without a clear position coming from Pres. Obama. She gave him credit that he “sent signals from Turkey…” He also needs to be aware when someone is dividing his Administration from the inside.

Photobucket

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.

Seguing to my continued efforts to keep Ms. Livni’s voice alive in all of this, I offer this recent statement from her on Lieberman, via CNN international, which is particularly timing given where this post began:

Lieberman’s predecessor, Tzipi Livni, told Israel Radio that Lieberman had “erased in 20 minutes, years of efforts to advance the peace process” when he declared that Israel was not bound by commitments it made at the summit in Annapolis.

Mitchell will be going to the region soon, to which Zahalka responded: “We should choose to live together.”

It’s also being reported that President Obama will travel to Israel in June.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Global Outrage Over Karzai Rape Law Brings Change

By on 07 April 2009
Photobucket

President Karzai underestimated the global attention that legalizing rape in Afghanistan would cause. Karzai’s rape law has now been put on hold. Being a signatore of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights means something. Especially when you have the American President calling you out openly, as Barack Obama did by calling Karzai’s rape law “abhorrent.” On behalf of all women, thank you, Mr. President.

However, this battle for women’s rights in countries where fundamentalist extremists rule will remain a one baby step at a time reality. We’ll take any win we can get.

Placating extremism has its price in a world that thrives on information and globalized reporting. Things that slid by in the 20th century won’t be so easy to hide today. That includes the subjugation of women’s civil rights no matter the reason, but especially if it’s for political purposes and done by a leader whose slipping because of corruption and incompetence.

A controversial law condoning marital rape and reintroducing Taleban-era rules for Afghan women has been shelved after an outcry in the West.

The Afghan Foreign Ministry said that the law had not been enacted, while Justice Ministry officials said that its contents might be reconsidered. The legislation was put on hold pending a review.

“The Justice Ministry is reviewing the law to make sure it is in line with the Afghan Government’s commitment to human rights and women rights conventions,” Sultan Ahmad Baheen, a spokesman for the ministry in Kabul, said. [..]

As the article above states, Article 22 of the Afghan Constitution also explicitly reiterates the equality of men and women before the law.

The sad truth, as stated by one female Afghan MP, is that many women today in Afghanistan are ignorant and don’t know their rights, even as young girls fight to get to school. They don’t know that they can be religious without being made to act against their will.

Previous generations of women may be lost, but it also explains the state of Afghanistan today. Because you can’t have a stable country without women participating. People, especially progressives saying we should abandon Afghanistan, should think about this before they fight to stand against President Obama’s new Af-Pak policy.

What we’re fighting for has nothing to do with the Bush-Cheney doctrine of preemption, occupation and forced democracy. You cannot talk democracy in a nation whose president thought he could get away with codifying rape against women.

President Obama’s intentions lean heavily on civilian aid to help Afghans build up the civil society so that terrorists can’t rip the foundation of daily life away from the Afghan people. Not demanding ending of poppy growing, but finding other ways to work with the Afghans that doesn’t threaten their only livelihood, though alternatives must be proposed, though not forced.

Just perhaps, as Scott Wilson suggests, we should be looking at lessons from Columbia.

… The conflicts in Colombia and Afghanistan share far more similarities with one another than either does with Iraq, which I covered in 2003 and 2004. The Taliban have caves and Colombian guerrillas their triple-canopy jungle and mountain hideouts — terrain far more useful to insurgencies than Iraq’s desert. Afghanistan’s opium poppies fund the Taliban, just as coca fuels Colombia’s guerrillas. As Pakistan does for the Taliban, Venezuela and Ecuador provide sanctuary to Colombia’s insurgents.

Perhaps the most important parallel, though, is the lack of a strong central government. Colombia’s government has rarely held sway beyond Bogota’s nearly two-mile high plateau, and the frail Karzai administration in Kabul has a similarly short reach. As a result, Colombia has relied on brutal paramilitary forces to support a weak army, alienating much of the population in the process. In Afghanistan, that role is played by U.S. forces, which, although by no means as savage as the Colombian irregulars, have cost Afghanistan’s government support among a people famously hostile to foreign invaders. … (read on)

But above all else we should be supporting President Obama’s Af-Pak strategy. It’s worth a shot.

Read full story · Comments are closed