http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HH26Ak03.html
Syria draws a line at the border
Syria draws a line at the border
By Sami Moubayed
DAMASCUS - When United Nations Resolution 1701 was passed on August 11, it was seen as a diplomatic breakthrough to end 33 days of war between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon.
Many today, however, are having serious doubts whether this ceasefire will last and whether 1701 is actually a diplomatic victory - or failure - for the UN. In addition to a ceasefire, the resolution demands the deployment of the Lebanese army, and eventually multinational troops, on the border to prevent any future
war between the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and Hezbollah. It gives Israel the right to self-defense, however, while denying this right to Hezbollah, explaining why the party's secretary general, Hassan Nasrallah, accepted the resolution "with reservations".
If implemented to the word, the resolution would deprive Hezbollah of the territory it has used to wage war against Israel since the 1980s. A Hezbollah that is deprived of southern Lebanon would be a Hezbollah that cannot fire rockets against northern Israel. The resolution also asked for implementation of Resolution 1559, which calls for the complete disarming of Hezbollah, and strongly says that no arms should be transferred to the Lebanese military group.
The first loophole in 1701 is that it does not give any mechanism for the disarming of Hezbollah, something that neither the United Nations Interim Force In Lebanon (UNIFIL) nor the Lebanese army - nor Israel - has been able to do. The expanded UN troop presence on the border will not be able to disarm Hezbollah. If the troops try to do that, they will certainly be attacked.
This was something made clear by French Major-General Alain Pelligrini, the UNIFIL commander in Lebanon, who said: "The Israelis cannot ask UNIFIL to disarm Hezbollah. This is not written in our mandate." He added that the ceasefire "is tense, very fragile, very volatile. Any provocation or misunderstanding could escalate very, very rapidly."
Speaking to the Financial Times on August 3, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert related what he saw as the perfect objective of UNIFIL in Lebanon. He said it should aim at "stopping violence against innocent Israelis from Lebanon and disarming this murderous organization, the Hezbollah, which is the long arm of Iran".
Olmert's distorted version of UNIFIL, however, seems to be very different from the one that is likely to emerge in Lebanon in the coming weeks. French newspaper Le Monde leaked a 21-page document distributed at the UN last week showing what the new expanded UNIFIL troops would look like.
First, very clearly, they would not be authorized to disarm Hezbollah. They would also lack the authority to search Hezbollah strongholds or bunkers. Second, they are authorized "to use force, up to and including deadly force", to implement peace on the Lebanese-Israeli border and to defend themselves against attack by either the IDF or Hezbollah. Third, they have to protect civilians, and fourth, they will have to provide backup to the Lebanese army.
Actually, bringing 15,000 troops from the Lebanese army to the border is easy. It has even been accepted by Nasrallah, who previously had rejected deployment of the Lebanese army to the south. Deploying an equal number of multinational troops is more difficult - but doable.
The history of multinational troops in Lebanon during the Israeli invasion of 1982 showed that these troops are vulnerable and could be driven out of Lebanon with ease. In October 1983, an attack on US marines in Lebanon led to the killing of 241 US and 58 French troops and the exodus of about 5,000 multinational troops from Lebanon.
No Arab country today, except Morocco, is willing to take part in such a force, since it would be viewed by the Arab street as a multinational force used to protect Israel from Hezbollah. Given Hezbollah's popularity in the Arab world, such a step would be political suicide - even for moderate Arab regimes such as Egypt and Jordan.
Turkey showed willingness to send troops to Lebanon, but this proposal was vetoed by the Lebanese-Armenians, who cannot forget Turkish massacres against the Armenians under the Ottoman Empire during World War I. Germany at first showed similar willingness to comply, but then backed down and said it would send advisers rather than troops. As one German journalist told this correspondent, this U-turn was because German troops on the border with Israel would be entitled to shoot - and use - "deadly force" to prevent any confrontation between the IDF and Hezbollah. Because of the historical luggage carried by the Germans from World War II, a German soldier today simply cannot fire against an Israeli.
Yet despite these obstacles, Greece, France and Italy, which alone will contribute 2,000-3,000 troops to UNIFIL, have all agreed to send troops. On Thursday, French President Jacques Chirac agreed to increase the number of French troops to 2,000.
Olmert made things more difficult for the UN by saying he would not accept troops at UNIFIL whose countries didn't have diplomatic relations with Israel. He was referring to Indonesia, Malaysia and Bangladesh. The Israeli premier does not have the luxury of hand-picking what countries will join the multinational troops in Lebanon, since not many countries have shown great enthusiasm to get involved in a new war in the Middle East.
French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said on Wednesday that UNIFIL forces in Lebanon would have two missions. One would be to let the Lebanese army deploy in the south. The second would be "to guarantee the embargo on arms delivery across all borders - I repeat - across all borders".
The Syrian factor
The minister was referring to the Syria-Lebanon border, which is considered by many in Lebanon and the international community to be the only source from which Syria can channel arms to Hezbollah.
According to Resolution 1701, this supply of arms must end, to bring Hezbollah to a gradual military end. Syria immediately snapped back by turning down the request to station troops on Lebanon's side of the Syrian-Lebanese border, with authority to administer checkpoints searching for arms coming in from Syria.
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said on Dubai TV that UNIFIL troops on Lebanon's border with Syria "is an infringement on Lebanese sovereignty and a hostile position" toward Syria. He added, "First, this means creating hostile conditions between Syria and Lebanon. Second, it is a hostile move toward Syria, and naturally it will create problems."
Assad's Foreign Minister Walid al-Moualim threatened from a state visit to Finland that if multinational troops were stationed on the Syrian-Lebanese border, Syria would close its border with Lebanon. The White House immediately responded to Syria's stance through its spokeswoman Dana Perino, who said, "If the president of Syria were not supplying Hezbollah, this wouldn't have been a problem in the first place."
Closing the border with Lebanon is an old trick practiced by the Syrians ever since prime minister Khalid al-Azm did it in 1950 to prevent the influx of Lebanese goods into Syria. President Adib al-Shishakli did it again in 1954 when he accused Lebanon of supporting a Druze uprising against his regime in Damascus. President Shukri al-Quwatli did it in 1957 when Lebanon retaliated to a series of overt Syrian intelligence operations on its territory by funding anti-regime activities in Damascus to obstruct Syria's honeymoon with Egypt.
It was semi-repeated by Assad last summer when Lebanese cargo trucks were held up for weeks at the Syrian border, causing some goods to rot, and forcing Prime Minister Fouad al-Siniora to go to Syria to solve the crisis.
This was at the apex of strained Syrian-Lebanese relations over the murder of Lebanon's former prime minister Rafiq al-Hariri. If Syria does carry out its threats and shut the border with Lebanon, it would cause a severe economic crisis in its neighbor, since Syria is the only land route for Lebanon.
The other country bordering Lebanon is Israel, with which diplomatic relations and passage routes are impossible at this stage. Currently, all sea routes to Lebanon are sealed by the Israelis, and so is landing at Lebanese airports.
With Israel controlling the skies and waters, and Syria controlling the ground routes, Lebanon would be stranded, with no connection to the outside world. Syria believes that only through such a harsh measure can it force the Lebanese government to say no to international troops on the Syrian border.
After all, it cannot say no to the troops itself, since they would not be stationed on its territory, but Damascus can use its leverage in Lebanon to force Siniora to say no. It does not mind UN troops on the Lebanese-Israeli border, nor does it mind the deployment of the Lebanese army, but it is categorically opposed to troops on the border with Syria.
Olmert has that he had no immediate plans of ending the air and sea blockade on Lebanon until an international peacekeeping force was deployed on Lebanon's borders, to prevent the arming of Hezbollah and their attacks on north Israel.
As things stand, multinational troops will be placed on the Syrian-Lebanese border in addition to the Lebanese-Israeli border. Otherwise, they would be useless. But if that happens, Syria could strangle Lebanon by closing down the border. Yet Olmert's rules say that only when Syria's border is monitored - meaning when Syria's ground route is closed - will Lebanon regain its air and sea routes.
To understand Syria's position one must understand how the Syrian regime is thinking in relation to the Israeli war in Lebanon. Assad claimed victory in this war, for his unconditional backing of Hezbollah, just as Syria claimed co-victory with Hezbollah when it liberated south Lebanon from the Israelis in May 2000.
The Syrians will not let Resolution 1701 destroy these victories by ruining or disarming Hezbollah. Not only is patrolling the Syrian border offensive to the Syrians, but if this is done, it would actually mean that no arms would in fact arrive in Lebanon to be used by Hezbollah. It would mean the military end to the Lebanese group - something Syria will not permit.
Hezbollah is the last-standing Syrian card in Lebanon. It is the card that will launch a political coup in Lebanon against the coalition government of Saad al-Hariri - the group that launched its own putsch against Syria in 2005 and drove the Syrian army out of Lebanon.
Syria will do all that is in its power to preserve Hezbollah. The Syrians believe that if this means obstructing UNIFIL on Lebanon's border with Syria, ruining Resolution 1701 or shutting Syria's border with Lebanon - then so be it. All is fair in love and war for Damascus, especially when it comes to Lebanon.
Sami Moubayed is a Syrian political analyst.
(Copyright 2006 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing .)
Full Version: AMERICA'S ROLE IN THE NEW MIDEAST CONFLICT
AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM JAMES Q. WILSON (AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE, AUGUST 23): The greatest barrier to American influence on the world today is probably not our system of government or even our unequalled military power, but our popular culture. As Martha Bayles and others have pointed out, this is not what we exported right after the Second World War when, with government aid, we sent abroad artists, jazz musicians, and gifted writers to show what America could produce. Our earlier efforts at public diplomacy were a success; our most recent efforts at consumerism confirm in the minds of many leaders that we are a corrupt, violent, and mindless people.
http://www.aei.org/publications/filter.all.../pub_detail.asp
VISION GAP, PART II: THE CASE FOR PUTTING DEMOCRACY PROMOTION AT THE CENTER OF A NEW PROGRESSIVE FOREIGN POLICY VISION - SHADI HAMID (AMERICAN PROSPECT, AUGUST 24): Public Diplomacy: The importance of improving our image abroad cannot be overstated. The more people hate us, the more easily they can be convinced to take up arms against us and our allies.
http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?sectio...articleId=11919
WAR ON LEBANON -- MAJOR PLAYERS IRAN, SYRIA, HEZBOLLAH, ISRAEL AND USA - (PEACEJOURNALISM.COM, NEPAL, AUGUST 23): World Security Network (WSN): "What do you think really of the democratisation program initiated by the Bush administration as a public diplomacy in the Middle East?" B. Ghalioun, a French-Syrian professor of political sociology at the Sorbonne University: 'I think that the US led democratisation project -- if ever it were really meant to be achieved and not just words in the air -- is now almost in the past as there is no talk about it anymore.'
http://peacejournalism.com/ReadArticle.asp?ArticleID=10380
HUNTING MONSTERS IN JERUSALEM - TOM BARRY (ASIA TIMES, AUGUST 25): Chief Middle East adviser at the White House's National Security Council (NSC) Elliott Abrams embodies the administration's zealous, ideological and dangerously delusional vision of US foreign policy in the Middle East. During the Reagan administration, Abrams was the government's nexus between the militarists in the NSC and the public-diplomacy operatives in the State Department, White House and National Endowment for Democracy.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HH26Ak01.html
TZIPI, YOU FAILED: WHILE THE WORLD WAS ARDUOUSLY BUYING NASRALLA'S LIES, YOU REMAINED IN YOUR OFFICE. ISRAEL WAS DEFEATED IN THE MEDIA WAR PRIMARILY BECAUSE OF YOU - ZVI MAZEL (YNETNEWS, ISRAEL, AUGUST 24): How unfortunate it is to discover that the Israel foreign ministry still doesn't recognize the extent of the media's importance; that it has yet to become acquainted with the arena of public diplomacy.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3295183,00.html
PROBLEM OF MARKETING, NOT PR: ISRAEL IS 20 YEARS AHEAD OF HIZBULLAH IN MILITARY MIGHT, AND 10 YEARS BEHIND IN MARKETING - RA'ANAN GISSIN (ISRAEL AND PUBLIC RELATIONS, JULY 30): At the end of the day we must remember that Israel's PR (note: there is no good English translation for the Hebrew word "hasbara") is uniquely Israeli, both due to its special position and due to the fact that many groups around the world don't recognize the country's right to exist.
http://www.tampabayprimer.org/index.cfm?ac...iewArt&art=1415
SEE ALSO
http://tundratabloid.blogspot.com/2006/08/...r-happened.html
http://jiw.blogspot.com/2006/08/critical-i...eli-public.html
RUSSIA FACES ISLAMIC RADICALISM - ZLATICA HOKE/ANYA ARDAYEVA (VOICE OF AMERICA, AUGUST 23): Ilan Berman, Vice President for Policy at the American Foreign Policy Council: "I think there is a pretty substantial effort in Central Asia right now for formulating public diplomacy, broadcasting, things like that, along counter-terrorism lines, certainly in order to reinforce the power of the authoritarian state in many cases."
http://www.voanews.com/english/NewsAnalysi...08-23-voa49.cfm
NEW YORK LAW SCHOOL'S CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL LAW LAUNCHES IRAN PROJECT - (PRESS RELEASE, NEW YORK LAW SCHOOL NY, AUGUST 23): Network 20/20 is an independent membership organization that helps prepare next generation leaders in the U.S. to participate meaningfully in public diplomacy and the creation and execution of policies promoting global public security.
http://www.nyls.edu/pages/4969.asp
AMERICA BY NUMBERS: LOTS OF DATA, BUT LITTLE INSIGHT, ABOUT GLOBAL OPINION [REVIEW OF 'AMERICA AGAINST THE WORLD: HOW WE ARE DIFFERENT AND WHY WE ARE DISLIKED' BY ANDREW KOHUT AND BRUCE STOKES] - PAUL HOLLANDER (WEEKLY STANDARD, AUGUST 21): In the end, major questions about the recent growth of anti-Americanism remain unanswered in this book.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Publ...12/570teosa.asp
NEW YORK MAN CHARGED WITH ENABLING HEZBOLLAH TELEVISION BROADCASTS - TIMOTHY WILLIAMS AND WILLIAM K. RASHBAUM (NEW YORK TIMES, AUGUST 25): The Hezbollah station, Al Manar -- or 'the beacon' in Arabic -- was designated a global terrorist entity by the United States Treasury Department in March of this year. Mark Dubowitz, who heads a Washington-based policy group that has monitored Al Manar -- through a project called the Coalition Against Terrorist Media -- has campaigned for its removal.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/25/nyregion...agewanted=print
HEZBOLLAH DIDN'T WIN - AMIR TAHERI (WALL STREET JOURNAL, AUGUST 25): "Hezbollah won the propaganda war because many in the West wanted it to win as a means of settling score with the United States," says Egyptian columnist Ali al-Ibrahim. "But the Arabs have become wise enough to know TV victory from real victory."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1156464200...in_commentaries
PAID SUBSCRIPTION
THE 'WAR PRESIDENT'S' LATEST FIASCO - ERIC MARGOLIS (LEWROCKWELL.COM, AUGUST 22): Hezbullah is now the Muslim World?s new hero after battling Israel's mighty armed forces to a humiliating draw. Any hope of damping down the Islamic World's surging hatred of the US, Britain, Australia and Israel (now add Canada) was killed in Lebanon.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/margolis/margolis44.html
A VOTE FOR CIVILIZATION IN THE MIDDLE EAST: TRACKING ARAB LARGE-CAPS THROUGH THE ISRAEL-HEZBOLLAH CRISIS - JERRY BOWYER (NATIONAL REVIEW, AUGUST 21): Reporters can poll the 'Arab street' all they want, but to find out what the locals really believe, you have to watch one of the most powerful ballots a man can cast -- his nest egg.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=M2NlN...WIzZWQ1MmZjZWY=
ISRAEL'S 'MORAL HIGH GROUND' IT KEEPS GETTING LOWER... - JUSTIN RAIMONDO (ANTIWAR.COM, AUGUST 23): The "narrative" Israel is trying to sell the American public is that the Jewish state is once again being targeted by "terrorists."
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=9595
NO U.S. ROLE IN LEBANON - DREW BENNETT (BALTIMORE SUN, AUGUST 24): Our actions regarding Lebanon have limited our strategic options. Our support for Israel appears to overshadow any ability to remain impartial.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/o...-oped-headlines
AND THE LOSER IS... EVERYONE LEON HADAR (ANTIWAR.COM, AUGUST 24): U.S. leaders are likely to begin questioning their long-held axiom that Israel is a "strategic asset" of the United States in the Middle East. From the U.S. perspective, the crisis marked the final collapse of President Bush's ambitious plan to remake and "democratize" the Middle East.
http://www.antiwar.com/hadar/?articleid=9599
RICE CATCHES FLAK AS MIDEAST DEAL FALTERS: REPUBLICAN CRITICS SAY WHITE HOUSE OVERSOLD STRENGTH OF PACT TO END ISRAEL-HEZBOLLAH WAR - NEIL KING JR. (WALL STREET JOURNAL, AUGUST 25): The deal Ms. Rice helped create, U.N. resolution 1701, lays out aims and demands that rely almost entirely on the will of a shaky international community. While the deal has stopped the fighting, few argue that it is likely to achieve Ms. Rice's larger goals.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1156464950...ays_us_page_one
PAID SUBSCRIPTION
THE NEW AXIS OF INTERVENTION - JOHN FEFFER (ASIA TIMES, AUGUST 25): In a world Thomas Hobbes called the "war of all against all" both aggressive countries like the US and Israel and aggressive non-state actors like al-Qaeda and the Islamic courts will feel right at home.
http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HH25Ak02.html
IRAN SCORES IN WORLD WAR - ARNAUD DE BORCHGRAVE (WASHINGTON TIMES, AUGUST 24): http://www.washtimes.com/functions/print.p...23-084117-7697r
YOUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK IN THE MIDDLE EAST - ARIANNA HUFFINGTON (HUFFINGTON POST, AUGUST 24): According to a new report by Chatham House, a British think tank, after spending over $400 billion on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States has succeeded... in making Iran the top dog in the region.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huff...html?view=print
ARTFUL IRAN OUTPLAYS HESITANT AMERICA - PHILIP STEPHENS (FINANCIAL TIMES, AUGUST 24)
https://registration.ft.com/registration/ba...00779e2340.html
PAID SUBSCRIPTION
A WEAKER US HAND IN THE MIDEAST: WITH AMERICAN LEVERAGE SEEN AS DIMINISHED, IRAN AND OTHERS HAVE MORE ROOM TO MOVE IN - HOWARD LAFRANCHI (CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, AUGUST 24)
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0824/p01s02-usfp.html
http://www.aei.org/publications/filter.all.../pub_detail.asp
VISION GAP, PART II: THE CASE FOR PUTTING DEMOCRACY PROMOTION AT THE CENTER OF A NEW PROGRESSIVE FOREIGN POLICY VISION - SHADI HAMID (AMERICAN PROSPECT, AUGUST 24): Public Diplomacy: The importance of improving our image abroad cannot be overstated. The more people hate us, the more easily they can be convinced to take up arms against us and our allies.
http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?sectio...articleId=11919
WAR ON LEBANON -- MAJOR PLAYERS IRAN, SYRIA, HEZBOLLAH, ISRAEL AND USA - (PEACEJOURNALISM.COM, NEPAL, AUGUST 23): World Security Network (WSN): "What do you think really of the democratisation program initiated by the Bush administration as a public diplomacy in the Middle East?" B. Ghalioun, a French-Syrian professor of political sociology at the Sorbonne University: 'I think that the US led democratisation project -- if ever it were really meant to be achieved and not just words in the air -- is now almost in the past as there is no talk about it anymore.'
http://peacejournalism.com/ReadArticle.asp?ArticleID=10380
HUNTING MONSTERS IN JERUSALEM - TOM BARRY (ASIA TIMES, AUGUST 25): Chief Middle East adviser at the White House's National Security Council (NSC) Elliott Abrams embodies the administration's zealous, ideological and dangerously delusional vision of US foreign policy in the Middle East. During the Reagan administration, Abrams was the government's nexus between the militarists in the NSC and the public-diplomacy operatives in the State Department, White House and National Endowment for Democracy.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HH26Ak01.html
TZIPI, YOU FAILED: WHILE THE WORLD WAS ARDUOUSLY BUYING NASRALLA'S LIES, YOU REMAINED IN YOUR OFFICE. ISRAEL WAS DEFEATED IN THE MEDIA WAR PRIMARILY BECAUSE OF YOU - ZVI MAZEL (YNETNEWS, ISRAEL, AUGUST 24): How unfortunate it is to discover that the Israel foreign ministry still doesn't recognize the extent of the media's importance; that it has yet to become acquainted with the arena of public diplomacy.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3295183,00.html
PROBLEM OF MARKETING, NOT PR: ISRAEL IS 20 YEARS AHEAD OF HIZBULLAH IN MILITARY MIGHT, AND 10 YEARS BEHIND IN MARKETING - RA'ANAN GISSIN (ISRAEL AND PUBLIC RELATIONS, JULY 30): At the end of the day we must remember that Israel's PR (note: there is no good English translation for the Hebrew word "hasbara") is uniquely Israeli, both due to its special position and due to the fact that many groups around the world don't recognize the country's right to exist.
http://www.tampabayprimer.org/index.cfm?ac...iewArt&art=1415
SEE ALSO
http://tundratabloid.blogspot.com/2006/08/...r-happened.html
http://jiw.blogspot.com/2006/08/critical-i...eli-public.html
RUSSIA FACES ISLAMIC RADICALISM - ZLATICA HOKE/ANYA ARDAYEVA (VOICE OF AMERICA, AUGUST 23): Ilan Berman, Vice President for Policy at the American Foreign Policy Council: "I think there is a pretty substantial effort in Central Asia right now for formulating public diplomacy, broadcasting, things like that, along counter-terrorism lines, certainly in order to reinforce the power of the authoritarian state in many cases."
http://www.voanews.com/english/NewsAnalysi...08-23-voa49.cfm
NEW YORK LAW SCHOOL'S CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL LAW LAUNCHES IRAN PROJECT - (PRESS RELEASE, NEW YORK LAW SCHOOL NY, AUGUST 23): Network 20/20 is an independent membership organization that helps prepare next generation leaders in the U.S. to participate meaningfully in public diplomacy and the creation and execution of policies promoting global public security.
http://www.nyls.edu/pages/4969.asp
AMERICA BY NUMBERS: LOTS OF DATA, BUT LITTLE INSIGHT, ABOUT GLOBAL OPINION [REVIEW OF 'AMERICA AGAINST THE WORLD: HOW WE ARE DIFFERENT AND WHY WE ARE DISLIKED' BY ANDREW KOHUT AND BRUCE STOKES] - PAUL HOLLANDER (WEEKLY STANDARD, AUGUST 21): In the end, major questions about the recent growth of anti-Americanism remain unanswered in this book.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Publ...12/570teosa.asp
NEW YORK MAN CHARGED WITH ENABLING HEZBOLLAH TELEVISION BROADCASTS - TIMOTHY WILLIAMS AND WILLIAM K. RASHBAUM (NEW YORK TIMES, AUGUST 25): The Hezbollah station, Al Manar -- or 'the beacon' in Arabic -- was designated a global terrorist entity by the United States Treasury Department in March of this year. Mark Dubowitz, who heads a Washington-based policy group that has monitored Al Manar -- through a project called the Coalition Against Terrorist Media -- has campaigned for its removal.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/25/nyregion...agewanted=print
HEZBOLLAH DIDN'T WIN - AMIR TAHERI (WALL STREET JOURNAL, AUGUST 25): "Hezbollah won the propaganda war because many in the West wanted it to win as a means of settling score with the United States," says Egyptian columnist Ali al-Ibrahim. "But the Arabs have become wise enough to know TV victory from real victory."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1156464200...in_commentaries
PAID SUBSCRIPTION
THE 'WAR PRESIDENT'S' LATEST FIASCO - ERIC MARGOLIS (LEWROCKWELL.COM, AUGUST 22): Hezbullah is now the Muslim World?s new hero after battling Israel's mighty armed forces to a humiliating draw. Any hope of damping down the Islamic World's surging hatred of the US, Britain, Australia and Israel (now add Canada) was killed in Lebanon.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/margolis/margolis44.html
A VOTE FOR CIVILIZATION IN THE MIDDLE EAST: TRACKING ARAB LARGE-CAPS THROUGH THE ISRAEL-HEZBOLLAH CRISIS - JERRY BOWYER (NATIONAL REVIEW, AUGUST 21): Reporters can poll the 'Arab street' all they want, but to find out what the locals really believe, you have to watch one of the most powerful ballots a man can cast -- his nest egg.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=M2NlN...WIzZWQ1MmZjZWY=
ISRAEL'S 'MORAL HIGH GROUND' IT KEEPS GETTING LOWER... - JUSTIN RAIMONDO (ANTIWAR.COM, AUGUST 23): The "narrative" Israel is trying to sell the American public is that the Jewish state is once again being targeted by "terrorists."
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=9595
NO U.S. ROLE IN LEBANON - DREW BENNETT (BALTIMORE SUN, AUGUST 24): Our actions regarding Lebanon have limited our strategic options. Our support for Israel appears to overshadow any ability to remain impartial.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/o...-oped-headlines
AND THE LOSER IS... EVERYONE LEON HADAR (ANTIWAR.COM, AUGUST 24): U.S. leaders are likely to begin questioning their long-held axiom that Israel is a "strategic asset" of the United States in the Middle East. From the U.S. perspective, the crisis marked the final collapse of President Bush's ambitious plan to remake and "democratize" the Middle East.
http://www.antiwar.com/hadar/?articleid=9599
RICE CATCHES FLAK AS MIDEAST DEAL FALTERS: REPUBLICAN CRITICS SAY WHITE HOUSE OVERSOLD STRENGTH OF PACT TO END ISRAEL-HEZBOLLAH WAR - NEIL KING JR. (WALL STREET JOURNAL, AUGUST 25): The deal Ms. Rice helped create, U.N. resolution 1701, lays out aims and demands that rely almost entirely on the will of a shaky international community. While the deal has stopped the fighting, few argue that it is likely to achieve Ms. Rice's larger goals.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1156464950...ays_us_page_one
PAID SUBSCRIPTION
THE NEW AXIS OF INTERVENTION - JOHN FEFFER (ASIA TIMES, AUGUST 25): In a world Thomas Hobbes called the "war of all against all" both aggressive countries like the US and Israel and aggressive non-state actors like al-Qaeda and the Islamic courts will feel right at home.
http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HH25Ak02.html
IRAN SCORES IN WORLD WAR - ARNAUD DE BORCHGRAVE (WASHINGTON TIMES, AUGUST 24): http://www.washtimes.com/functions/print.p...23-084117-7697r
YOUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK IN THE MIDDLE EAST - ARIANNA HUFFINGTON (HUFFINGTON POST, AUGUST 24): According to a new report by Chatham House, a British think tank, after spending over $400 billion on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States has succeeded... in making Iran the top dog in the region.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huff...html?view=print
ARTFUL IRAN OUTPLAYS HESITANT AMERICA - PHILIP STEPHENS (FINANCIAL TIMES, AUGUST 24)
https://registration.ft.com/registration/ba...00779e2340.html
PAID SUBSCRIPTION
A WEAKER US HAND IN THE MIDEAST: WITH AMERICAN LEVERAGE SEEN AS DIMINISHED, IRAN AND OTHERS HAVE MORE ROOM TO MOVE IN - HOWARD LAFRANCHI (CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, AUGUST 24)
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0824/p01s02-usfp.html
America's Rottweiler
By Uri Avnery
The Second Lebanon War is considered by many as a "War by Proxy". That's to say: Hizbullah is the Dobermann of Iran, we are the Rottweiler of America. Hizbullah gets money, rockets and support from the Islamic Republic, we get money, cluster bombs and support from the United States of America.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14717.htm
By Uri Avnery
The Second Lebanon War is considered by many as a "War by Proxy". That's to say: Hizbullah is the Dobermann of Iran, we are the Rottweiler of America. Hizbullah gets money, rockets and support from the Islamic Republic, we get money, cluster bombs and support from the United States of America.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14717.htm
U.S. Freezes Assets Of Hezbollah Unit
By Glenn Kessler
The Bush administration moved yesterday against a key fundraising arm of Hezbollah, the militant Shiite Muslim movement that is part of Lebanon's government, ordering a freeze on its assets in the United States and making it illegal for Americans to contribute to the organization.
To view the entire article, go to http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...er=emailarticle
By Glenn Kessler
The Bush administration moved yesterday against a key fundraising arm of Hezbollah, the militant Shiite Muslim movement that is part of Lebanon's government, ordering a freeze on its assets in the United States and making it illegal for Americans to contribute to the organization.
To view the entire article, go to http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...er=emailarticle
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_na...ontemplates.htm
-- --
August 31, 2006 at 08:09:08
US Army Contemplates Redrawing Middle East Map to Stave-off Looming Global Meltdown
by Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed
http://www.opednews.com
In a little-noted article printed in early August in the Armed Forces Journal, a monthly magazine for officers and leaders in the United States military community, early retired Major Ralph Peters sets out the latest ideas in current US strategic thinking. And they are extremely disturbing.
Ethnically Cleansing the Entire Middle East
Maj. Peters, formerly assigned to the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence where he was responsible for future warfare, candidly outlines how the map of the Middle East should be fundamentally re-drawn, in a new imperial endeavour designed to correct past errors. "Without such major boundary revisions, we shall never see a more peaceful Middle East," he observes, but then adds wryly: "Oh, and one other dirty little secret from 5,000 years of history: Ethnic cleansing works."
Thus, acknowledging that the sweeping reconfiguration of borders he proposes would necessarily involve massive ethnic cleansing and accompanying bloodshed on perhaps a genocidal scale, he insists that unless it is implemented, "we may take it as an article of faith that a portion of the bloodshed in the region will continue to be our own." Among his proposals are the need to establish "an independent Kurdish state" to guarantee the long-denied right to Kurdish self-determination. But behind the humanitarian sentiments, Maj. Peters declares that: "A Free Kurdistan, stretching from Diyarbakir through Tabriz, would be the most pro-Western state between Bulgaria and Japan."
He chastises the United States and its coalition partners for missing "a glorious chance" to fracture Iraq, which "should have been divided into three smaller states immediately." This would leave "Iraq's three Sunni-majority provinces as a truncated state that might eventually choose to unify with a Syria that loses its littoral to a Mediterranean-oriented Greater Lebanon: Phoenecia reborn." Meanwhile, the Shia south of old Iraq "would form the basis of an Arab Shia State rimming much of the Persian Gulf." Jordan, a US-Israeli friend in the region, would "retain its current territory, with some southward expansion at Saudi expense. For its part, the unnatural state of Saudi Arabia would suffer as great a dismantling as Pakistan." Iran too would "lose a great deal of territory to Unified Azerbaijan, Free Kurdistan, the Arab Shia State and Free Baluchistan, but would gain the provinces around Herat in today's Afghanistan." Although this vast imperial programme could be impossible to implement now, with time, "new and natural borders will emerge", driven by "the inevitable attendant bloodshed."
As for the goals of this plan, Maj. Peters is equally candid. While including the necessary caveats about fighting "for security from terrorism, for the prospect of democracy", he also mentions the third important issue -- "and for access to oil supplies in a region that is destined to fight itself".
The whole thing sounds disturbingly familiar, especially to those who have read the musings of then Israeli Foreign Ministry official Oded Yinon.
Keeping the World Safe... for Our Economy
Despite trying to dress up his vision as an exercise in attempting to selflessly democratize the Middle East, in a contribution to the quarterly US Army War College journal Parameters almost a decade ago, he acknowledged with some jubilation that: "Those of us who can sort, digest, synthesize, and apply relevant knowledge soar--professionally, financially, politically, militarily, and socially. We, the winners, are a minority." This minority will inevitably conflict with the vast majority of the world's population. "For the world masses, devastated by information they cannot manage or effectively interpret, life is 'nasty, brutish . . . and short-circuited.'" In "every country and region", these masses who can neither "understand the new world", nor "profit from its uncertainties... will become the violent enemies of their inadequate governments, of their more fortunate neighbors, and ultimately of the United States." The coming clash, then, is not really about blood, faith, ethnicity, at all. It is about the gap between the haves and the have-nots. "We are entering a new American century", he says, in a veiled reference to the Bush administration Project of the same name founded in the same year he was writing. In the new century, "we will become still wealthier, culturally more lethal, and increasingly powerful. We will excite hatreds without precedent."
In predicting the future course for the US Army, Maj. Peters argues that: "We will see countries and continents divide between rich and poor in a reversal of 20th-century economic trends." In this context, he says, "we in the United States will continue to be perceived as the ultimate haves", and therefore, "terrorism will be the most common form of violence", along with "transnational criminality, civil strife, secessions, border conflicts, and conventional wars." Meanwhile, "in defense of its interests", the US "will be required to intervene in some of these contests." And then he sums it all up in one tidy paragraph:
"There will be no peace. At any given moment for the rest of our lifetimes, there will be multiple conflicts in mutating forms around the globe. Violent conflict will dominate the headlines, but cultural and economic struggles will be steadier and ultimately more decisive. The de facto role of the US armed forces will be to keep the world safe for our economy and open to our cultural assault. To those ends, we will do a fair amount of killing."
So what's prompted Maj. Peter's decision to air his vision for the Middle East in the Armed Forces Journal at this time in the wake of the latest Middle East crisis? A number of critical developments.
Source: Imminent Global Crises Converge
According to an American source with high-level access to the US military, political and intelligence establishment, Western policymakers are in no doubt that the world faces the imminent convergence of multiple global crises. These crises threaten not only to undermine the basis of Western power in its current military and geopolitical configurations, but also to destabilize the entire foundations of industrial civilization.
The source said that the latest petroleum data indicates that "global oil production most likely peaked two years ago." This is consistent with the findings of respected geologists such as leading oil depletion expert Dr. Colin Campbell, who in the late 90s predicted that world oil production would peak in the early 21st century. "We have come to the end of the first half of the Oil Age," said Dr. Campbell, who has a doctorate in geology from the University of Oxford and more than 40 years of experience in the oil industry. Similarly, Kenneth Deffeyes, a geologist and professor emeritus at Princeton University, estimates the occurrence of the peak near the end of last year.
The source also said that leading US financial analysts privately believe that "a collapse of the global banking system is imminent by 2008." Although the warning is consistent with the public findings of other experts, this is the first time that a more precise date has been estimated. In a prescient analysis drawing on highly placed financial sources, US historian Gabriel Kolko, professor emeritus at York University, concluded in late July that:
"All the factors which make for crashes – excessive leveraging, rising interest rates, etc. – exist... Contradictions now wrack the world's financial system, and a growing consensus now exists between those who endorse it and those, like myself, who believe the status quo is both crisis-prone as well as immoral. If we are to believe the institutions and personalities who have been in the forefront of the defense of capitalism, and we should, it may very well be on the verge of serious crises."
The source also commented on the danger posed by rapid climate change. Although most conventional estimates suggest that global climate catastrophe is not due before another 30 odd years, he argued that the multiplication of several "tipping-points" suggested that a series of devastating climatic events could be "triggered within the next 10 to 15 years." Once again, this is consistent with the findings of other experts, most recently a joint task-force report by the Institute for Public Policy Research in the UK, the Center for American Progress in the US, and the Australia Institute, which said in January last year that if the average world temperature rises "two degrees centigrade above the average world temperature prevailing in 1750 before the industrial revolution", it would trigger an irreversible chain of climatic disasters. In its report, the task-force says:
"The possibilities include reaching climatic tipping points leading, for example, to the loss of the West Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets (which, between them, could raise sea level more than 10 meters over the space of a few centuries), the shutdown of the thermohaline ocean circulation (and, with it, the Gulf Stream), and the transformation of the planet's forests and soils from a net sink of carbon to a net source of carbon."
The source also revealed that US generals had repeatedly war-gamed a prospective conflict with Iran, but consistently found that the simulations predicted "an absolute nuclear disaster", from which no clear winner would emerge. The scenarios gamed were so dismal, he said, that the generals briefed administration officials to avoid such a war at all costs. However, the source said that the Bush administration is ignoring the fears of the US military.
In this context, it would seem that the musings of Maj. Peters issue less from a concerted confidence in US power, than from a sense of growing desperation and unease as the political, financial and energy architecture of the global system is increasingly fragmenting under the weight of its own inherent instability. Despite the seeming gloominess of the situation, however, there is clearly fundamental dissent about the current trajectory of American and Western policy at the highest levels of power. The source remarked that "humanity is on the verge of a precipice, and either we'll all just drop off the edge, or we'll evolve. I'm not sure what that new human being might look like, but it will clearly have to involve a completely new set of ideas and values, a new way of looking at the world that respects life and nature."
nafeez.blogspot.com
Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed is the author of The London Bombings: An Independent Inquiry. He teaches courses in International Relations at the School of Social Sciences and Cultural Studies, University of Sussex, Brighton, where he is doing his PhD studying imperialism and genocide. Since 9/11, he has authored three other books revealing the realpolitik behind the rhetoric of the "War on Terror", The War on Freedom, Behind the War on Terror, and The War on Truth: 9/11, Disinformation and the Anatomy of Terrorism. In summer 2005, he testified as an expert witness in US Congress about his research on international terrorism.
-- --
August 31, 2006 at 08:09:08
US Army Contemplates Redrawing Middle East Map to Stave-off Looming Global Meltdown
by Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed
http://www.opednews.com
In a little-noted article printed in early August in the Armed Forces Journal, a monthly magazine for officers and leaders in the United States military community, early retired Major Ralph Peters sets out the latest ideas in current US strategic thinking. And they are extremely disturbing.
Ethnically Cleansing the Entire Middle East
Maj. Peters, formerly assigned to the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence where he was responsible for future warfare, candidly outlines how the map of the Middle East should be fundamentally re-drawn, in a new imperial endeavour designed to correct past errors. "Without such major boundary revisions, we shall never see a more peaceful Middle East," he observes, but then adds wryly: "Oh, and one other dirty little secret from 5,000 years of history: Ethnic cleansing works."
Thus, acknowledging that the sweeping reconfiguration of borders he proposes would necessarily involve massive ethnic cleansing and accompanying bloodshed on perhaps a genocidal scale, he insists that unless it is implemented, "we may take it as an article of faith that a portion of the bloodshed in the region will continue to be our own." Among his proposals are the need to establish "an independent Kurdish state" to guarantee the long-denied right to Kurdish self-determination. But behind the humanitarian sentiments, Maj. Peters declares that: "A Free Kurdistan, stretching from Diyarbakir through Tabriz, would be the most pro-Western state between Bulgaria and Japan."
He chastises the United States and its coalition partners for missing "a glorious chance" to fracture Iraq, which "should have been divided into three smaller states immediately." This would leave "Iraq's three Sunni-majority provinces as a truncated state that might eventually choose to unify with a Syria that loses its littoral to a Mediterranean-oriented Greater Lebanon: Phoenecia reborn." Meanwhile, the Shia south of old Iraq "would form the basis of an Arab Shia State rimming much of the Persian Gulf." Jordan, a US-Israeli friend in the region, would "retain its current territory, with some southward expansion at Saudi expense. For its part, the unnatural state of Saudi Arabia would suffer as great a dismantling as Pakistan." Iran too would "lose a great deal of territory to Unified Azerbaijan, Free Kurdistan, the Arab Shia State and Free Baluchistan, but would gain the provinces around Herat in today's Afghanistan." Although this vast imperial programme could be impossible to implement now, with time, "new and natural borders will emerge", driven by "the inevitable attendant bloodshed."
As for the goals of this plan, Maj. Peters is equally candid. While including the necessary caveats about fighting "for security from terrorism, for the prospect of democracy", he also mentions the third important issue -- "and for access to oil supplies in a region that is destined to fight itself".
The whole thing sounds disturbingly familiar, especially to those who have read the musings of then Israeli Foreign Ministry official Oded Yinon.
Keeping the World Safe... for Our Economy
Despite trying to dress up his vision as an exercise in attempting to selflessly democratize the Middle East, in a contribution to the quarterly US Army War College journal Parameters almost a decade ago, he acknowledged with some jubilation that: "Those of us who can sort, digest, synthesize, and apply relevant knowledge soar--professionally, financially, politically, militarily, and socially. We, the winners, are a minority." This minority will inevitably conflict with the vast majority of the world's population. "For the world masses, devastated by information they cannot manage or effectively interpret, life is 'nasty, brutish . . . and short-circuited.'" In "every country and region", these masses who can neither "understand the new world", nor "profit from its uncertainties... will become the violent enemies of their inadequate governments, of their more fortunate neighbors, and ultimately of the United States." The coming clash, then, is not really about blood, faith, ethnicity, at all. It is about the gap between the haves and the have-nots. "We are entering a new American century", he says, in a veiled reference to the Bush administration Project of the same name founded in the same year he was writing. In the new century, "we will become still wealthier, culturally more lethal, and increasingly powerful. We will excite hatreds without precedent."
In predicting the future course for the US Army, Maj. Peters argues that: "We will see countries and continents divide between rich and poor in a reversal of 20th-century economic trends." In this context, he says, "we in the United States will continue to be perceived as the ultimate haves", and therefore, "terrorism will be the most common form of violence", along with "transnational criminality, civil strife, secessions, border conflicts, and conventional wars." Meanwhile, "in defense of its interests", the US "will be required to intervene in some of these contests." And then he sums it all up in one tidy paragraph:
"There will be no peace. At any given moment for the rest of our lifetimes, there will be multiple conflicts in mutating forms around the globe. Violent conflict will dominate the headlines, but cultural and economic struggles will be steadier and ultimately more decisive. The de facto role of the US armed forces will be to keep the world safe for our economy and open to our cultural assault. To those ends, we will do a fair amount of killing."
So what's prompted Maj. Peter's decision to air his vision for the Middle East in the Armed Forces Journal at this time in the wake of the latest Middle East crisis? A number of critical developments.
Source: Imminent Global Crises Converge
According to an American source with high-level access to the US military, political and intelligence establishment, Western policymakers are in no doubt that the world faces the imminent convergence of multiple global crises. These crises threaten not only to undermine the basis of Western power in its current military and geopolitical configurations, but also to destabilize the entire foundations of industrial civilization.
The source said that the latest petroleum data indicates that "global oil production most likely peaked two years ago." This is consistent with the findings of respected geologists such as leading oil depletion expert Dr. Colin Campbell, who in the late 90s predicted that world oil production would peak in the early 21st century. "We have come to the end of the first half of the Oil Age," said Dr. Campbell, who has a doctorate in geology from the University of Oxford and more than 40 years of experience in the oil industry. Similarly, Kenneth Deffeyes, a geologist and professor emeritus at Princeton University, estimates the occurrence of the peak near the end of last year.
The source also said that leading US financial analysts privately believe that "a collapse of the global banking system is imminent by 2008." Although the warning is consistent with the public findings of other experts, this is the first time that a more precise date has been estimated. In a prescient analysis drawing on highly placed financial sources, US historian Gabriel Kolko, professor emeritus at York University, concluded in late July that:
"All the factors which make for crashes – excessive leveraging, rising interest rates, etc. – exist... Contradictions now wrack the world's financial system, and a growing consensus now exists between those who endorse it and those, like myself, who believe the status quo is both crisis-prone as well as immoral. If we are to believe the institutions and personalities who have been in the forefront of the defense of capitalism, and we should, it may very well be on the verge of serious crises."
The source also commented on the danger posed by rapid climate change. Although most conventional estimates suggest that global climate catastrophe is not due before another 30 odd years, he argued that the multiplication of several "tipping-points" suggested that a series of devastating climatic events could be "triggered within the next 10 to 15 years." Once again, this is consistent with the findings of other experts, most recently a joint task-force report by the Institute for Public Policy Research in the UK, the Center for American Progress in the US, and the Australia Institute, which said in January last year that if the average world temperature rises "two degrees centigrade above the average world temperature prevailing in 1750 before the industrial revolution", it would trigger an irreversible chain of climatic disasters. In its report, the task-force says:
"The possibilities include reaching climatic tipping points leading, for example, to the loss of the West Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets (which, between them, could raise sea level more than 10 meters over the space of a few centuries), the shutdown of the thermohaline ocean circulation (and, with it, the Gulf Stream), and the transformation of the planet's forests and soils from a net sink of carbon to a net source of carbon."
The source also revealed that US generals had repeatedly war-gamed a prospective conflict with Iran, but consistently found that the simulations predicted "an absolute nuclear disaster", from which no clear winner would emerge. The scenarios gamed were so dismal, he said, that the generals briefed administration officials to avoid such a war at all costs. However, the source said that the Bush administration is ignoring the fears of the US military.
In this context, it would seem that the musings of Maj. Peters issue less from a concerted confidence in US power, than from a sense of growing desperation and unease as the political, financial and energy architecture of the global system is increasingly fragmenting under the weight of its own inherent instability. Despite the seeming gloominess of the situation, however, there is clearly fundamental dissent about the current trajectory of American and Western policy at the highest levels of power. The source remarked that "humanity is on the verge of a precipice, and either we'll all just drop off the edge, or we'll evolve. I'm not sure what that new human being might look like, but it will clearly have to involve a completely new set of ideas and values, a new way of looking at the world that respects life and nature."
nafeez.blogspot.com
Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed is the author of The London Bombings: An Independent Inquiry. He teaches courses in International Relations at the School of Social Sciences and Cultural Studies, University of Sussex, Brighton, where he is doing his PhD studying imperialism and genocide. Since 9/11, he has authored three other books revealing the realpolitik behind the rhetoric of the "War on Terror", The War on Freedom, Behind the War on Terror, and The War on Truth: 9/11, Disinformation and the Anatomy of Terrorism. In summer 2005, he testified as an expert witness in US Congress about his research on international terrorism.
The Nafeez Ahmed article above prompts an idea for a forthcoming symposium to be aired on C-SPAN.
Guest speakers to be invited could include the following:
Jesus
Buddha
The Dalai Lama
Mike Ruppert (via satellite from who knows where)
Catherine Austin Fitts
Carolyn Baker, Ph.D.
Mahatma Gandhi
David Ray Griffin
DWB04
Other suggestions for invitees are welcome.
Guest speakers to be invited could include the following:
Jesus
Buddha
The Dalai Lama
Mike Ruppert (via satellite from who knows where)
Catherine Austin Fitts
Carolyn Baker, Ph.D.
Mahatma Gandhi
David Ray Griffin
DWB04
Other suggestions for invitees are welcome.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?con...&articleId=3147
-- -- --
The Next Phase of the Middle East War
by Michel Chossudovsky
September 4, 2006
GlobalResearch.ca
Israel's war on Lebanon is an integral part of a US sponsored "military roadmap".
The war on Lebanon, which has resulted in countless atrocities including the destruction of the nation's economy and civilian infrastructure, is "a stage" in a sequence of carefully planned military operations.
Lebanon constitutes a strategic corridor between Israel and North-western Syria. [See http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?con...&articleId=2824 ] The underlying objective of this war was the militarization of Lebanon, including the stationing of foreign troops, as a precondition for carrying out the next phase of a broader military agenda.
Formally under a UN mandate, the foreign troops to be stationed on Lebanese soil on the immediate border with Syria, are largely although not exclusively from NATO countries. This military force mandated by the UN Security Council is by no means neutral. It responds directly to US and Israeli interests.
Moreover, the timely withdrawal of Syrian troops, following the February 2005 assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri has contributed to opening up a "new space". The withdrawal of Syrian troops served Israel. The timely pullout was of strategic significance, it certainly was a major factor in the timing and planning of the July 2006 IDF attacks on Lebanon.
In the aftermath of the Israeli bombings and the "ceasefire", UN Security Council Resolution 1701, drafted by France and the US in close consultation with the Israeli government, has paved the way for the militarization of Lebanon, under a bogus UN mandate.
The Next Phase of the Middle East War
Confirmed by official statements and military documents, the US in close coordination with Britain (and in consultation with its NATO partners), is planning to launch a war directed against Iran and Syria. US Ambassador to the UN John Bolton has already initiated the draft of a UN Security Council resolution with a view to imposing sanctions on Tehran for its alleged (nonexistent) nuclear weapons program. Whether this resolution is adopted is not the main issue. The US may decide to proceed in defiance of the Security Council, following a veto by Russia and/or China. The vote of France and Britain, among the permanent members has already been secured.
US military sources have confirmed that an aerial attack, pursuant to a sanctions regime on Iran, with or without UN approval, would involve a large scale deployment comparable to the US "shock and awe" bombing raids on Iraq in March 2003:
American air strikes on Iran would vastly exceed the scope of the 1981 Israeli attack on the Osiraq nuclear center in Iraq, and would more resemble the opening days of the 2003 air campaign against Iraq. Using the full force of operational B-2 stealth bombers, staging from Diego Garcia or flying direct from the United States, possibly supplemented by F-117 stealth fighters staging from al Udeid in Qatar or some other location in theater, the two-dozen suspect nuclear sites would be targeted.
Military planners could tailor their target list to reflect the preferences of the Administration by having limited air strikes that would target only the most crucial facilities ... or the United States could opt for a far more comprehensive set of strikes against a comprehensive range of WMD related targets, as well as conventional and unconventional forces that might be used to counterattack against US forces in Iraq
(See Globalsecurity.org at http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/iran-strikes.htm
The aerial bombing plans have been fully operational ("in an advanced state of readiness") since June 2005. The various components of the military operation are firmly under US Command, coordinated by the Pentagon and US Strategic Command Headquarters (USSTRATCOM) at the Offutt Air Force base in Nebraska.
In November 2004, US Strategic Command conducted a major exercise of a "global strike plan" entitled "Global Lightening". The latter involved a simulated attack using both conventional and nuclear weapons against a "fictitious enemy" [Iran]. Following the "Global Lightening" exercise, US Strategic Command declared "an advanced state of readiness".
The operational implementation of the Global Strike is called CONCEPT PLAN (CONPLAN) 8022. The latter is described as "an actual plan that the Navy and the Air Force translate into strike package for their submarines and bombers,'
The command structure of the operation is centralized and ultimately The Pentagon will decide on the sequence; " if and when" to launch military operations against Iran and Syria. Israeli military actions and those of other coalition partners including Turkey, would be carried out in close coordination with the Pentagon.
Ground War
While the threat of punitive aerial bombardments of Iran's nuclear facilities have been announced repeatedly by the Bush administration, recent developments suggest that an all out ground war is also under preparation.
CONPLAN constitutes only one component of the Middle East military agenda. CONPLAN 8022 does not contemplate a ground war. It posits "no boots on the ground", which was the initial assumption envisaged in relation to the proposed aerial attacks on Iran.
US and Israeli military planners are fully aware that the aerial "punitive bombings" will almost inevitably lead coalition forces into a ground war scenario in which they will have to confront Iranian and Syrian forces in the battlefield.
Tehran has confirmed that it will retaliate if attacked, in the form of ballistic missile strikes directed against Israel as well as against US military facilities in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Persian Gulf, which would immediately lead us into a scenario of military escalation and all out war.
Iranian troops could cross the Iran-Iraq border and confront coalition forces inside Iraq. Israeli troops and/or Special Forces could enter into Syria.
The foreign troops stationed in Lebanon under UN mandate would respond to the diktats of the US led coalition and the prior commitments reached with Washington and Tel Aviv in the context of the various military alliances (NATO-Israel, Turkey-Israel, GUUAM, etc).
War Games
These military preparations have also been marked, quite recently, by the conduct of war games.
In late August, Iran was involved in the conduct of war games in major regions of the country, including border areas with Turkey, Iraq, Azerbaijan, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Iran's Defense Minister General Mostafa Mohammad Najjar has confirmed the deployment of enhanced military capabilities including weapons systems and troops on the Iranian border: "[Iranian] forces are supervising all movements by trans-regional troops and their agents around the Iranian borders" (FARS news, 2 September 2006)
Barely acknowledged by the Western media, military exercises organized by Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan under the Collective Security Treaty Organization, (CSTO) were also launched in late August. These war games, officially tagged as part of a counter terrorism program, were conducted in response to US-Israeli military threats in the region including the planned attacks against Iran. (See Michel Chossudovsky, August 2006). In turn, China an Kazakhstan held concurrent war games under the auspices of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO).
Azerbaijan and neighboring Georgia have close military ties to Washington. Both countries are part of GUUAM, a military alliance with the US and NATO.
Turkey is a close ally of Israel. [See http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?con...&articleId=2906 ]. Since 2005, Israel has deployed Special Forces in the mountainous areas of Turkey bordering Iran and Syria with the collaboration of the Ankara government: Pakistan is also a close ally of the US and Britain. Georgia has a longstanding military cooperation agreement with the US and Israel. Meanwhile, the USS Enterprise, America's largest aircraft carrier is en route to the Persian Gulf.
Map; Copyright Eric Waddell, Global Research 2003
US Troop Build-up
US troops in Iraq have been increased to 140,000 as confirmed by recent Pentagon statements (Reuters, 2 September 2006) These plans have been coupled with a the compulsory recall of "inactive servicemen" as well as the expansion of mercenary forces. (Mahdi Darius Namzaroaya, August 2006)
The Pentagon justifies the troop build-up as part of a "routine" process of replacement and rotation, required in its ongoing war against "terrorists" in Iraq. The speeding up of military recruitment is also occurring in the core countries of the Anglo-American coalition including Great Britain. Australia and Canada (see also Recruiting Canada). Canada and Australia are aligned with the US. Australian Prime Minister John Howard as well as Canada's Steven Harper have confirmed their commitment to the US-Israeli war and have promised an expansion of the armed forces in their respective countries.
Meanwhile British troops stationed in Iraq have been redeployed to the Iranian border in southern Iraq. This redeployment has been casually presented by Britain's Ambassador to Iraq as part of a "crack down on smuggling and the entrance of weapons into Iraq from Iran".
While British officials are maintaining no desire or preparations for a conflict with Iran, more British troops are being mobilized and deployed to Iraq at the same time. The Light Infantry of the 2nd Battalion, another unit with rapid deployment capabilities, is deploying to the southern Iraqi border with Iran. The 2nd Battalion is being sent to Iraq under the pretext of working in the Rear Operations Battle Group which will provide escorts for military convoys and security for British forces and bases in Basra. (See Mahdi Darius Namzaroaya, August 2006)
The Role of Israel
In the wake of the war on Lebanon. Israel's military plans and pronouncements are increasingly explicit. Tel Aviv has announced plans to wage a pre-emptive "full-scale war" against Iran and Syria, implying the deployment of both air and ground force. These war plans are now said to at the top of the defense agenda:
"Israel is preparing for a possible war with both Iran and Syria, according to Israeli political and military sources."
(...)
“The challenge from Iran and Syria is now top of the Israeli defense agenda, higher than the Palestinian one,” said an Israeli defense source. Shortly before the war in Lebanon Major-General Eliezer Shkedi, the commander of the air force, was placed in charge of the “Iranian front”, a new position in the Israeli Defense Forces. His job will be to command any future strikes on Iran and Syria."
(...)
In the past we prepared for a possible military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities,” said one insider, “but Iran’s growing confidence after the war in Lebanon means we have to prepare for a full-scale war, in which Syria will be an important player.”
(...)
As a result of the change in the defense priorities, the budget for the Israeli forces in the West Bank and Gaza is to be reduced." (Sunday Times, 3 September 2006)
Media Disinformation
The Western media is beating the drums of war.
The Sunday Times views Israel's war plans as legitimate acts of self defense, to prevent Tehran from launching an all out nuclear attack on Israel: "Iran and Syria have ballistic missiles that can cover most of Israel, including Tel Aviv. An emergency budget has now been assigned to building modern shelters."
The fact that Iran does not possess nuclear weapons capabilities as confirmed by the IAEA report does not seem to be an issue for debate.
Media disinformation has contributed to creating an atmosphere of fear and intimidation. The announcement on August 10 by the British Home Office of a foiled large scale terror attack to simultaneously blow up as many as ten airplanes, conveys the impression that it is the Western World rather than the Middle East which is under attack.
Realities are twisted upside down. The disinformation campaign has gone into full gear. The British and US media are increasingly pointing towards "preemptive war" as an act of "self defense" against Al Qaeda and the State sponsors of terrorism, who are allegedly preparing a Second 911.
The underlying objective, through fear and intimidation, is ultimately to build public acceptance for the next stage of the Middle East "war on terrorism" which is directed against Syria and Iran.
The antiwar movement has also been weakened.
While China and Russia will oppose the US led war at the diplomatic level as well as at the UN Security Council, Washington has secured the support of France and Germany. While Russia and China have military cooperation agreements with Iran, they would most probably not would intervene militarily in favor of Iran.
NATO is broadly supportive of the US led military agenda. In February 2005, NATO signed a military cooperation agreement with Israel.
Nuclear Weapons against Iran
The use of tactical nuclear weapons by the US and Israel against Iran, is contemplated, ironically in retaliation for Iran's nonexistent nuclear weapons program.
The Bush administration's new nuclear doctrine contains specific "guidelines" which allow for "preemptive" nuclear strikes against "rogue enemies" which "possess" or are "developing" weapons of mass destruction (WMD). (2001 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) and Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations (DJNO)).
CONPLAN 8022, referred to above, is 'the overall umbrella plan for sort of the pre-planned strategic scenarios involving nuclear weapons.'
'It's specifically focused on these new types of threats -- Iran, North Korea -- proliferation and potentially terrorists too,' he said. 'There's nothing that says that they can't use CONPLAN 8022 in limited scenarios against Russian and Chinese targets.'(According to Hans Kristensen, of the Nuclear Information Project, quoted in Japanese economic News Wire, op cit)
The mission of JFCCSGS is to implement CONPLAN 8022, in other words to trigger a nuclear war with Iran.
The Commander in Chief, namely George W. Bush would instruct the Secretary of Defense, who would then instruct the Joint Chiefs of staff to activate CONPLAN 8022.
The use of nuclear weapons against Iran would be coordinated with Israel, which possesses a sophisticated nuclear arsenal.
The use of nuclear weapons by Israel or the US cannot be excluded, particularly in view of the fact that tactical nuclear weapons have now been reclassified as a variant of the conventional bunker buster bombs and are authorized for use in conventional war theaters. ("they are harmless to civilians because the explosion is underground").
In this regard, Israel and the US rather than Iran constitute a nuclear threat.
The World is at a Critical Crossroads
The Bush Administration has embarked upon a military adventure which threatens the future of humanity. This is not an overstatement. If aerial bombardments were to be launched against Iran, they would trigger a ground war and the escalation of the conflict to a much broader region. Even in the case of aerial and missile using conventional warheads, the bombings would unleash a nuclear nightmare resulting from the spread of nuclear radiation following the destruction of Iran's nuclear energy facilities.
Throughout history, the structure of military alliances has played a crucial role in triggering major military conflicts. In contrast to the situation prevailing prior to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, America's ongoing military adventure is now firmly supported by the Franco-German alliance. Moreover, Israel is slated to play a direct role in this military operation.
NATO is firmly aligned with the Anglo-American-Israeli military axis, which also includes Australia and Canada. In 2005, NATO signed a military cooperation agreement with Israel, and Israel has a longstanding bilateral military agreement with Turkey.
Iran has observer status in The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and is slated to become a full member of SCO. China and Russia have far-reaching military cooperation agreements with
China and Russia are firmly opposed to a US-led military operation in the diplomatic arena. While the US sponsored military plan threatens Russian and Chinese interests in Central Asia and the Caspian sea basin, it is unlikely that they would intervene militarily on the side of Iran or Syria.
The planned attack on Iran must be understood in relation to the existing active war theaters in the Middle East, namely Afghanistan, Iraq and Lebanon-Palestine.
The conflict could easily spread from the Middle East to the Caspian sea basin. It could also involve the participation of Azerbaijan and Georgia, where US troops are stationed.
Military action against Iran and Syria would directly involve Israel's participation, which in turn would trigger a broader war throughout the Middle East, not to mention the further implosion in the Palestinian occupied territories. Turkey is closely associated with the proposed aerial attacks.
If the US-UK-Israeli war plans were to proceed, the broader Middle East- Central Asian region would flare up, from the Eastern Mediterranean to the Afghan-Chinese border. At present, there are three distinct war theaters: Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine-Lebanon. An attack directed against Iran would serve to integrate these war theaters transforming the broader Middle East Central Asian region into an integrated war zone. (see map above)
In turn the US sponsored aerial bombardments directed against Iran could contribute to triggering a ground war characterized by Iranian attacks directed against coalition troops in Iraq. In turn, Israeli forces would enter into Syria.
An attack on Iran would have a direct impact on the resistance movement inside Iraq. It would also put pressure on America's overstretched military capabilities and resources in both the Iraqi and Afghan war theaters.
In other words, the shaky geopolitics of the Central Asia- Middle East region, the three existing war theaters in which America is currently, involved, the direct participation of Israel and Turkey, the structure of US sponsored military alliances, etc. raises the specter of a broader conflict.
The war against Iran is part of a longer term US military agenda which seeks to militarize the entire Caspian sea basin, eventually leading to the destabilization and conquest of the Russian Federation.
The Pentagon's Second 911
The economic and political dislocations resulting from this military agenda are far-reaching.
If the attacks directed against Iran and Syria were to proceed, martial law and/or a state of emergency could be declared in the US and possibly Britain on the pretext that the homeland is under attack by Iran sponsored terrorists. The purpose of these measures would essentially be to curb antiwar movement and provide legitimacy to an illegal war.
The Pentagon has intimated in this regard, in an official statement, that "another [9/11] attack could create both a justification and an opportunity to retaliate against some known targets [Iran and Syria]". In a timely statement, barely a few days following the onslaught of the bombing of Lebanon, Vice President Cheney reiterated his warning: "The enemy that struck on 9/11 is fractured and weakened, yet still lethal, still determined to hit us again" (Waterloo Courier, Iowa, 19 July 2006).
Reversing the Tide of War
The issues raised in this article do not necessarily imply that the war will take place.
What the analysis of official statments and military documents onfirms is that
a) the war is part of a political agenda and
military plans to launch an attack on Iran and Syria are "in an advanced stage of readiness".
The issue is not whether the war will inevitably take place but what are the instruments at our disposal which will enable us to shunt and ultimately disarm this global military agenda.
War criminals occupy positions of authority. The citizenry is galvanized into supporting the rulers, who are "committed to their safety and well-being". Through media disinformation, war is given a humanitarian mandate.
The legitimacy of the war must be addressed. Antiwar sentiment alone does not disarm a military agenda. High ranking officials of the Bush administration, members of the military and the US Congress have been granted the authority to uphold an illegal war.
The corporate backers and sponsors of war and war crimes must also be targeted including the oil companies, the defense contractors, the financial institutions and the corporate media, which has become an integral part of the war propaganda machine.
There is a sense of urgency. In the weeks and months ahead, the antiwar movement must act, consistently, and address a number of key issues.
1. The role of media disinformation in sustaining the military agenda is crucial.
We will not succeed in our endeavours unless the propaganda apparatus is weakened and eventually dismantled. It is essential to inform our fellow citizens on the causes and consequences of the US-led war, not to mention the extensive war crimes and atrocities which are routinely obfuscated by the media. This is no easy task. It requires an effective counter-propaganda program which refutes mainstream media assertions.
It is essential that the relevant information and analysis reaches the broader public. The Western media is controlled by a handful of powerful business syndicates. The media conglomerates which control network TV and the printed press must be challenged through cohesive actions which reveal the lies and falsehoods.
2. There is opposition within the political establishment in the US as well as within the ranks of the Armed Forces.
While this opposition does not necessarily question to overall direction of US foreign policy, it is firmly opposed to military adventurism, including the use of nuclear weapons. These voices within the institutions of the State, the Military and the business establishment are important because they can be usefully channeled to discredit and ultimately dismantle the "war on terrorism" consensus. The broadest possible alliance of political and social forces is, therefore, required to prevent a military adventure which in a very real sense threatens the future of humanity.
3. The structure of military alliances must be addressed. A timely shift in military alliances could potentially reverse the course of history.
Whereas France and Germany are broadly supportive of the US led war, there are strong voices in both countries as well as within the European Union, which firmly oppose the US led military agenda, both at the grassroots level as well within the political system itself.
It is essential that the commitments made by European heads of government and heads of state, to Washington be cancelled or nullified, through pressure exerted at the appropriate political levels. This applies, In particular, to the unbending support of the Bush adminstration's military agenda by President Jacques Chirac and Chancellor Angela Merkel.
The weakening of the system of alliances which commit Western Europe to supporting the Anglo-American military axis, could indeed contribute reverse the tide. Washington would hesitate to wage a war on Iran without the support of France and Germany.
4. The holding of large antiwar rallies is important and essential. But in will not in itself reverse the tide of war unless it is accompanied by the development of a cohesive antiwar network.
What is required is a grass roots antiwar network, a mass movement at national and international levels, which challenges the legitimacy of the main military and political actors, as well as their corporate sponsors, and which would ultimately be instrumental in unseating those who rule in our name. The construction of this type of network will take time to develop. Initially it should focus of developing an antiwar stance within existing citizens' organizations (e.g. trade unions, community organizations, professional regroupings, student federations, municipal councils, etc.).
5. 9/11 plays a crucial and central role in the propaganda campaign.
The threat of an Al Qaeda "Attack on America" is being used profusely by the Bush administration and its indefectible British ally to galvanize public opinion in support of a global military agenda. Revealing the lies behind 911 would serve to undermine the legitimacy of the "war on terrorism". Without 911, the war criminals in high office do not have a leg to stand on. The entire national security construct collapses like a deck of cards. Known and documented, the "Islamic terror network" is a creation of the US intelligence apparatus. Several of the terror alerts were based on fake intelligence as revealed in the recent foiled "liquid bomb attack". There is evidence that the several of the terrorist "mass casualty events" which have resulted in civilian casualties were triggered by the military and/or intelligence services. The "war on terrorism" is bogus. The 911 narrative as conveyed by the 911 Commission report is fabricated. The Bush administration is involved in acts of cover-up and complicity at the highest levels of government.
-- --
Michel Chossudovsky is the author of the international best seller "The Globalization of Poverty " published in eleven languages. He is Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa and Director of the Center for Research on Globalization. His most recent book is America’s "War on Terrorism", Global Research, 2005.
-- -- --
The Next Phase of the Middle East War
by Michel Chossudovsky
September 4, 2006
GlobalResearch.ca
Israel's war on Lebanon is an integral part of a US sponsored "military roadmap".
The war on Lebanon, which has resulted in countless atrocities including the destruction of the nation's economy and civilian infrastructure, is "a stage" in a sequence of carefully planned military operations.
Lebanon constitutes a strategic corridor between Israel and North-western Syria. [See http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?con...&articleId=2824 ] The underlying objective of this war was the militarization of Lebanon, including the stationing of foreign troops, as a precondition for carrying out the next phase of a broader military agenda.
Formally under a UN mandate, the foreign troops to be stationed on Lebanese soil on the immediate border with Syria, are largely although not exclusively from NATO countries. This military force mandated by the UN Security Council is by no means neutral. It responds directly to US and Israeli interests.
Moreover, the timely withdrawal of Syrian troops, following the February 2005 assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri has contributed to opening up a "new space". The withdrawal of Syrian troops served Israel. The timely pullout was of strategic significance, it certainly was a major factor in the timing and planning of the July 2006 IDF attacks on Lebanon.
In the aftermath of the Israeli bombings and the "ceasefire", UN Security Council Resolution 1701, drafted by France and the US in close consultation with the Israeli government, has paved the way for the militarization of Lebanon, under a bogus UN mandate.
The Next Phase of the Middle East War
Confirmed by official statements and military documents, the US in close coordination with Britain (and in consultation with its NATO partners), is planning to launch a war directed against Iran and Syria. US Ambassador to the UN John Bolton has already initiated the draft of a UN Security Council resolution with a view to imposing sanctions on Tehran for its alleged (nonexistent) nuclear weapons program. Whether this resolution is adopted is not the main issue. The US may decide to proceed in defiance of the Security Council, following a veto by Russia and/or China. The vote of France and Britain, among the permanent members has already been secured.
US military sources have confirmed that an aerial attack, pursuant to a sanctions regime on Iran, with or without UN approval, would involve a large scale deployment comparable to the US "shock and awe" bombing raids on Iraq in March 2003:
American air strikes on Iran would vastly exceed the scope of the 1981 Israeli attack on the Osiraq nuclear center in Iraq, and would more resemble the opening days of the 2003 air campaign against Iraq. Using the full force of operational B-2 stealth bombers, staging from Diego Garcia or flying direct from the United States, possibly supplemented by F-117 stealth fighters staging from al Udeid in Qatar or some other location in theater, the two-dozen suspect nuclear sites would be targeted.
Military planners could tailor their target list to reflect the preferences of the Administration by having limited air strikes that would target only the most crucial facilities ... or the United States could opt for a far more comprehensive set of strikes against a comprehensive range of WMD related targets, as well as conventional and unconventional forces that might be used to counterattack against US forces in Iraq
(See Globalsecurity.org at http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/iran-strikes.htm
The aerial bombing plans have been fully operational ("in an advanced state of readiness") since June 2005. The various components of the military operation are firmly under US Command, coordinated by the Pentagon and US Strategic Command Headquarters (USSTRATCOM) at the Offutt Air Force base in Nebraska.
In November 2004, US Strategic Command conducted a major exercise of a "global strike plan" entitled "Global Lightening". The latter involved a simulated attack using both conventional and nuclear weapons against a "fictitious enemy" [Iran]. Following the "Global Lightening" exercise, US Strategic Command declared "an advanced state of readiness".
The operational implementation of the Global Strike is called CONCEPT PLAN (CONPLAN) 8022. The latter is described as "an actual plan that the Navy and the Air Force translate into strike package for their submarines and bombers,'
The command structure of the operation is centralized and ultimately The Pentagon will decide on the sequence; " if and when" to launch military operations against Iran and Syria. Israeli military actions and those of other coalition partners including Turkey, would be carried out in close coordination with the Pentagon.
Ground War
While the threat of punitive aerial bombardments of Iran's nuclear facilities have been announced repeatedly by the Bush administration, recent developments suggest that an all out ground war is also under preparation.
CONPLAN constitutes only one component of the Middle East military agenda. CONPLAN 8022 does not contemplate a ground war. It posits "no boots on the ground", which was the initial assumption envisaged in relation to the proposed aerial attacks on Iran.
US and Israeli military planners are fully aware that the aerial "punitive bombings" will almost inevitably lead coalition forces into a ground war scenario in which they will have to confront Iranian and Syrian forces in the battlefield.
Tehran has confirmed that it will retaliate if attacked, in the form of ballistic missile strikes directed against Israel as well as against US military facilities in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Persian Gulf, which would immediately lead us into a scenario of military escalation and all out war.
Iranian troops could cross the Iran-Iraq border and confront coalition forces inside Iraq. Israeli troops and/or Special Forces could enter into Syria.
The foreign troops stationed in Lebanon under UN mandate would respond to the diktats of the US led coalition and the prior commitments reached with Washington and Tel Aviv in the context of the various military alliances (NATO-Israel, Turkey-Israel, GUUAM, etc).
War Games
These military preparations have also been marked, quite recently, by the conduct of war games.
In late August, Iran was involved in the conduct of war games in major regions of the country, including border areas with Turkey, Iraq, Azerbaijan, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Iran's Defense Minister General Mostafa Mohammad Najjar has confirmed the deployment of enhanced military capabilities including weapons systems and troops on the Iranian border: "[Iranian] forces are supervising all movements by trans-regional troops and their agents around the Iranian borders" (FARS news, 2 September 2006)
Barely acknowledged by the Western media, military exercises organized by Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan under the Collective Security Treaty Organization, (CSTO) were also launched in late August. These war games, officially tagged as part of a counter terrorism program, were conducted in response to US-Israeli military threats in the region including the planned attacks against Iran. (See Michel Chossudovsky, August 2006). In turn, China an Kazakhstan held concurrent war games under the auspices of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO).
Azerbaijan and neighboring Georgia have close military ties to Washington. Both countries are part of GUUAM, a military alliance with the US and NATO.
Turkey is a close ally of Israel. [See http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?con...&articleId=2906 ]. Since 2005, Israel has deployed Special Forces in the mountainous areas of Turkey bordering Iran and Syria with the collaboration of the Ankara government: Pakistan is also a close ally of the US and Britain. Georgia has a longstanding military cooperation agreement with the US and Israel. Meanwhile, the USS Enterprise, America's largest aircraft carrier is en route to the Persian Gulf.
Map; Copyright Eric Waddell, Global Research 2003
US Troop Build-up
US troops in Iraq have been increased to 140,000 as confirmed by recent Pentagon statements (Reuters, 2 September 2006) These plans have been coupled with a the compulsory recall of "inactive servicemen" as well as the expansion of mercenary forces. (Mahdi Darius Namzaroaya, August 2006)
The Pentagon justifies the troop build-up as part of a "routine" process of replacement and rotation, required in its ongoing war against "terrorists" in Iraq. The speeding up of military recruitment is also occurring in the core countries of the Anglo-American coalition including Great Britain. Australia and Canada (see also Recruiting Canada). Canada and Australia are aligned with the US. Australian Prime Minister John Howard as well as Canada's Steven Harper have confirmed their commitment to the US-Israeli war and have promised an expansion of the armed forces in their respective countries.
Meanwhile British troops stationed in Iraq have been redeployed to the Iranian border in southern Iraq. This redeployment has been casually presented by Britain's Ambassador to Iraq as part of a "crack down on smuggling and the entrance of weapons into Iraq from Iran".
While British officials are maintaining no desire or preparations for a conflict with Iran, more British troops are being mobilized and deployed to Iraq at the same time. The Light Infantry of the 2nd Battalion, another unit with rapid deployment capabilities, is deploying to the southern Iraqi border with Iran. The 2nd Battalion is being sent to Iraq under the pretext of working in the Rear Operations Battle Group which will provide escorts for military convoys and security for British forces and bases in Basra. (See Mahdi Darius Namzaroaya, August 2006)
The Role of Israel
In the wake of the war on Lebanon. Israel's military plans and pronouncements are increasingly explicit. Tel Aviv has announced plans to wage a pre-emptive "full-scale war" against Iran and Syria, implying the deployment of both air and ground force. These war plans are now said to at the top of the defense agenda:
"Israel is preparing for a possible war with both Iran and Syria, according to Israeli political and military sources."
(...)
“The challenge from Iran and Syria is now top of the Israeli defense agenda, higher than the Palestinian one,” said an Israeli defense source. Shortly before the war in Lebanon Major-General Eliezer Shkedi, the commander of the air force, was placed in charge of the “Iranian front”, a new position in the Israeli Defense Forces. His job will be to command any future strikes on Iran and Syria."
(...)
In the past we prepared for a possible military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities,” said one insider, “but Iran’s growing confidence after the war in Lebanon means we have to prepare for a full-scale war, in which Syria will be an important player.”
(...)
As a result of the change in the defense priorities, the budget for the Israeli forces in the West Bank and Gaza is to be reduced." (Sunday Times, 3 September 2006)
Media Disinformation
The Western media is beating the drums of war.
The Sunday Times views Israel's war plans as legitimate acts of self defense, to prevent Tehran from launching an all out nuclear attack on Israel: "Iran and Syria have ballistic missiles that can cover most of Israel, including Tel Aviv. An emergency budget has now been assigned to building modern shelters."
The fact that Iran does not possess nuclear weapons capabilities as confirmed by the IAEA report does not seem to be an issue for debate.
Media disinformation has contributed to creating an atmosphere of fear and intimidation. The announcement on August 10 by the British Home Office of a foiled large scale terror attack to simultaneously blow up as many as ten airplanes, conveys the impression that it is the Western World rather than the Middle East which is under attack.
Realities are twisted upside down. The disinformation campaign has gone into full gear. The British and US media are increasingly pointing towards "preemptive war" as an act of "self defense" against Al Qaeda and the State sponsors of terrorism, who are allegedly preparing a Second 911.
The underlying objective, through fear and intimidation, is ultimately to build public acceptance for the next stage of the Middle East "war on terrorism" which is directed against Syria and Iran.
The antiwar movement has also been weakened.
While China and Russia will oppose the US led war at the diplomatic level as well as at the UN Security Council, Washington has secured the support of France and Germany. While Russia and China have military cooperation agreements with Iran, they would most probably not would intervene militarily in favor of Iran.
NATO is broadly supportive of the US led military agenda. In February 2005, NATO signed a military cooperation agreement with Israel.
Nuclear Weapons against Iran
The use of tactical nuclear weapons by the US and Israel against Iran, is contemplated, ironically in retaliation for Iran's nonexistent nuclear weapons program.
The Bush administration's new nuclear doctrine contains specific "guidelines" which allow for "preemptive" nuclear strikes against "rogue enemies" which "possess" or are "developing" weapons of mass destruction (WMD). (2001 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) and Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations (DJNO)).
CONPLAN 8022, referred to above, is 'the overall umbrella plan for sort of the pre-planned strategic scenarios involving nuclear weapons.'
'It's specifically focused on these new types of threats -- Iran, North Korea -- proliferation and potentially terrorists too,' he said. 'There's nothing that says that they can't use CONPLAN 8022 in limited scenarios against Russian and Chinese targets.'(According to Hans Kristensen, of the Nuclear Information Project, quoted in Japanese economic News Wire, op cit)
The mission of JFCCSGS is to implement CONPLAN 8022, in other words to trigger a nuclear war with Iran.
The Commander in Chief, namely George W. Bush would instruct the Secretary of Defense, who would then instruct the Joint Chiefs of staff to activate CONPLAN 8022.
The use of nuclear weapons against Iran would be coordinated with Israel, which possesses a sophisticated nuclear arsenal.
The use of nuclear weapons by Israel or the US cannot be excluded, particularly in view of the fact that tactical nuclear weapons have now been reclassified as a variant of the conventional bunker buster bombs and are authorized for use in conventional war theaters. ("they are harmless to civilians because the explosion is underground").
In this regard, Israel and the US rather than Iran constitute a nuclear threat.
The World is at a Critical Crossroads
The Bush Administration has embarked upon a military adventure which threatens the future of humanity. This is not an overstatement. If aerial bombardments were to be launched against Iran, they would trigger a ground war and the escalation of the conflict to a much broader region. Even in the case of aerial and missile using conventional warheads, the bombings would unleash a nuclear nightmare resulting from the spread of nuclear radiation following the destruction of Iran's nuclear energy facilities.
Throughout history, the structure of military alliances has played a crucial role in triggering major military conflicts. In contrast to the situation prevailing prior to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, America's ongoing military adventure is now firmly supported by the Franco-German alliance. Moreover, Israel is slated to play a direct role in this military operation.
NATO is firmly aligned with the Anglo-American-Israeli military axis, which also includes Australia and Canada. In 2005, NATO signed a military cooperation agreement with Israel, and Israel has a longstanding bilateral military agreement with Turkey.
Iran has observer status in The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and is slated to become a full member of SCO. China and Russia have far-reaching military cooperation agreements with
China and Russia are firmly opposed to a US-led military operation in the diplomatic arena. While the US sponsored military plan threatens Russian and Chinese interests in Central Asia and the Caspian sea basin, it is unlikely that they would intervene militarily on the side of Iran or Syria.
The planned attack on Iran must be understood in relation to the existing active war theaters in the Middle East, namely Afghanistan, Iraq and Lebanon-Palestine.
The conflict could easily spread from the Middle East to the Caspian sea basin. It could also involve the participation of Azerbaijan and Georgia, where US troops are stationed.
Military action against Iran and Syria would directly involve Israel's participation, which in turn would trigger a broader war throughout the Middle East, not to mention the further implosion in the Palestinian occupied territories. Turkey is closely associated with the proposed aerial attacks.
If the US-UK-Israeli war plans were to proceed, the broader Middle East- Central Asian region would flare up, from the Eastern Mediterranean to the Afghan-Chinese border. At present, there are three distinct war theaters: Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine-Lebanon. An attack directed against Iran would serve to integrate these war theaters transforming the broader Middle East Central Asian region into an integrated war zone. (see map above)
In turn the US sponsored aerial bombardments directed against Iran could contribute to triggering a ground war characterized by Iranian attacks directed against coalition troops in Iraq. In turn, Israeli forces would enter into Syria.
An attack on Iran would have a direct impact on the resistance movement inside Iraq. It would also put pressure on America's overstretched military capabilities and resources in both the Iraqi and Afghan war theaters.
In other words, the shaky geopolitics of the Central Asia- Middle East region, the three existing war theaters in which America is currently, involved, the direct participation of Israel and Turkey, the structure of US sponsored military alliances, etc. raises the specter of a broader conflict.
The war against Iran is part of a longer term US military agenda which seeks to militarize the entire Caspian sea basin, eventually leading to the destabilization and conquest of the Russian Federation.
The Pentagon's Second 911
The economic and political dislocations resulting from this military agenda are far-reaching.
If the attacks directed against Iran and Syria were to proceed, martial law and/or a state of emergency could be declared in the US and possibly Britain on the pretext that the homeland is under attack by Iran sponsored terrorists. The purpose of these measures would essentially be to curb antiwar movement and provide legitimacy to an illegal war.
The Pentagon has intimated in this regard, in an official statement, that "another [9/11] attack could create both a justification and an opportunity to retaliate against some known targets [Iran and Syria]". In a timely statement, barely a few days following the onslaught of the bombing of Lebanon, Vice President Cheney reiterated his warning: "The enemy that struck on 9/11 is fractured and weakened, yet still lethal, still determined to hit us again" (Waterloo Courier, Iowa, 19 July 2006).
Reversing the Tide of War
The issues raised in this article do not necessarily imply that the war will take place.
What the analysis of official statments and military documents onfirms is that
a) the war is part of a political agenda and
military plans to launch an attack on Iran and Syria are "in an advanced stage of readiness". The issue is not whether the war will inevitably take place but what are the instruments at our disposal which will enable us to shunt and ultimately disarm this global military agenda.
War criminals occupy positions of authority. The citizenry is galvanized into supporting the rulers, who are "committed to their safety and well-being". Through media disinformation, war is given a humanitarian mandate.
The legitimacy of the war must be addressed. Antiwar sentiment alone does not disarm a military agenda. High ranking officials of the Bush administration, members of the military and the US Congress have been granted the authority to uphold an illegal war.
The corporate backers and sponsors of war and war crimes must also be targeted including the oil companies, the defense contractors, the financial institutions and the corporate media, which has become an integral part of the war propaganda machine.
There is a sense of urgency. In the weeks and months ahead, the antiwar movement must act, consistently, and address a number of key issues.
1. The role of media disinformation in sustaining the military agenda is crucial.
We will not succeed in our endeavours unless the propaganda apparatus is weakened and eventually dismantled. It is essential to inform our fellow citizens on the causes and consequences of the US-led war, not to mention the extensive war crimes and atrocities which are routinely obfuscated by the media. This is no easy task. It requires an effective counter-propaganda program which refutes mainstream media assertions.
It is essential that the relevant information and analysis reaches the broader public. The Western media is controlled by a handful of powerful business syndicates. The media conglomerates which control network TV and the printed press must be challenged through cohesive actions which reveal the lies and falsehoods.
2. There is opposition within the political establishment in the US as well as within the ranks of the Armed Forces.
While this opposition does not necessarily question to overall direction of US foreign policy, it is firmly opposed to military adventurism, including the use of nuclear weapons. These voices within the institutions of the State, the Military and the business establishment are important because they can be usefully channeled to discredit and ultimately dismantle the "war on terrorism" consensus. The broadest possible alliance of political and social forces is, therefore, required to prevent a military adventure which in a very real sense threatens the future of humanity.
3. The structure of military alliances must be addressed. A timely shift in military alliances could potentially reverse the course of history.
Whereas France and Germany are broadly supportive of the US led war, there are strong voices in both countries as well as within the European Union, which firmly oppose the US led military agenda, both at the grassroots level as well within the political system itself.
It is essential that the commitments made by European heads of government and heads of state, to Washington be cancelled or nullified, through pressure exerted at the appropriate political levels. This applies, In particular, to the unbending support of the Bush adminstration's military agenda by President Jacques Chirac and Chancellor Angela Merkel.
The weakening of the system of alliances which commit Western Europe to supporting the Anglo-American military axis, could indeed contribute reverse the tide. Washington would hesitate to wage a war on Iran without the support of France and Germany.
4. The holding of large antiwar rallies is important and essential. But in will not in itself reverse the tide of war unless it is accompanied by the development of a cohesive antiwar network.
What is required is a grass roots antiwar network, a mass movement at national and international levels, which challenges the legitimacy of the main military and political actors, as well as their corporate sponsors, and which would ultimately be instrumental in unseating those who rule in our name. The construction of this type of network will take time to develop. Initially it should focus of developing an antiwar stance within existing citizens' organizations (e.g. trade unions, community organizations, professional regroupings, student federations, municipal councils, etc.).
5. 9/11 plays a crucial and central role in the propaganda campaign.
The threat of an Al Qaeda "Attack on America" is being used profusely by the Bush administration and its indefectible British ally to galvanize public opinion in support of a global military agenda. Revealing the lies behind 911 would serve to undermine the legitimacy of the "war on terrorism". Without 911, the war criminals in high office do not have a leg to stand on. The entire national security construct collapses like a deck of cards. Known and documented, the "Islamic terror network" is a creation of the US intelligence apparatus. Several of the terror alerts were based on fake intelligence as revealed in the recent foiled "liquid bomb attack". There is evidence that the several of the terrorist "mass casualty events" which have resulted in civilian casualties were triggered by the military and/or intelligence services. The "war on terrorism" is bogus. The 911 narrative as conveyed by the 911 Commission report is fabricated. The Bush administration is involved in acts of cover-up and complicity at the highest levels of government.
-- --
Michel Chossudovsky is the author of the international best seller "The Globalization of Poverty " published in eleven languages. He is Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa and Director of the Center for Research on Globalization. His most recent book is America’s "War on Terrorism", Global Research, 2005.
Binyamin Netanyahu is coming to DC as I type this to visit Cheney and some US Senators, only JP has covered this, and I have seen zero in the US media. Is is me, or shouldn't someone in the media here cover this and ask who is attending and find out what will be discussed?
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid...rticle/ShowFull
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid...rticle/ShowFull
INDIVIDUALS, SMALL GROUPS CITED AS TERRORIST THREATS: U.S. STRATEGY CALLS DEMOCRACY A WEAPON - KAREN DEYOUNG (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 6): The National Strategy for Combating Terrorism says that "[t]hrough outreach programs and public diplomacy we will reveal the terrorists' violent extremist ideology for what it is -- a form of totalitarianism following in the path of fascism and Nazism."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0501399_pf.html
SEE ALSO
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6090500481.html
FIVE YEARS AFTER: IS THE U.S. WINNING THIS WAR? -- AL QAEDA HAS SUFFERED SETBACKS, BUT AMERICA MAY HAVE LOST GROUND IN THE LONG-TERM FIGHT, EXPERTS SAY. STATISTICS CAN'T TELL THE FULL STORY - DOYLE MCMANUS (LOS ANGELES TIMES, SEPTEMBER 10): The Bush administration's aim isn't to persuade the world's Muslims to like the U.S. -- the focus of the administration's unsuccessful early "public diplomacy" efforts. Instead, the main goal is to de-legitimize terrorism -- to convince Muslims that Bin Laden and his followers threaten Muslim communities as much as they threaten New York or Washington.
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na...1,4687707.story
COUNTERTERROR STRATEGY LACKS COHERENCE OXFORD ANALYTICA (FORBES, SEPTEMBER 12): Most of the counter-terrorism effort has gone into "hard power" tasks. Public diplomacy and activities aimed at communicating a more positive message to Muslim populations and social policies for countering the marginalization of Muslim communities have been comparatively neglected.
http://www.forbes.com/home/business/2006/0...0912oxford.html
BUSH WARNS OF ENDURING TERROR THREAT: WORDS OF BIN LADEN, ALLIES SHOW THEIR GOALS, HE SAYS - MICHAEL A. FLETCHER (WASHINGTON, SEPTEMBER 6): The bipartisan Center for Strategic and International Studies issued a report saying, inter alia, that the administration's attempts at public diplomacy are "undermined by perceived U.S. unilateralism."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0500312_pf.html
SEE ALSO
http://www.jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/200...cus/focus4.html
WHAT I HAVE LEARNED ABOUT PUBLIC DIPLOMACY - JANET STEELE (JAKARTA POST, SEPTEMBER 12): Mutual understanding is not about political expediency or promoting narrow U.S. policy interests, it is about listening to one another and respecting differences. This is the real meaning of public diplomacy.
http://www.thejakartapost.com/detaileditor...0911.F04&irec=3
GIVING MUSLIMS HOPE - THOMAS H. KEAN AND LEE H. HAMILTON (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 10): We should cultivate educational and cultural exchanges, and vigorous public diplomacy.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/10/opinion/...agewanted=print
FIVE YEARS FROM GROUND ZERO UNITY, LIES IN RUINS - ALEX MASSIE (SCOTSMAN, SEPTEMBER 10): Bush's efforts at public diplomacy have been every bit as feeble in the Arab world as they have been with regard to its European allies.
http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=1336062006
BUSH'S HEZBOLLAH HANGOVER - ASHRAF FAHIM (ASIA TIMES, SEPTEMBER 6): Rice clearly realizes that when it comes to US foreign policy in the Middle East, it is possible to fool a lot of Americans a lot of the time. It is harder, however, to fool anybody in the Arab world any of the time, rendering stillborn US efforts at public diplomacy.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HI06Ak02.html
VIA
http://www.kimandrewelliott.com/
JOHNS HOPKINS SOURCES FOR SEPT. 11 ANNIVERSARY COVERAGE PRESS RELEASE (ASCRIBE SEPTEMBER 6): Waleed Hazbun, assistant professor of political science: "I am interested in the failure of American public diplomacy efforts. ... The more the Bush Administration seeks to define its global strategy in terms of the global war on terrorism or a fight against 'islamo-fascism,' rather than engaging with the understandings and interests of the peoples of the Middle East, the less likely to the U.S. will be able to succeed in 'the struggle of ideas.'"
http://newswire.ascribe.org/cgi-bin/behold...r=2006&public=0
REMEMBERING SEPT. 11 ONCE MORE, BUT NO CHANGE - HASAN ABU NIMAH (JORDAN TIMES, SEPTEMBER 6): The United States has made repeated attempts to paper over the reasons why people in the Middle East view it with increasing anger and disapproval -- by using "public diplomacy," US-government funded radio and television and other tools. All these efforts have failed miserably, and the underlying issues -- US support for Israeli colonialism and US opposition to genuinely democratic elections --- keep reemerging.
http://www.menafn.com/qn_news_story_s.asp?...=1093126212#top
CAN THE WEST DEFEAT THE ISLAMIST THREAT? HERE ARE TEN REASONS WHY NOT - DAVID SELBOURNE (TIMES, U.K., SEPTEMBER 8): If the war declared by al-Qaeda and other Islamists is under way war, one of ten good reasons why, as things stand, Islam will not be defeated in it is the extent of political division in the non-Muslim world about what is afoot. Divided counsels have dictated everything from reliance on 'public diplomacy' to 'aking out Islamic sites, Mecca included.'http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,6-2349195,00.html
U.S. PUBLIC RELATIONS ON IRAQ WAR NEED TRUTH, HONESTY ABOUT AMERICA - STEVE HAMMONS (UFODIGEST, CANADA - SEPTEMBER 6): A sound and effective public diplomacy needs to communicate truthfully and honestly when implementing persuasion operations and programs
http://www.ufodigest.com/news/0906/iraqwar.html
THE LONG WAR: A SELF-DEFEATING PROPHECY - MICHAEL VLAHOS (ASIA TIMES, SEPTEMBER 9): In Saudi Arabia, reforms are going nowhere fast, and cannot be usefully encouraged by the United States, except at the ethereal margins of "public diplomacy."
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/HI09Aa01.html
GAO SEEKS STRATEGIC PLAN ON BROADCASTS TO ARAB WORLD ASSOCIATED PRESS (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 6): Despite claims of success by the Bush administration, radio broadcasts and satellite telecasts by the U.S. government to the Arab world lack reliable audience estimates and accuracy checks. That is the conclusion of the Government Accountability Office, Congress's watchdog agency.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6090501206.html
FIVE YEARS AFTER 9/11: U.S. DIPLOMAT CHARTS PROGRESS OF WAR ON TERROR - (RFE/RL, SEPTEMBER 8): U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy Colleen Graffy, visiting RFE/RL headquarters in Prague ahead of the fifth anniversary of the September 11, 2001, attacks against the United States, spoke with RFE/RL correspondent Eugene Tomiuc.
http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2006/...345db6a1e4.html
U.S. SEEKS TO ENCOURAGE IRANIAN VISITS - GEORGE GEDDA, ASSOCIATED PRESS (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 6): The Bush administration wants to open cultural exchanges with archrival Iran this fall despite tensions between Washington and Tehran about its nuclear program.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0600265_pf.html
U.S. SCHOOLS COMPETE FOR SAUDI STUDENTS - GARANCE BURKE, ASSOCIATED PRESS (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 9): Thousands of students from Saudi Arabia are enrolling on college campuses across the United States this semester under a new educational exchange program brokered by President Bush and Saudi King Abdullah.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0900139_pf.html
THE NEXT BOLD MOVE: IT'S TIME FOR BUSH TO REACH OUT TO SHIITES - WILLIAM MCKENZIE (DALLASNEWS.COM, SEPTEMBER 12): Our diplomats will need to think about more than political leaders and fervently court religious ones. This will require Karen Hughes' public diplomacy shop to get ambassadors thinking differently, which she's tried to do.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dw...5b972.html'
ARAB AMERICA'S SEPTEMBER 11 - MOUSTAFA BAYOUMI (NATION, NY, SEPTEMBER 7): In June Karen Hughes recruited four Muslim American "civilian ambassadors" to travel to Europe and display how warmly the United States welcomes its Muslims. But the question of whether American Muslims have more freedom than their co-religionists do in Europe or elsewhere is not really the issue.
http://www.pej.org/html/modules.php?op=mod...order=0&thold=0
(scroll down link for item)
THE NEW AND MAYBE IMPROVED KAREN HUGHES SHOW GOES ON THE ROAD - AL KAMEN (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 11): We're told public diplomacy czarina Ms. Hughes is hitting the road next month to Europe, the Middle East and South Asia. Let's hope with some new material.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1000797_pf.html
IRAN'S FORMER PRESIDENT TAKES VEILED SWIPE AT BUSH - WILLIAM DOUGLAS, MCCLATCHY NEWSPAPERS (KNIGHT-RIDDER WASHINGTON BUREAU, SEPTEMBER 7): Mehrzad Boroujerdi, a political science professor at Syracuse University: "In a subtle way, Iran is trying to send a signal that, at least, let's engage in public diplomacy."
http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/15463914.htm
ISRAEL TO RE-BRAND ITSELF IN THE WORLD (ISRAEL TODAY, ISRAEL, SEPTEMBER 12): Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi: "[F]or a long time Israel has ignored the part of public diplomacy because of lack of resources and it's about time to invest more in the battle for public image. The return we will get will be greater than anyone could imagine"
http://www.israeltoday.co.il/default.aspx?tabid=178&nid=9460
OSAMA'S SPIN LESSONS - JOHN TIERNEY (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 12): Once again Osama has beaten America at an American game: public relations. He may be sitting powerlessly in a cave, but his image is as scary as ever.
http://select.nytimes.com/2006/09/12/opini...agewanted=print
PAID SUBSCRIPTION
DARK MILESTONE: MORE AMERICANS HAVE NOW DIED IN IRAQ THAN DIED ON 9/11 R.J. ESKOW (HUFFINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 11)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rj-eskow/dar...html?view=print
SITUATION CALLED DIRE IN WEST IRAQ: ANBAR IS LOST POLITICALLY, MARINE ANALYST SAYS - THOMAS E. RICKS (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 11)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1001204_pf.html
US INTEL REPORT: IRAQ'S ANBAR PROVINCE 'POLITICALLY LOST': CHIEF MARINE ANALYST SAYS REGION'S POLITICAL VACUUM BEING FILLED BY AL QAEDA - TOM REGAN (CSMONITOR.COM, SEPTEMBER 12)
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0911/dailyUpdate.html
US "DEFEATED POLITICALLY" IN AL-ANBAR - JUAN COLE (INFORMED COMMENT: THOUGHTS ON THE MIDDLE EAST, HISTORY, AND RELIGION, SEPTEMBER 11): 'A painful realization is setting in that it is more and more likely that Iraq is going to be partitioned. ... I continue to resist it.'
http://www.juancole.com/
(scroll down text for item)
UNWINDING BUSH: HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE TO CORRECT THE PRESIDENT'S MISTAKES? -JONATHAN RAUCH (REASON, SEPTEMBER 11): The Iraq adventure fueled a precipitous decline in America's image abroad, and Bush's pugnacious style during his first term and his tin ear for foreign opinion made a bad situation worse.
http://www.reason.com/rauch/091106.shtml
PRESIDENT BUSH'S REALITY EDITORIAL (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 12): The nation needs to hear a workable plan to stabilize a fractured, disintegrating country -- Iraq -- and end the violence. If such a strategy exists, it seems unlikely that Mr. Bush could see it through the filter of his fantasies.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/12/opinion/...agewanted=print
EVEN DATING IS PERILOUS IN POLARIZED BAGHDAD: RISING TENSION BETWEEN SUNNIS, SHIITES NEARLY PUTS END TO MIXED RELATIONSHIPS - AMIT R. PALEY (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 12)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6091101044.html
REINFORCE BAGHDAD - WILLIAM KRISTOL AND RICH LOWRY (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 12): More U.S. troops in Iraq would improve our chances of winning a decisive battle at a decisive moment.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1100879_pf.html
MORAL FORCE: IN IRAQ, THE UNITED STATES ISN'T THE PROBLEM; IT'S THE SOLUTION - LAWRENCE F. KAPLAN (NEW REPUBLIC, SEPTEMBER 12): The moral cost of abandoning a country we have turned inside-out seems not to have made the slightest impression on opinion-makers.
http://www.tnr.com/docprint.mhtml?i=w060911&s=kaplan091206
THE BEST WAR EVER YOUTUBE (SEPTEMBER 9): This video chronicles how the U.S. defeated itself by believing its own propaganda that the invasion and occupation of Iraq would be a cakewalk.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qGAqA-muYU
CALLING IRAN'S BLUFF: A HISTORY LESSON FOR THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION - FRED KAPLAN (SLATE, SEPTEMBER 11): Why not take up the Iranians on every diplomatic gambit they throw at us, if just to show the world that we're trying to settle this conflict and (assuming they back away from each gambit once we pursue it) the Iranians aren't? At the very least, we might regain some much-needed credibility.
http://www.slate.com/id/2149362/
STARTING ANOTHER WAR - NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 12): Iran's government is so corrupt, tyrannical and incompetent that it will eventually collapse -- unless we attack its nuclear sites and trigger a nationalistic surge of support for the regime.
http://select.nytimes.com/2006/09/12/opini...agewanted=print
PAID SUBSCRIPTION
THE 'CONFUSION' IS IN BUSH POLICY - TRUDY RUBIN (BALTIMORE SUN, SEPTEMBER 12): If we bomb Iran, Tehran is bound to retaliate against U.S. interests in Iraq, where it has many agents and is allied with Iraq's Shiite leaders. Bombing Iran would doom any slim U.S. hopes of salvaging stability in Baghdad.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/o...-oped-headlines
WOBBLY DIPLOMACY: WHAT HAPPENED TO THE SUPPORT THAT THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION SAID IT HAD FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST IRAN? EDITORIAL (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 11): The resistance to sanctions of Russia and China only raises the chances that President Bush will see force as the only way to stop an Iranian bomb.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1000889_pf.html
PROXY TERRORISM FROM IRAN: IT'S TIME TO BRING THE FIGHT AGAINST TERRORISTS TO THE COUNTRIES THAT ARM AND FUND THEM - NATAN SHARANSKY (LOS ANGELES TIMES, SEPTEMBER 12): By failing to hold Iran accountable for its brazen support of Hezbollah, the free world has undermined a central pillar in the war on terror and given the Iranian regime a huge weapon for achieving its ambitions.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-...inion-rightrail
WAR WITHIN WAR - MAX RODENBECK (NEW YORK REVIEW OF BOOKS, SEPTEMBER 21): For the time being, Israel's bungled offensive appears to have empowered the forces opposed to it, and opposed to a regional Pax Americana.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/19250
ANTI-JUDAISM: JEWS ARE UNDER ATTACK. AND NO ONE SEEMS MUCH CONCERNED - WILLIAM KRISTOL (WEEKLY STANDARD, SEPTEMBER 11): University of Chicago political science professor John Mearsheimer, along with his sidekick, Stephen Walt of Harvard's Kennedy School of Government spoke to the Council on American-Islamic Relations and attacked the "Israel lobby" for its pernicious deeds, singling out several Jews who served or serve in the Bush administration. Much of the world is in denial about the jihadist threat.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Publ...5aslgc.asp?pg=2
HOPE FLICKERS IN THE MIDDLE EAST: IF HAMAS TRULY DOES ACCEPT A TWO-STATE SOLUTION, IT'S TIME FOR A CARROT EDITORIAL (LOS ANGELES TIMES, SEPTEMBER 12): As Hamas makes concrete steps toward peace, it should get real economic benefits. Moving too quickly, as the Europeans favor, or too slowly, as the Americans and Israelis tend to do, could extinguish this latest glimmer of hope.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-...pinion-leftrail
U.S. MUST ACT TO END PALESTINIAN HEALTH CRISIS - MICHAEL MORSE (BALTIMORE SUN, SEPTEMBER 12)
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/o...-oped-headlines
TURNING ISLAMISTS INTO DEMOCRATS - MONITOR'S VIEW (CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, SEPTEMBER 12): A factor now at work in the Palestinian-Israeli saga that seems to be pushing the concerned parties in the right direction has been the pressure of international sanctions led by the United States, the European Union, and Israel.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0912/p08s02-comv.html
THE WAR WITH AL-QAEDA - JUAN COLE (INFORMED COMMENT: THOUGHTS ON THE MIDDLE EAST, HISTORY, AND RELIGION, SEPTEMBER 11): The Arab world mostly just dislikes US policy, mainly because of kneejerk support for Israeli depredations against Palestinians. The dislike doesn't change that much, though we reached a nadir in 2003-2004.
http://www.juancole.com/
(scroll down text for item)
A NEW MIDDLE EAST - ROBERT MALLEY (NEW YORK REVIEW OF BOOKS, SEPTEMBER 21): Arab public opinion is increasingly radicalized and governments allied with the US stand doubly discredited. America's standing in the region may well recover, but it is increasingly difficult to see how, or when.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/19301
FIVE YEARS AFTER 9/11: A SHIFTED VIEW OF THE WORLD: THE WINNERS AND LOSERS THAT ARE STILL CHURNING THE WORLD'S POLITICS - PETER GRIER AND MARK RICE-OXLEY (CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, SEPTEMBER 11): While Europe may have become a target and center of operations for terrorist cells, the US and Islam are the two poles around which 21st-century geopolitics may increasingly revolve.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0911/p01s02-usgn.html
ARAB REFLECTIONS ON THE FIFTH ANNIVERSARY OF 9/11 MARC LYNCH (ABU AARDVACK, SEPTEMBER 11): It shouldn't be surprising that most Arabs continue to pour scorn on Bush and his approach to the war on terror.
http://abuaardvark.typepad.com/abuaardvark...reflection.html
BLAMING THE VICTIM: WHEN IT COMES TO 9/11 THE ARAB MEDIA IGNORES THE ATTACK AND CONCENTRATES ON THE AMERICAN RESPONSE TO IT - MOHAMMED FADHIL (OPINION JOURNAL FROM THE WALL STREET JOURNAL EDITORIAL PAGE, SEPTEMBER 12)
http://www.opinionjournal.com/federation/f...e/?id=110008928
HOW SAFE A WORLD? EDITORIAL (BOSTON GLOBE, SEPTEMBER 11): Al Qaeda's appeal to many Muslims has more to do with the perception that the United States has become an oppressor than with the particulars of the group's intolerant world-view.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial...a_world?mode=PF
THE WAR FOR ISLAM: OSAMA BIN LADEN MAY GO DOWN IN HISTORY NOT ONLY AS THE MURDEROUS CRIMINAL WHO DECLARED HOLY WAR ON THE UNITED STATES, BUT ALSO AS A RADICAL FIGURE IN WHAT HAS COME TO BE CALLED THE ISLAMIC REFORMATION -- THE EPIC STRUGGLE TO DEFINE THE FAITH OF OVER A BILLION PEOPLE - REZA ASLAN (BOSTON GLOBE, SEPTEMBER 10)
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/art...r_islam?mode=PF
WHOSE WAR ON TERROR? - MAI YAMANI (TOMPAINE.COM, SEPTEMBER 11): The Bush administration, having proclaimed a war on terror, invaded and occupied countries and yet failed to see that these events were being linked in the eyes of people in the region.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/09/1...r_on_terror.php
STATE OF TERRORISM ADDRESS: WHAT WOULD OSAMA BIN LADEN SAY TO JIHADISTS FIVE YEARS LATER? - BRIAN MICHAEL JENKINS (LOS ANGELES TIMES, SEPTEMBER 11): "For us, it [the first truly global jihad] is a mere instant in a conflict that began centuries ago and will last until Judgment Day."
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-op-...inion-rightrail
A PROVOCATIVE LOOK AT THE IMAGES OF 9/11 [REVIEW OF 'WATCHING THE WORLD CHANGE: THE STORIES BEHIND THE IMAGES OF 9/11' BY DAVID FRIEND] - DAVID GREENBERG (CHICAGO TRIBUNE, SEPTEMBER 10): Modern terrorism hinges on spectacle, on getting the whole world to watch a monstrous event.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/boo...1,5307261.story
THE REAL JACK BAUERS: THERE ARE REAL REASONS WE HAVEN'T BEEN ATTACKED AGAIN - PETER KIRSANOW (NATIONAL REVIEW, SEPTEMBER 11): Many of the victories against terrorists have been won by the military?s elite units -- special-forces/counterterrorism units and others that the media knows little, if anything about.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OTE3M...2ViZTZjYWM5YWQ=
REMEMBERING THE 'BLESSED TERROR' - SUZANNE FIELDS (WASHINGTON TIMES, SEPTEMBER 1): The radical Islamic theology appeals to death, the "blessed terror."
http://www.washtimes.com/functions/print.p...10-101234-1321r
WAR OF WORDS - MICHELLE MALKIN (WASHINGTON TIMES, SEPTEMBER 11): Jihadis: these are our enemies -- from Mohamed Atta and company to the Butchers of Beslan, to the throat-slitters in Karachi and Baghdad and Mindanao, to the bombers of Bali, Madrid and London, to their funders and imams and enablers worldwide.
http://www.washtimes.com/functions/print.p...10-102745-1881r
MILESTONE NO. 5 - JOHN CAREY (WASHINGTON TIMES, SEPTEMBER 11): The war on terror we are engaged in may best carry this new definition: We will do what we have to do, on all levels throughout the world, to keep the enemy on the run, off-balance and living in fear.
http://www.washtimes.com/functions/print.p...10-102742-6703r
THE THREAT THEN AND NOW - ED ROYCE (WASHINGTON TIMES, SEPTEMBER 11): All means of national power must be harnessed to combat radical Islam.
(Ed Royce, California Republican, is a member of the U.S. House of Representatives.)
http://www.washtimes.com/functions/print.p...10-102740-2599r
SOLIDARITY - CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS (WALL STREET JOURNAL, SEPTEMBER 11): Clerical fanaticism means to fight a war which can only have one victor. "We" -- and our allies -- simply have to become more ruthless and more experienced.
http://online.wsj.com/article_print/SB1157...6550358908.html
PAID SUBSCRIPTION
LIKE THAT DAY ON 9/11, FAITH REMAINS A FIRST RESPONDER - JANET HORTON (CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, SEPTEMBER 11): The raw willpower of the terrorists will never overcome the courage and faith of the American people.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0911/p09s01-coop.html
THE END OF CIVILIZATION - JAMES CARROLL (BOSTON GLOBE, SEPTEMBER 11): America's enemy has triumphed already in the way Americans regard one another as enemies.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial...ization?mode=PF
LOSING THE WAR ON TERROR: WHY MILITANTS ARE BEATING TECHNOLOGY FIVE YEARS AFTER SEPT. 11 - AHMED RASHID (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 11): Guerrillas are learning faster than Western armies, and the West makes appalling strategic mistakes while the extremists make brilliant tactical moves.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1001145_pf.html
9/11/06 EDITORIAL (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 11): The war against terror we meant to fight in Afghanistan is at best stuck in neutral, with the Taliban resurgent and the best economic news involving a bumper crop of opium. Iraq, which had nothing to do with 9/11 when it was invaded, is now a breeding ground for a new generation of terrorists.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/11/opinion/...agewanted=print
THINKING BEYOND VIOLENCE - AZIZ HUQ (TOMPAINE.COM, SEPTEMBER 11): America's continued support of undemocratic regimes, and its failure to support real democracies, is today tilling the soil once more for a new crop of jihadists.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/09/1...nd_violence.php
BIN LADEN'S VICTORY - RICHARD COHEN (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 12): By using torture, by the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison, by employing "extraordinary renditions" of suspects to countries where they could be tortured, by insisting on going it almost alone in Iraq, by telling the international community to shove it, by declaring a war for an idée fixe -- this fierce obsession with Hussein goes back a long way -- the United States has made itself reviled in much of the world.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1100880_pf.html
WHAT WE LOST AFTER 9/11 - HELENA COBBAN (TOMPAINE.COM, SEPTEMBER 11): In the name of what they called their "Global War on Terror" the Bush administration proceeded to invade and occupy two distant countries, to subvert the governance structures of many others, establish a globe-girdling network of "black-hole" prisons into which suspects disappeared without trial, and assault many of our liberties here at home.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/09/1...t_after_911.php
THE DAY THAT CHANGED EVERYTHING WASN'T 9/11 - IRA CHERNUS (TOMDISPATCH, SEPTEMBER 10): There is a growing awareness that the Bush Global War on Terror is doing more harm than good.
http://www.tomdispatch.com/index.mhtml?pid=119758
GAPING HOLES IN THE 9/11 NARRATIVE: FIVE YEARS OUT FROM THE ATTACKS, WHY DO WE STILL KNOW SO LITTLE ABOUT WHAT REALLY HAPPENED THAT DAY? - ROBERT SCHEER (TRUTHDIG, SEPTEMBER 11/COMMON DREAMS): Despite this sorry record of neglect in Southwest Asia and the creation of a quagmire and recruiting poster for terrorism in Iraq, Bush once again arrogantly asserts that his policies have made us safer.
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0911-25.htm
NOW IT'S UP TO THE PEOPLE...- THE CENTRALITY OF WAR IN THE PRESIDENCY OF GEORGE W. BUSH - COL. DAN SMITH (COUNTERPUNCH, SEPTEMBER 11): After five years of the permanent war presidency, the U.S. and the world appear neither safer nor better.
http://www.counterpunch.org/smith09112006.html
PROMISES NOT KEPT - PAUL KRUGMAN (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 11): The perpetrators of 9/11 are still at large, five years later, and that they have re-established a large safe haven.
http://select.nytimes.com/2006/09/11/opini...agewanted=print
PAID SUBSCRIPTION
A WAR OF WORDS - EUGENE ROBINSON (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 12): By far the most fateful post-Sept. 11 coinage is "war on terrorism." The phrase that has come to define our era is entirely suspect, except perhaps the "on."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1100883_pf.html
THE NEVER-ENDING WAR: THE PRESIDENT USES THE FIFTH ANNIVERSARY OF OUR NATIONAL TRAGEDY TO PROMISE A GLOBAL CONFLICT THAT WILL LAST DECADES - WALTER SHAPIRO (SALON, SEPTEMBER 12)
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2006/...eech/print.html
HOW BAD IS HE?: BUSH RAN AS A MODERATE, TACKED RIGHT AND GOVERNED INEFFECTUALLY -- BEFORE 9/11. SINCE THEN HE'S BECOME THE MOST RADICAL AMERICAN PRESIDENT IN HISTORY -- AND ARGUABLY THE WORST - SIDNEY BLUMENTHAL (SALON, SEPTEMBER 12): Bush used the "global war on terrorism" to impose a "unitary executive" of absolute power, disdainful of the Congress and brushing aside the judicial branch when he felt it necessary In foreign policy.
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/09/...erpt/print.html
9/11/06: FIVE YEARS LATER, SOME COMPLACENCY HAS RETURNED, BUT WITH THE NEW KNOWLEDGE THAT OUR EASILY DISTRACTED OPENNESS IS ALSO A STRENGTH EDITORIAL (LOS ANGELES TIMES, SEPTEMBER 11): In Washington, the war on terror has been institutionalized, like the war on poverty, or cancer: something for politicians to talk about while the rest of us go about our business.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-...pinion-leftrail
AMERICA'S WARRIOR NATION - THE LEGACY OF 9/11: THE SHORTCOMINGS OF THE AMERICAN LEADER WERE ALARMINGLY EXPOSED ON THE DAY THE TERRORISTS STRUCK. HE AND HIS ACOLYTES ARE NOW LEADING THEIR EMPIRE TOWARDS PERMANENT CONFLICT WITH ISLAM - GORE VIDAL (INDEPENDENT, SEPTEMBER 10)
http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentat...icle1433329.ece
PAID SUBSCRIPTION
5 YEARS AFTER 9/11: THE GROWTH OF SUICIDE TERRORISM - ROBERT A. PAPE (CHICAGO TRIBUNE, SEPTEMBER 11): Suicide terrorism is mainly a response to foreign occupation rather than a product of Islamic fundamentalism.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion...ncommentary-hed
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0501399_pf.html
SEE ALSO
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6090500481.html
FIVE YEARS AFTER: IS THE U.S. WINNING THIS WAR? -- AL QAEDA HAS SUFFERED SETBACKS, BUT AMERICA MAY HAVE LOST GROUND IN THE LONG-TERM FIGHT, EXPERTS SAY. STATISTICS CAN'T TELL THE FULL STORY - DOYLE MCMANUS (LOS ANGELES TIMES, SEPTEMBER 10): The Bush administration's aim isn't to persuade the world's Muslims to like the U.S. -- the focus of the administration's unsuccessful early "public diplomacy" efforts. Instead, the main goal is to de-legitimize terrorism -- to convince Muslims that Bin Laden and his followers threaten Muslim communities as much as they threaten New York or Washington.
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na...1,4687707.story
COUNTERTERROR STRATEGY LACKS COHERENCE OXFORD ANALYTICA (FORBES, SEPTEMBER 12): Most of the counter-terrorism effort has gone into "hard power" tasks. Public diplomacy and activities aimed at communicating a more positive message to Muslim populations and social policies for countering the marginalization of Muslim communities have been comparatively neglected.
http://www.forbes.com/home/business/2006/0...0912oxford.html
BUSH WARNS OF ENDURING TERROR THREAT: WORDS OF BIN LADEN, ALLIES SHOW THEIR GOALS, HE SAYS - MICHAEL A. FLETCHER (WASHINGTON, SEPTEMBER 6): The bipartisan Center for Strategic and International Studies issued a report saying, inter alia, that the administration's attempts at public diplomacy are "undermined by perceived U.S. unilateralism."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0500312_pf.html
SEE ALSO
http://www.jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/200...cus/focus4.html
WHAT I HAVE LEARNED ABOUT PUBLIC DIPLOMACY - JANET STEELE (JAKARTA POST, SEPTEMBER 12): Mutual understanding is not about political expediency or promoting narrow U.S. policy interests, it is about listening to one another and respecting differences. This is the real meaning of public diplomacy.
http://www.thejakartapost.com/detaileditor...0911.F04&irec=3
GIVING MUSLIMS HOPE - THOMAS H. KEAN AND LEE H. HAMILTON (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 10): We should cultivate educational and cultural exchanges, and vigorous public diplomacy.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/10/opinion/...agewanted=print
FIVE YEARS FROM GROUND ZERO UNITY, LIES IN RUINS - ALEX MASSIE (SCOTSMAN, SEPTEMBER 10): Bush's efforts at public diplomacy have been every bit as feeble in the Arab world as they have been with regard to its European allies.
http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=1336062006
BUSH'S HEZBOLLAH HANGOVER - ASHRAF FAHIM (ASIA TIMES, SEPTEMBER 6): Rice clearly realizes that when it comes to US foreign policy in the Middle East, it is possible to fool a lot of Americans a lot of the time. It is harder, however, to fool anybody in the Arab world any of the time, rendering stillborn US efforts at public diplomacy.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HI06Ak02.html
VIA
http://www.kimandrewelliott.com/
JOHNS HOPKINS SOURCES FOR SEPT. 11 ANNIVERSARY COVERAGE PRESS RELEASE (ASCRIBE SEPTEMBER 6): Waleed Hazbun, assistant professor of political science: "I am interested in the failure of American public diplomacy efforts. ... The more the Bush Administration seeks to define its global strategy in terms of the global war on terrorism or a fight against 'islamo-fascism,' rather than engaging with the understandings and interests of the peoples of the Middle East, the less likely to the U.S. will be able to succeed in 'the struggle of ideas.'"
http://newswire.ascribe.org/cgi-bin/behold...r=2006&public=0
REMEMBERING SEPT. 11 ONCE MORE, BUT NO CHANGE - HASAN ABU NIMAH (JORDAN TIMES, SEPTEMBER 6): The United States has made repeated attempts to paper over the reasons why people in the Middle East view it with increasing anger and disapproval -- by using "public diplomacy," US-government funded radio and television and other tools. All these efforts have failed miserably, and the underlying issues -- US support for Israeli colonialism and US opposition to genuinely democratic elections --- keep reemerging.
http://www.menafn.com/qn_news_story_s.asp?...=1093126212#top
CAN THE WEST DEFEAT THE ISLAMIST THREAT? HERE ARE TEN REASONS WHY NOT - DAVID SELBOURNE (TIMES, U.K., SEPTEMBER 8): If the war declared by al-Qaeda and other Islamists is under way war, one of ten good reasons why, as things stand, Islam will not be defeated in it is the extent of political division in the non-Muslim world about what is afoot. Divided counsels have dictated everything from reliance on 'public diplomacy' to 'aking out Islamic sites, Mecca included.'http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,6-2349195,00.html
U.S. PUBLIC RELATIONS ON IRAQ WAR NEED TRUTH, HONESTY ABOUT AMERICA - STEVE HAMMONS (UFODIGEST, CANADA - SEPTEMBER 6): A sound and effective public diplomacy needs to communicate truthfully and honestly when implementing persuasion operations and programs
http://www.ufodigest.com/news/0906/iraqwar.html
THE LONG WAR: A SELF-DEFEATING PROPHECY - MICHAEL VLAHOS (ASIA TIMES, SEPTEMBER 9): In Saudi Arabia, reforms are going nowhere fast, and cannot be usefully encouraged by the United States, except at the ethereal margins of "public diplomacy."
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/HI09Aa01.html
GAO SEEKS STRATEGIC PLAN ON BROADCASTS TO ARAB WORLD ASSOCIATED PRESS (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 6): Despite claims of success by the Bush administration, radio broadcasts and satellite telecasts by the U.S. government to the Arab world lack reliable audience estimates and accuracy checks. That is the conclusion of the Government Accountability Office, Congress's watchdog agency.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6090501206.html
FIVE YEARS AFTER 9/11: U.S. DIPLOMAT CHARTS PROGRESS OF WAR ON TERROR - (RFE/RL, SEPTEMBER 8): U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy Colleen Graffy, visiting RFE/RL headquarters in Prague ahead of the fifth anniversary of the September 11, 2001, attacks against the United States, spoke with RFE/RL correspondent Eugene Tomiuc.
http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2006/...345db6a1e4.html
U.S. SEEKS TO ENCOURAGE IRANIAN VISITS - GEORGE GEDDA, ASSOCIATED PRESS (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 6): The Bush administration wants to open cultural exchanges with archrival Iran this fall despite tensions between Washington and Tehran about its nuclear program.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0600265_pf.html
U.S. SCHOOLS COMPETE FOR SAUDI STUDENTS - GARANCE BURKE, ASSOCIATED PRESS (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 9): Thousands of students from Saudi Arabia are enrolling on college campuses across the United States this semester under a new educational exchange program brokered by President Bush and Saudi King Abdullah.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0900139_pf.html
THE NEXT BOLD MOVE: IT'S TIME FOR BUSH TO REACH OUT TO SHIITES - WILLIAM MCKENZIE (DALLASNEWS.COM, SEPTEMBER 12): Our diplomats will need to think about more than political leaders and fervently court religious ones. This will require Karen Hughes' public diplomacy shop to get ambassadors thinking differently, which she's tried to do.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dw...5b972.html'
ARAB AMERICA'S SEPTEMBER 11 - MOUSTAFA BAYOUMI (NATION, NY, SEPTEMBER 7): In June Karen Hughes recruited four Muslim American "civilian ambassadors" to travel to Europe and display how warmly the United States welcomes its Muslims. But the question of whether American Muslims have more freedom than their co-religionists do in Europe or elsewhere is not really the issue.
http://www.pej.org/html/modules.php?op=mod...order=0&thold=0
(scroll down link for item)
THE NEW AND MAYBE IMPROVED KAREN HUGHES SHOW GOES ON THE ROAD - AL KAMEN (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 11): We're told public diplomacy czarina Ms. Hughes is hitting the road next month to Europe, the Middle East and South Asia. Let's hope with some new material.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1000797_pf.html
IRAN'S FORMER PRESIDENT TAKES VEILED SWIPE AT BUSH - WILLIAM DOUGLAS, MCCLATCHY NEWSPAPERS (KNIGHT-RIDDER WASHINGTON BUREAU, SEPTEMBER 7): Mehrzad Boroujerdi, a political science professor at Syracuse University: "In a subtle way, Iran is trying to send a signal that, at least, let's engage in public diplomacy."
http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/15463914.htm
ISRAEL TO RE-BRAND ITSELF IN THE WORLD (ISRAEL TODAY, ISRAEL, SEPTEMBER 12): Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi: "[F]or a long time Israel has ignored the part of public diplomacy because of lack of resources and it's about time to invest more in the battle for public image. The return we will get will be greater than anyone could imagine"
http://www.israeltoday.co.il/default.aspx?tabid=178&nid=9460
OSAMA'S SPIN LESSONS - JOHN TIERNEY (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 12): Once again Osama has beaten America at an American game: public relations. He may be sitting powerlessly in a cave, but his image is as scary as ever.
http://select.nytimes.com/2006/09/12/opini...agewanted=print
PAID SUBSCRIPTION
DARK MILESTONE: MORE AMERICANS HAVE NOW DIED IN IRAQ THAN DIED ON 9/11 R.J. ESKOW (HUFFINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 11)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rj-eskow/dar...html?view=print
SITUATION CALLED DIRE IN WEST IRAQ: ANBAR IS LOST POLITICALLY, MARINE ANALYST SAYS - THOMAS E. RICKS (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 11)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1001204_pf.html
US INTEL REPORT: IRAQ'S ANBAR PROVINCE 'POLITICALLY LOST': CHIEF MARINE ANALYST SAYS REGION'S POLITICAL VACUUM BEING FILLED BY AL QAEDA - TOM REGAN (CSMONITOR.COM, SEPTEMBER 12)
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0911/dailyUpdate.html
US "DEFEATED POLITICALLY" IN AL-ANBAR - JUAN COLE (INFORMED COMMENT: THOUGHTS ON THE MIDDLE EAST, HISTORY, AND RELIGION, SEPTEMBER 11): 'A painful realization is setting in that it is more and more likely that Iraq is going to be partitioned. ... I continue to resist it.'
http://www.juancole.com/
(scroll down text for item)
UNWINDING BUSH: HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE TO CORRECT THE PRESIDENT'S MISTAKES? -JONATHAN RAUCH (REASON, SEPTEMBER 11): The Iraq adventure fueled a precipitous decline in America's image abroad, and Bush's pugnacious style during his first term and his tin ear for foreign opinion made a bad situation worse.
http://www.reason.com/rauch/091106.shtml
PRESIDENT BUSH'S REALITY EDITORIAL (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 12): The nation needs to hear a workable plan to stabilize a fractured, disintegrating country -- Iraq -- and end the violence. If such a strategy exists, it seems unlikely that Mr. Bush could see it through the filter of his fantasies.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/12/opinion/...agewanted=print
EVEN DATING IS PERILOUS IN POLARIZED BAGHDAD: RISING TENSION BETWEEN SUNNIS, SHIITES NEARLY PUTS END TO MIXED RELATIONSHIPS - AMIT R. PALEY (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 12)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6091101044.html
REINFORCE BAGHDAD - WILLIAM KRISTOL AND RICH LOWRY (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 12): More U.S. troops in Iraq would improve our chances of winning a decisive battle at a decisive moment.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1100879_pf.html
MORAL FORCE: IN IRAQ, THE UNITED STATES ISN'T THE PROBLEM; IT'S THE SOLUTION - LAWRENCE F. KAPLAN (NEW REPUBLIC, SEPTEMBER 12): The moral cost of abandoning a country we have turned inside-out seems not to have made the slightest impression on opinion-makers.
http://www.tnr.com/docprint.mhtml?i=w060911&s=kaplan091206
THE BEST WAR EVER YOUTUBE (SEPTEMBER 9): This video chronicles how the U.S. defeated itself by believing its own propaganda that the invasion and occupation of Iraq would be a cakewalk.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qGAqA-muYU
CALLING IRAN'S BLUFF: A HISTORY LESSON FOR THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION - FRED KAPLAN (SLATE, SEPTEMBER 11): Why not take up the Iranians on every diplomatic gambit they throw at us, if just to show the world that we're trying to settle this conflict and (assuming they back away from each gambit once we pursue it) the Iranians aren't? At the very least, we might regain some much-needed credibility.
http://www.slate.com/id/2149362/
STARTING ANOTHER WAR - NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 12): Iran's government is so corrupt, tyrannical and incompetent that it will eventually collapse -- unless we attack its nuclear sites and trigger a nationalistic surge of support for the regime.
http://select.nytimes.com/2006/09/12/opini...agewanted=print
PAID SUBSCRIPTION
THE 'CONFUSION' IS IN BUSH POLICY - TRUDY RUBIN (BALTIMORE SUN, SEPTEMBER 12): If we bomb Iran, Tehran is bound to retaliate against U.S. interests in Iraq, where it has many agents and is allied with Iraq's Shiite leaders. Bombing Iran would doom any slim U.S. hopes of salvaging stability in Baghdad.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/o...-oped-headlines
WOBBLY DIPLOMACY: WHAT HAPPENED TO THE SUPPORT THAT THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION SAID IT HAD FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST IRAN? EDITORIAL (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 11): The resistance to sanctions of Russia and China only raises the chances that President Bush will see force as the only way to stop an Iranian bomb.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1000889_pf.html
PROXY TERRORISM FROM IRAN: IT'S TIME TO BRING THE FIGHT AGAINST TERRORISTS TO THE COUNTRIES THAT ARM AND FUND THEM - NATAN SHARANSKY (LOS ANGELES TIMES, SEPTEMBER 12): By failing to hold Iran accountable for its brazen support of Hezbollah, the free world has undermined a central pillar in the war on terror and given the Iranian regime a huge weapon for achieving its ambitions.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-...inion-rightrail
WAR WITHIN WAR - MAX RODENBECK (NEW YORK REVIEW OF BOOKS, SEPTEMBER 21): For the time being, Israel's bungled offensive appears to have empowered the forces opposed to it, and opposed to a regional Pax Americana.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/19250
ANTI-JUDAISM: JEWS ARE UNDER ATTACK. AND NO ONE SEEMS MUCH CONCERNED - WILLIAM KRISTOL (WEEKLY STANDARD, SEPTEMBER 11): University of Chicago political science professor John Mearsheimer, along with his sidekick, Stephen Walt of Harvard's Kennedy School of Government spoke to the Council on American-Islamic Relations and attacked the "Israel lobby" for its pernicious deeds, singling out several Jews who served or serve in the Bush administration. Much of the world is in denial about the jihadist threat.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Publ...5aslgc.asp?pg=2
HOPE FLICKERS IN THE MIDDLE EAST: IF HAMAS TRULY DOES ACCEPT A TWO-STATE SOLUTION, IT'S TIME FOR A CARROT EDITORIAL (LOS ANGELES TIMES, SEPTEMBER 12): As Hamas makes concrete steps toward peace, it should get real economic benefits. Moving too quickly, as the Europeans favor, or too slowly, as the Americans and Israelis tend to do, could extinguish this latest glimmer of hope.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-...pinion-leftrail
U.S. MUST ACT TO END PALESTINIAN HEALTH CRISIS - MICHAEL MORSE (BALTIMORE SUN, SEPTEMBER 12)
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/o...-oped-headlines
TURNING ISLAMISTS INTO DEMOCRATS - MONITOR'S VIEW (CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, SEPTEMBER 12): A factor now at work in the Palestinian-Israeli saga that seems to be pushing the concerned parties in the right direction has been the pressure of international sanctions led by the United States, the European Union, and Israel.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0912/p08s02-comv.html
THE WAR WITH AL-QAEDA - JUAN COLE (INFORMED COMMENT: THOUGHTS ON THE MIDDLE EAST, HISTORY, AND RELIGION, SEPTEMBER 11): The Arab world mostly just dislikes US policy, mainly because of kneejerk support for Israeli depredations against Palestinians. The dislike doesn't change that much, though we reached a nadir in 2003-2004.
http://www.juancole.com/
(scroll down text for item)
A NEW MIDDLE EAST - ROBERT MALLEY (NEW YORK REVIEW OF BOOKS, SEPTEMBER 21): Arab public opinion is increasingly radicalized and governments allied with the US stand doubly discredited. America's standing in the region may well recover, but it is increasingly difficult to see how, or when.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/19301
FIVE YEARS AFTER 9/11: A SHIFTED VIEW OF THE WORLD: THE WINNERS AND LOSERS THAT ARE STILL CHURNING THE WORLD'S POLITICS - PETER GRIER AND MARK RICE-OXLEY (CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, SEPTEMBER 11): While Europe may have become a target and center of operations for terrorist cells, the US and Islam are the two poles around which 21st-century geopolitics may increasingly revolve.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0911/p01s02-usgn.html
ARAB REFLECTIONS ON THE FIFTH ANNIVERSARY OF 9/11 MARC LYNCH (ABU AARDVACK, SEPTEMBER 11): It shouldn't be surprising that most Arabs continue to pour scorn on Bush and his approach to the war on terror.
http://abuaardvark.typepad.com/abuaardvark...reflection.html
BLAMING THE VICTIM: WHEN IT COMES TO 9/11 THE ARAB MEDIA IGNORES THE ATTACK AND CONCENTRATES ON THE AMERICAN RESPONSE TO IT - MOHAMMED FADHIL (OPINION JOURNAL FROM THE WALL STREET JOURNAL EDITORIAL PAGE, SEPTEMBER 12)
http://www.opinionjournal.com/federation/f...e/?id=110008928
HOW SAFE A WORLD? EDITORIAL (BOSTON GLOBE, SEPTEMBER 11): Al Qaeda's appeal to many Muslims has more to do with the perception that the United States has become an oppressor than with the particulars of the group's intolerant world-view.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial...a_world?mode=PF
THE WAR FOR ISLAM: OSAMA BIN LADEN MAY GO DOWN IN HISTORY NOT ONLY AS THE MURDEROUS CRIMINAL WHO DECLARED HOLY WAR ON THE UNITED STATES, BUT ALSO AS A RADICAL FIGURE IN WHAT HAS COME TO BE CALLED THE ISLAMIC REFORMATION -- THE EPIC STRUGGLE TO DEFINE THE FAITH OF OVER A BILLION PEOPLE - REZA ASLAN (BOSTON GLOBE, SEPTEMBER 10)
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/art...r_islam?mode=PF
WHOSE WAR ON TERROR? - MAI YAMANI (TOMPAINE.COM, SEPTEMBER 11): The Bush administration, having proclaimed a war on terror, invaded and occupied countries and yet failed to see that these events were being linked in the eyes of people in the region.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/09/1...r_on_terror.php
STATE OF TERRORISM ADDRESS: WHAT WOULD OSAMA BIN LADEN SAY TO JIHADISTS FIVE YEARS LATER? - BRIAN MICHAEL JENKINS (LOS ANGELES TIMES, SEPTEMBER 11): "For us, it [the first truly global jihad] is a mere instant in a conflict that began centuries ago and will last until Judgment Day."
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-op-...inion-rightrail
A PROVOCATIVE LOOK AT THE IMAGES OF 9/11 [REVIEW OF 'WATCHING THE WORLD CHANGE: THE STORIES BEHIND THE IMAGES OF 9/11' BY DAVID FRIEND] - DAVID GREENBERG (CHICAGO TRIBUNE, SEPTEMBER 10): Modern terrorism hinges on spectacle, on getting the whole world to watch a monstrous event.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/boo...1,5307261.story
THE REAL JACK BAUERS: THERE ARE REAL REASONS WE HAVEN'T BEEN ATTACKED AGAIN - PETER KIRSANOW (NATIONAL REVIEW, SEPTEMBER 11): Many of the victories against terrorists have been won by the military?s elite units -- special-forces/counterterrorism units and others that the media knows little, if anything about.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OTE3M...2ViZTZjYWM5YWQ=
REMEMBERING THE 'BLESSED TERROR' - SUZANNE FIELDS (WASHINGTON TIMES, SEPTEMBER 1): The radical Islamic theology appeals to death, the "blessed terror."
http://www.washtimes.com/functions/print.p...10-101234-1321r
WAR OF WORDS - MICHELLE MALKIN (WASHINGTON TIMES, SEPTEMBER 11): Jihadis: these are our enemies -- from Mohamed Atta and company to the Butchers of Beslan, to the throat-slitters in Karachi and Baghdad and Mindanao, to the bombers of Bali, Madrid and London, to their funders and imams and enablers worldwide.
http://www.washtimes.com/functions/print.p...10-102745-1881r
MILESTONE NO. 5 - JOHN CAREY (WASHINGTON TIMES, SEPTEMBER 11): The war on terror we are engaged in may best carry this new definition: We will do what we have to do, on all levels throughout the world, to keep the enemy on the run, off-balance and living in fear.
http://www.washtimes.com/functions/print.p...10-102742-6703r
THE THREAT THEN AND NOW - ED ROYCE (WASHINGTON TIMES, SEPTEMBER 11): All means of national power must be harnessed to combat radical Islam.
(Ed Royce, California Republican, is a member of the U.S. House of Representatives.)
http://www.washtimes.com/functions/print.p...10-102740-2599r
SOLIDARITY - CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS (WALL STREET JOURNAL, SEPTEMBER 11): Clerical fanaticism means to fight a war which can only have one victor. "We" -- and our allies -- simply have to become more ruthless and more experienced.
http://online.wsj.com/article_print/SB1157...6550358908.html
PAID SUBSCRIPTION
LIKE THAT DAY ON 9/11, FAITH REMAINS A FIRST RESPONDER - JANET HORTON (CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, SEPTEMBER 11): The raw willpower of the terrorists will never overcome the courage and faith of the American people.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0911/p09s01-coop.html
THE END OF CIVILIZATION - JAMES CARROLL (BOSTON GLOBE, SEPTEMBER 11): America's enemy has triumphed already in the way Americans regard one another as enemies.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial...ization?mode=PF
LOSING THE WAR ON TERROR: WHY MILITANTS ARE BEATING TECHNOLOGY FIVE YEARS AFTER SEPT. 11 - AHMED RASHID (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 11): Guerrillas are learning faster than Western armies, and the West makes appalling strategic mistakes while the extremists make brilliant tactical moves.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1001145_pf.html
9/11/06 EDITORIAL (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 11): The war against terror we meant to fight in Afghanistan is at best stuck in neutral, with the Taliban resurgent and the best economic news involving a bumper crop of opium. Iraq, which had nothing to do with 9/11 when it was invaded, is now a breeding ground for a new generation of terrorists.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/11/opinion/...agewanted=print
THINKING BEYOND VIOLENCE - AZIZ HUQ (TOMPAINE.COM, SEPTEMBER 11): America's continued support of undemocratic regimes, and its failure to support real democracies, is today tilling the soil once more for a new crop of jihadists.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/09/1...nd_violence.php
BIN LADEN'S VICTORY - RICHARD COHEN (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 12): By using torture, by the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison, by employing "extraordinary renditions" of suspects to countries where they could be tortured, by insisting on going it almost alone in Iraq, by telling the international community to shove it, by declaring a war for an idée fixe -- this fierce obsession with Hussein goes back a long way -- the United States has made itself reviled in much of the world.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1100880_pf.html
WHAT WE LOST AFTER 9/11 - HELENA COBBAN (TOMPAINE.COM, SEPTEMBER 11): In the name of what they called their "Global War on Terror" the Bush administration proceeded to invade and occupy two distant countries, to subvert the governance structures of many others, establish a globe-girdling network of "black-hole" prisons into which suspects disappeared without trial, and assault many of our liberties here at home.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/09/1...t_after_911.php
THE DAY THAT CHANGED EVERYTHING WASN'T 9/11 - IRA CHERNUS (TOMDISPATCH, SEPTEMBER 10): There is a growing awareness that the Bush Global War on Terror is doing more harm than good.
http://www.tomdispatch.com/index.mhtml?pid=119758
GAPING HOLES IN THE 9/11 NARRATIVE: FIVE YEARS OUT FROM THE ATTACKS, WHY DO WE STILL KNOW SO LITTLE ABOUT WHAT REALLY HAPPENED THAT DAY? - ROBERT SCHEER (TRUTHDIG, SEPTEMBER 11/COMMON DREAMS): Despite this sorry record of neglect in Southwest Asia and the creation of a quagmire and recruiting poster for terrorism in Iraq, Bush once again arrogantly asserts that his policies have made us safer.
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0911-25.htm
NOW IT'S UP TO THE PEOPLE...- THE CENTRALITY OF WAR IN THE PRESIDENCY OF GEORGE W. BUSH - COL. DAN SMITH (COUNTERPUNCH, SEPTEMBER 11): After five years of the permanent war presidency, the U.S. and the world appear neither safer nor better.
http://www.counterpunch.org/smith09112006.html
PROMISES NOT KEPT - PAUL KRUGMAN (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 11): The perpetrators of 9/11 are still at large, five years later, and that they have re-established a large safe haven.
http://select.nytimes.com/2006/09/11/opini...agewanted=print
PAID SUBSCRIPTION
A WAR OF WORDS - EUGENE ROBINSON (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 12): By far the most fateful post-Sept. 11 coinage is "war on terrorism." The phrase that has come to define our era is entirely suspect, except perhaps the "on."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1100883_pf.html
THE NEVER-ENDING WAR: THE PRESIDENT USES THE FIFTH ANNIVERSARY OF OUR NATIONAL TRAGEDY TO PROMISE A GLOBAL CONFLICT THAT WILL LAST DECADES - WALTER SHAPIRO (SALON, SEPTEMBER 12)
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2006/...eech/print.html
HOW BAD IS HE?: BUSH RAN AS A MODERATE, TACKED RIGHT AND GOVERNED INEFFECTUALLY -- BEFORE 9/11. SINCE THEN HE'S BECOME THE MOST RADICAL AMERICAN PRESIDENT IN HISTORY -- AND ARGUABLY THE WORST - SIDNEY BLUMENTHAL (SALON, SEPTEMBER 12): Bush used the "global war on terrorism" to impose a "unitary executive" of absolute power, disdainful of the Congress and brushing aside the judicial branch when he felt it necessary In foreign policy.
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/09/...erpt/print.html
9/11/06: FIVE YEARS LATER, SOME COMPLACENCY HAS RETURNED, BUT WITH THE NEW KNOWLEDGE THAT OUR EASILY DISTRACTED OPENNESS IS ALSO A STRENGTH EDITORIAL (LOS ANGELES TIMES, SEPTEMBER 11): In Washington, the war on terror has been institutionalized, like the war on poverty, or cancer: something for politicians to talk about while the rest of us go about our business.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-...pinion-leftrail
AMERICA'S WARRIOR NATION - THE LEGACY OF 9/11: THE SHORTCOMINGS OF THE AMERICAN LEADER WERE ALARMINGLY EXPOSED ON THE DAY THE TERRORISTS STRUCK. HE AND HIS ACOLYTES ARE NOW LEADING THEIR EMPIRE TOWARDS PERMANENT CONFLICT WITH ISLAM - GORE VIDAL (INDEPENDENT, SEPTEMBER 10)
http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentat...icle1433329.ece
PAID SUBSCRIPTION
5 YEARS AFTER 9/11: THE GROWTH OF SUICIDE TERRORISM - ROBERT A. PAPE (CHICAGO TRIBUNE, SEPTEMBER 11): Suicide terrorism is mainly a response to foreign occupation rather than a product of Islamic fundamentalism.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion...ncommentary-hed
QUOTATIONS FOR THE DAY
'WHERE ARE THE MOTHERS ORGANIZING AGAINST TERRORISM AS AMERICAN MOTHERS DID AGAINST DRUNKEN DRIVING?'
--Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs Karen Hughes, in her 'here's the Outrage? A United World Must Resolutely Condemn Terror?'(USA Today, September 12)
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/...three12.art.htm
"I'M A NEOCONSERVATIVE WHO'S BEEN MUGGED BY REALITY."
--John Agresto, the president of St. John's College in Santa Fe, N.M., who came to Iraq to build a whole new university system and left having accomplished almost nothing; cited in Sidney Blumenthal, "Emerald City Exposed" (Salon, September 13)
http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/20...iraq/print.html
WHERE'S THE OUTRAGE? A UNITED WORLD MUST RESOLUTELY CONDEMN TERROR KAREN HUGHES (USA TODAY, SEPTEMBER 12): "I believe most of us hope that terrorism is an aberration. Unfortunately, I do not believe it is true. Part of my job is to look at the propaganda being spread on Internet sites and TV sets around the world. It is chilling. ... Our challenge is to launch a new grassroots movement across all faiths and continents, a movement that clearly states that no grievance, no complaint, no matter how legitimate, can ever justify the targeting and killing of innocent civilians'
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/...three12.art.htm
SEE ALSO
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1200770_pf.html
(scroll down link for item, "Where's the Outrage?")
http://www.republicansocialtheatre.com/200...you-mad-people/
http://www.extrememortman.com/foreign-poli...blic-diplomacy/
http://www.mountainrunner.us/2006/09/wheres_the_outr.html
http://cheatseekingmissiles.blogspot.com/2...-to-terror.html
http://www.isthatlegal.org/archives/2006/0...a_never_ag.html
WHITE HOUSE TALK - DAN FROOMKIN (Q & A, WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 13): 'Danville, Ill.: Does anyone know what Karen Hughes is doing? Other than writing op-eds for USA Today? Dan Froomkin: What she's not doing, I'm betting, is having much influence on her good friend George anymore. Her job at the State Department is to win over the Islamic world, and he isn't giving her much to work with.'
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1601290_pf.html
BUSH'S LAME JUSTIFICATION FOR IRAQ - HELEN THOMAS (FALLS CHURCH NEWS PRESS, VA, SEPTEMBER 14): Karen Hughes -- the president's close confidante -- has been given the impossible mission of making friends for the U.S. in the Middle East. She will fail in this mission unless U.S. foreign policy is transformed.
http://www.fcnp.com/index.php?option=com_c...d=217&Itemid=35
SLIP SLIDING AWAY - JOHN ZOGBY (DAILY NEWS, SEPTEMBER 7): 'I had the privilege of serving on the congressionally-created Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy with several distinguished colleagues in 2003. The commission did an admirable job -- but our mandate did not include any discussion of U.S. policy in the region. And that is an unfortunate blind spot -- because it is America's policy that remains the core problem.'
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ideas_opin...2p-378743c.html
A NARRATIVE FOR A LONG WAR OPINION SHAPERS IN WASHINGTON WORRY THAT THEY ARE LOSING THE WAR OF IDEAS WITH THE JIHADISTS. BUT ARE THEY? - REPORTER: STAN CORREY (AUSTRALIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION): Among those interviewed are Marc Lynch, John Rendon, Kylie Morris, Faisal Devji, William Mccants, Steven Corman, Ted Sorensen, Adel Iskandar, John Brown. Stan Correy: 'What is the Arabic term for public diplomacy?' Adel Iskandar [communications specialist from the American University in Washington, D.C]: 'It's called Ikhteraq, which means to penetrate or break through, or tear through, which is a very active, invasive term. It doesn't resonate the same way as public diplomacy.'
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/backgroundbriefin...06/1716276.htm#
VIA
http://abuaardvark.typepad.com/abuaardvark...c_diplomac.html
MR. REID'S 'KILL BILL' MOMENT EDITORIAL (WASHINGTON TIMES, SEPTEMBER 14): Senate minority leader Harry Reid's "real security" amendment to the port-security bill, voted down 57-41, had several useful ideas, like public-diplomacy improvements, which no one can reasonably oppose. But there were also laughers.
http://washingtontimes.com/functions/print...13-085942-8376r
KHATAMI'S PUBLIC DIPLOMACY COUP: A LESSON IN HOW TO DO IT WELL - PATRICIA LEE SHARPE (WHIRLED VIEW, SEPTEMBER 12): Iran's ex-president Mahmoud Khatami, during his visit to the U.S., gave us this week a masterful example of public diplomacy.
http://whirledview.typepad.com/whirledview...mis_public.html
KUWAIT SEES THREE MAJOR THREATS IN MIDDLE EAST KUNA (KUWAIT TIMES, KUWAIT, SEPTEMBER 14): The head of the American Studies Unit at Kuwait University, Dr. Abdullah Al-Shaijy, urged NATO to exert more efforts in the public diplomacy domain to correct its image, which has been perceived as negative by the public opinion and observers in the Gulf region.
http://www.kuwaittimes.net/Navariednews.as...rtid=1793033732
THE MEN WHO WANT KOFI ANNAN'S JOB: KOFI ANNAN WILL STEP DOWN AS UN SECRETARY GENERAL AT THE END OF THE YEAR, AND THE RACE TO SUCCEED HIM IS GATHERING PACE BBC NEWS (SEPTEMBER 14): One of the candidates, India's Shashi Tharoor, the 50-year-old under secretary-general for communications and public information in the UN, is said to be excellent at public diplomacy.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5334820.stm
TORTURE 'R' US [CORRECTIONS DEPARTMENT] TOM ENGELHARDT (NATION, SEPTEMBER 13): Torture is regularly named as such only when the President denies that we do it or that he ordered it.
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/notion?pid=121030
TORTURED LOGIC EDITORIAL (LOS ANGELES TIMES, SEPTEMBER 13): The difference between torture and the "alternative procedures" euphemistically called by President Bush for eliciting information from prisoners suspected of being terrorists seems to be who's conducting the interrogation and where it takes place.
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/o...la-news-comment
PRISONERS - GEORGE PACKER (NEW YORKER, SEPTEMBER 11): No good intelligence is going to come from abusive practices.
http://www.newyorker.com/printables/talk/0...8ta_talk_packer
STREAM OF CONSCIENCE: WHY IT MATTERS WHAT DEFINITION OF TORTURE WE USE - DAHLIA LITHWICK (SLATE, SEPTEMBER 13)
http://www.slate.com/id/2149564/
AN ALTERNATIVE SET OF INTERROGATION PROCEDURES - JOANNE MARINER (FINDLAW.COM, SEPTEMBER 12/COMMON DREAMS)
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0912-31.htm
THE BATTLE FOR GUANTÁNAMO - TIM GOLDEN (NEW YORK TIMES MAGAZINE, SEPTEMBER 17): What privileges and freedoms the detainees are allowed may come even more into question as the Guantánamo population is winnowed down to a harder core and joined by the most notorious terror suspects captured by the C.I.A.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/17/magazine...agewanted=print
ENACT THE PRESIDENT'S CODE FOR MILITARY COMMISSIONS: THE MCCAIN/GRAHAM/WARNER OBJECTIONS ARE MERITLESS - ANDREW C. MCCARTHY (NATIONAL REVIEW, SEPTEMBER 13): The president's proposal for procedures for terrorist trials would allow us to protect the nation's critical secrets from those pledged to kill us, yet conduct war-crimes trials that easily surpass the modicum of due process owed to terrorists whose atrocities mock the laws of war.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YzM4M...TQ4OTU1OGE5Mjc=
THOSE POOR, POOR TERRORISTS - WILLIAM MURCHISON (WASHINGTON TIMES, SEPTEMBER 14): God bless Americans. You won't catch anyone else celebrating the rights of those trying to kill them.
http://www.washtimes.com/functions/print.p...13-085943-8607r
IS IT THE PR, OR THE POLICY? - BILL BERKOWITZ (ANTIWAR.COM, SEPTEMBER 14): As early as September 2003, less than six months after the invasion of Iraq, the administration determined that the best way to sell its policy was to make its highest ranking officials -- including the president -- available for safe media opportunities.
http://www.antiwar.com/ips/berkowitz.php?articleid=9698
BUSH USES 9/11 SPEECH TO PROMOTE MORE KILLING IN IRAQ - STEPHEN ZUNES (FOREIGN POLICY IN FOCUS, SEPTEMBER 13/COMMON DREAMS)
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0913-35.htm
TRICKERY CONTINUES ON REASONS FOR WAR - DERRICK Z. JACKSON (BOSTON GLOBE, SEPTEMBER 13): Three and a half years and tens of thousands of bodies after the Great False War in Iraq began, Vice President Dick Cheney still tells us it ?was the right thing to do, and if we had it to do over again, we'd do exactly the same thing."
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial...for_war?mode=PF
THE REALITY IN IRAQ - H.D.S. GREENWAY (BOSTON GLOBE, SEPTEMBER 12): The best that can be hoped for is some compromises that will halt Iraq's increasingly vicious civil war.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial...in_iraq?mode=PF
THE IRAQ WAR: MISSION IMPOSSIBLE -- AFTER THE WARSAW PACT FELL APART, AMERICANS FELT SAFER THAN EVER. JOLTED BY 9/11, US PRESIDENT BUSH AND HIS ADVISORS RESOLVED TO DETER ANY FUTURE ATTACKS. BUT OUSTING SADDAM HUSSEIN ONLY PUT IRAQ ON THE BRINK OF CIVIL WAR AND EXPOSED THE VULNERABILITY OF THE WORLD'S ONLY SUPERPOWER - HANS HOYNG AND GEORG MASCOLO (SPIEGEL INTERNATIONAL, SEPTEMBER 12)
http://service.spiegel.de/cache/internatio...,436560,00.html
WHY WE CAN'T SEND MORE TROOPS - LAWRENCE J. KORB AND PETER OGDEN (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 14): Sending more troops to Iraq would, at the moment, threaten to break our nation's all-volunteer Army and undermine our national security.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1301575_pf.html
UNDERSTANDING WHY IRAQ IS A DISASTER - THOMAS GALE MOORE (ANTIWAR.COM, SEPTEMBER 12): For most Americans, products of the largely secular West, it is hard to understand the depth of feeling that the occupation of an Arab/Muslim country generates among the inhabitants.
http://www.antiwar.com/moore/?articleid=9684
EMERALD CITY EXPOSED: JOURNALIST RAJIV CHANDRASEKARAN PULLS BACK THE CURTAIN ON THE GREEN ZONE IN BAGHDAD TO REVEAL THE FLOPS AND FAILURES OF THE BUSH WAR TEAM - SIDNEY BLUMENTHAL (SALON, SEPTEMBER 13): The Green Zone, according to Chandrasekaran, was "Baghdad's Little America," an insular bubble where Americans went to familiar fast-food joints, watched the latest movies, lived in air-conditioned comfort, had their laundry cleaned and pressed promptly, drove GMC Suburbans and listened to a military FM radio station, "Freedom Radio," that played "classic rock and rah-rah messages."
http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/20...iraq/print.html
BLOOD MONEY IN IRAQ - T. CHRISTIAN MILLER (TOMPAINE.COM, SEPTEMBER 13): Many, if not most, contractors and government officials in Iraq were good people doing a nearly impossible job. That said, Iraq did not have to be the Wild West.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/09/1...ney_in_iraq.php
IRAN: AHMADINEJAD DECLARES TIES WITH IRAQ 'EXCELLENT': IRANIAN PRESIDENT MAHMUD AHMADINEJAD TODAY PLEDGED TO HELP AUTHORITIES IN NEIGHBORING IRAQ TO STABILIZE THEIR COUNTRY - GOLNAZ ESFANDIARI (RFE/RL, SEPTEMBER 12)
http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2006/...dd2813f25f.html
BACK FROM THE BRINK, IRAN AND THE US MUST NOW BUILD COMITY: ON HIS US TRIP, KHATAMI URGED MILD RHETORIC AND OFFERED A WAY FORWARD ON IRAQ - HELENA COBBAN (CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, SEPTEMBER 14)
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0914/p09s01-coop.html
TERRORIST NETWORK DISCONNECT - GARETH PORTER (TOMPAINE.COM, SEPTEMBER 13): The real history of the international politics of al-Qaida shows that the Bush administration is being compromised by its ties with countries aligned with the terrorists against Iran.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/09/1..._disconnect.php
LAND FOR NATO - THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 13): The fact that Condi Rice and the French foreign minister, working with the U.N., were able to secure an international peacekeeping force in south Lebanon is a potentially key achievement.
http://select.nytimes.com/2006/09/13/opini...agewanted=print
PAID SUBSCRIPTION
UNESCO SENDS EXPERTS TO ASSESS WAR'S EFFECTS ON LEBANON?S CULTURAL HERITAGE ? UN NEWS CENTRE (SEPTEMBER 11)
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?News...4&Cr=Leban&Cr1=
TURNING AROUND TURKISH OPINION - MONITOR'S VIEW (CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, SEPTEMBER 13): In Turkey opinion is also moving swiftly away from familiar ties with the West. Turks are warming significantly to their eastern neighbor, Iran.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0913/p08s02-comv.html
BLAIR ATTACKS EUROPE'S "MAD ANTI - AMERICANS" REUTERS (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPEMBER 13): British Prime Minister Tony Blair launched a withering attack on Thursday on what he called ?mad anti-Americanism" among European politicians.
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/news/news-s...agewanted=print
LABOR'S LOVE LOST: HOW BRITONS CAME TO HATE TONY BLAIR AND AMERICA, AND WHY THE NEXT PRIME MINISTER WILL PAY THE PRICE - ANDREW BROWN (SALON, SEPTEMBER 13)
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2006/...lair/print.html
PROPER APPRECIATION FOR THE ANGLO-AMERICAN ALLIANCE: FOR HIS LOYALTY TO THE US, CONGRESS SHOULD GRANT TONY BLAIR HONORARY CITIZENSHIP - JOHN HUGHES (CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, SEPTEMBER 13)
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0913/p09s01-cojh.html
PAKISTAN'S SEPARATE PEACE: PRESIDENT MUSHARRAF STRIKES A DEAL THAT MAY SPARE HIMSELF AND HIS TROOPS, AT THE LIKELY EXPENSE OF AMERICANS EDITORIAL (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 13)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1201691_pf.html
DON'T LOSE SEOUL, AMERICA: THE SOUTH KOREAN PRESIDENT VISITS BUSH TODAY, AT A TIME WHEN THE TWO COUNTRIES' CRUCIAL ALLIANCE IS SEVERELY WEAKENED - G. JOHN IKENBERRY AND MITCHELL B. REISS (LOS ANGELES TIMES, SEPTEMBER 13): A self-confident new generation of South Koreans doesn't recall the shared sacrifices of the Korean War and doesn't reflexively defer to the United States.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-...inion-rightrail
CHINA'S ECHO CHAMBER EDITORIAL (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 13): China has long prided itself on its ability to master capitalism without indulging in the messy business of democracy. So Beijing got a twofer this week when it gave the state-run Xinhua news agency monopoly control over the lucrative financial news business and the power to administer broad censorship rules for all foreign news entering China.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/13/opinion/...agewanted=print
BUSH TO HOLD TALKS WITH KAZAKH LEADER ON ALI G'S BORAT TRUTHDIG (SEPTEMBER 13): When the president meets with Kazakhstan President Nursultan Nazarbayev in Maine, the two will reportedly discuss the way in which Kazakstan?s image has been savaged by the Sacha Baron Cohen character, Borat.
http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/ite...bush_ali_borat/
SEE ALSO
http://www.wonkette.com/politics/borat/whi...-war-200416.php
THE FASCIST DISEASE: "ISLAMIC FASCISM" IS AN ACCURATE -- AND IMPORTANT -- TERM - JOSEPH LOCONTE (WEEKLY STANDARD, SEPTEMBER 14)
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Publ...12/695odaut.asp
ISLAMIC FASCISM: THE NEW HYSTERIA - ALAN MAASS (COUNTERPUNCH, SEPTEMBER 12): The chieftains of the never-ending "war on terror" are peddling a newly updated enemy: "Islamic fascism."
http://www.counterpunch.org/maass09122006.html
THINK AGAIN: IT'S WISE TO CHALLENGE SOME 9-11 ASSUMPTIONS - JUAN COLE (JSONLINE, SEPTEMBER 9): As al-Qaida struggles to strike again, the United States wrestles with a confused war on terror that won't end until Americans are forced to choose between Medicare and missiles.
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?i...55&format=print
DON'T TURN WAR ON TERROR TO CIVILIZATION CLASH LIU XUECHENG (PEOPLE?S DAILY, BEIJING, SEPTEMBER 13)
http://english.people.c
'WHERE ARE THE MOTHERS ORGANIZING AGAINST TERRORISM AS AMERICAN MOTHERS DID AGAINST DRUNKEN DRIVING?'
--Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs Karen Hughes, in her 'here's the Outrage? A United World Must Resolutely Condemn Terror?'(USA Today, September 12)
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/...three12.art.htm
"I'M A NEOCONSERVATIVE WHO'S BEEN MUGGED BY REALITY."
--John Agresto, the president of St. John's College in Santa Fe, N.M., who came to Iraq to build a whole new university system and left having accomplished almost nothing; cited in Sidney Blumenthal, "Emerald City Exposed" (Salon, September 13)
http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/20...iraq/print.html
WHERE'S THE OUTRAGE? A UNITED WORLD MUST RESOLUTELY CONDEMN TERROR KAREN HUGHES (USA TODAY, SEPTEMBER 12): "I believe most of us hope that terrorism is an aberration. Unfortunately, I do not believe it is true. Part of my job is to look at the propaganda being spread on Internet sites and TV sets around the world. It is chilling. ... Our challenge is to launch a new grassroots movement across all faiths and continents, a movement that clearly states that no grievance, no complaint, no matter how legitimate, can ever justify the targeting and killing of innocent civilians'
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/...three12.art.htm
SEE ALSO
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1200770_pf.html
(scroll down link for item, "Where's the Outrage?")
http://www.republicansocialtheatre.com/200...you-mad-people/
http://www.extrememortman.com/foreign-poli...blic-diplomacy/
http://www.mountainrunner.us/2006/09/wheres_the_outr.html
http://cheatseekingmissiles.blogspot.com/2...-to-terror.html
http://www.isthatlegal.org/archives/2006/0...a_never_ag.html
WHITE HOUSE TALK - DAN FROOMKIN (Q & A, WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 13): 'Danville, Ill.: Does anyone know what Karen Hughes is doing? Other than writing op-eds for USA Today? Dan Froomkin: What she's not doing, I'm betting, is having much influence on her good friend George anymore. Her job at the State Department is to win over the Islamic world, and he isn't giving her much to work with.'
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1601290_pf.html
BUSH'S LAME JUSTIFICATION FOR IRAQ - HELEN THOMAS (FALLS CHURCH NEWS PRESS, VA, SEPTEMBER 14): Karen Hughes -- the president's close confidante -- has been given the impossible mission of making friends for the U.S. in the Middle East. She will fail in this mission unless U.S. foreign policy is transformed.
http://www.fcnp.com/index.php?option=com_c...d=217&Itemid=35
SLIP SLIDING AWAY - JOHN ZOGBY (DAILY NEWS, SEPTEMBER 7): 'I had the privilege of serving on the congressionally-created Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy with several distinguished colleagues in 2003. The commission did an admirable job -- but our mandate did not include any discussion of U.S. policy in the region. And that is an unfortunate blind spot -- because it is America's policy that remains the core problem.'
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ideas_opin...2p-378743c.html
A NARRATIVE FOR A LONG WAR OPINION SHAPERS IN WASHINGTON WORRY THAT THEY ARE LOSING THE WAR OF IDEAS WITH THE JIHADISTS. BUT ARE THEY? - REPORTER: STAN CORREY (AUSTRALIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION): Among those interviewed are Marc Lynch, John Rendon, Kylie Morris, Faisal Devji, William Mccants, Steven Corman, Ted Sorensen, Adel Iskandar, John Brown. Stan Correy: 'What is the Arabic term for public diplomacy?' Adel Iskandar [communications specialist from the American University in Washington, D.C]: 'It's called Ikhteraq, which means to penetrate or break through, or tear through, which is a very active, invasive term. It doesn't resonate the same way as public diplomacy.'
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/backgroundbriefin...06/1716276.htm#
VIA
http://abuaardvark.typepad.com/abuaardvark...c_diplomac.html
MR. REID'S 'KILL BILL' MOMENT EDITORIAL (WASHINGTON TIMES, SEPTEMBER 14): Senate minority leader Harry Reid's "real security" amendment to the port-security bill, voted down 57-41, had several useful ideas, like public-diplomacy improvements, which no one can reasonably oppose. But there were also laughers.
http://washingtontimes.com/functions/print...13-085942-8376r
KHATAMI'S PUBLIC DIPLOMACY COUP: A LESSON IN HOW TO DO IT WELL - PATRICIA LEE SHARPE (WHIRLED VIEW, SEPTEMBER 12): Iran's ex-president Mahmoud Khatami, during his visit to the U.S., gave us this week a masterful example of public diplomacy.
http://whirledview.typepad.com/whirledview...mis_public.html
KUWAIT SEES THREE MAJOR THREATS IN MIDDLE EAST KUNA (KUWAIT TIMES, KUWAIT, SEPTEMBER 14): The head of the American Studies Unit at Kuwait University, Dr. Abdullah Al-Shaijy, urged NATO to exert more efforts in the public diplomacy domain to correct its image, which has been perceived as negative by the public opinion and observers in the Gulf region.
http://www.kuwaittimes.net/Navariednews.as...rtid=1793033732
THE MEN WHO WANT KOFI ANNAN'S JOB: KOFI ANNAN WILL STEP DOWN AS UN SECRETARY GENERAL AT THE END OF THE YEAR, AND THE RACE TO SUCCEED HIM IS GATHERING PACE BBC NEWS (SEPTEMBER 14): One of the candidates, India's Shashi Tharoor, the 50-year-old under secretary-general for communications and public information in the UN, is said to be excellent at public diplomacy.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5334820.stm
TORTURE 'R' US [CORRECTIONS DEPARTMENT] TOM ENGELHARDT (NATION, SEPTEMBER 13): Torture is regularly named as such only when the President denies that we do it or that he ordered it.
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/notion?pid=121030
TORTURED LOGIC EDITORIAL (LOS ANGELES TIMES, SEPTEMBER 13): The difference between torture and the "alternative procedures" euphemistically called by President Bush for eliciting information from prisoners suspected of being terrorists seems to be who's conducting the interrogation and where it takes place.
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/o...la-news-comment
PRISONERS - GEORGE PACKER (NEW YORKER, SEPTEMBER 11): No good intelligence is going to come from abusive practices.
http://www.newyorker.com/printables/talk/0...8ta_talk_packer
STREAM OF CONSCIENCE: WHY IT MATTERS WHAT DEFINITION OF TORTURE WE USE - DAHLIA LITHWICK (SLATE, SEPTEMBER 13)
http://www.slate.com/id/2149564/
AN ALTERNATIVE SET OF INTERROGATION PROCEDURES - JOANNE MARINER (FINDLAW.COM, SEPTEMBER 12/COMMON DREAMS)
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0912-31.htm
THE BATTLE FOR GUANTÁNAMO - TIM GOLDEN (NEW YORK TIMES MAGAZINE, SEPTEMBER 17): What privileges and freedoms the detainees are allowed may come even more into question as the Guantánamo population is winnowed down to a harder core and joined by the most notorious terror suspects captured by the C.I.A.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/17/magazine...agewanted=print
ENACT THE PRESIDENT'S CODE FOR MILITARY COMMISSIONS: THE MCCAIN/GRAHAM/WARNER OBJECTIONS ARE MERITLESS - ANDREW C. MCCARTHY (NATIONAL REVIEW, SEPTEMBER 13): The president's proposal for procedures for terrorist trials would allow us to protect the nation's critical secrets from those pledged to kill us, yet conduct war-crimes trials that easily surpass the modicum of due process owed to terrorists whose atrocities mock the laws of war.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YzM4M...TQ4OTU1OGE5Mjc=
THOSE POOR, POOR TERRORISTS - WILLIAM MURCHISON (WASHINGTON TIMES, SEPTEMBER 14): God bless Americans. You won't catch anyone else celebrating the rights of those trying to kill them.
http://www.washtimes.com/functions/print.p...13-085943-8607r
IS IT THE PR, OR THE POLICY? - BILL BERKOWITZ (ANTIWAR.COM, SEPTEMBER 14): As early as September 2003, less than six months after the invasion of Iraq, the administration determined that the best way to sell its policy was to make its highest ranking officials -- including the president -- available for safe media opportunities.
http://www.antiwar.com/ips/berkowitz.php?articleid=9698
BUSH USES 9/11 SPEECH TO PROMOTE MORE KILLING IN IRAQ - STEPHEN ZUNES (FOREIGN POLICY IN FOCUS, SEPTEMBER 13/COMMON DREAMS)
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0913-35.htm
TRICKERY CONTINUES ON REASONS FOR WAR - DERRICK Z. JACKSON (BOSTON GLOBE, SEPTEMBER 13): Three and a half years and tens of thousands of bodies after the Great False War in Iraq began, Vice President Dick Cheney still tells us it ?was the right thing to do, and if we had it to do over again, we'd do exactly the same thing."
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial...for_war?mode=PF
THE REALITY IN IRAQ - H.D.S. GREENWAY (BOSTON GLOBE, SEPTEMBER 12): The best that can be hoped for is some compromises that will halt Iraq's increasingly vicious civil war.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial...in_iraq?mode=PF
THE IRAQ WAR: MISSION IMPOSSIBLE -- AFTER THE WARSAW PACT FELL APART, AMERICANS FELT SAFER THAN EVER. JOLTED BY 9/11, US PRESIDENT BUSH AND HIS ADVISORS RESOLVED TO DETER ANY FUTURE ATTACKS. BUT OUSTING SADDAM HUSSEIN ONLY PUT IRAQ ON THE BRINK OF CIVIL WAR AND EXPOSED THE VULNERABILITY OF THE WORLD'S ONLY SUPERPOWER - HANS HOYNG AND GEORG MASCOLO (SPIEGEL INTERNATIONAL, SEPTEMBER 12)
http://service.spiegel.de/cache/internatio...,436560,00.html
WHY WE CAN'T SEND MORE TROOPS - LAWRENCE J. KORB AND PETER OGDEN (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 14): Sending more troops to Iraq would, at the moment, threaten to break our nation's all-volunteer Army and undermine our national security.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1301575_pf.html
UNDERSTANDING WHY IRAQ IS A DISASTER - THOMAS GALE MOORE (ANTIWAR.COM, SEPTEMBER 12): For most Americans, products of the largely secular West, it is hard to understand the depth of feeling that the occupation of an Arab/Muslim country generates among the inhabitants.
http://www.antiwar.com/moore/?articleid=9684
EMERALD CITY EXPOSED: JOURNALIST RAJIV CHANDRASEKARAN PULLS BACK THE CURTAIN ON THE GREEN ZONE IN BAGHDAD TO REVEAL THE FLOPS AND FAILURES OF THE BUSH WAR TEAM - SIDNEY BLUMENTHAL (SALON, SEPTEMBER 13): The Green Zone, according to Chandrasekaran, was "Baghdad's Little America," an insular bubble where Americans went to familiar fast-food joints, watched the latest movies, lived in air-conditioned comfort, had their laundry cleaned and pressed promptly, drove GMC Suburbans and listened to a military FM radio station, "Freedom Radio," that played "classic rock and rah-rah messages."
http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/20...iraq/print.html
BLOOD MONEY IN IRAQ - T. CHRISTIAN MILLER (TOMPAINE.COM, SEPTEMBER 13): Many, if not most, contractors and government officials in Iraq were good people doing a nearly impossible job. That said, Iraq did not have to be the Wild West.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/09/1...ney_in_iraq.php
IRAN: AHMADINEJAD DECLARES TIES WITH IRAQ 'EXCELLENT': IRANIAN PRESIDENT MAHMUD AHMADINEJAD TODAY PLEDGED TO HELP AUTHORITIES IN NEIGHBORING IRAQ TO STABILIZE THEIR COUNTRY - GOLNAZ ESFANDIARI (RFE/RL, SEPTEMBER 12)
http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2006/...dd2813f25f.html
BACK FROM THE BRINK, IRAN AND THE US MUST NOW BUILD COMITY: ON HIS US TRIP, KHATAMI URGED MILD RHETORIC AND OFFERED A WAY FORWARD ON IRAQ - HELENA COBBAN (CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, SEPTEMBER 14)
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0914/p09s01-coop.html
TERRORIST NETWORK DISCONNECT - GARETH PORTER (TOMPAINE.COM, SEPTEMBER 13): The real history of the international politics of al-Qaida shows that the Bush administration is being compromised by its ties with countries aligned with the terrorists against Iran.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/09/1..._disconnect.php
LAND FOR NATO - THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 13): The fact that Condi Rice and the French foreign minister, working with the U.N., were able to secure an international peacekeeping force in south Lebanon is a potentially key achievement.
http://select.nytimes.com/2006/09/13/opini...agewanted=print
PAID SUBSCRIPTION
UNESCO SENDS EXPERTS TO ASSESS WAR'S EFFECTS ON LEBANON?S CULTURAL HERITAGE ? UN NEWS CENTRE (SEPTEMBER 11)
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?News...4&Cr=Leban&Cr1=
TURNING AROUND TURKISH OPINION - MONITOR'S VIEW (CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, SEPTEMBER 13): In Turkey opinion is also moving swiftly away from familiar ties with the West. Turks are warming significantly to their eastern neighbor, Iran.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0913/p08s02-comv.html
BLAIR ATTACKS EUROPE'S "MAD ANTI - AMERICANS" REUTERS (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPEMBER 13): British Prime Minister Tony Blair launched a withering attack on Thursday on what he called ?mad anti-Americanism" among European politicians.
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/news/news-s...agewanted=print
LABOR'S LOVE LOST: HOW BRITONS CAME TO HATE TONY BLAIR AND AMERICA, AND WHY THE NEXT PRIME MINISTER WILL PAY THE PRICE - ANDREW BROWN (SALON, SEPTEMBER 13)
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2006/...lair/print.html
PROPER APPRECIATION FOR THE ANGLO-AMERICAN ALLIANCE: FOR HIS LOYALTY TO THE US, CONGRESS SHOULD GRANT TONY BLAIR HONORARY CITIZENSHIP - JOHN HUGHES (CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, SEPTEMBER 13)
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0913/p09s01-cojh.html
PAKISTAN'S SEPARATE PEACE: PRESIDENT MUSHARRAF STRIKES A DEAL THAT MAY SPARE HIMSELF AND HIS TROOPS, AT THE LIKELY EXPENSE OF AMERICANS EDITORIAL (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 13)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1201691_pf.html
DON'T LOSE SEOUL, AMERICA: THE SOUTH KOREAN PRESIDENT VISITS BUSH TODAY, AT A TIME WHEN THE TWO COUNTRIES' CRUCIAL ALLIANCE IS SEVERELY WEAKENED - G. JOHN IKENBERRY AND MITCHELL B. REISS (LOS ANGELES TIMES, SEPTEMBER 13): A self-confident new generation of South Koreans doesn't recall the shared sacrifices of the Korean War and doesn't reflexively defer to the United States.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-...inion-rightrail
CHINA'S ECHO CHAMBER EDITORIAL (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 13): China has long prided itself on its ability to master capitalism without indulging in the messy business of democracy. So Beijing got a twofer this week when it gave the state-run Xinhua news agency monopoly control over the lucrative financial news business and the power to administer broad censorship rules for all foreign news entering China.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/13/opinion/...agewanted=print
BUSH TO HOLD TALKS WITH KAZAKH LEADER ON ALI G'S BORAT TRUTHDIG (SEPTEMBER 13): When the president meets with Kazakhstan President Nursultan Nazarbayev in Maine, the two will reportedly discuss the way in which Kazakstan?s image has been savaged by the Sacha Baron Cohen character, Borat.
http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/ite...bush_ali_borat/
SEE ALSO
http://www.wonkette.com/politics/borat/whi...-war-200416.php
THE FASCIST DISEASE: "ISLAMIC FASCISM" IS AN ACCURATE -- AND IMPORTANT -- TERM - JOSEPH LOCONTE (WEEKLY STANDARD, SEPTEMBER 14)
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Publ...12/695odaut.asp
ISLAMIC FASCISM: THE NEW HYSTERIA - ALAN MAASS (COUNTERPUNCH, SEPTEMBER 12): The chieftains of the never-ending "war on terror" are peddling a newly updated enemy: "Islamic fascism."
http://www.counterpunch.org/maass09122006.html
THINK AGAIN: IT'S WISE TO CHALLENGE SOME 9-11 ASSUMPTIONS - JUAN COLE (JSONLINE, SEPTEMBER 9): As al-Qaida struggles to strike again, the United States wrestles with a confused war on terror that won't end until Americans are forced to choose between Medicare and missiles.
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?i...55&format=print
DON'T TURN WAR ON TERROR TO CIVILIZATION CLASH LIU XUECHENG (PEOPLE?S DAILY, BEIJING, SEPTEMBER 13)
http://english.people.c