Chas Freeman, former US Ambassador to Saudi Arabia and thirty-year veteran of the United States’ foreign service delivered a speech today that
Ambassador Chas W. Freeman
everyone in the United States should be paying attention to. It is a searing indictment of American policy in the Middle East from a man who was in the middle of it for decades.
The focus of Chas’ talk is the current battle being waged against Da’ish, or the Islamic State, ISIS, ISIL, whatever the name you want to use may be. If you’ve been following me on Twitter or Facebook, you’ve seen my view in this, but I’ll re-state it briefly.
I believe the entire approach we’ve taken to IS is completely off-course. It is, in fact, a repeat of previous errors. IS wanted the United States to intervene, just as al-Qaeda wanted the US to react with massive force to 9/11. Any losses IS suffers will be more than made up for by the increasing radicalization of the region caused by US intervention. This reality is doubled because the US will only bomb, which will greatly increase damage to civilian lives and infrastructure. And from that soil will grow many more IS recruits, eager to battle their foes in the region and in the West.
Chas lays all of this out very neatly in his speech. But there is an underlying point which, though Chas did make it explicit in his speech, he doesn’t spend a great deal of time on, as he decided to focus on current events. Let me give you my own take on it, so that you can be even more tempted to read and, more importantly, share widely, Chas’ speech. Continue Reading »
Posted in Islamic State, Middle East | Tagged 9/11, al-Qaeda, Chas Freeman, Da'ish, Dick Cheney, Iraq, ISIL, ISIS, Islamic State, Israel, Middle east, Obama, Palestinians, United States | Leave a Comment »
Some people are surprised by some of the things Israeli President Reuven Rivlin has said and done. That just shows a real lack of historical perspective on the Israeli political scene.
In the United States and Europe, the Israeli right, epitomized by the Likud Coalition, has always been the “opponent of peace,” while the Labor Party and, later, Kadima were the “pursuers of peace.” This was always a false dichotomy. It would have been somewhat truer to say that supporters of Likud were usually, but far from always, opposed to the two-state solution that Oslo envisioned, while Labor and Kadima supported it. Continue Reading »
Posted in Israel | Tagged 1956, Anti-Arab racism, Ariel Sharon, Benjamin Netanyahu, Ehud Barak, Kadima, Kafr Kassem, Labor Party, Likud, Meretz, One-State Solution, Oslo Process, Reuven Rivlin, Two-state solution | 1 Comment »
Former American diplomat Aaron David Miller is a frequent and worthwhile contributor to US foreign policy discussions in both Washington and the news media. His long career in Middle East diplomacy and strong focus on Israel have enabled him to clarify for the general public the many difficulties that exist under the surface of these issues. Unfortunately, as shown by his recent piece in Foreign Policy magazine, he sometimes obscures them as well.
Miller correctly points out that the Israel-Palestine conflict is not the major source of regional instability and that Secretary of State John Kerry was foolish to imply that the lack of progress on this issue had in some way become a contributing factor to the rise of the group that calls itself the Islamic State. But he also elides the enormous amount of responsibility the United States has and continues to hold not only for the Israel-Palestine conflict itself, but also for the difficulty in making any progress on the issue, let alone resolving it. Read more at LobeLog
Posted in United States | Tagged Aaron David Miller, BDS, Benjamin Netanyahu, David trimble, European Union, Foreign Policy Magazine, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Gaza, Gerry Adams, ISIS, Islamic State, Israeli Settlements, Jerusalem, Jerusalem Light Rail Station Attack, John Kerry, Jordan Valley, Josef Stalin, Mahmoud Abbas, OECD, Temple Mount, UN Security Council, West Bank, Winston Churchill | Leave a Comment »
In the United States, we seem to be surrounded by irrational hysteria these days. Two, perhaps three cases of ebola within our borders have
Click on the image above to download the full report
generated a great deal of fear despite the fact that there are far more virulent, widespread and equally deadly diseases around us all the time.
The Islamic State has generated similarly cowardly reactions in the US. The media and, especially, members of Congress from both parties are whipping up terror far beyond what IS is capable of on its own, despite its murderous ideology and actions so brutal even al-Qaeda is appalled. The hysteria is, itself, something to be addressed because rational decisions cannot be made under such conditions and no decisions call out for rationality than military ones. But more than that, the panic over IS allows the United States to reframe the entire view of the Middle East’s descent into ever-widening sectarian war.
It is the evil “ISIS” or al-Qaeda, or the “Nusra Front” or this or that Islamic cleric that is at the root of this. No one thinks in terms of the US’ own responsibility for the conditions in the entire region. But in fact the US, while certainly not the root cause of sectarianism in the Arab world, is very much responsible for unleashing the madness engulfing the region, through decades of politically invasive policy decisions based on US self-interest and rooted in an appalling ignorance of the social, economic, religious and political realities of the region and capped off by the invasion of Iraq over a decade ago which served as the spark to light the fire.
The problems in Iraq go far beyond IS, even of IS is the most horrifying symptom of them right now. That’s why this new report on the conditions for minorities in Iraq is so helpful. The perspective it brings goes beyond IS into the larger problems of sectarianism in Iraq and the difficulties that arise not only from the ongoing strife but also from the weakness of security and the Iraqi government. Americans in particular need to see this. The solutions lie in international law and international action, but the responsibility lies with us.
Posted in Iraq | Tagged al-Qaeda, Iraq, ISIL, ISIS, Islamic State, Minority Rights Group International | Leave a Comment »
Fear truly is the mind-killer. It has a way, when intentionally stoked and directed at some enemy, of killing a lot of people as well. In Israel, the
Jewish graffiti on a Palestinian home
bombardment and invasion of Gaza over the summer demonstrates what can happen when a populace is fed a consistent diet of fear, no matter how safe the society is and how meager the threat to them is. A similar dynamic could be taking hold in the United States, as the specter of the Islamic State becoming strong enough to threaten the US is being pushed harder and harder all the time, despitehow unrealistic it is.
One of the more powerful lies that feeds public panic about IS is that the global Muslim community is silent about them, whether out of fear, or sympathy. With a billion Muslims worldwide, this combines with widespread Islamophobia to raise the specter of a fierce and huge Muslim army to install a global caliphate, complete with beheadings of enemies and infidels, and the subjugation of all to a reactionary form of Islam. Of course, it’s a phony image, and few subscribe to such an extreme illusion, for now. But the accusation of silence from the Muslim world about IS sticks, despite a tidal wave of Muslim condemnation of the group, and that feeds an ominous fire. Read more at Souciant.
Posted in Islamophobia, Jewish Community | Tagged Avigdor Lieberman, Ayelet Shaked, Benjamin Netanyahu, David Duke, Dresden, Edmund Burke, Gaza, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, ISIS, Islam, Islamic State, Islamophobia, Israel, Judaism, Rabbi Shlomo Lewis, United States | Leave a Comment »
During the summertime war in Gaza, the two most progressive members of the US Senate stirred up controversy among their backers with expressions of uncritical support for Israel. At a town hall meeting, Bernie Sanders of Vermont, the lone Senate independent, responded to a questioner that Israel had “overreacted” with its 52-day bombardment and ground incursion, but then proceeded to justify Israel’s actions with the usual pro-Israel talking points about “missiles fired from populated areas” and “sophisticated tunnels.” An audience member began to shout objections, to which Sanders said, “Shut up.”
Elizabeth Warren, the Democrat from Massachusetts, went further in her defense of Israel at a meeting with constituents on Cape Cod. She said it was right for the United States to send $225 million in aid to Israel, a “democracy controlled by the rule of law,” as the bombing continued. She ventured no criticism at all of the extensive damage to civilian lives and livelihoods in Gaza. When another constituent suggested that future US aid be conditioned on Israel halting settlement construction in the West Bank, Warren replied, “I think there’s a question of whether we should go that far.” Read more at the Middle East Research and Information Project
Posted in Uncategorized, United States, US-Israel Lobby | Tagged AIPAC, Barack Obama, BDS, Bernie Sanders, Black September, campaign financing, Chuck Hagel, Code Pink, Cold War, Cory Booker, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Egypt, Elizabeth Warren, Gaza, Gaza Under Attack, George W. Bush, Golda Meir, Harry S. Truman, Henry Kissinger, International Atomic Energy Agency, International Criminal Court, Israel Lobby, Israel Nuclear weapons, Israeli nuclear program, Jewish Voice for Peace, John Foster Dulles, John Mearsheimer, Jordan, Kurds, Lyndon B. Johnson, Nasser, national security council, Noam Chomsky, Occupation, Phantom Jets, Richard Nixon, Settlements, Sheldon Adelson, Soviet Union, Stephen Walt, Syria, United Nations, US Aid to Israel, US Foreign Policy, US geo-strategy, US National interests, West Bank, Yitzhak Rabin, Zionism | Leave a Comment »
When I started getting serious about action on the Israel-Palestine conflict and the associated US foreign policy, I found it imperative to convince people that the Oslo Accords were doomed to fail. There were the obvious critiques of the accords: the lack of any sort of human rights framework, the absence of consequences for failing to abide by conditions or fulfill agreed upon commitments, and the formal recognition of Israel without any mention whatsoever of a potential Palestinian state. But I saw an even bigger obstacle.
Conventional wisdom has it that Jerusalem is the most difficult stumbling block. But I have always maintained that it is the Palestinian refugees that were the most serious obstacle to a negotiated solution. Read more at LobeLog
Posted in Refugees | Tagged 1948, Aaron David Miller, Anti-Zionist, apartheid, Bringing Back the Palestinian Refugee Question, Dennis Ross, Gaza, Hamas, International Crisis Group, Islamic Waqf, Jerusalem, Jim Crow, John Kerry, Mahmoud Abbas, Native Americans, Netanyahu, New Historians, Obama, Old City, Oslo Accords, Palestine Liberation Organization, Palestine Papers, Palestinian Refugees, Palestinian Statehood, Right of Return, Rwanda, slavery, South Africa, Temple Mount, Yasir Arafat, Yugoslavia, Zionism | Leave a Comment »
« Newer Posts - Older Posts »