My new book project, & a request

29 thoughts on “My new book project, & a request”

1. What will happen when we leave Iraq? Depends a lot on how we do it. If we leave in a pell-mell rush to the door after we kill hundreds of civilians in some atrocity that pushes everyone over the edge, or if we loose 100 troops in one incident, well, Iraq will be caught in a swirl and there will be bloody civil war. If we leave in an orderly way, there will be bloody civil war in a more planned manner, with larger actions. If we stay as we are, there will be bloody civil war in a slow strangle as it is now. Any way it happens, there’s trouble ahead. In the one thing I agree with bush on, I feel it is important to keep Iraq together. Israel has instructed our neo-cons to want it divided up. If it divides, either in fact or practice, Iran will aid the Shite east and south, becoming the premiere influence in the area and have control of over 200 B barrels of oil. Which they want to sell, by the way. Our old friends, Saudi Arabia will fund the Sunni west, and Al-Queda-Like (AQL) will continue on there as a terror institution. The northern Kurdish area will have trouble with both Turkey and Iran, who will become better friends and partners. Israel will set up secret organizations that operate out of Kurdistan. IF Iraq stays together, and a nationalistic oil program is run ( NOT the bush pushed oil law!), Iraq will be overrun with Iraqis! They will wipe out any disruptive terror groups, to the detriment of Al-Queda.
   I want us out of Iraq as a military force. If we believe in Iraq as a country, then we will have an embassy. There will be enough hard feelings, no matter which way things play out, that our embassy will have to be a fort. Since the “safe area” ( Green Zone?) will have to be big enough that mortars can’t engulf it, we might as well keep that area for all the embassies of the world. I assume the burden of keeping an area safe for national/int’l growth and diplomacy. We will also have to be able to drive out to the airport, so there’s another duty. I accept that we will have to keep 10K fighting troops, out of sight, passive until needed, – aside from known bad guy status protection.

2. I see no indications that there will be a reduction of US forces of any size in Iraq.
   As to having a fortress for an embassy – how could it function as an embassy under such a situation?
   Good luck with your book, Helena.

3. ‘m not picking a fight, Susan, but I would like more detail. I’m pretty sure we’re on the same side. So you see no reduction of troops? What about when there’s a Dem Pres & congress? But this is where it gets tricky. We (insert assumption here)Dems still expect Iraq to be there, and we will have relations. So many people will hate us, there will still be insurrection, and ALL the embassies will be forts. All of ours are anyway. Look at our Turkey Embassy, in a NATO ally “friendly” country.
   We need to explore the aftermath in a realistic way. It’s only 2 years away.

4. I guess what I haven’t made clear is that we owe the whole world for what we’vr done in Iraq. A minimal gesture would be that we could provide a safe haven for the world’s embassies and outreaches, to bring Iraq into the fold. I’m just wanting to economize on a very worthy effect.

5. Helena,
   Will you include a chapter on Middle Eastern Youth? Understanding youth in the region is key to comprehending the entire region, as I see it.

6. “The US and the world after Iraq.” It sounds to me like a very good theme, Helena. And one which has come to dominate my own thinking these last few months (but it is not a subject I am competent to write seriously about).
   It seems to me that the problem which is going to be the major one confronting the world in the next years is the isolation and unawareness by many Americans of the outside world. It may not be evident to you who live in the States, but it is very clear to us who live in Europe. Back in 2004, I specifically accepted an invitation to a conference in SW Colorado in order to remind myself, after 30 years, what it was like to be somewhere which was 2000 miles from the sea, let alone another country (and don’t tell me I’m factually wrong, you know what I mean). It was a fascinating experience to be somewhere where nothing other than the United States and its internal events had any meaning.
   Very obvious to someone like me how easy it is to exploit this ignorance of the outer world, as indeed the Bush/Cheyney crowd do. No matter that they all have internet access. The number of poorly informed Americans who crowd out the comment sections of British newspaper webpages is stunning.
   So the big question is: are all those people in the central US, Mid-West, whatever (I do not speak of the east and west coasts, and obviously I generalise enormously), going slowly to become more aware of the outside world, or are they going to remain an ignorant power base easily swayed by Neo-Cons or their successors? It’s a big issue which will decide the future of the US, its relations with the rest of the world, and just possibly the future of the world, but probably not the last.

7. The greatest obstacle to international order is that monstrously exaggerated spirit of nationalism which also goes by the fair-sounding but misused name of patriotism.
   — Albert Einstein, essay entitled “The World As I See It”, Living Philosophies (pp. 3-7) New York: Simon Schuster, 1931.

8. Truesdell– thanks. That’s a great one!

9. I have a pearl for the chapter where you advocate your usual solution, relying on the UN for the safety, peace and justice of the world:
   http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070721/wl_nm/ivorycoast_un_abuse_dc
   “ABIDJAN (Reuters) – The United Nations has suspended a Moroccan military contingent from its peacekeeping mission in Ivory Coast while it investigates allegations of widespread sexual abuse, the world body said on Saturday.
   Soldiers from the 734-strong battalion are alleged to have sexually abused large numbers of girls as young as 13 over a three-year period as units rotated through the West African country, U.N. officials said.
   A statement from the world body said the entire battalion had been suspended pending an investigation and confined to their barracks in Bouake, the main city in the northern half of the country controlled by rebels since a 2002-2003 civil war.”

10. Dear Helena,
    Perhaps this quote from Samuel P. Huntington could be of use:
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do.”

11. I have become very fond of a quote by Yau Man a competitor on this years “Survivor”
    “Love Many, Trust Few, Harm no one”
    Not sure if this is something you might want.

12. Hi Helena,
    What a great book project ! I like the idea of concentrating on the US : there is a lot of work to do with US opinion and IMO, especially after the Iraq invasion and given the recent US imperial arrogance of the US administration, it has become difficult for a US citizen to tell other countries what they should do.
    Concerning quotes, I’d try to find something among Kofi Annan speaches.
    There is the lecture he gave at Princeton concerning the Role of disarmament and non-proliferation and even better the Truman Library speech; here is for instance a transcript of his last press conference in 2006.
    Extracts :
    asked about what were his three worst moments at the UN he answered :
    I think the worst moment, of course, was the Iraq war, which, as an organization, we couldn’t stop. I really did everything I can to try to see if we can stop it.
    The other really painful one was the loss of our colleagues in Baghdad, which was a very painful thing for all of us, and for me personally. They were not just colleagues; they were true friends. And, I think nothing had hit me as much as — was the loss of my twin sister.
    I think that the third one, if I may say so, was also the “oil-for-food” [programme], and the way it was exploited to undermine the Organization. Yes, there was some mismanagement. But, I think, when historians look at the records, they will draw the conclusion that, yes, there was mismanagement; there may have been several UN staff members who were engaged, but the scandal, if any, was in the capitals and with the 2,200 companies that made a deal with Saddam behind our backs.
    Of course, I hope the historians will realize that the UN is more than oil-for-food. The UN is the UN that coordinates tsunami [relief], the UN that deals with the Kashmir earthquake, the UN that is pushing for equality and fighting to implement the Millennium Development Goals, the UN that is fighting for human dignity and the rights of others, and all the other aspects. That was a very special programme, the oil-for-food, we were asked to implement. So, please don’t generalize from the particular.
    It is striking to realize that these three worst moments were all due to the US actions and foreign policies. Yes, I count the campaign against the scandal of the oil for food program among the US nasty actions, because they used it as a way to pressure Kofi Annan and to discredit the UN, because both refused to be completely manipulated by the US imperialists like Bolton. (btw, the amounts in play there were later dwarfed by those the Bremer administration in Iraq couldn’t account for)
    Some time before holding this last press conference, Kofi Annan went to the US and gave a public conference at a University, where there should be interesting quotes but I cna’t find it right now.
    (…)
    Question : Then, my question is, since you’re leaving, you sort of get a magic wand to look at the world. You talk about the importance of the United Nations as an institution, particularly in this era of globalization. Yet, the UN has many critics. What would you do to sort of change perceptions — to try and make people around the world realize the importance of working and living together?
    Answer : On the question of trust and belief in the UN, let me say that the perception and appreciation of the UN differs from continent to continent and from region to region. There are countries and regions in the world where the work and operations of the UN is highly appreciated.
    I know we have vocal critics in the United States. They may be in the minority, but they are very vocal. They are not always fair in their criticism. We do accept honest and fair criticism, but I think what I should say is that those who, instead of working to strengthen the UN, would want to destroy it or weaken it, they should ask themselves: if the UN is no longer here, how do we deal with some of the issues which cross borders? Who is going to speak out and stand up for the poor, the weak and the voiceless? Whom are we going to turn to when you have the “ Lebanons”? We saw it last summer. The UN was the only organization that could have stepped in and do what we did. Who is going to coordinate the next tsunami? Or the Kashmir earthquake? Who is going to send in the troops to protect the weak and the helpless? And who is going to feed the internally displaced in Darfur and other regions?
    They just have to think sincerely and simply and look around them — but I’m not sure — that’s a problem — you can’t fight ideology.
    …..
    The Secretary-General: I don’t think that an effort like the Alliance of Civilizations can be expected to solve all problems. But, at least it is a major effort to try and develop understanding and dialogue amongst peoples. And I also indicated — the work of the High-level Group also makes clear that we talk of clash of civilizations, dialogue among civilizations, Alliance of Civilizations, but that, indeed, in today’s globalized world, we are living in one civilization. Sometimes we are brutal to each other. But, when you think about it very carefully, we all have different identities: we may be a Ghanaian, you may be a Christian, you may be a Muslim. There are all sorts of things. And this we see in many parts of the world. But, when you look at the direction the world is going, we should emphasize what unites us much more than what divides us. But I think the effort of the Alliance of Civilizations, which is going to continue, they would want to set up a practical mechanism to implement the recommendations that came out — I hope will help encourage dialogue and understanding around the world. I think that’s the only thing that it can do, not more than that.
    Concerning the attitude of the US toward the UN, The New York Review of Books has an interesting article by Tony Judt in February 2007. I found about it because “Le Courrier international” translated it in French in one of its last issue (Number 871, 12th July) (it’s for subscribers only, but the direct link may work).

13. Christiane, hi! I’s an awesome idea to use some material from Kofi Annan– especially because revitalizing the work of the UN is a key theme I’ll be writing about.
    Thanks for these quotes, and any others you can contribute!

14. It’s not a quote–but it may be a useful idea. We’re not/no longer the quarterback; now, sometimes, we can be the star, play-making forward.

15. I totally agree with your goal of replacing US hegemony with cooperation with the other peoples of the world. The idea that America was created with some special permit to rule the world has poisoned our world standing and inhibited our ability to affect positive changes. It needs to change.
    I’m just afraid that the premises of the book, that we will (1) withdraw from Iraq and (2) not invade other countries post-haste may be in error. I think that we will be in Iraq for a long time and that the war machine must be fueled with more attacks. The Congress has spoken strongly for Iran, others are yearning to whack Pakistan, and we can’t rule out other countries like Venezuela. The Pentagon is now running our foreign policy, and force is seen as the prime foreign policy agent. Good grief!

16. “I’m pretty sure we’re on the same side. So you see no reduction of troops? What about when there’s a Dem Pres & congress?”
    When bush/cheney are out of power, then I might start seeing a reduction in US troops in Iraq – but that will be two years down the road, at a minimum. And even then, I am not sure it will be a real end to occupation, or just less ground troops and lots of air bombings.
    Between now and then, without impeachment, I just don’t see it. And I don’t think they will impeach. Saw a picture recently with 300 armored tanks in Germany – being prepped for Iraq.

17. Wonderful book theme Helena, and I’ve been searching my TJefferson quote resources for tight lines relevant to your “global inclusion” approach. This is fun – yet tricky!
    We can find many potentially relevant TJ quotes about America respecting the rights of other nations to self-determination in their government forms, the abhorence of war, avoiding “entangling alliances,” general good wishes for republics (democracies), the respect for “world opinion” (and a “decent respect” thereto), and the hope that all governments would be guided by “conscience” — and that in so doing, all would benefit therefrom… But finding this combination in one quote is a challenge. Here’s a few initial ideas: (I can clarify details, dates, on all the sources here. With each quote, there’s a context too that needs to be checked…)
    ————–
    “Moral obligations constitute a law for nations as well as individuals.” –TJ Reply to New York Tammany Society, 1808.
    “Let us hope that our new government will take… occasion to show, that they mean to proscribe no virtue from the canons of their conduct with other nations.” –TJ to James Madison, 1789. ME 7:450, Papers 15:367
    “The will of our citizens to countenance no injustice towards a foreign nation [fills] me with comfort as to our future course.” –TJ to Albert Gallatin, 1818.
    “It has a great effect on the opinion of our people and the world to have the moral right on our side.” –TJ to James Madison, 1809
    This one exhibits TJ’s ambivalence towards world opinion – valuing it enormously, yet hesitant to allow its power to be dictatorial:
    …it is true that nations are to be judges for themselves; since no one nation has a right to sit in judgment over another, but the tribunal of our consciences remains, and that also of the opinion of the world. These will revise the sentence we pass in our own case, and as we respect these, we must see that in judging ourselves we have honestly done the part of impartial and rigorous judges.” –TJ: Opinion on French Treaties, 1793. ME 3:228
    (from a still fascinating written TJ debate w/ Alexander Hamilton, in the “court” of then Pres. G. Washington. Key int’l legal authority both TJ & AH cited was… Vattel.)

18. Perhaps for another chapter, there are “powerful” TJ statements on war & peace (which neocons authors lately have bent over backwards to avoid).
    ————–
    “Never was so much false arithmetic employed on any subject as that which has been employed to persuade nations that it is their interest to go to war.” –TJ: Notes on Virginia Q.XXII , 1782.
    “I abhor war and view it as the greatest scourge of mankind.” –TJ to Elbridge Gerry, 1797
    “Although I dare not promise myself that [peace] can be perpetually maintained, yet if, by the inculcations of reason or religion, the perversities of our nature can be so far corrected as sometimes to prevent the necessity, either supposed or real, of an appeal to the blinder scourges of war, murder, and devastation, the benevolent endeavors of the friends of peace will not be entirely without remuneration.” –TJ to Noah Worcester, 1817.
    (this latter quote has me thinking TJ was an early American variant of Kant….)

19. I also caught your reference to Chuck Hagel…. His various Eisenhower-as-model speeches over the years might well be a good source.
    For example, his speech before the Brookings Institution about this time last year (7/28) has this gem:
    “Rarely will America succeed if its actions seek to impose its objectives on others, or achieve change and reform through power alone. America is always strongest when it acts in concert with friends and allies. This approach has enhanced our power and magnified our influence.”
    http://www.brook.edu/comm/events/20060728hagel.pdf
    And here’s a Hagel-the-veteran un-guarded quip…
    “When it comes to war, Democrats die in war just like Republicans, and we debase war and the responsibility we have when we try to make it captive to a political position or a political party.” (from Hagel on Faux News with Chris Wallace, 08/20/2006)
    I referenced both items w/n my post here at jwn last August 21 https://vintage.justworldnews.org/archives/002073.html
    It seems in many ways your book is setting out to answer the questions Hagel has been mulling….

20. You’ll say that I like goodbye speeches.. but there also Dwight D Eisenhower farewell speech to the nation in 1961, in which he warns against the militaro-industrial complexe :
    “A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction…
    This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence — economic, political, even spiritual — is felt in every city, every statehouse, every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
    In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
    We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together.”
    (Source: Public Papers of the Presidents, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1960, p. 1035-1040,
    See Wikipedia.org for more in this.)
    Not sure that you’ll like all of it, especially not the first paragraph, but I think that this was a much respected president, so what he says may be more easily accepted by Americans.

21. You’ll say that I like goodbye speeches.. but there is also Dwight D Eisenhower farewell speech to the nation in 1961, in which he warns against the militaro-industrial complexe :
    “A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction…
    This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence — economic, political, even spiritual — is felt in every city, every statehouse, every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
    In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
    We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together.”
    (Source: Public Papers of the Presidents, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1960, p. 1035-1040,
    See Wikipedia.org for more in this.)
    Not sure that you’ll like all of it, especially not the first paragraph, but I think that this was a much respected president, so what he says may be more easily accepted by Americans.

22. The whole address of Eisenhower speech of 1961 is there.

23. Helena
    you might like to muse over this. Tim bitterly regrets the conflict.
    “We are entering Iraq to free a people and the only flag which will be flown in that ancient land is their own. Show respect for them.
    If you are ferocious in battle remember to be magnanimous in victory
    “There are some who are alive at this moment who will not be alive shortly. Those who do not wish to go on that journey, we will not send.
    “As for the others I expect you to rock their world. Wipe them out if that is what they choose. But if you are ferocious in battle remember to be magnanimous in victory.
    “Iraq is steeped in history. It is the site of the Garden of Eden, of the Great Flood and the birthplace of Abraham. Tread lightly there.
    “You will see things that no man could pay to see and you will have to go a long way to find a more decent, generous and upright people than the Iraqis.
    “You will be embarrassed by their hospitality even though they have nothing.
    “Don’t treat them as refugees for they are in their own country. Their children will be poor, in years to come they will know that the light of liberation in their lives was brought by you.
    “If there are casualties of war then remember that when they woke up and got dressed in the morning they did not plan to die this day.
    “Allow them dignity in death. Bury them properly and mark their graves.”
    Tim Collins 1 R Irish March 2003

24. Antiwar quotes here.

25. No doubt many “realists” & “paleoconservatives” would chime in with the famous July 4th 1821 quote from John Quincy Adams: (though perhaps it might be taken, incorrectly I think, as a statement for American isolationism…. rather than “inclusiveness”) I rather like lesser quoted last two sentences in the following passage…. and think Bush/Rice when you read…
    —————
    “She {America} has abstained from interference in the concerns of others, even when conflict has been for principles to which she clings, as to the last vital drop that visits the heart. She has seen that probably for centuries to come, all the contests of that Aceldama the European world, will be contests of inveterate power, and emerging right. Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. She will commend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example. She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom. The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force. . . . She might become the dictatress of the world. She would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit. . . . [America’s] glory is not dominion, but liberty.” [July 4, 1821, from his address as Secretary of State]

26. To my great frustration I am unable to find the source of this marvellous quotation from Marcus Aurelius Antoninus.
    A noble man compares and estimates himself by an idea which is higher than himself; and a mean man, by one lower than himself. The one produces aspiration; the other ambition, which is the way in which a vulgar man aspires.

27. Well, if we are talking specifically about Iraq, here are a couple of recent quotes that I regard as capturing especially well the colonial nature of the war:
    “We dominate the scene and we will continue to impose our will on this country.”
    – L. Paul Bremer, Head of the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq, June 2003.
    “With a heavy dose of fear and violence, and a lot of money for projects, I think we can convince these people that we are here to help them.”
    – Colonel Nathan Sassaman, battalion commander in Iraq, New York Times, Dec. 7, 2003.
    If anyone is interested, I’ve compiled in a Word document a whole series of quotes pertaining to the purposes/goals of the Iraq war.
    – Patrick

28. Patrick, I have used both those quotes – particularly the one from that ridiculous little cock-a-hoop (thanks to Helena for that one), L. Paul “Jerry” Bremer III.
    And yes, I am interested in your collection of quotes, particularly if you cite time, place, and source for them.

29. Hi Shirin,
    Sure, write to me at patrickcummins@shaw.ca and I’ll send the Word document as an attachment.
    Cheers, Patrick

Comments are closed.