Just World News with Helena Cobban – Page 84 – Info, analysis, discussion

Those Pesky Border Regions

President Obama: “At the heart of a new Afghanistan policy is going to be a smarter Pakistan policy. As long as you’ve got safe havens in these border regions that the Pakistani government can’t control or reach, in effective ways, we’re going to continue to see vulnerability on the Afghan side of the border.”
Obama was talking about Afghanistan and Pakistan, halfway around the world, but soon he might be using similar language for the USA and Mexico. While there haven’t been insurgent attacks in the USA yet, there has been an increase in crime, particularly kidnapping.

And the al-Qaeda and Iran bugaboos have been raised by alert US lawmakers.

Continue reading “Those Pesky Border Regions”

Noa & Mira — confusing the categories

(Update, after making this post, I’ve been alerted that there’s another side to Noa lately that rather undermines her reputation. I’ll post a separate entry above.)
There’s something ironic, yet hopeful in Israel’s entry to the 2009 Eurovision music competition, to be broadcast from Moscow in May. (Think “American idol” — only bigger.) Though not geographically part of Europe, Israel participates as a member of the European Broadcasting Union.
Israel’s entrants this year, “Noa and Mira” (Achinoam Nini and Mira Awad), are “Israeli” singers confusing the categories and getting sniped at from multiple sides inside Israel.
For background, see this recent Ethan Bronner NYT dispatch, which explains how a popular Israeli singer of Yemeni extraction linked forces with a green-eyed Israeli Christian Arab. They’re feeling a bit orphaned by their own country, condemned by many for their criticisms of settlements, Hamas, and the use of violence. Their January selection to participate in Eurovision was criticized even by the “left”:

[C]oinciding as it did with Israel’s Gaza war and the rise of Avigdor Lieberman, the ultranationalist politician who threatens Israeli Arabs with a loyalty oath, the committee’s choice was labeled by many on the left and in the Arab community as an effort to prettify an ugly situation…
A petition went around demanding that the duo withdraw, saying they were giving the false impression of coexistence in Israel and trying to shield the nation from the criticism it deserved.

Conundrum indeed. How does one be a voice for peace, without being “used” by hasbaristas who would abstractly proclaim peace while still building settlements, strangling Gaza, erecting walls, etc? Curious, I scrounged around youtube to learn about this intriguing duo.
Here’s a 2007 interview with Noa & Mira, keyed to their popular rendition of the Beattles classic, “We can work it out.” (Here’s a lively version of the song performed in Paris last year at the “peace of the heart” confab for Israel.)
In the abstract, I rather like Noa’s apparent philosophy. In the interview above, she wrestles with the Christian concept of turning the other cheek, and how it runs hard into the ongoing “exploding & release” of pent up frustrations and hurts. Yet Noa insists that the parties must “apologize, recognize & share.” If only. Mira is a bit more coy, saying that “everyone knows the solution,” even as she professes that she doesn’t know much of politics.
Undaunted by their critics, Noa & Mira on March 2nd performed four tunes before Israeli viewers and judges. In the end, Israel selected this song to be its entry for the Eurovision semifinals: There must be another way.”
And when I cry, I cry for both of us
My pain has no name
And when I cry, I cry
To the merciless sky and say
There must be another way
(Full Lyrics here and in extension.)
May we yet find it.
*********************************

Continue reading “Noa & Mira — confusing the categories”

An officer home from Iraq: his thoughts

I enjoyed an extended chat with a jr. US Army officer, on furlough from Iraq, about the time that Phyllis Bennis here gave a stimulating guest comment that questioned the Obama Administration agenda in Iraq.
I too was sensing something awry when the WaPost Outlook section last Sunday had three separate neoconservatives (Feith, Pletka, & Scheunemann) praising “Obama’s Plan for Iraq,” presumably because it seemed to place more emphasis on “finishing the job” and equivocating on the withdrawal timetable.
On the other hand, I’ve often wondered how simply withdrawing US troops necessarily will “end the war,” especially with the multiple worm cans festering in northern Iraq. (That of course is not an argument in itself for staying, just a “grounded” check.) In any case, I am encouraged that the violence is down considerably, even as we debate the various explanations.
With such questions on my mind, I was eager to listen to this young officer current impressions. He’s been there less than half a year, ensconced in one of the large army bases near the Baghdad airport. I present here a few of his observations, without my own “spin.” For his sake, I am not going to mention his name or unit, save to say that his comments were “candid” and, as far as I could tell, unconcerned about command ramifications.
Biggest complaint: While he did frequently mention cold showers (which beats being electrocuted by one of the notorious KBR showers!), his primary gripe was about sheer, raw boredom. The army keeps him “busy.” As a young engineer-in-training, he puts in 13+ hour days , 6.5 days a week, but his duties seem largely dominated by bureaucratic “make work” the army notoriously can create to fill space. (For effect, he mentioned that his drudge work had included warehouse inventories at the massive Abu Ghraib complex.)

Continue reading “An officer home from Iraq: his thoughts”

Salam Fayyad resigns

The PA’s ’emergency’-installed PM Salam Fayyad has submitted his resignation to (date-expired) PA President Mahmoud Abbas. People close to Fayyad indicated to me when I was in Ramallah ten days ago this would most likely happen.
His present resignation is to pave the way for a government of national unity, or of national accord, which I guess is slightly different.
It is possible that Fayyad himself might emerge as the agreed-upon candidate for PM in the GNU/A. But whoever the next PM is, the task and mandate of the US-trained (“Dayton”) forces the PA has been fielding in the West Bank will have to change; as too will the PA’s beyond-compliant posture, or lack of posture, in the negotiations with Israel. Otherwise, no national unity or even national accord will be possible; and the implosion of Fateh will only accelerate.
Fateh’s collapse-from-inside is already pretty far advanced, anyway. No amount of US hugging and US-mobilized mega-billion funding can arrest that now. Only the GNU/A can. (Actually, absent any discernible US spine or focus in the peace negotiations, the US hugging and funding of Abbas only further undermine him. This is known as the hug of death. Ask Fouad Siniora.)
I’m writing this short post from Amman. I came here by bus this morning from Nazareth, and I have a 12-hour layover here before returning to the US. I’ve gotten some really great material during my month-long reporting trip around this part of the Middle East.
One of the items buried in a notebook is the interview I did with Fayyad on Feb. 24. I need to dig it out and write it up properly. Maybe later today.

Britain engaging with Hizbullah: Excellent!

Gordon Brown’s government in London is the first significant western government to– finally– break the taboo on political engagement with Hizbullah.
Yesterday, a spokesperson for the Foreign Office said,

This is excellent news; and long overdue.
I have been arguing for many years now that all the world’s governments need to engage politically with Hizbullah, a significant Lebanese political movement that has participated (successfully) in Lebanese parliamentary elections since 1992 and has even had representatives in a number of Lebanese governments over the years, including now.
You can read two of my longer pieces on Hizbullah here (spring 2005) and here (Nov/Dec 2006).
So long as George Bush and his neocon allies were in power in Washington– and yes, also, before him, under Bill Clinton– no significant western power dared to break the prohibition that Washington and the Israelis kept in place on their allies and friends having any contact with Hizbullah, Hamas, Iran, or (to a certain extent) Syria. Indeed, George Bush’s Washington gave its full support to the brutal military campaigns Israel waged to crush and/or topple Hizbullah in 2006, and Hamas at the end of last year.
Now– with or without a nod of consent from Washington (though I suspect, with)– London has broken the taboo on dealing with Hizbullah.
Hillary Clinton is meanwhile urging that Iran be included in a peace-sponsoring conference she’s proposing for Afghanistan… And Washington is well on its way to restoring the level of political relations with Syria to what it was before George Bush and Elliott Abrams came along with their thinly veiled campaign for regime change in Damascus.
Hizbullah for its part sounds almost deliriously happy about London’s change heart, showcasing the Union Jack on ts website (behind Hizbullah’s own signature yellow flag), and writing that “the British-Hezbollah relations entered a new era!”
Things are definitely changing… and in a good, de-escalatory direction. Long may the trend continue.

My IPS analysis on Jerusalem developments

… is here. Also here.
Since you can’t currently comment here, why don’t y’all go over and comment over at the second of those locations.
My view is that Jerusalem is emerging as increasingly central to the Palestinian-Israeli interaction. Of course, it is an issue that captures the imagination and allegiance of Muslims, Jews– and quite a few Christians– around the world. (Did you know that one of the oldest Orthodox Jewish communities inside Jerusalem, the Naturei Karta, is still resolutely anti-Zionist?)
But even at the raw political level Jerysalem is crucial because it is, if you like, a kind of “bridge issue” between the issue of ending the post-1967 occupation and the issues around the decidedly second-class citizenship that Israel’s own 1.2 million indigenous Palestinians are forced to live with.
In addition, the situation of East Jerusalem’s 220,000 Palestinians is in many ways far more precarious than that of their compatriots (and often close relatives) living elsewhere in the West Bank, outside the municipal boundaries that Israel expanded, for purely Zionist-ideological reasons, back in 1967. Primarily because, though these Palestinians do live in indubitably occupied territory, the vast majority of members of the US-dominated international community has done almost nothing to provide them with the kinds of financing and other support that the Palestinian communities in the rest of the West Bank have been receiving.
In that respect, their situation is very similar to that of Gaza’s grossly under-supported (until now) Palestinians.
Though the Jerusalem Palestinians are now nearly completely cut off from daily contact with their confreres in the rest of the West Bank they do have fairly good contacts with the Palestinians who are citizens of Israel. Thus, new coalitions of solidarity have been emerging among these different segments of the Palestinian people; and the plight of the Jerusalem Palestinians throws a helpful spotlight on the challenges of continuing land-grabs and decidedly inferior civil and political status that the Palestinian Israelis face, within their own different context.
Anyway, the issues of Jerusalem’s Palestinians will certainly be important in the months ahead…

Resources on East Jerusalem

I just finished writing my weekly news analysis for IPS, which is on the situation of the Palestinians in Jerusalem and the potential for that become a huge new issue.
In the course of that I checked out a bunch of online resources, to use to supplement the results of my own very up-to-date reporting. Since I now have them all as tabs on my Firefox I’m happy to share them here.
* Website of Ir Amim in English, great resource on the situation of Palestinians in the city. Lots of good info available through the tabs/links in the left sidebar.
* FMEP’s table showing the population of Israel’s illegal settlements in East Jerusalem, through 2006.
* Info about– and link to PDF text of– the letter sent to Hillary Clinton by the residents of the Bustan neighborhood of Silwan in East Jerusalem. Includes a fairly ghastly photo of the ageing Shimon Peres kissing Hillary.
* Info about the most recent destruction of Um Kamel’s tent in Sheikh Jarrah.
* Good article by The Independent’s Donald Macintyre about the Silwan situation.

Lieberman as Israeli foreign minister?

If so, then let’s hope this clarifies the true nature of Israel to the whole of the outside world.
Including the United States.

Comments temporarily unsubmittable

The ‘verification code’ (Captcha) feature at the bottom of the Comments-submitting form is not working. I don’t know why but have contacted my tech adviser who is many time zones away from me.
Please therefore don’t bother submitting comments until further notice (or, until you see the Captcha codes appearing at the bottom of the comment-submission form.)
Sorry about this.
In case the tech adviser is unavailable, if any readers can give me clear instructions how to fix my Captcha or install a new one without too much trouble, please tell me. My version of MT is 3.21. Thanks!

Is Obama working to end the US war and occupation in Iraq?

The following is a guest op-ed contributed to JWN by Phyllis Bennis
President Obama announced “a new strategy to end the war in Iraq.” That sounds good – an indication that he is keeping to his campaign promises, responding to the powerful anti-war consensus in this country. But if this plan were actually a first step towards a complete end to the U.S. occupation of Iraq, it would be even better than good.
A real end to the war would mean this withdrawal was the first step towards a complete withdrawal of all U.S. troops in Iraq and bringing them home, not redeploying them to another failing war in Afghanistan. It would mean pulling out all the 150,000+ U.S.-paid foreign mercenaries and contractors, closing all the U.S. military bases, and ending all U.S. efforts to control Iraqi oil.
And so far, that is not on Obama’s agenda.
The troop withdrawal now planned would leave behind as many as 50,000 U.S. troops. That’s an awful lot. Even Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi thinks that may be too much. She told Rachel Maddow “I don’t know what the justification is for 50,000, at the present …I would think a third of that, maybe 20,000, a little more than a third, 15,000 or 20,000.”
Those left-over U.S. forces won’t include officially-designated “combat brigades.” But they will still be occupying Iraq. Doing what? Very likely, just what combat troops do – patrol and bomb and shoot like combat troops, even if they are not part of recognized combat brigades. Some of them might be “re-labeled” or “re-missioned” so combat actions are described as training or support. That would mean a retreat to the lies and deception that characterized this war during the Bush years – something President Obama promised to leave behind. It would also mean military resistance in Iraq would continue, leading to more Iraqi and U.S. casualties.
Last year’s U.S. agreement with Iraq calls for all U.S. forces to be out of Iraq by the end of December 2011, and President Obama said he intends to remove all troops. But intentions are not commitments, and the agreement can too easily be changed. Retired General Barry McCaffrey wrote an internal report for the Pentagon last year, saying, “We should assume that the Iraqi government will eventually ask us to stay beyond 2011 with a residual force of trainers, counterterrorist capabilities, logistics, and air power. (My estimate – perhaps a force of 20,000 to 40,000 troops).”
And what if the reduction in ground troops is matched by an escalation of U.S. air attacks? That means more Iraqi civilians continuing to be killed by the U.S. military. We need to withdraw all air and naval forces too – something the Status of Forces Agreement negotiated with Iraq requires, but we have yet to hear a commitment from the Obama administration.
Obama promised transparency in the contracting process, but he hasn’t yet promised to bring home all the mercenaries and contractors. That means even more windfalls for the oil companies and powerful contractors whose CEOs and stockholders have made billion dollar killings on Iraq contracts.
We should end all U.S. funding for the giant contractors– Dyncorp, Bechtel, Blackwater – that serve as out-sourced unaccountable components of the U.S. military. They were part of the torture scenes at Abu Ghraib. (Blackwater’s recent name change to “Xe” should not allow its role in killing Iraqi civilians to be forgotten.) Even as some troops may be withdrawn, we will need congressional hearings on the human rights violations and misuse of taxpayer funds by the war profiteers who run these companies. President Obama’s decision to close the Guantanamo prison shows his awareness of the severity of the crimes committed there. Ending the funding of the contractors who carried out so many of those crimes should be a logical next step.
As the Obama administration seeks new ways to cut military spending, closing the 50+ Iraqi bases, particularly the five mega-bases becomes an urgent necessity. And the giant embassy-on-steroids that the Bush administration built to house up to 5,000 U.S. diplomats and officials should be closed down as a relic of an illegal war launched to maintain control of the country, people and resources of Iraq.
We know there is no military solution in Iraq. Pulling out any troops from Iraq is a good thing. But Obama’s plan falls short of his most important promise regarding the Iraq War: bringing it quickly to its end.
___________________________________
Phyllis Bennis is a Fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies. Her most recent book is Ending the Iraq War: A Primer, and she contributed a chapter on Iraq policy in the just-released Mandate for Change: Policies and Leadership for 2009 and Beyond. To sign up to receive her talking points and articles, go to http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/357/t/1011/signUp.jsp?key=95 and choose “New Internationalism Project.”