Showing posts with label Foreign Policy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Foreign Policy. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 21, 2007

The Language of Defeat

As I was channel surfing one night I came across Senator John McCain on the Charlie Rose Show. If these guys weren’t so frightening they would be laughable. As I was listening to him speak, I couldn’t get over how he kept using the same catch phrases from decades ago. It’s as if these guys are living in a time warp, this is still 1950 in their minds and nothing can change that. The rhetoric is still the “gunboat” philosophy that has characterized our foreign policy for a generation.

He continually used the buzz words, “Israel” and “projection of American power”. Is it just me or have these guys been cryogenically frozen for the last 60 years? The world has changed their view of it has not. As long as our foreign policy is being conducted by those who are still living in some “glorious past”, we will never be safe or free. We must adjust our foreign policy goals to reflect the real world and not some false assumption provided by “analysis” that haven’t seen the real world in who knows how long. The more we continue to bang the same song on the same drum the sooner we escalate our descent into irrelevancy. We are becoming nothing more than the sandlot bully, gone are the principles and credibility of democracy. They have been replaced by the tenets of greed and racism.

I think what shocked me the most was an exchange between Mr. McCain and Charlie Rose when Mr. McCain was talking about the Chinese building aircraft carriers and how that was something we needed to watch closely. According to Mr. McCain the aircraft carrier allows the host nation to project its power around the world. Charlie Rose retorted that we have aircraft carriers why shouldn’t the Chinese, it was at this point the hypocrisy became unbearable. Mr. McCain said that the difference was that the US “didn’t have a history of imposing its power on other nations”. Charlie Rose then asked if the Chinese had such a history and Mr. McCain said no, but they still had to be watched carefully.

First of all the line about the US not having a history of imposing it’s power on other nations by the use of aircraft carriers was ridiculous. I think Mr. McCain is suffering from selective amnesia, so just in case let me just refresh his memory. Obviously he has forgotten about Iraq, Grenada, the whole southern hemisphere, Cuba and the list goes on and on. For our leaders to go on television and make these types of statements, it is no wonder the credibility of the US is at an all-time low.

This rhetoric of good versus evil has to stop. The politics of the cold war must be replaced by the diplomacy of the new world. We can’t continue to kill those who don’t agree with us. At the same time we silence dissent at home by violating the very document that is supposed to stand for democracy. Before we start trying to repair what’s wrong in the world, maybe we should spend a little time righting what is wrong here in this country. With this shoot first and ask questions later foreign policy, it is we who have the rest of the world leery. Is America the source of all that is wrong in the world? No, but we have to accept our culpability where applicable and strive to not repeat the mistakes of the past.

The current crop of politicians and media types appear to have learned nothing from the past and are dead set on repeating the same mistakes. Mr. McCain and others, the world has changed and continues to evolve, it is a shame that you people have not. If my truths do not evolve, but remain steadfast in false premises then I have learned nothing. Worse than the fact that I have learned nothing is that with this mindset I am incapable of learning, which is not only foolish but dangerous. It is this mindset that will cause us to be defeated in Iraq as it has caused our defeats in the past.


There's no principles in what you say
No direction in the things you do
For your world is soon to come to a close
Through the ages all great men have taught
Truth and happiness just can't be bought-or sold
Tell me why are you people so cold

I'm...... Going back to Saturn where the rings all glow
Rainbow, moonbeams and orange snow On Saturn
People live to be two hundred and five
Going back to Saturn where the people smile
Don't need cars cause we've learn to fly On Saturn
Just to live to us is our natural high

We have come here many times before
To find your strategy to peace is war
Killing helpless men, women and children
That don't even know what they're dying for
We can't trust you when you take a stand
With a gun and bible in your hand
And the cold expression on your face
Saying give us what we want or we'll destroy

Saturn
Stevie Wonder

Read more!

Thursday, August 16, 2007

The Kiss Of Death

You know you’ve lost your groove when the “so-called” leading country of democracy supports a group in elections and that group consistently loses. These loses are not just in one country or region, but all over the world. There is no political group in the world today that wants its party or movement supported by the US. It seems that having the support of the US is the worse endorsement you can get. I remember a time when the world looked to America as the beacon of hope and worthy of emulation, I guess those days are long gone.




“It’s the kiss of death,” said Turki al-Rasheed, a Saudi reformer who watched last Sunday’s elections closely. “The minute you are counted on or backed by the Americans, kiss it goodbye, you will never win.”

The paradox of American policy in the Middle East — promoting democracy on the assumption it will bring countries closer to the West — is that almost everywhere there are free elections, the American-backed side tends to lose.

Lebanon’s voters in the Metn district, in other words, appeared to have joined the Palestinians, who voted for Hamas; the Iraqis, who voted for a government sympathetic to Iran; and the Egyptians, who have voted in growing numbers in recent elections for the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood. “No politician can afford to identify with the West because poll after poll shows people don’t believe in the U.S. agenda,” said Mustafa Hamarneh, until recently the director of the Center for Strategic Studies at the University of Jordan. Mr. Hamarneh is running for a seat in Jordan’s Parliament in November, but he says he has made a point of keeping his campaign focused locally, and on bread-and-butter issues. “If somebody goes after you as pro-American he can hurt you,” he said.[1]

This should show the neo-cons that even if they try to promote democracy at the end of a gun it won’t work, whoever they support is going to lose in a free and fair election. It looks like we are back in the puppet regime, dictator mode again. You know that it is so much cleaner and just requires bribe money. Free elections are so messy and you can’t predict the outcomes. There is nothing worse than to expend all that money and all those lives only to get a government that will be hostile to you anyway. That ole dictator ain’t looking so bad right about now.

In part, regional analysts say, candidates are tainted by the baggage of American foreign policy — from its backing of Israel to the violence in Iraq. But more important, they say, American support is often applied to one faction instead of to institutions, causing further division rather than bringing stability.

The problem is not necessarily the support itself, Mr. Nassif said, but that it invariably skews conflicts, worsening rather than easing sectarian and ethnic tensions.

“When the U.S. interferes in favor of one party, their interference leads to an explosion,” he said. “The U.S. openly says it supports the Siniora government, but it should say we support the Lebanese government.”[2]

If I didn’t know better I would say he was advocating even handed treatment, but that couldn’t be right. Whether you support Barack Obama or not, the one thing I have to agree with him is that we have to begin to do things another way. The same old rhetoric and business as usual politics is not working, it is not working here or abroad. The world is tired of the same old crap coming out of Washington no matter who is espousing it. If whoever comes into office is not willing to change how we do foreign policy then it won’t matter who wins.

We must get to the place where we are once again viewed as the country that supports the rights of the people and not a divider of the people. Promoting division and factionalism in the long run only hurts our interests and our standing. I don’t really hear that from the current crop of candidates; it seems that they disagree more with how it was done, more than what was done. This would be a dangerous omen to the rest of the world.



[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/10/world/middleeast/10arab.html?hp

[2] Ibid.

Read more!

Monday, June 18, 2007

A Friend Indeed?

The prime minister of Israel, Ehud Olmert, said: “I call on my friend Abu Mazen,” referring to Mr. Abbas, who was in Ramallah, to take the opportunity, now that almost the entire world understands the viciousness, the brutality of Hamas, to exercise his authority as the leader of the Palestinian people.”

Israel will do what it can, he said in an interview with The New York Times in Tel Aviv, to “be helpful and supportive of the Palestinian people in every possible way, including economic cooperation and security cooperation.”

It is so refreshing to see that Israel’s prime minister is so willing to help the Palestinian people. As the Palestinians continue to struggle against one another in a push for power between the democratically elected government headed by Hamas and the Fatah party led by President Abbas, the Israeli government is now willing to help.

I think that it is interesting that throughout the “so-called” Middle East peace process the Israeli’s have done everything within their power to undermine Mr. Abbas, that now when faced with the prospect of a Hamas led government they are willing to support him. I am afraid that it is too little, too late for Mr. Abbas. The Hamas led government is a direct result of the foot-dragging and disingenuous negotiations that Israel and the US have been engaged end trying to placate the Palestinians while the Israelis continue to cement their land grab and occupation of lands taken in the 1967 war. If the Israeli’s had bargained in good faith in the past maybe we would not be in the position we are today.

The occupation has not made Israel safer and it has only inflamed the passions of the Palestinians and the Arab world. Before the Hamas victory in elections, Israel had ample opportunity to negotiate with the moderate Palestinians, but instead chose to stonewall the process and continue to build settlements, settlements that violate the letter and the spirit of the peace process. However, due to their lobbying efforts and media domination they have been able to present the occupation as being humane and in the best interest of the Palestinians. The Palestinians are too barbaric to be able to govern themselves and require the benevolent assistance of the Israelis to save them from themselves. This picture will again be played out in the main stream press as the violence intensifies.

Of course throughout this process what won’t be discussed are the efforts of the Israelis and the US to destabilize the Palestinians and to keep them splintered so they cannot mount an effective defense against the media savvy Israelis. Thus allowing them to present the Palestinians as uncivilized and therefore unworthy of having a place at the bargaining table. This has allowed the Israelis to continue to fortify their positions and settlements in the occupied territory. The Israelis and the US will disavow any complicity in the violence that is now taking place in Gaza, not accepting that this violence is in direct response to the fact that the lawfully elected government is being kept from governing by the interference of Washington and Tele Aviv.

Am I a fan of Hamas? Certainly not. But I am not a Palestinian and so my vote doesn’t count for anything in this struggle. I do know that you cannot create an environment that fosters frustration, hopelessness, and fear and not expect some backlash. You cannot restrict the daily movements of a people and interrupt their interactions with their families and then be shocked when they respond. Let’s not forget that for a long time this land belonged to them as much as it did to Israel, if not more. Are they also entitled to self-determination? Are they not entitled to their own state?

So what is there to do? We can continue to play the blame game and the retaliation mess or we can try something novel and maybe talk to all parties. If we continue to marginalize and isolate those who we disagree with we only continue to foster their beliefs that we are insensitive to their needs. We open the door for even more radical elements, because the moderates have shown little, if any gains. Hamas is a creation of the corruption of the Fatah party and the frustration at the lack of progress for the average Palestinian. In a conflict of this magnitude, one that runs this deep there are only two options: either we make peace and sacrifice for that peace or we kill all of them. Because as long as they are there, there will be no peace. There will be no peaceful co-existence. So either sit down with all parties and negotiate in good faith or stop the “snipe hunt” and let the killing begin…

Read more!

Friday, June 8, 2007

Mister, “Can you spare a gallon?”

It seems like every year at this time we go through the same gas shortage/high prices phenomenon. This has been going on since I first started driving in 1976, I started late! Did I miss something? I know I am not very smart and don’t claim to be, but why has this problem not been adequately dealt with in 30 years? Why have we allowed the big oil companies to year after year present this same lame excuse for price gouging? Why have our elected officials not been able to or been unwilling to tackle this national problem?

I was in Chicago over the weekend and gas prices were 4.00@gallon. Is it just me or does that seem inordinately high? If every year the oil companies know there will be a larger demand in the summer, why do they not make allowances for this? Can it really be as simple as it is being reported by the media for why gas is so high? I have never been one to accept the status quo so after a little investigating this is what I found out.

There's no doubt that the recent refining share has gone higher, although the share has been higher in the past. (Note: With a higher gasoline price, the spread in dollars is going to be higher even with a constant share.) A quick glance reveals obvious seasonality in the refiner's share. To get a feel for how we stand relative to the same time in previous years, Figure 4 presents the refiner's share over the current and past three years.

gaso4.gif
Figure 4: Share of gasoline prices associated with refining, in 2007 (blue), in 2006 (red), in 2005 (green), in 2004 (black), in percent. Source: Energy Information Administration.

The graph confirms the impression that the refiner's share has been particularly high for this time of the year, although there have been higher peaks, specifically in 2004.

One bit of policy analysis. The Washington Post article quotes the assertion that the wide spreads are due to policy inaction over the past six years. There is indeed a temptation to ascribe the wide spreads to cartelization, or opportunistic shutdowns of refineries (and I won't rule either of those out -- remember Enron and California in '00-'01...). However, high spreads are also consistent with the view that there is no coordinated reduction of supply and the view that if conservation had been encouraged over the past six years (instead of tax breaks for SUVs), the spread would be smaller. That's because theory predicts that the greater and more inelastic the demand, the greater the resulting price-cost margin.

So one way of thinking about what policies could have mitigated the crack spread is to consider both demand management and supply enhancement. The Administration until recently focused almost solely on the latter.[1]

Basically what is happening is that the oil companies which not only import oil, they also refine the oil, and then they sell the gasoline that is refined from the oil are always looking for ways to increase profit margin. The profit margin in the actual price of crude oil is pretty much stagnant; it is built into whatever the market will bear. All oil companies pay about the same price for crude so there isn’t a lot of room for individual price change, except on a conspiratorial cartel level which the author seems to brush off with little desire to explore. As usual we fell to grasp the obvious in our search for some far fetched analysis of why things are the way they are. The answer is usually something simple; in this case it is; big oil companies wanting to maximize profits at the expense of a captive consumer. It is a known fact that even with gas prices spiraling; demand has not diminished and it does not diminish due to what we drive and how we drive.

I have never understood why no one has ever investigated the link between the American auto industry and big oil. Is it just a coincidence that when the price of gas is at an all-time high the most popular vehicles are SUV’s and other large vehicles? We must not fall for the old scam of “it is a consumer driven market”, the consumer will buy what is presented to them. If there were no SUV’s would consumers demand them? I find it interesting that we have an energy policy that does not deal with two of the most important components of the issue. The fact that we have been sold vehicles that are energy inefficient and that our gas policy is being set by a few giant energy conglomerates. It doesn’t seem to matter who is in power or who is in office, the oil companies keep making money. And we the consumer, keep filling the coffers of those companies despite the hardships it is causing.

The rise in prices is hurting working class and lower-income families the most, as they have less disposable income to shift to transportation costs. This means that the high prices are cutting into other necessary spending, including food, prices for which are also rising throughout the country. An AP poll released May 25 found that 46 percent of the population said that high gasoline prices are causing severe financial problems.

The shortage of refining capacity is generally attributed in the media to a number of planned and unplanned refinery outages. However, refinery capacity has been deliberately decreased over the course of the past two decades, for the explicit purpose of boosting profit margins.

The Journal article notes, “For decades, there was too much refining capacity in the US, margins were crummy and many companies were closing or selling off refineries. In 1986, refiners made little more than $2 for every barrel they processed.” The newspaper quotes Fadel Gheit, a senior energy analyst of Oppenheimer & Co. and a former employee at Mobil, now part of ExxonMobil, as saying, “We used to commission studies to get rid of refineries. We wanted to give them away.”

In the first quarter of the year, refining profits of $1.91 billion at Exxon and $1.62 billion at Chevron have helped generate massive profits for the companies as a whole. Corporations that engage only in refining have done even better.

In the long-term, the high gasoline prices are a product of the conscious policy of the giant oil companies, who, through a series of mergers and acquisitions over the same period, have concentrated the market in the hands of a small number of firms. Inflation-adjusted prices for gasoline in the US were below $2.00 a gallon for most of the late 1980s and 1990s. They only surged above $2.00 in 2004, and have pushed past $3.00 for periods of time in 2005, 2006 and again in 2007.

The ability of energy companies to increase profits simply by raising prices is aided by the fact that demand for gasoline, particularly in the United States, is highly inelastic—i.e., demand does not fluctuate much with changing prices. This is due to the fact that there are few alternatives to automobile transportation, given the absence of viable public transportation systems in many areas. In major metropolitan areas such as Los Angeles or Detroit workers have no choice but to drive the often long distances separating homes from work. According to the Census Bureau, only 4.7 percent of the US commuting population takes mass transit to work each day.[2]

It appears that the biggest surge in prices have come under the President with ties to big oil. Am I the only one who finds this disheartening? When will we as Americans stop supporting those who do not share our best interest?

NEWSFLASH – There are other issues in this country besides abortion and gay marriage. While these issues are important to a great many people and I would never attempt to minimize them, we also have to look at the big picture. While the powerful are pushing these “hot button” issues they are stealing the country blind. The sad fact is that these people will not abide by or be affected by whatever the outcome of these will be in court or public opinion. They don’t care if abortion is illegal or legal, if they need to have one they will get one. So while average Joe and Jane are picketing and voting in these corporate and wealthy stooges, the rich keep right on getting richer. These people could care less about the average person; there only loyalty is to money. It is not to race, creed, or color; unless the color is green. They will make money off of anybody or anything. Just think about all those things that were once considered “ethnic” and how they are now being used to sell everything from luxury sedans to diapers.

What is clear is that the rise in prices cannot be explained by a corresponding rise in crude, since crude prices have remained largely flat over the period that gasoline prices have soared.

Several commentators, including the WSWS, noted the coincidence last year between a sharp decline in the gasoline prices and the run-up to the 2006 mid-term elections. According to polls conducted at the time, 42 percent of the American population held the opinion that the price drop was part of a deliberate attempt to manipulate the elections by temporarily decreasing economic insecurity. This was seen as a potential boost to Republican candidates. (See “US gasoline prices; the ‘free market’ and the November elections”)

With the soaring gas prices, the energy companies are now getting back every penny, with interest, that they lost while prices were relatively low in September, October and November.

Even if one were to suppose that there was no element of deliberate manipulation, the situation stands as an indictment of the anarchistic character of the capitalist market, particularly evident in the fluctuations in the prices of basic necessities such as gasoline. An energy policy developed to serve the interests of the population, and not the profits of a handful of energy giants, would involve ensuring an adequate supply and low prices, not to mention substantial investment in public transportation infrastructure. The subordination of the energy market to the demands of profit has also made it impossible to pursue rational energy policy on such issues as global warming.

Under these conditions, the various proposals advanced by the Democrats in Washington are noteworthy only for their cynicism. The House of Representatives passed a bill that would punish anyone found guilty of engaging in price gouging. Others have suggested measures—the same ones suggested and never passed whenever gasoline prices spike—that would temporarily cut federal taxes or create a “windfall profits” tax. Leading Democrats raise these proposals knowing full well they will never pass into law. However, even if they did, they would have no impact on the underlying problem—the domination of a handful of energy companies over a market that affects hundreds of millions of people.[3]

The interesting thing here is that even if we were naïve enough to believe that there were no price gouging, just the fact that one of our most basic needs is being manipulated by such a small group. Just as we have public energy commissions for our other energy concerns, why do we not have one for gasoline? Let the oil companies justify their rate hikes before a group of citizens who are not on the payroll. We should be tired of the same old tricks, where the Democrats hold hearings and protest before the cameras only to leave the thing still broke. They get some mileage from beating up “big oil” and still get to keep their contributions. Is this a great country or what?



[1] http://www.econbrowser.com/archives/2007/05/gasoline_prices_3.html

[2] http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/may2007/gaso-m31.shtml

[3] Ibid

Read more!

Wednesday, May 2, 2007

Political Courage

I know to look at the headline is to see an incredible oxymoron. How can anyone put political and courage in the same sentence? I believe that the time has come where we must demand courage from our elected officials.

What is courage? I define courage as the following: courage is not, never being afraid, that is foolishness. Courage is even though I am terrified I am going to go on anyway, in spite of my fear. I am going to do this thing, because it is the right thing to do and damn the consequences. There are not many of us with that kind of courage, so it is not surprising that we are not seeing it from our elected officials. Remember, they are merely a reflection of us. However, having said that, it is precisely this type of courage that our troops require of us all at this moment. The time for moral victories and rhetoric has passed. Either we want to end this war or we don’t. We must be clear as a nation; do we think we can win this war? If the answer is no, then we must do what needs to be done regardless of the consequences. If we answer no, then we have a moral imperative to find the best and most humane way to end this. This is no longer about some political “pissing” contest or who is the most resolute in their convictions, it is about life and death.

It has become self-evident that we cannot expect this President or this administration to end this war on their own accord. It also appears that the Republicans have chosen to place party over country and that is a mistake that history will judge very harshly. How can we believe that the same people, who used criminal tactics to get us into this war, will now find the error of their ways and relent to the inevitable. It is not going to happen. We, the American people must and should make plain in no uncertain terms that we want this war to end. We must let this President and his cronies know that we have lost confidence in his leadership and in his word. Up until now there have been no consequences to this Presidents intransigence on this issue. It is now time to bring it to a head, it is time to have the debate we should have had 4 years ago. This debate will not take place unless our elected officials stand firm on the bill they have sent to the President. If he chooses to veto it, then we must continue to resend it until he gets the message. Now, here is where courage comes in. It will be easy to say at that point, “We did our part and he vetoed it” and then concede to the funding without any clear time table for action. We must give the Congress the will and the courage to stand strong in the face of their fear. They will not unless we stand with them. We must contact our lawmakers and let them know that they have our support in this fight. And we must contact those who are supporting this war and let them know that this is not the will of the people.

I have included the links to the Congress and Senate homepage. On these pages you will find links to email your congressman and senator. Let’s encourage them to stand strong on this issue and to not succumb to the bullying tactics that have become synonymous with this administration. The lives of our troops and the lives of the Iraqis are in our hands. When the vote is cast for truth, will you be there? When history finally closes this chapter will you be able to say you stood on the side of action? Or were you too busy watching American Idol to save our troops? The time is now to instead of supporting our troops, let’s begin to save some of them. And our brave service people count on you? Courage!

http://www.house.gov/writerep/

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

Read more!

Thursday, April 19, 2007

Who Is In Charge Here?

I am about to broach a subject that has always been a contentious one, yet one I can no longer ignore. The question I have to ask is who is in charge of our foreign policy?

At the risk of ruffling the feathers of the Israeli lobbyist and their American minions and being painted with the anti-Semitic brush which by the way seems to be getting larger and larger, I can’t help but wonder who decides how our foreign policy decisions are made and implemented. Do not get me wrong I am for continued support to the state of Israel and its viability as an ally. However, at some point our foreign policy has to be ours. There are times when our goals and Israel’s goals are not the same. Even with the closest of married couples there are times when their interest diverge.

For years we have reports of Israel protesting and vetoing our foreign policy initiatives in the Middle East giving the other players in the region the impression that our brokering is one sided and heavy handed.

“…Instead, the thrust of US policy in the region derives almost entirely from domestic politics, and especially the activities of the ‘Israel Lobby’. Other special-interest groups have managed to skew foreign policy, but no lobby has managed to divert it as far from what the national interest would suggest, while simultaneously convincing Americans that US interests and those of the other country – in this case, Israel – are essentially identical.”[1]

The question we must ask is, “Are the US interest and the Israeli interest identical?” Let’s look at some empirical data that may help in finding the answer to this very important question.

“Since the October War in 1973, Washington has provided Israel with a level of support dwarfing that given to any other state. It has been the largest annual recipient of direct economic and military assistance since 1976, and is the largest recipient in total since World War Two, to the tune of well over $140 billion (in 2004 dollars). Israel receives about $3 billion in direct assistance each year, roughly one-fifth of the foreign aid budget, and worth about $500 a year for every Israeli. This largesse is especially striking since Israel is now a wealthy industrial state with a per capita income roughly equal to that of South Korea or Spain.”[2]

So we are subsidizing each individual Israeli to the tune of $500 a year. The problem with this is that there are other states that are having a lot worse time right now than Israel and could use that money. Remember, there is only so much foreign aid dollars to spread around. There are countries that are a lot more impoverished that could use some of that money. Could we agree that Israel could begin to take on a larger share of its own defense and economy?

Let’s take a look at what all this money is buying, surely it is buying us unfailing support from our ally.

“A final reason to question Israel’s strategic value is that it does not behave like a loyal ally. Israeli officials frequently ignore US requests and renege on promises (including pledges to stop building settlements and to refrain from ‘targeted assassinations’ of Palestinian leaders). Israel has provided sensitive military technology to potential rivals like China, in what the State Department inspector-general called ‘a systematic and growing pattern of unauthorized transfers’. According to the General Accounting Office, Israel also ‘conducts the most aggressive espionage operations against the US of any ally’. In addition to the case of Jonathan Pollard, who gave Israel large quantities of classified material in the early 1980s (which it reportedly passed on to the Soviet Union in return for more exit visas for Soviet Jews), a new controversy erupted in 2004 when it was revealed that a key Pentagon official called Larry Franklin had passed classified information to an Israeli diplomat. Israel is hardly the only country that spies on the US, but its willingness to spy on its principal patron casts further doubt on its strategic value.”[3]

Here is an example of how they undermine our goals: Ms Pelosi went to Syria with the assurance that Israel sought peace with Syria and yet when she arrived to pursue that stated goal we get the double talk.

“Shortly afterward, however, Mr. Olmert’s office issued a clarification of his message, insisting that, “although Israel is interested in peace with Syria, that country continues to be part of the axis of evil and a force that encourages terror in the entire Middle East.”

To begin serious peace negotiations, the Israeli statement said, Syria must end its support of terrorism and its sponsorship of the Hamas and Islamic Jihad organizations; refrain from providing weapons to Hezbollah and bringing about the destabilizing of Lebanon; stop its support of terrorism in Iraq; and relinquish the strategic ties it is building with the government in Iran.”

Loyalty is a two-way street and it appears that “our ally” is only loyal when it fits in with their strategic goals, not when it meets ours. In our efforts to return our country to the position of global leader, we should begin to look at all of our strategic alliances, not just the one with Israel. We should look at our relationships with dictators, despots, and other assorted characters we now find ourselves in bed with. Either we want to promote democracy or we don’t. Either we will apply our foreign policy evenly or we will not. We as a nation must decide this and then stick to it. Gone are the days of the cold war acceptance of any and all partners. The days of your enemy is my friend and vice versa. There are many opportunities around the world where we could lead the way towards freedom and tolerance, but these opportunities require something that recently has been in short supply, diplomacy and engagement. Are we peacemakers or not? This is the question that will determine the “soul” of America.

Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall be called sons of God….



[1] John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt's essay 'The Israel Lobby'

[2] Ibid

[3] Ibid

Read more!
 
HTML stat tracker