Foreign Policy in Focus/Institute for Policy Studies, August 14, 2008, By John Feffer, Stephen Zunes
The international condemnation of Russian aggression against Georgia – and the concomitant assaults by Abkhazians and South Ossetians against ethnic Georgians within their territories – is in large part appropriate. But the self-righteous posturing coming out of Washington should be tempered by a sober recognition of the ways in which the United States has contributed to the crisis. [Source]
Category: Elections
Electoral Politics
Why Obama Won
Huffington Post June 26, 2008 | Updated May 25, 2011 [source]
Barack Obama has won the race for the Democratic nomination for president against Hillary Clinton on the issues. Sort of. This is not what the pundits will tell you: they would rather focus upon the most superficial and trivial aspects of the two final candidates’ style, personality, associates, personal history, and campaign organization and strategy, not to mention race and gender. This is not what many on the left will say either…
Clinton’s GWU Iraq Speech
Foreign Policy In Focus March 25, 2008 [source]
On March 17, New York Senator and Democratic presidential contender Hillary Clinton gave a speech at George Washington University outlining her plans to de-escalate U.S. military involvement in Iraq. Though she called for the gradual withdrawal of U.S. combat brigades over the next several years, she continued to refuse to apologize for her 2002 vote authorizing the invasion, to acknowledge the illegality of the war, or to fully explain her false claims made at that time regarding Iraq’s military capabilities and alleged ties to al-Qaeda. Nor was she able to offer an explanation as to what led to her dramatic shift…
Behind Obama and Clinton
Foreign Policy In Focus, February 4, 2008, by John Feffer, Stephen Zunes
Voters on the progressive wing of the Democratic Party are rightly disappointed by the similarity of the foreign policy positions of the two remaining Democratic Party presidential candidates, Senator Hillary Clinton and Senator Barack Obama. However, there are still some real discernable differences to be taken into account. Indeed, given the power the United States has in the world, even minimal differences in policies can have a major difference in the lives of millions of people.
Barack Obama on Diplomacy
Foreign Policy in Focus (FPIF.org) January 17, 2008 [source]
By Emily Schwartz Greco, Stephen Zunes
The rise in popular support for Senator Barack Obama’s candidacy reflects the growing skepticism among Democratic and independent voters regarding both the Bush administration’s and the Democratic Party establishment’s foreign policies. Indeed, on issues ranging from Iraq to nuclear weapons to global warming to foreign aid, as well as his general preference for diplomacy over militarism, Obama has also staked out positions considerably more progressive than the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry…
Obama and the Middle East: Will He Bring About “Change?”
Alternet January 15, 2008 [source]
The strong showings by Senator Barack Obama of Illinois in the early contests for the Democratic presidential nomination don’t just mark a repudiation of the Bush administration’s Iraq policy and “war on terrorism.” They also indicate a rejection of the Democratic Party establishment, much of which supported the invasion of Iraq and other tragic elements of the administration’s foreign policy.
Barack Obama on the Middle East
Foreign Policy in Focus (FPIF.org) January 10, 2008 [source]
By Emily Schwartz Greco, Stephen Zunes
The strong showings by Senator Barack Obama of Illinois in the early contests for the Democratic presidential nomination don’t just mark a repudiation of the Bush administration’s Iraq policy and “war on terrorism.” They also indicate a rejection of the Democratic Party establishment…
John Edwards’ Foreign Policy
Foreign Policy in Focus (FPIF.org) December 20, 2007,
by Emily Schwartz Greco and Stephen Zunes [source]
A sizable number of progressive activists, celebrities and unions who, for various reasons, are unwilling to support the underfunded long-shot bid of Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich are backing the presidential campaign of former North Carolina Senator John Edwards as their favorite among the top-tier candidates for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination. Indeed, the charismatic populist has staked out positions on important domestic policy issues, particularly addressing economic justice, that are more progressive than any serious contender for the nomination of either party in many years. On foreign policy, however, his record is decidedly mixed…
Hillary Clinton’s Militarism Exposed
Alternet Dec. 17, 2007, by Stephen Zunes [source]
While much attention has been given to Senator Hillary Clinton’s support for the U.S. invasion of Iraq, her foreign policy record regarding other international conflicts and her apparent eagerness to accept the use of force appears to indicate that her fateful vote authorizing the invasion and her subsequent support for the occupation and counter-insurgency war was no aberration. Indeed, there’s every indication that, as president, her foreign policy agenda would closely parallel that of the Bush administration.
Hillary Clinton Can’t be Trusted on Iraq
Alternet Dec. 13, 2007, by Stephen Zunes [source]
Public opinion polls have consistently shown that the majority of Americans — and even a larger majority of Democrats — believe that Iraq is the most important issue of the day, that it was wrong for the United States to have invaded that country, and the United States should completely withdraw its forces in short order. Despite this, the clear front-runner for the Democratic Party nomination for president is Senator Hillary Clinton, a strident backer of the invasion who only recently and opportunistically began to criticize the war and call for a partial withdrawal of American forces.
Hillary Clinton on Military Policy
Foreign Policy In Focus/IPS December 12, 2007:
By Emily Schwartz Greco, Stephen Zunes
While much attention has been given to Senator Hillary Clinton’s support for the U.S. invasion of Iraq, her foreign policy record regarding other international conflicts and her apparent eagerness to accept the use of force appears to indicate that her fateful vote authorizing the invasion and her subsequent support for the occupation and counter-insurgency war was no aberration. Indeed, there’s every indication that, as president, her foreign policy agenda would closely parallel that of the Bush administration. Despite efforts by some conservative Republicans to portray her as being on the left wing of the Democratic Party, in reality her foreign policy positions bear a far closer resemblance to those of Ronald Reagan than they do of George McGovern. [source]
Hillary Clinton on International Law
Foreign Policy In Focus/IPS December 10, 2007:
By John Feffer, Stephen Zunes [source]
Perhaps the most terrible legacy of the administration of President George W. Bush has been its utter disregard for such basic international legal norms as the ban against aggressive war, respect for the UN Charter, and acceptance of international judicial review. Furthermore, under Bush’s leadership, the United States has cultivated a disrespect for basic human rights, a disdain for reputable international human rights monitoring groups, and a lack of concern for international humanitarian law. Ironically, the current front-runner for the Democratic nomination for president shares much of President Bush’s dangerous attitudes toward international law and human rights.
Hillary Clinton on Iraq
Foreign Policy In Focus/IPS December 12, 2007, By Stephen Zunes
Public opinion polls have consistently shown that the majority of Americans – and even a larger majority of Democrats – believe that Iraq is the most important issue of the day, that it was wrong for the United States to have invaded that country, and the United States should completely withdraw its forces in short order. Despite this, the clear front-runner for the Democratic Party nomination for president is Senator Hillary Clinton, a strident backer of the invasion who only recently and opportunistically began to criticize the war and call for a partial withdrawal of American forces… [source is no longer available]
U.S. Denial of the Armenian Genocide
Common Dreams, October 22, 2007 [Source link is no longer available]
It continues to boggle the mind what the Democratic leadership in Congress will do whenever the Republicans raise the specter of labeling them “soft on terrorism.” They approve wiretapping without a court order. They allow for indefinite detention of suspects without charge. They authorize the invasion and occupation of a country on the far side of the world that was no threat to us, and then provide unconditional funding for the bloody and unwinnable counter-insurgency war that inevitably followed…
Hillary Clinton’s Hawkish Record
March 9, 2007 [Source link is no longer available]
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has already assumed front-runner status for the Democratic Party nomination for president despite a foreign policy agenda that closely parallels that of the Bush administration…
Some Potentially Positive Developments from a Disastrous Election
January 21, 2005 by Stephen Zunes [source is no longer online]
No progressive should be happy with the results of the presidential election. However, it is hard to predict what the longer-term impact on American politics of a particular presidential election result might be. For example, it would have felt terrible at the time if ‘ despite Vietnam and Watergate ‘ Gerald Ford had managed to defeat Jimmy Carter in the close election of 1976. However, if Ford had stayed in office for another four years, the Republicans would have been blamed for the recession and the Iranian hostage crisis of subsequent years and the Democrats would have almost certainly won in 1980, thereby sparing the nation and the world the consequences of the eight years of the Reagan administration…
Despite the Lies about Iraq and the Resulting Disaster, Bush Still Maintains Strong Support
Common Dreams, October 29, 2004
by Stephen Zunes [source is no longer available]
Even putting aside the many important legal and moral questions about the Bush Administration’s decision to invade Iraq, it has been a disaster even in practical terms. Mainstream to conservative strategic analysts and retired generals ‘ along with the majority of career professionals in the State Department, Defense Department, and CIA ‘ recognize that the invasion and occupation has made America less secure rather than more secure…
Presidential Election Offers Little Choice for Israeli-Arab Peace
Foreign Policy In Focus/IPS, October 26, 2004
By Stephen Zunes [source link is no longer available]
Earlier this month, in a widely quoted interview in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, Dov Weisglass–Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s senior adviser–acknowledged what most independent observers have known all along: that the Israeli government is not actually interested in a peace agreement with the Syrian government or the Palestinian Authority. Israel has occupied the Palestinian West Bank and Gaza Strip and the Syrian Golan Heights since these territories were seized by the Israeli armed forces in 1967, expelling thousands of Arabs and then colonizing these territories with Jewish settlers in contravention of international law…
Why We Must Prevent the Re-election of Senators Who Supported the Invasion of Iraq
October 15, 2004, by Stephen Zunes [source is no longer online]
It has been just over two years since Congress took its fateful vote to authorize President George W. Bush to invade Iraq. This came despite the fact that such an invasion was a clear violation of the United Nations Charter, which, as a formal treaty signed and ratified by the United States, is — according to Article VI of the U.S. Constitution — to be treated as supreme law. Since that time, as of this writing, over 1100 Americans have been killed and 7500 wounded. Most estimates indicate that at least 20,000 Iraqis have been killed, more than two-thirds of them civilians, and more than 40,000 have been injured. The war has thus far cost the American taxpayer over $150 billion…
A Humphrey-Nixon Redux?
Foreign Policy In Focus/IPS, October 11, 2004
by Stephen Zunes [source]
No wonder it feels so damn frustrating. It?s like 1968 all over again. The United States is bogged down in a bloody counter-insurgency war on the other side of the globe, a war that the majority of the American people believe we should have never entered. Polls consistently show it is the number one issue on the minds of American voters in the weeks leading up to a close presidential election. The majority of Democrats and independents and a growing minority of Republicans believe that the war is unwinnable and we should get out. Despite that, both Republicans and Democrats have nominated presidential and vice-presidential candidates who have supported the war from the beginning and have pledged to continue fighting it for years to come…