CommonDreams.org, June 28, 2005
By Stephen Zunes [source link’s no longer available]
The election of the hard-line Tehran mayor Mahmoud Ahmadinejad over former president Hashemi Rafsanjani as the new president of Iran is undeniably a setback to those hoping to advance the cause of greater social and political freedom in that country.
It should not necessarily be seen as a turn to the right by the Iranian electorate, however. While Rafsanjani was portrayed as a more moderate conservative, the fact that this 70-year-old cleric had become a millionaire while in government service and was widely seen as the penultimate wheeler dealer of the political establishment was apparently perceived by many Iranians as of greater importance than his modest reform agenda. By contrast, the victorious campaign of the young Tehran mayor focused upon the plight of the poor and cleaning up corruption…
Category: Foreign Policy
Bush Administration Support for Repression in Uzbekistan Belies Pro-Democracy Rhetoric
Foreign Policy In Focus and Antiwar.com June 25, 2005.
By Stephen Zunes [source]
Recent revelations that the United States successfully blocked a call by NATO for an international investigation of the May 13 massacre of hundreds of civilians by the government of the former Soviet Republic of Uzbekistan serves as yet another reminder of the insincerity of the Bush administration’s claims for supporting freedom and democracy in the Islamic world and the former Soviet Union…
Bush Administration Attacks on Amnesty International: Old Wine, New Bottles
Foreign Policy In Focus/IPS, June 6, 2005
By Stephen Zunes [source link’s no longer online]
In what appears to be a concerted effort to discredit independent human rights advocates, the Bush administration and its allies in the media have been engaging in a series of attacks against Amnesty International, the world’s largest human rights organization and winner of the 1977 Nobel Peace Prize… [source not available]
Undermining the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty—It Didn’t Start With the Bush Administration
Foreign Policy In Focus/IPS, June 1, 2005
Stephen Zunes [Source link is no longer available]
Most of the international community and arms control advocates here in the United States have correctly blamed the Bush administration for the failure of the recently completed review conference of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. In the course of the four-week meeting of representatives of the 188 countries which have signed and ratified the treaty, the United States refused to uphold its previous arms control pledges, blocked consideration of the establishment of a nuclear-free zone in the Middle East, refused to rule out U.S. nuclear attacks against non-nuclear states…
The U.S. Role in the Breakdown of the Israeli-Palestinian Peace Process
Foreign Policy In Focus/IPS, May 1, 2005 By Stephen Zunes
In the time since the collapse of the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks at Camp David in the summer of 2000 and the subsequent Palestinian uprising, details have emerged that challenge the Clinton administration’s insistence—reiterated by leaders of both the Democratic and Republican parties as well as by much of the mainstream media—that the Palestinians were responsible for the failure to reach a peace agreement and for much of the violence that has engulfed Israel and Palestine since then…
Crediting Bush for Growing Lebanese Demands for Freedom Misplaced
Foreign Policy In Focus/IPS March 22, 2005 &
Antiwar.com, March 26, 2005 By Stephen Zunes [source]
In a mirror image of those who blame everything wrong in the world on President George W. Bush, a surprising number of people are now giving him credit for the recent show of force by hundreds of thousands of Lebanese protestors demanding an end to Syria’s overbearing influence in their country. It is extremely doubtful that the U.S. invasion of Iraq has had anything to do with the inspirational “people power” demonstrations in the Lebanese capital of Beirut. Many leading members of the Lebanese opposition–such as the late Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, whose assassination prompted the recent wave of anti-Syrian protests–were outspoken opponents of U.S. policy in the region, including the invasion of Iraq…
President Bush’s Foreign Policy Discussion in the 2005 State of the Union Address
Foreign Policy In Focus, October 3, 2005
By John Gershman, Stephen Zunes [source]
The foreign policy segments of President George W. Bush’s February 2 State of the Union address spoke to values and concerns that resonate with the majority of Americans from across the political spectrum. Unfortunately, much of what was said during his speech was quite misleading. Below are excerpts from the speech, followed by a short critical analysis…
A Critique of the Most Misleading Statements in the Foreign Policy Segments of President Bush’s 2005 State of the Union Address
Common Dreams, February 27, 2005, by Stephen Zunes
[source is no longer available]. Also see East Bay Times
The foreign policy segments of President George W. Bush’s February 2 State of the Union address spoke to values and concerns that resonate with the majority of Americans from across the political spectrum. Unfortunately, much of what was said during his speech was quite misleading. Below are excerpts from the speech, followed by a short critical analysis…
Concern Grows over Democratic House Leader Pelosi’s Support for Iraq War
OpenLetterOnline.com, January 22, 2005
by Stephen Zunes [source link’s no longer available]
On January 4, Congressional Democrats re-elected California Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi as minority leader in the House of Representatives. This comes despite that, since assuming her current leadership position two years ago, Pelosi has not only disappointed her liberal San Francisco constituency, but the majority of Democrats nationally as well, through her support for President George W. Bush’s policies toward Iraq…
Reading Harry Reid: New Democratic Leader in Senate Unlikely to Oppose Bush Administration’s Foreign Policy Agenda
Foreign Policy In Focus/IPS November 19, 2004 by Stephen Zunes [source is no longer online]
The overwhelming selection of Nevada Senator Harry Reid as minority leader of Congress’ upper house shows that the Democrats are still willing to give their backing for the Bush administration’s reckless militarism and contravention of international legal norms. Despite evidence that Iraq no longer had weapons of mass destruction, WMD programs, or offensive delivery systems, Reid voted in October 2002 to authorize a U.S. invasion…
Arafat Was the Excuse, Not the Reason, for the Failure of the Peace Process
Foreign Policy In Focus/IPS, November 11, 2004
by Stephen Zunes source
While there are many negative things one can say about the late Yasser Arafat, he was not the primary reason for the breakdown in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. At most, he was the excuse. This is not to say that Arafat did not make quite a number of stupid and unethical choices in his lengthy career which set back hopes for peace and badly hurt the Palestinian cause. In recent years, however, the late Palestinian leader?s negotiating position regarding the outstanding issues of the peace process?such as the extent of the Israeli withdrawal, the status of Jerusalem, and the fate of the settlements?was actually more moderate, more consistent with international law, and more in line with UN Security Council resolutions, the positions of America’s leading allies, and the policies of previous U.S. administrations than the current Israeli or American positions…
Missing Explosives Cache Emblematic of Bush Administration Failures in Iraq
November 1, 2004 by Stephen Zunes [source is no longer online]
Whether news about the 380 tons of powerful explosives found missing from a major weapons depot in Iraq will have any impact on the presidential election remains to be seen. Democrats hope that these disclosures have given a last-minute boost to John Kerry’s presidential campaign, which is depicting this debacle as illustrative of President Bush’s failure of leadership. Since the Democratic Party decided to nominate presidential and vice-presidential candidates who, like the incumbent president, falsely claimed that Iraq had ‘weapons of mass destruction…
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…
Bush Administration Disasters Depicted as Triumphs
By Foreign Policy In Focus, October 29, 2004
By Stephen Zunes [source]
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 on 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. Still, the Bush administration continues to defend its actions and public opinion polls still show that a majority of Americans trust George W. Bush more than John Kerry to defend America….
The U.S. Invasion of Iraq: The Military Side of Globalization?
Foreign Policy In Focus/IPS, October 26, 2004
By Stephen Zunes [source link is no longer online]
The major justifications for the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq—Saddam Hussein’s supposed possession of weapons of mass destruction and Iraqi ties to the terrorist al-Qaida network—are now widely discredited, and Washington’s claims that its efforts are creating a democratic Iraq are also highly dubious. Although economic factors did play an important role in prompting a U.S. invasion, the simplistic notion that Iraq’s makeover was undertaken simply for the sake of oil company profits ignores the fact that even optimistic projections of the financial costs of the invasion and occupation far exceeded anticipated financial benefits…
Misleading Foreign Policy Statements Made by the Candidates in the Vice Presidential Debate
Foreign Policy In Focus/IPS, October 6, 2004
by Stephen Zunes [source link’s no longer available]
The list below contains what I consider to be the sixteen most misleading statements made by Vice President Dick Cheney and Senator John Edwards during the foreign policy segment of their debate of October 5, followed by my critiques. This is a resolutely non-partisan analysis: eleven of the misleading statements cited are from Cheney and five are from Edwards. The quotes are listed in the order in which they appear in the transcript…
While Criticizing Implementation, Kerry Endorses Bush’s Unilateralist Agenda
Foreign Policy In Focus/IPS, by Stephen Zunes October 5, 2004
[source is no longer available]
Democratic nominee John Kerry’s foreign policy speech at New York University has been widely hailed as a long-overdue effort to place some daylight between himself and President Bush regarding Iraq. In his September 20 address, the Massachusetts senator appropriately took the president to task for launching the war prematurely, mishandling the occupation, misleading the American public regarding the deteriorating situation on the ground, and pursuing policies that have weakened America’s security interests. However, the speech also contained a number of disturbing elements…
President Bush’s UN Speech: Idealistic Rhetoric Disguises Sinister Policies
Foreign Policy In Focus/IPS, September 22, 2004
by Stephen Zunes [source is no longer available]
Commentators in the mainstream media seem genuinely perplexed over the polite but notably unenthusiastic reception given to President George W. Bush’s September 21 address before the United Nations General Assembly. Why wasn’t a speech that emphasized such high ideals as democracy, the rule of law, and the threat of terrorism better received? The answer may be found through a critical examination of the assumptions underlying the idealistic rhetoric of the U.S. president’s message. Below are a number of examples…
Is Kerry Really More Open than Bush to Alternative Foreign Policy Perspectives?
Common Dreams, September 15, 2004
by Stephen Zunes [source is no longer available].
Some progressive supporters of Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry have argued that, despite his support for the invasion of Iraq and other neoconservative-driven foreign policies of the Bush Administration, at least a President Kerry – unlike the incumbent president – would be more willing to listen to the views of those with more moderate perspectives than himself. A President Kerry, so goes this argument, while likely to take a number of foreign policy positions more hawkish than most Democrats could support, would at least be more open to hearing a number of competing assessments and policy options before choosing military solutions to foreign policy problems. Unfortunately, while a President Kerry would almost certainly be less ideological and impulsive… the Massachusetts senator appears to be just as unwilling to listen to alternative viewpoints regarding foreign affairs as the incumbent president…
International Law, The U.N., and MIddle Eastern Conflicts
Professor Stephen Zunes prepared this paper to present at the 2003 convention of the State Bar Association of Arizona, September 9, 2004. However, two weeks before the event, SBA president Ernest Calderon banned the presentation following complaints that Zunes, who had been invited to prepare it six months earlier– was “anti-Israel” and “anti-American.” At no point was Zunes given an opportunity to defend himself and challenge these charges… Access the full paper [tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1040265042000278513] or see the summary image below.
