Stephen Zunes, Posted Sept. 3, 2004 [source no longer available]
The only people who could possibly be swayed by the unfair and misleading attacks on Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry put forward by speakers at the Republican National Convention (particularly Vice-President Dick Cheney and Georgia Senator Zell Miller) would be those with little understanding of contemporary strategic issues and modern diplomatic history. Unfortunately, that probably includes the majority of eligible American voters…
Category: Foreign Policy
Attacks Against World Court by Bush, Kerry and Congress Reveal Growing Bipartisan Hostility to International Law
Foreign Policy In Focus by Stephen Zunes, August 17, 2004
[source is no longer available]
On July 9, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) determined that the Israeli government’s construction of a separation wall running through the occupied Palestinian West Bank was illegal. Among other things, the ICJ noted that the construction of the first 125 miles of the proposed 450-mile barrier “has involved the confiscation and destruction of Palestinian land and resources, the disruption of the lives of the thousands of protected civilians and the de facto annexation of large areas of territory.” The court called on Israel to cease construction of the wall, to dismantle what has already been built in areas beyond Israel’s internationally recognized border, and to compensate Palestinians who have suffered losses as a result of the wall’s construction. The vote was 14-1, a not-unexpected margin…
Democratic Party Platform Shows Shift to the Right on Foreign Policy
Foreign Policy In Focus, by Stephen Zunes, August 5, 2004
[source is no longer available]
Against the backdrop of ongoing death and destruction in Iraq as a result of the U.S. invasion and subsequent occupation, the Democratic Party formally adopted its 2004 platform on July 28 at its convention in Boston. The platform focused more on foreign policy than it had in recent years. It represented an opportunity to challenge the Republican administration’s unprecedented and dangerous departure from the post-World War II international legal consensus forbidding aggressive wars as well as a means with which to offer a clear alternative to the Bush Doctrine…
The Disappointing Selection of John Edwards, a Foreign Policy Hawk
Foreign Policy In Focus, by Stephen Zunes, July 16, 2004
[source is no longer available]
John Kerry’s decision to select a vice presidential running mate who shares his militaristic foreign policy agenda has once again demonstrated the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee’s willingness to take the party’s activist core, which overwhelmingly supports human rights and international law, for granted. While bringing Senator John Edwards—a bright and charismatic Southern populist—onto the Democratic ticket might attract some voters, it will likely serve to further alienate the majority of Democrats already disappointed in Kerry’s strident support for President George W. Bush’s illegal and disastrous decision to invade Iraq…
President Bush’s May 24 Speech on Iraq: A Critique
Foreign Policy In Focus by Stephen Zunes, May 25, 2004
[source is no longer available]
The most striking element of President George W. Bush’s May 24th speech at the Army War College regarding the situation in Iraq was that it could come across as quite convincing as long as you agreed with the following dubious assumptions:
* Only the continued U.S. military presence in Iraq would lead to “the rise of a free and self-governing Iraq.”
* Conversely, if the U.S. forces withdrew, either unilaterally or as part of a transfer to United Nations authority, the result would be a totalitarian government which would “embolden the terrorists, leading to more bombings, more beheadings and more murders of the innocent around the world.”…
Bush Endorsement of Sharon Proposal Undermines Peace and International Law
Foreign Policy In Focus, April 27, 2004
by Stephen Zunes [source is no longer available]
President George W. Bush’s unconditional endorsement of right-wing Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon’s disengagement plan constitutes a shocking reversal of longstanding U.S. Middle East policy and one of the most flagrant challenges to international law and the integrity of the United Nations system ever made by a U.S. president. By giving unprecedented backing for Israeli plans to annex large swaths of occupied Palestinian territories in the West Bank in order to incorporate illegal Jewish settlements, President Bush has effectively renounced UN Security Council resolutions 242 and 338, which call on Israel — in return for security guarantees from its Arab neighbors — to withdraw from Palestinian territories seized in the June 1967 war…
The US in Iraq: If Bush is Blind, Kerry is at Best Near-Sighted
Foreign Policy In Focus, April 23, 2004
by Stephen Zunes [source is no longer available]
Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry was one of a minority of Democratic members of Congress who voted to authorize President George W. Bush to invade Iraq. With the war becoming increasingly unpopular with the electorate, however, Senator Kerry has recently been sounding more critical. Still, his recent efforts to explain his evolving position raise some troubling questions…
Kerry’s Foreign Policy Record Suggests Few Differences with Bush
Foreign Policy In Focus by Stephen Zunes, March 5, 2004
[source is no longer available]
Those who had hoped that a possible defeat of President George W. Bush in November would mean real changes in U.S. foreign policy have little to be hopeful about now that Massachusetts Senator John Kerry has effectively captured the Democratic presidential nomination. That Senator Kerry supported the Bush Administration’s invasion of Iraq and lied about former dictator Saddam Hussein possessing a sizable arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in order to justify it would be reason enough to not support him. However, a look at his record shows that Kerry’s overall foreign policy agenda has also been a lot closer to the Republicans than to the rank-and-file Democrats he claims to represent…
Kerry’s Support for the Invasion of Iraq and the Bush Doctrine Still Unexplained
Stephen Zunes, March 1, 2004 [source no longer available]
As casualties mount and disorder continues in Iraq, and as the lies that were put forward to garner support of the invasion are exposed, Massachusetts senator John Kerry and his supporters have desperately sought to defend his decision to back the U.S. invasion and occupation. Their failure to make a convincing case may spell trouble for Senator Kerry’s dreams of capturing the White House in November…
Interview of Bush Reveals Dangerous Assumptions Behind U.S. Foreign Policy
Foreign Policy In Focus/Institute for Policy Studies,
March 1, 2004, by Stephen Zunes [source no longer available]
A number of critiques have been written about President George W. Bush’s responses to Tim Russert’s questions in the February 8 edition of NBC’s “Meet the Press,” primarily regarding his shifting rationale for the invasion of Iraq. More problematic, however, was the fact that President Bush made a number of assertions that were patently false or–at the very least–misleading. The failure of Mr. Russert to challenge these statements and the ongoing repetition of such rationales by the administration and its supporters make it all the more imperative that such assertions not be allowed to go unquestioned. The implications of Bush’s statements are quite disturbing, since they involve such fundamental issues as international terrorism, the United Nations, weapons of mass destruction, and the policy of preemption…
Libyan Disarmament a Positive Step, but Threat of Proliferation Remains
January 15, 2004 by Stephen Zunes [source no longer available]
In a world seemingly gone mad, it is ironic that one of most sane and reasonable actions to come out of the Middle East recently has emanated from the government of Muammar Qaddafi, the Libyan dictator long recognized as an international outlaw. Libya’s stunning announcement that it is giving up its nascent biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons programs and accepting international assistance and verification of its disarmament efforts is a small but important positive step in the struggle to curb the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). It would be a big mistake, however, to accept claims by the Bush administration and its supporters that it was the invasion of Iraq and other threatened uses of force against so-called “rogue states” which pursue WMD programs that led to Libya’s decision to end its WMD programs…
Annotate This! Misleading Rhetoric in 2004 State of the Union Address
Foreign Policy In Focus/Institute for Policy Studies,
January 1, 2004, by Stephen Zunes [source is no longer available]
Tonight, hundreds of thousands of American servicemen and women are deployed across the world in the war on terror… Though no one should question their commitment, their missions of invading and occupying foreign countries and engaging in high altitude bombing and urban counterinsurgency operations that kill civilians, has brought more fear than hope. And it has delivered more violence than justice, and created an unprecedented level of anti-American sentiment in the Islamic world and beyond that has actually made America less secure…
More ‘Right’ on Israel Than Bush
Alternet by Stephen Zunes, December 24, 2003 [source]
The moment images of Saddam Hussein’s capture flashed across TV screens around the world, John Kerry and Joseph Lieberman jumped on the opportunity to lash out at Howard Dean for not supporting the war on Iraq, even as they congratulated the Bush White House for a job well done. It was not, however, the first time that the two Democratic candidates have attacked the former Vermont governor for being too “liberal” on foreign policy. Nor is Iraq the only issue where the Democratic leadership — and its anointed heirs — have revealed an unmistakably rightwing agenda. It is a less-known fact that when it comes to the Israel/Palestinian issue, the Democratic establishment is virtually indistinguishable from the Bush administration…
Israelis and Palestinians Attempt to Jumpstart the Peace Process Despite Washington’s Support for Sharon
By Stephen Zunes, Posted December 3, 2003
[source]
The peace plan signed in Geneva December 1 by leading Israeli and Palestinian political figures represents an important step forward. Former president Jimmy Carter who was present at the ceremony may be correct in noting that ‘It’s unlikely we shall ever see a more promising foundation for peace.’ Contrary to initial reports at the time and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat’s inept diplomacy notwithstanding, then-Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak’s peace proposal at Camp David in July 2000 did not actually provide the Palestinians with a viable independent state. President Bill Clinton’s amended proposal that December was more reasonable, but still fell short of what even moderate Palestinians could accept…
Noble Rhetoric Supports Democracy While Ignoble Policies Support Repression
Foreign Policy In Focus/Institute for Policy Studies,
November 17, 2003, by Stephen Zunes [source]
President George W. Bush’s November 6 speech before the National Endowment for Democracy emphasizing the need for greater democracy and freedom in the Arab world, while containing a number of positive aspects, was nevertheless very misleading and all-too characteristic of the longstanding contradictory messages that have plagued U.S. policy in the Middle East. On the positive side, President Bush challenged the racist mythology that Islamic societies were somehow incapable of democracy and recognized that greater political pluralism need not follow a U.S. model…
An Annotated Refutation of President George W. Bush’s September 23 Address Before the United Nations
Common Dreams September 24, 2003
by Stephen Zunes [source link’s no longer available]
“Events during the past two years have set before us the clearest of divides: Between those who seek order and those who spread chaos; between those who work for peaceful change and those who adopt the methods of gangsters; between those who honor the rights of man and those who deliberately take the lives of men and women and children, without mercy or shame.” This is an ironic statement from a man who defied basic principles of international law and rebuked those who called for peaceful alternatives….
Time to Question the U.S. Role In Saudi Arabia
Foreign Policy In Focus, May 20, 2003
by Stephen Zunes [source]
The terrorist bombings that struck Saudi Arabia on May 12th have raised a number of serious questions regarding American security interests in the Middle East. First of all, the attacks underscore the concern expressed by many independent strategic analysts that the United States has been squandering its intelligence and military resources toward Iraq–which had nothing to do with al Qaeda and posed no direct danger to the United States–and not toward al Qaeda itself, which is the real threat. More importantly, however, the bombings bring to the fore the question of whether U.S. interests have been enhanced or threatened by the cozy American relationship with Saudi Arabia…
Talking Points on Recent Concerns Raised by Bush Administration Officials Regarding Syria
Foreign Policy in Focus/Institute for Policy Studies, April 14, 2003
By John Gershman, Stephen Zunes [Source]
Recent statements by top Bush administration officials have accused the Syrian government of aiding senior Iraqi officials to escape, possessing chemical weapons, and committing “hostile acts” against the U.S. by allegedly supplying military equipment, such as night-vision goggles, to the Iraqis. On April 10th, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz told Congress, “The Syrians are behaving badly. They need to be reminded of that, and if they continue, then we need to think about what our policy is with respect to a country that harbors terrorists or harbors war criminals, or was in recent times shipping things to Iraq.” People should keep in mind the following points in response to administration claims…
President Bush’s February 26 Speech on the Future of Iraq: A Critique
Common Dreams by Stephen Zunes, March 8, 2003
[source is no longer available]
Considerable attention has been given to President George W. Bush’s February 26 speech before the right-wing American Enterprise Institute in Washington, DC outlining his vision of the Middle East in the aftermath of a possible U.S. invasion of Iraq. The speech was broadcast live over national radio and television and given widespread coverage in the print media, yet few critical voices questioning the major points raised in this sanctimonious and highly misleading address were given the opportunity to offer commentary. Below are excerpts of some key portions of the speech followed by some critique…
Addressing Iraqi Repression and the Need for a Change of Regime
Foreign Policy In Focus by Stephen Zunes January 30, 2003 [source]
As the administration’s rationales for invading Iraq–such as Baghdad’s alleged ties to al Qaeda and claims of an imminent nuclear threat–have crumbled under closer scrutiny, the administration and its allies in Congress and the media are increasingly emphasizing a point that cannot be disputed: the repressive nature of the Iraqi regime..