Foreign Policy In Focus, Dec. 5, 2007, By Stephen Zunes
Also at Antiwar.com and AmericanTaskForce.org
Despite the best efforts by the Bush administration of putting a positive spin on the recently-completed summit in Annapolis to restart the “Performance-Based Road Map to Peace,” there is little reason to expect that it will actually move the Israeli-Palestinian peace process forward as long as the United States insists on simultaneously playing the role of chief mediator and chief supporter of the more powerful of the two parties.
Category: Peace and War
Broken Peace Process
Foreign Policy In Focus, November 26, 2007, By Stephen Zunes [source]
There’s little reason to hope for a breakthrough at the Middle East peace summit in Annapolis, unless there is a fundamental shift in U.S. policy in addressing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. And there’s little evidence to suggest such a change is forthcoming.
Five Years Later, We Can’t Forgive or Forget
Foreign Policy In Focus, October 11, 2007
By Emily Schwartz Greco, Stephen Zunes
This week marks the fifth anniversary of the congressional vote granting President George W. Bush unprecedented war-making authority to invade Iraq at the time and circumstances of his own choosing. Had a majority of either the Republican-controlled House or the Democratic-controlled Senate voted against the resolution or had they passed an alternative resolution conditioning such authority on an authorization from the United Nations Security Council, all the tragic events that have unfolded as a consequence of the March 2003 invasion would have never occurred…
The Peace Movement Addresses Israel-Palestine (Finally)
Foreign Policy In Focus | June 14, 2007
In my Inbox last Friday was an email from Peace Action, the country’s largest peace group, encouraging its members to join the thousands of peace and human rights activists from across the country in the June 10 march in Washington against the Israeli occupation. This otherwise unremarkable letter served as an important reminder that U.S. support for the Israeli occupation is finally becoming an issue for the mainstream of the peace movement… [source]
Bring ‘Em Home, Bring ‘Em Home
Foreign Policy In Focus, May 14, 2007
by Emily Schwartz Greco, Stephen Zunes
Bruce Springsteen belts out an old peace movement standard. I first heard it while driving home from work on a college FM station. It was a song I had forgotten about but had known, with slightly different opening lyrics, in my childhood…
U.S. Blocks Israel-Syria Talks
Foreign Policy in Focus/Institute for Policy Studies, May 1, 2007
By John Feffer, Stephen Zunes [source].
Even as American officials reluctantly agreed last month to include Syrian representatives in multiparty talks on Iraqi security issues, the Bush administration continues to block Israel from resuming negotiations with Syria over its security concerns. In 2003, President Bashar al-Assad offered to resume peace talks with Israel where they had left off three years earlier, but Israel, backed by the Bush administration, refused. Assad eventually agreed to reenter peace negotiations without preconditions, but even these overtures were rejected…
The United States, the UN, and the Lebanon Ceasefire
Foreign Policy In Focus, August 21, 2006,
by John Feffer, Stephen Zunes
The UN Security Council resolution for a ceasefire to the fighting in Lebanon is certainly good news in terms of ending the carnage. Passed on August 11, Resolution 1701 is also a marked improvement over the original U.S. draft and contains some positive language. Both sides, for instance, are called upon to honor a full cessation of hostilities. And Israel must provide the UN with maps of landmines planted in southern Lebanon during Israel’s 22-year occupation that ended in 2000…
Democrats Versus the Peace Movement?
Foreign Policy In Focus, July 3, 2006
John Feffer, Stephen Zunes< [source]
The U.S. Congress failed in recent weeks to take even symbolic steps to encourage a withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, even though the majority of Americans support an end to the war. Many anti-war advocates are hoping that the mid-term U.S. elections in November will push Congress into Democratic hands and thereby increase the chances of ending the war. Don’t hold your breath…
U.S. Undermines Israeli Doves in their Quest for Peace
National Catholic Reporter, Jan. 20, 2006, by Stephen Zunes [source]
With national elections scheduled for the end of March, much attention is being given to the political direction Israeli voters will take their country in the post-Sharon era. During Israel’s last election in January 2003, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon defeated Labor Party leader Amram Mitzna, who had pledged to support a withdrawal of Israeli occupation forces from the bulk of the occupied territories in exchange for security guarantees on terms quite close to proposals made by the Palestinian delegation…
El-Baradei and the IAEA’s Nobel Peace Prize a Mixed Blessing
Foreign Policy In Focus, December 12, 2005
By John Gershman, Stephen Zunes [source]
My reaction to the awarding this past weekend of the 2005 Nobel Peace Prize to the International Atomic Energy Agency and its director Mohammed El-Baradei was similar to my reaction to the awarding of the 2002 prize to former President Jimmy Carter: while they have pursued a number of policies contrary to the spirit of the Nobel Peace Prize, they have also done much to make the world a safer place. On the one hand, the IAEA has helped to promote nuclear energy, an extremely dangerous, expensive, and unnecessary means of electrical generation, and has been accused of downplaying the serious health and environmental impact of the 1986 Chernobyl disaster and essentially being a shill of the nuclear energy…
The Peace Process Between Israel and Syria
Foreign Policy in Focus/Institute for Policy Studies,
October 4, 2005, by Stephen Zunes [Source]
Key Points
* The U.S. role as a superpower with strong strategic and economic interests in the region often conflicts with its role as mediator in the Israeli-Syrian peace process.
* Syria has moderated its once-belligerent posture toward the Israelis and is now closer to accepting the existence of Israel and living in peace, particularly if the Palestinians are allowed a viable state alongside Israel.
* The United States has maintained its strong support for Israel’s negotiating position, even though Israel now takes a more hard-line posture than its autocratic neighbor.
The Release of Mordechai Vanunu and U.S. Complicity in the Development of Israel’s Nuclear Arsenal
Foreign Policy In Focus, Oct. 2, 2005
By John Gershman & Stephen Zunes [source]
The recent release on April 22 of Mordechai Vanunu from an Israeli prison provides an opportunity to challenge the U.S. policy of supporting Israel ’s development of nuclear weapons while threatening war against other Middle Eastern states for simply having the potential for developing such weaponry. Vanunu, a nuclear technician at Israel ’s Dimona nuclear plant, passed along photographs he had taken inside the plant to the Sunday Times of London in 1986. His evidence demonstrated that Israel had developed up to two hundred nuclear weapons of a highly advanced design, making it the world’s sixth-largest nuclear power…
The U.S. and Iran: Democracy, Terrorism, and Nuclear Weapons
Columbia.edu & Foreign Policy In Focus, July 25, 2005 By Stephen Zunes
The election of the hard-line Tehran mayor, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, over former President Ayatollah Hashemi Rafsanjani as the new head of Iran is undeniably a setback for those hoping to advance greater social and political freedom in that country. It should not necessarily be seen as a turn to the right by the Iranian electorate…
Bush Administration Stokes Dangerous Arms Race on Indian Subcontinent
Foreign Policy In Focus, July 20, 2005
By John Gershman, Stephen Zunes [source]
For more than two decades, arms control experts have argued that the most likely scenario for the hostile use of nuclear weapons was not between the former Cold War superpower rivals, an act of terrorism by an underground terrorist group, or the periodically threatened unilateral U.S. attack against a “rogue state,” but between India and Pakistan…
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…
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…
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…
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…
A US Invasion of Iraq Can Be Stopped
By Stephen Zunes January 15, 2003 [source no longer available]
Despite increased preparation for war, there is a growing perception that a U.S. invasion of Iraq can be stopped. There is little question that were it not for the anti-war movement, the United States would have gone to war against Iraq already. It was the strength of opposition to plans for a unilateral U.S. invasion that forced the Bush Administration to go to the UN in the first place…