Search Posts Chronologically

The US Has No Credibility Dealing With Chemical Weapons

Posted on

Truthout September 9, 2013; Also in Third World Network and
Blog.Transnational.org. This is an updated and expanded version
of “The US and Chemical Weapons: No Leg to Stand On,”
originally posted in Foreign Policy in Focus, May 2, 2013.
If, as alleged, the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons, it would indeed be a serious development, constituting a breach of the Geneva Protocol of 1925… which banned the use of chemical weapons… Syria is one of only eight of the UN’s 193 member countries not party to the convention. However, U.S. policy regarding chemical weapons has been so inconsistent and politicized, that the U.S. is in no position to take leadership in response to any use of such weaponry by Syria…

Interview on KQED’s “Forum”: Congress Set to Vote on Syria Strikes (audio)

Posted on

KQED: September 29, 2013
Dr. Stephen Zunes talks with a panel that includes, David Mark, editor-in-chief of Politix, an online community focusing on national politics, and former senior editor with Politico, Robert Danin, senior fellow for Middle East and Africa studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, Steve Weber, professor of political science at UC Berkeley and author of books including “The End of Arrogance, America and the Global Competition of Ideas”, about the vote to strike Syria.

Eight Arguments Against Going to War With Syria

Posted on

Truthout September 4, 2013 [Versions were also published by Future of Freedom Foundation, ZNetwork, and Santa Cruz Sentinel]
Ten reasons why the U.S. should not attack Syria. The decision by President Barack Obama to first seek congressional approval of any US military action against Syria is good and important, not only on constitutional grounds, but because it gives the American people an opportunity to stop it. It is critically important to convince members of Congress not to grant the president that authority.

US government hypocrisy undercuts demand for Snowden’s extradition

Posted on

National Catholic Reporter, August 29, 2013
Reasonable people can disagree on whether former National Security Agency analyst Edward Snowden should be celebrated as a whistleblower for revealing widespread U.S. government spying or whether he should be tried and punished for leaking classified documents. However, the Obama administration’s extraordinary hypocrisy in demanding his immediate extradition to the United States, despite the lack of an extradition treaty with Russia, while refusing to extradite far worse criminals to countries with which the United States has such treaty obligations, denies the U.S. government any credibility…

Interview: What should be the US’s next step in Syria? (89.3 KPCC, National Public Radio Los Angeles audio)

Posted on

KPCC (NPR) LAist AirTalk August 27, 2013
In a statement yesterday, Secretary of State John Kerry called the use of chemical weapons in Syria “a moral obscenity” that demands action from the U.S. Now the question is what action the U.S. will take against Syria for crossing the “red line” President Obama outlined against the use of chemical weapons?

Interview: The Impact of Drone Strikes on Yemen (audio)

Posted on

Uprising Radio August 12, 2013: Obama has escalated the U.S. unspoken war on the Gulf Arab state of Yemen with 9 drone bombing raids in 10 days killing about 3 dozens Yemenis… apparently in response to an Al Qaeda terrorist threat which both the U.S. and Yemeni governments have cited in recent days, at the same time as the closures of American embassies in the Middle East and North Africa. But the people of Yemen are puzzled and more than a little angry…

Restless Nation: The Real Meaning of Iran’s Elections

Posted on

[YES!, Transcend.org and Transnational.org Blog, August 13, 2013]
Iran inaugurated its new president, Hassan Rouhani—clearly the most moderate candidate in the running. This outcome illustrates the growing desire for change among the people of Iran. The situation resembles Eastern Europe in the 1970s: The people are not yet at a point where they can bring down the regime, but the ideological hegemony that kept the system intact is gone.

Managing Repression (video)

Posted on

International Center on Nonviolent Conflict (NonviolentConflict.org) Fletcher Summer Institute 2013: Managing Repression June 18 [Video]

Dr. Stephen Zunes, Professor of Politics and International Studies at the University of San Francisco, emphasizes the international impact of repression, specifically how nonviolent responses in the face of brutal repression makes it easier to isolate the oppressive regime, whereas violent resistance, even where seemingly justifiable, could be seen as rationalizing further repression in the name of “national security” or “counter-terrorism.” He also addresses the importance of nonviolent discipline in encouraging defections by security forces and divisions within the regime.
Dr. Erica Chenoweth, Assistant Professor at the Josef Korbel School, University of Denver, discusses how repression affects nonviolent campaigns. She provides empirical evidence that nonviolent movements are still effective even against brutally oppressive opponents. She discusses how movements “manage” repression through the promotion of backfire, as well as the strategic options movements have in dealing with repression. She also provides evidence suggesting that nonviolent movements that adopt violence or develop armed wings are not usually advantaged relative to nonviolent movements. This is because using violence against the regime, even when provoked, can undermine the necessary public participation that nonviolent campaigns enjoy, and can also undermine the backfiring of regime repression.

The Last Colony: Beyond Dominant Narratives on the Western Sahara Roundtable

Posted on

Middle East Studies Pedagogy Initiative (MESPI) June 3, 2013
[Republished by Dagsavisen.no, Jadaliyya.com, JADMAG, and Transnational.org]
   Western Sahara is a sparsely-populated territory about the size of Italy, on the Atlantic coast in northwestern Africa, just south of Morocco. Traditionally inhabited by nomadic Arab tribes, collectively known as Sahrawis and famous for their long history of resistance to outside domination, the territory was occupied by Spain from the late 1800s through the mid-1970s. With Spain holding onto the territory well over a decade after most African countries had achieved their freedom from European colonialism, the nationalist Polisario Front launched an armed independence struggle against Spain in 1973. This (along with pressure from the United Nations) eventually forced Madrid to promise the people of what was then still known as the Spanish Sahara a referendum on the fate of the territory by the end of 1975. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) heard irredentist claims by Morocco and Mauritania and ruled in October of 1975 that (despite pledges of fealty to the Moroccan sultan back in the nineteenth century by some tribal leaders bordering the territory, and close ethnic ties between some Sahrawi and Mauritanian tribes) the right of self-determination was paramount. A special visiting mission from the United Nations engaged in an investigation of the situation in the territory that same year and reported that the vast majority of Sahrawis supported independence under the leadership of the Polisario, not integration with Morocco or Mauritania.