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…
Search Posts Chronologically
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.
How Kerry’s Foreign Policies Leave Him Vulnerable to Republican Attacks
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…
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…
Rightward Ho!
Foreign Policy In Focus by Stephen Zunes, August 10, 2004
[source 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 their 2004 platform on July 28 at their 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…
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…
US Christian Right’s Grip on Middle East Policy
Foreign Policy In Focus by Stephen Zunes, July 14, 2004
[source no longer available]
In recent years, a politicized and right-wing Protestant fundamentalist movement has emerged as a major factor in US support for the policies of the rightist Likud government in Israel. To understand this influence, it is important to recognize that the rise of the religious right as a political force in the United States is a relatively recent phenomenon that emerged as part of a calculated strategy by leading right-wingers in the Republican Party who – while not fundamentalist Christians themselves – recognized the need to enlist the support of this key segment of the US population in order to achieve political power…
Ronald Reagan and the Cold War: Don’t Credit Reagan for Defeating Communism
Foreign Policy In Focus, October 1, 2004
By John Gershman, Stephen Zunes [source]
Perhaps the most dangerous myth regarding the legacy of the late President Ronald Reagan is that he was somehow responsible for the end of the Cold War. Soviet-style communism was doomed in part because it fell victim to the pro-democracy movement that was also then sweeping Latin America and parts of Africa and Asia during this same period. No credit can be given to the Reagan Administration, which was a strong supporter of many of these right-wing dictatorial regimes, such as the Marcos regime in the Philippines…
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…
Iraq One Year Later
Foreign Policy In Focus/Institute for Policy Studies, March 1, 2004
by Stephen Zunes [source no longer available]
A full year after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, while the tyrannical rule of Saddam Hussein is over, the killing continues and the quality of life for most Iraqis has actually deteriorated. Meanwhile, the United States is continuing to sacrifice lives and money in an enterprise for which the original rationales–eliminating Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and its support for the al Qaeda terrorist network–are now widely acknowledged to be false. This essay offers a brief overview of the situation on the ground and the U.S. response to it. The violence in reaction to the U.S. occupation has consisted of both urban guerrilla warfare against U.S. and other occupation forces, led primarily by Baathist and other nationalist militias, and terrorism against Iraqi and foreign civilians, presumably led by domestic or foreign radical Islamists. There is also small-scale and potentially large-scale nonviolent resistance, particularly in the Shiite community…
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…
Democrats’ Attacks on Dean Enhance Bush’s Re-election Prospects
Stephen Zunes, January 7, 2004 [source no longer available]
It is not the increasingly likely prospect of Howard Dean’s nomination that could lead to a Democratic defeat in November, it’s his opponents’ attacks against him. As Dick Gephardt, John Kerry and Joe Lieberman see themselves lagging in the polls running up to the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary later this month, their campaigns are engaging in increasingly desperate attacks against the front-runner for their party’s nomination…
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…