EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Rise Up or Die
- Rallying Cry: Citizens Worldwide to Unite in 'March Against Monsanto'
- A 'Nonviolent Army of Love' Rises in North Carolina to Face Down Rightwing's Assault on Progress
- The Latest Lie: IRS Targeted Conservatives
- Genetically Modified Democracy: Monsanto and Congress Move to Stomp on Your Rights
Popular content
Today's Top News
Before Obama's Speech, A Few Thoughts on a New Middle East Policy
President Obama has the chance to completely retool U.S. policy in the Middle East in the context of the Arab Spring - but it doesn't look likely that he will.
The Obama administration faces a huge contradiction in trying to craft a new policy for the Middle East in the midst of the Arab Spring.
Obama delivers an address to the Muslim world in the Grand Hall of Cairo University in 2009. Today's remarks take place in a whole new context.
They are trying to position the U.S. as a friend of the newly democratizing forces, while at the same time refusing to give up the policy of support for those on top, who imposed dictatorships and occupations across the Middle East, to protect U.S. interests in oil, Israel, and strategic stability. Now it is the people of the region who are creating new democracies from below – and it is long past time to change how the U.S. relates to them.
A transformed U.S. role in the region will have to go beyond soaring words and even additional economic assistance. It will require an entirely different policy based on support for popular bottom-up democracy, acceptance of new indigenous definitions of social and economic justice, and respect for local decision-making – even when reality doesn’t match Washington’s illusion of what the “new Middle East” should look like.
What would that policy look like?
- An end to the U.S. military aid and diplomatic protection that enable Israel’s occupation and apartheid policies, and supporting regional and globally-led diplomacy rather than imposing its own failed “peace process.”
- An end to all U.S. military ties to any regime suppressing the Arab Spring protests in its own or other countries (that means Saudi Arabia as well as Bahrain, for example, as well as pulling all troops and mercenaries out of Iraq).
- An end to all economic aid until it can be redirected away from militaries (even in democratizing countries) and into the hands of accountable governments. Supporting creation of a nuclear weapons-free zone throughout the Middle East.
- An end to the double-standard of harsh sanctions and massive military force (such as in Syria and Libya) imposed against some dictators’ attacks on protestors, while continuing to arm and finance dictatorships strategically allied with the U.S. (such as Bahrain and Yemen) with hardly a word of protest against their lethal assaults on unarmed demonstrators.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
18 Comments so far
Show AllBennis' recommendations are all worthy, but none of them will come to pass under Obama or any other imperial President.
The US will aggressively oppose any "bottom up democracy" that seeks to diminish the US role in the region, and any genuine democratic movement in the Middle East and North Africa is almost certain to propose just that outcome!
Another day, another what Obama should do list. Ho hum.
How about a primer on getting Obama's bosses off our backs or a primer on how to live without a job? You know, something of value.
All that we have to give to other nations are guns and bombs.
The author said" ....but it doesn't look likely that he will."
My comment: Obama won't. Because he can't. There are hidden forces that are beyond his control. He will make a good a speech though. Remember his speech at Cairo?
Hmmm
Great post Phyllis. It is refreshing to hear what should be done in a clear, concise and logical manner. What is truly sad however, is that Obama like Bush before him, owes his allegiance to Zionism and will act accordingly. The American public and the greater world at large be damned.
Right, Dearborn, it's always mostly about the great Jewish Conspiracy. The MIC, powerful banking interests, those in the innermost circles of U.S. empire all defer to Israel. There's no interest in oil, strategic geo-political moves on the earth as grand chessboard, or any priority other than Israel that factors into the grand calculus. Nice deflection device...
Israel will reap its own karma, but conflating what Israel does with what the U.S. does as if the two nations' interests and motives represent entirely the same thing is dishonest. And it wreaks of anti-semitism.
In response to the author's list for U.S. foreign policy improvements vis-a-vis the Arab world (and its "spring") Every one one of the items mentioned sounds like a prescription for all that's needed for regime change here at home.
Siouxrose, PRECISELY!
They are exactly the prescriptions necessary for the same change "at home" --- because the diagnosis is the same "abroad" and "at home", as Hannah Arendt presciently warned from her life-long study of Empires:
"Empire abroad entail tyranny at home".
it is precisely a global Empire, Siouxrose, that controls the Middle-East (and N Africa), and it is the very SAME global Empire that controls our own country "at home".
And ONLY by exposing, confronting, and excising that global Empire that Obama is shilling for, will we ever become truly free with liberty and democracy.
Thanks for your continuing insight, and best to you and yours,
Alan
Phyllis, before the speech this is what I'd have wished Obama to say:
What the American people should be asking Obama about his speech tonight and about the policy of unending wars of Empire in North Africa, the Middle-east, and mainland Asia:
I'd like to ask the president to explain to the American people what the global Empire is planning to do (and already doing) in the MiddleEast with respect to Thomas Barnett's 2004 Naval War College strategy and book, "The Pentagon's New Map" -- which lays out a PNAC-like preemptive war plan to take-over all these "GAP" countries along the 5000 mile swath from across N. Africa, the greater Middel-East, and south central Asia, from Mauritania to the very boarders of India and China??
Barnett's strategy is already being deceptively 'played out' secretly and behind the American peoples back by what he accurately terms the "Leviathan" military forces of the "Old Core" (western 'global Empire') to insure that a "New Core" (of BRIC countries) can not operate and secure the massive natural resources (oil) and geostrategic position in the "GAP" territories.
I would like Obama to explain and level with the American citizens as to why the actual maps in Barnett's "Pentagon's New Map" exactly match the military control maps of the Pentagon itself and its global imperial force structures for global war and global control, as pictured here:
http://eaves.ca/2008/06/16/firefox-3-pledge-map-vs-barnetts-the-pentagons-new-map/
http://www.defense.gov/home/features/2009/0109_unifiedcommand/
http://thomaspmbarnett.com/globlogization/2010/5/17/marine-corps-gazette-the-gap-as-arc-of-instability.html
Lastly, I (and the American public) should be asking our supposedly elected, and supposedly president (faux-Emperor) how he can describe our former democratic country as anything other than a global corporate/financial/militarist EMPIRE? And whether he is being honest with us, or whether he is just a political pawn of this global Empire fooling us into the final World War of the Empire that he is captive to?
Obama, how is “globalization” anything but your Obama branded advertising term for “global Empire”??
Alan MacDonald
Sanford, Maine
Liberty & democracy over violent empire -- New America People's Party 2012
But after the speech, this is what I knew the impact of his speech would be:
Obama's speech immediately reminded me of the old James Bond "Spy Who Loved Me" song, "Nobody Does It Better" --- in that nobody does disguised global Empire better than the US and its new "Open Globalization" pitch-man.
Yes, Obama is a wonderful spokesman (better than even Reagan or Friedman) in promoting the appearance of a promising "Globalization" and looking forward to democracy for all, while glossing over the fact that the forced march to globalization by force of arms is essentially just a cover for the reality of "global Empire".
The PR skills of the US and Obama are the only combination that can promise the advertising illusion of such 'hope for change' under the implied mantel of "democracy" and free market economic "Globalization", and yet deliver the reality of deceptive, disguised, dysfunctional, and unsustainable "Global Empire" --- Nobody does it better.
The world, and particularly this "GAP" portion of the world, as defined in Thomas Barnett's "The Pentagon's New Map", can not help but be beguiled by such a sales-pitch. Nor can any other individual or set of countries proffer such appealing rhetoric.
But the results of such a promising sounding plan, extended by the disguised hand of the global corporate/financial/militarist Empire which has already taken over our own former country (and many others) will not end well --- as can be predicted with precision by looking no further than the looting of public countries that the privatized global Empire has so recently practiced on America and much of the fading western nation-state world of countries.
As Nobel economist George Akerlof more presciently diagnosed as far back as 2001, "This is not normal government economic policy, but a form of LOOTING".
The global looting of public assets for private greed is the job of the global Empire, while the job of lying and luring the world into this trap is the job of Obama --- and he has done a great job for his masters.
Alan MacDonald
Sanford, Maine
Liberty & democracy over violent empire -- New America People's Party 2012
Alan: Great analysis. I would add that I don't think the world is as beguiled as you seem to believe. While Amerikans are accustomed to living in a state of paradox bordering on psychosis, the direct result of the contradiction between stated intentions and actual practices, the rest of the world has enough distance on this dastardly modus operandi to see it for what it is.
Of course the money-class may play along because so far, Disaster Capitalism has kept their personal ships afloat.
Another poster brought up the intriguing prospect that Amerika, as empire, does not explain the growing power of global corporations that owe their allegiance to no land. Of course they prefer a nebulous tie to Amerika so as to make use of its massive military. As Smedley Butler related, it's the fist in the glove that works to win access to precious resources the world over. And if his testimony weren't enough, Thomas Friedman's mantra that there could "be no McDonalds without MacDonnell-Douglas" ought to make matters meticulously clear.
Also, what's your feeling about the recent escalation of geologic and climate perturbations? The costs to Japan for the nuclear melt-down, added to those hitting Australia from its massive floods, with threats of similar acts shadowing over other nations... must factor onto the global balance sheets sooner or later. Is it your view that the sum of these costly natural events, added to the probable lessening of access to cheap oil, might act in ways to derail the beast of Empire?
My point is that US militarism is NOT the greatest power in this universe. I submit that this humbling realization is soon to prove itself for all mankind to see... and learn from.
I look forward to your response.
Interesting points, thank you.
It's funny how often I find the comments in CD more enlightening than the actual story.
NO "News"
I agree with siouxrose and Alan MacDonald. I disagree with the conclusion that
Obama "CAN'T" etc. etc. etc. Rather he (and Israel) WON'T..
Israel and the US seem to favor something called "negotiation". It is not
negotiation with a fully recognized partner, negotiations in "good faith",
negotiations in which Israel (and the US) give up something.
Palestine may choose to await the outcome of September's Palestinian
election and to appoint its CHIEF NEGOTIATOR. Such a person with
his team could be a spokesperson and/or official of Hamas. What is
vital is that Palestinians define their team, not conquerring parties with
conflicting interests.
Since Hamas has demonstrated an amazing record in the execution of
its foreign policy, I reserve that to them.
Israelis may go back to the Charter for Hamas. They never mention
the attacks by Israel with US support. It is more than worth it to
analyze the development of Zionism and study the diaries of David
Ben Gurion. These are central to understanding the problems and
their origin. It is history and it is by definition relevant.
It is NOT where we are now. As long as Israel (and the US) refuse to
recognize Hamas as co-equals and their concerns as meritorious---
as well as THEIR not so distant history ---there will be no resolution,
no real "dialogue".
Remember the Nakba !!!
email:peterloeb@yahoo.com
"A transformed U.S. role in the region will have to go beyond soaring words and even additional economic assistance. It will require an entirely different policy based on support for popular bottom-up democracy, acceptance of new indigenous definitions of social and economic justice, and respect for local decision-making – even when reality doesn’t match Washington’s illusion of what the “new Middle East” should look like."
We need bottom-up democracy here in the US. We need a better way for people to be able to work with ideas and concepts rather than having their realty preached to them by the media. People need to think critically and use their creativity rather than having a continual jump through this hoop and get reward dogma. I am certain that human beings can come up with something more creative with how we live our lives than having the top 1% conduct the train at 500 mph towards a brick wall.
I believe people need a more efficent way of learning and communicating. I'm not sure what this is, but I do think there are way too many barriers to information. For instance, there is an incredible amount if information available in books. A few barriers are: 1) Books cost money. This limits people at large to a few books in their entirety. 2) Books are often written is a way in which one must do a lot of reading to get to any specific point. This makes working with any one specifc point more troublesome.
I do like the wiki format and feel this is a step in the right direction. I feel we need a new way of people being able to work with ideas and concepts.
My 2 cents...
NEO: You sound a lot like "Ready to Transform." She, too, speaks of the need for utilizing more creativity. And she's provided '2 cents' so often, she's probably got some major dollars stored up (symbolically) by now!
"Books are often written is a way in which one must do a lot of reading to get to any specific point."
Precisely. Many things in life are complex and can be intimately and publicly be examined and shared through the wit, anguish, and wisdom of human intelligence, creativity, word-play, dialogue, and research found in...books.
Or they can just enjoyed for the hell of it. Sometimes, there may not be a point, or the point is to continue an on-going human dialectic or create something because you are compelled to create it.
Literature can be fiction, nonfiction, prose, poetry, printed images or any combination of all those forms in ways that no other human creation can.
I don't mean that literature is a superior art form and/or means of communication; but if we lose literaure, in all its complexity, diversity, contradiction, joyfulness and sensuality, we lose an essential part of the human spirit that has come to permeate the vast majority of human cultures.
Bad shit, that. That's my point.
Right, there's a vast amount of knowledge and insight available in the form of books. In an age where data and communication travels in mere milliseconds, why don't we make the content in books more readily available?
For instance, I've been working with some safety and engineering codes for my work, which are very expensive to buy. If the codes are there for the general safety and welfare of people, why not make them readily available? Currently there are many authors that have intimate knowledge and insight into the specific conflicts we face. Be it knowledge/insight on Blackwater, middle east nations and peoples, or economic practices and policy solutions, they are contained in a book form and cost money.
I feel that there is much information, while it may be complex, is vital to understand what we human beings are doing to ourselves and the earth. With 6.5 billion of us, I feel there is much creative potential, but to apply that creativity to any type of solution, the problem must be understood first. I feel we must promote learning and understanding and also have a way to integrate the many people who could provide intelligent and creative solutions.
This is the problem with the top 1% having all the power. They just don't have the creativity or wisdom to make decisions for the rest of the world. Unfortunately, more money does not impart more intelligence, insight, or wisdom, but does give a person more access to resources. Why do we, here in this information age, still cast votes for representatives every 2 years? We should be using our technology to create tools to work with issues and topics in a meaningful way.
I certainly do appreciate the essay style of communication here on CD. I feel it's more productive than the banter and BS scattered through the web.
You can't negotiate with someone who is intent on your destruction. Our narcissistic lunatic president has taken away any assurances that Israel previously had from the US. This is a major mistake and Israel will now have to take pre-emptive actions to defend itself.
While the right and left apparently agree on a globalist agenda, they apparently don't know how it will be characterized. Regardless of the talk about democracy, it is apparently that any new global world order will not be a protector of liberty and freedom. Strange to find ourselves hiding under the same bed.
I was alive in 1967 (age 20). Israel was attacked by Iraq, Jordan, Egyp, and Syria. Irael defeated them and drove them to defensible positions. Since that time, Israel has returned most of that land in an effort to broker peace and satisfy those who deny the intent of their hatred. (i.e. progressives). These efforts have been praised, but they never dimmed the hatred of Israel by all her neighbors. Before Obama, The US at least guaranteed Israel that she would not be left to defend herself. She no longer has that comfort level.
To answer your question, NO I am a Christian. Yes, we love Jews. We love Israel and we love Arabs. Unfortunately, Israel is the only government in the middle east that won't change with the firing of a single bullet. The middle east will not allow itself to be democratized, while Moslems are in control. To negotiate with Hamas, Hezbollah, the PLO or whatever it calls itself next, is a mistake. The face may change but it has the same father.