In an effort to define the dominant narrative about the on-going Arab awakening and America’s role in the Middle East, President Obama will give tomorrow what the White House is billing as a major address on Middle East policy. However eloquently delivered, the address will not be able to overcome or compensate for Obama’s profound lack of a strategic vision that could actually shape a more effective U.S. posture toward this critical region.
Obama will speak at a time when U.S. influence in the Middle East continues to decline and American policy is seen as less and less effective. Pew Research Poll released this week a poll of key Middle East populations conducted in late March and early April—in other words, after all of the major elements of the Arab awakening to date (e.g., changes of regime in Tunisia and Egypt, U.S./NATO military intervention in Libya, Saudi intervention in Bahrain, and the outbreak of unrest in Syria) were in play. Contrary to conventional wisdom in the Obama Administration and their echo chambers around Washington that the Arab Awakening will surely work to U.S. advantage, the poll shows continued anger and resentment over U.S. policy and toward President Obama.
The President and his senior advisers are determined to depict what is happening in the Middle East today as a popular repudiation of both Usama Bin Ladin and the Islamic Republic of Iran. Besides overlooking the profound antagonism between Al-Qa’ida and the Islamic Republic, this approach is fundamentally at odds with on-the-ground reality in the region, and is, therefore, likely to fall flat as a rhetorical strategy.
We have pointed out before, and it remains true, that those Middle Eastern regimes that have been overthrown or are at serious risk of being overthrown (at least without Saudi military intervention) have been challenged not because they were sympathetic to either bin Ladin (none were) or Iran. They have been challenged because their own people saw them as not only corrupt and unresponsive, but as bought-and-paid-for vessels for U.S. policies requiring them to compromise their nations’ sovereignty and independence and to act against the interests and preferences of their peoples.
Furthermore, Obama and his administration are heading down the same dead-end road as their recent predecessors in focusing on U.S.-sponsored economic development as the solution to many of the region’s most pressing problems. This tactic has been deployed for years to assuage Palestinian despair over life under open-ended, U.S.-facilitated occupation and “explain away” the fundamentally political roots of anti-Israeli and anti-U.S. violence in the region. It has not worked in the past; it will not work now.
At a time when the United States desperately needs to be rethinking its posture toward Islamist movements in the Middle East—starting with Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood and moving on to Hamas and Hezbollah—Obama will instead double down on the failed approaches of the past. Obama will say he is happy for the United States to engage with Islamist movements—so long as those movements surrender in advance on all of their major points of difference with the United States and Israel, abandon even the idea that armed resistance to occupation might be legitimate, and forsake everything that makes them distinctive as political actors.
If these groups were to do as Obama “asks”, what future relevance could they possibly have? All Obama will accomplish with this point is to perpetuate and deepen America’s self-imposed isolation from some of the most vital political forces shaping real-life outcomes across the Middle East.
These elements of Obama’s Middle East “strategy” are all set against a backdrop of intensifying American concern about rising Iranian influence. Obama will, no doubt, try to tell the world that this is not so—that it is the Islamic Republic, not the United States, whose interests and strategic position are threatened by unfolding events in the region. On this point, it is worth examining part of a speech that President Obama’s national security advisor, Tom Donilon, gave at a Washington Institute for Near East policy even last week. We append below the portion of Donilon’s remarks dealing with Iran:
“President Obama has long understood the regional and international consequences of Iran becoming a nuclear weapons state. That is why we are committed to preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons. From his first days in office, he has made clear to Iran that it has a choice: it can act to restore the confidence of the international community in the purposes of its nuclear program by fully complying with the IAEA and UN Security Council resolutions, or it can continue to shirk its international obligations, which will only increase its isolation and the consequences for the regime. There is no escaping or evading that choice. Already, Iran is facing sanctions that are far more comprehensive than ever before. As a result, it finds it hard to do business with any reputable bank internationally; to conduct transactions in Euros or dollars; to acquire insurance for its shipping; or to gain new capital investment or technology infusions in its antiquated oil and natural gas infrastructure. And it has found in that critical sector alone, close to $60 billion in projects have been put on hold or discontinued. Other sectors are clearly being affected as well. Leading multinational corporations understand the risk of doing business with Iran—and are choosing to no longer do so. These are companies you’ve heard of: Shell, Toyota, Kia, Repsol, Deutsche Bank, UBS, and Credit Suisse, to name just a few.
The impact is real.
Unless and until Iran complies with its obligations under the NPT and all relevant UN Security Council resolutions, we will continue to ratchet up the pressure. As the President has said: ‘Iran can prove that its intentions are peaceful. It can meet its obligations under the NPT and achieve the security and prosperity worthy of a great nation. It can have confidence in the Iranian people and allow their rights to flourish. For Iranians are heirs to a remarkable history.’
Like all NPT Parties, Iran has the right to peaceful nuclear energy. But it also has a responsibility to fulfill its obligations. There is no alternative to doing so. That is why—even with all the events unfolding in the Middle East—we remain focused on ensuring that Iran does not acquire nuclear weapons.
But as you all well know, the Iranian regime’s nuclear program is part of a larger pattern of destabilizing activities throughout the region: In Iraq—where, as our former commander General Odierno said last summer, ‘They continue to be involved in violence specifically directed at U.S. forces’; in Syria, where it has helped the Asad regime suppress pro-democracy demonstrations; and in Lebanon, where it continues to arm Hizballah.
So make no mistake, we have no illusions about the Iranian regime’s regional ambitions. We know that they will try to exploit this period of tumult and will remain vigilant. But we must also remember that Iran has many weaknesses and vulnerabilities.
Iran’s model, like al-Qaeda’s, lacks a vision relevant to our times. It is a model that could not be more out of step with the sentiments of the Arab Spring. This model has the following characteristics:
First: A corrupt, mismanaged and isolated economy that offers the younger generation little hope for a better future. It is an economy increasingly working for the security services like the IRGC and elites, and not for the people of Iran.
Second: The denial of the basic human rights of freedom of expression—the very liberties people across the Middle East are prepared to risk their lives to claim.
Third: a political leadership focused on preserving its reign at all costs, including by unleashing violence against its own citizens, rather than enabling its citizens to flourish.
Fourth: The pursuit of policies that have worked to make a great civilization and people an isolated state, increasingly unable to carry on basic interactions with the rest of the world.
So it’s no surprise, then, that Iran’s world view bears little or no resemblance to the movements afoot in the streets of Tunis and Cairo, Benghazi, Deraa.
Iranian leaders’ attempts to declare themselves the inspiration for these demonstrators are belied by their clear hypocrisy: demanding justice for others while crushing their own people’s demands.
Our observation is that since the elections in 2009, the regime has been heavily focused internally—on silencing dissent and preserving itself. And as you might expect, we now see fissures developing among the ruling class—a dispute that has nothing to do with meeting the needs and aspirations of the Iranian people. It also reflects a fundamental question: whether Iran has the confidence to engage with the outside world—a prospect that has been offered and that is in the overwhelming interest of its people. As the President has said to Iran’s leaders: ‘We know what you’re against, now tell us what you’re for.’
Externally, Iran’s destabilizing activities are backfiring by uniting its neighbors in the Gulf against their activities—this was something I heard often when I visited the Gulf last month.
This is something Arab leaders are saying not just in private but in public as well. The Gulf Cooperation Council recently said it was ‘deeply worried about continuing Iranian meddling’ and accused Tehran of fueling sectarianism.
I want to be clear: The door to diplomacy remains open to Iran. But that diplomacy must be meaningful and not a tactical attempt to ward off further sanctions. These choices remain available to the Iranian government. In the meantime, America and our partners will keep the pressure on by continuing our current sanctions efforts and seeking new lines of activity to target…”
This is, in our view, the most dangerously misguided aspect of Obama’s approach to the Middle East. Increasingly, the region’s major powers—not just Iran, but also Egypt, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey—are charting their own courses, and viewing the United States as poorly intentioned, incompetent, and/or progressively less relevant to their interests. President Obama will try to cast this as a moment of redemption for U.S. strategy, but, in fact, this is a moment of crisis for an America that remains intent on denying regional reality.
–Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett
Alnes,
G W Bush was much worse than Obama, especially on Israel/Palestine. Obama has to deal with numerous stooges of the Israel lobby in the US Congress, many of whom are Democrats.
Voice of Tehran,
The US had strong misgivings about any intervention in Libya, and if Gaddafi had not ranted on TV about slaughtering civilians in Benghazi, the intervention might not have happened. In other words, extreme stupidity on the part of Gaddafi brought about the military intervention of “the west”.
BiBiJon,
Russia, Turkey and China have made clear, time and time again, that they support Iran’s domestic nuclear power programme and oppose any nuclear weapons programme.
This is a sensible course of action, and one taken by Italy and other European countries.
BiBiJon says: May 20, 2011 at 1:06 pm
The United States and her satellites have not been interested in accommodating the rise in Iranian power.
This was a fundamental and salient fact of the international arena that was faced by the Iranian leaders.
While a correct and non-adversarial relationship with EU states and US, as well as Persian Gulf states is desirable for Iran, her leaders have made the determination that such an end state in not worth the price of entry.
The Chinese attitude to Iran is actually an interesting one. They understand that independent energy producers are crucial to the security of China. However, they cannot directly challenge Axis Powers in their Middle Eastern sandbox.
So they strengthen Iran by indirect means; Axis Powers asks them not to sell a turn-key uranium conversion plant to Iran, they put a huff-and-puff show, extract a few concessions (or bank another IOU) and turn around and teach Iranians how to build it themselves. This is how they operate across the board.
Additionally, the Chinese view is that Iranians are a useful distraction to the Axis Powers [a view shared by the Russian] that ties them in that part of the world and generates enemies for them. Moreover, in their view, between Hindu Kush to the Mediterranean Sea there is no functioning state except the Islamic republic of Iran. They are not going to ruin that for the sake of Axis Powers.
I think the Russian leaders also have ridden the Iranian train for profit and pleasure for at least 2 decades. Someday, the diplomatic maneuvering of Mr. Putin in case of Iran will be studied all over the world. But the crucial thing about the Russian State is that the existence of an independent Iranian power is essential to her survival. Therefore, in my judgment, there is a limit to which they will go to suppress Iranian power or to try to keep her down.
Both Russia and China are jealous of their NPT position as nuclear-weapon states. And to this must be attributed some of their hostile actions in the Iranian nuclear case. Both states, also, telling Iran and the Iranians to sink or swim. Or in the words of the late Gen. De Gaulle: “To be a strong country, you have to act like one.” This Iranians are doing but is a painful experience for these disorganized and chaotic people who entered the 20-th century with 1% literacy rate wielding ploughs.
Spring has arrived in Europe via Spain
view live from Puerta Del Sol
:http://www.soltv.tv/soltv2/index.html
Ben-Obama has always been very good on repeating Israel Hasbara lies – even if those lies look ridiculous. Obama began his ‘address of lies’ with mentioning Osama bin Laden, who was put to his death for the second time to push Israeli war into Pakistan.
“Bin Laden was no martyr. He was a mass murderer who offered a message of hate – an insistence that Muslims had to take up arms against the West, and that violence against men, women and children was the only path to change,” Obama claimed.
Yep. It was Osama who killed over two million Iraqi Muslims and Christians, not the US. It was Osama who occupied a foreign land and force over five million of its native Muslims and Christians to live in exile, not the western Jewish settlers funded and protected by United states, France, Germany and England. Only the western-created terrorist groups have claimed him to be ‘martyr’ to demonize Islam and Muslims. Oh, Obama forgot to mention that Osama and his Al-Qaeda was created by Iran and not the US!
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2011/05/02/obama-kills-osama-again/
Are You a Sheeple? Take the Sheeple Quiz and Find Out
http://lewrockwell.com/adams-m/adams-m18.1.html
This was for our esteemed UU , who among various and multifaceted extertises , is also a grandmaster of the secrets of true “Sheeplelism” :-)
nahid says: May 20, 2011 at 1:09 pm
I think that one could argue that from a very abstract perspective colonialism and vasslage both conform to the abstract pattern of unequal power and hierarchical organization.
But I think that level of abstraction misses the nuances and specificities that obtain in each case as empirical historical phenomena.
I think understanding those specificities (those features that distinguish the Indian Raj from Sassanian vassalage, for example) are germaine to developing a better understanding of the current situation as well as formulating better policies.
We could ascribe all acts of murders and theft to the fallen nature of Mankind but each instance is very specific indeed.
Soon there will be a press conference about nettie yahoo and obama, the outcome? probably disagreement and the weak and lame obama didnt dare to press this netanyahu warmonger.
I think this a must see interview, as Barghouti effectively counters Obama’s speech point by point. I highly recommend it:
http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=6801
fyi
vassal state which to me it means they have limited power mostly internal affiars. Is not the same neo_colonialism just polished up old colonialism .
fyi says:
May 20, 2011 at 11:58 am
While I disagree with you about prospects for war, I very much agree that the key to US-Iran relations in in Tel Aviv.
GW implicitly acknowledged the Russian/Chinese bright red line when it comes to making war on Iran. Bush said: “So I told people [Russians] that if you’re interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested” in ensuring Iran not gain the capacity to develop such weapons.
Surely, if the stakes were significantly lower, Iran would have been attacked a dozen times already. Look, not only does Iran have the capacity to badly maul an attacker (or his interests) in the short term, but there is no way Russia, China, Turkey, and Pakistan are going to allow Iran to fold if the conflict lasted longer. Or, put another way, predicting war, year after year, decade after decade, will earn the same accolade of precision for the ‘sage’, as that accorded to a broken clock telling the right time twice a day.
I think Iranians of all stripes would welcome a non-adversarial relationship with the US, with hopes of actual friendship blossoming in due course. As things stand, Iran cannot negotiate a fair relationship with Russia or China, seeing as she depends on them as a shield in the security council, and as a conduit for sanctions busting. Indeed, there is no way of knowing how much of Iran’s current positions on world issues is organic, as opposed to being an affect — a way of recompensating Russia and China for current and future anticipated favors.
In short, I disagree. There’s a lot in it for Iran to have an amicable relationship with the US. That is what the US can offer, though obviously in more robust terms than ‘happy nowruz’.
I hope that one day Israel will formulate her security in terms of regional stability and hence Iran’s unmolested presence in the region. Maybe Obama will tell Netanyahu today US is through with fighting endless wars against Israel’s neighbors. That would surely start the thought process which will lead to fairly obvious conclusions.
fyi says:
May 20, 2011 at 11:58 am
“Note that given the Axis Powers war against Libya and the rumblings of a war against Syria, it must be assumed that the Axis Powers will eventually bring war to Iran as well.
”
fyi , yes true , as this would be a part of the “Grand Scenario” and a war against Iran would be the last nail in the coffin of US/EU Empire , it would accelerate the process of ‘safe ‘ demise so to say , it’s up to them to chose.
FYI writes: “will eventually bring war to Iran as well”
The US/Israeli war with Iran is on. It continues. It is current.
It not only involves an ongoing seige, it involves professional assassinations and industrial sabotage within the targeted country, as well as the co-ordination of atempts to create public uprisings. All that is public and proven.
Direct military action has been postponed until a more convenient moment, however, the situating of permanent military basis and ordinance for that eventuality is complete.
BiBi, wasn’t there a USG funded poll taken of Iraqis? Perhaps that’s one he’s referring to, I don’t know.
Arnold Evans says: May 20, 2011 at 11:50 am
I disagree with your conflation of several concepts: sovereignty, independence, nation, satellite, and state.
France and Saudi Arabia are sovereign states: they are not under occupation by another state and their political leaders are not sent by others. South Korea, Germany, Japan, and Italy are semi-sovereign states; their sovereignty compromised by the position that the United States occupies in their polity.
Saudi Arabia and France are satellite states of (Imperial) US. This is quite clear from the history of their political positions and one should not mistake – in my opinion – occasional bouts of independent action from these 2 actors for genuine independence from the United States.
In the parlance of Medieval Europe, France and Saudi Arabia are vassals of US, that sought US protection – one because it was freed by US and the other because it does not want to have an army that in turn could gain control of the state.
And Saudi Arabia has her own vassals: such as Bahrain just as France has tried to maintain her own vassals in Africa and elsewhere.
But even in Medieval Europe, vassals had scope for independent action and at times got their Overlord into trouble.
Saudi Arabia is a state, whether it is a nation in the European sense remains a mystery to me.
However, I would like to repeat that I do not have the conceptual quantitative metrics to decide if a state is more independent or less independent than another contemporary state. I certainly have neither the metrics nor the data to compare the Qing China with Farouk’s Egypt with Saudi Arabia and decide how quantitatively close to one another they are in some scale of independence.
[This would be an interesting research problem in clio-history and quantitative analysis of history - I imagine several Ph.D. thesis can come out of this.]
This basically means, at least to me, that our judgments on this subject matter are necessarily subjective. That they are, in fact, opinions.
When you use the word “colony” I understand the concepts coming from the historical experience of the last 400 years of European expansion and their colonial enterprise. By those criteria, Jordan is not a colony nor is Saudi Arabia. The vassalage concept, practiced by many different political systems in the Middle East and Europe over the last 3000 years, I believe, supplies a better model.
I think fundamentally I do not agree with your conceptualization, “Colonial Structure” due to its historical content. I think “Vassalage Structure” with its tributary payments or services to the “Overlord” is a more accurate model. For example, Georgia and Armenia were tribute-paying independent kingdoms at times that, however, were also vassals of the Persian Kingdom or the Ottomans, or the Russian Empire.
BiBiJon says: May 20, 2011 at 11:40 am
Yes, but US cannot produce or promote men like the late Mr. Nixon; a first rate strategic thinker.
Furthrmore, US has nothing to offer to Iran; all her inducements are negative or absence of negaive inducements.
Furthermore, Iran is now in the best strategic position she has been in 300 years; Ottomons, Sheybanis, Mughals, British, and Russian Empires are all gone and vanished. And Iran is now also entrenched in Mesopotamia as well as in Lebanon.
There are very many American strategists who grasp all of this. These same people also realize that making a North Korea in Northern Persian Gulf is harmful to US interests.
Americans are committed Champions of Israel, and since they are also unwilling to alter their post Peace of Yalta grand strategy, they will march down this path to the bitter end.
Expect a prolonged confrontation between the Axis Powers and Iran.
Note that given the Axis Powers war against Libya and the rumblings of a war against Syria, it must be assumed that the Axis Powers will eventually bring war to Iran as well.
fyi:
I’ve said before that I think there is a scale of independence among nominally independent countries. Qing China was close to one pole, modern China is close to the other pole. Egypt under Farouk was closer to the Qing China poll. Egypt under Nasser closer to modern China.
You consider France a US satellite. The people of France are cousins of the people of the US and there is a great deal of organic agreement in worldview between the two countries. Most coordination between the US and France happens, in my estimation, because the people of the US and the people of France have compatible aims.
You consider Saudi Arabia a sovereign nation. It is, just as much as Farouk’s Egypt or Qing China.
It could not be more clear that Saudi Arabia coordinates its policy with the United States even more closely than France does and that it does not do so because of any organic agreement in worldview between the people of the US and the people ruled by Saudi Arabia.
In the spectrum of independence, Saudi Arabia is far closer to Farouk’s Egypt and Qing China than it is to modern China or post-revolution Iran. Unless I misunderstood, you earlier seemed to place France closer to Qing China on the scale than you place Saudi Arabia. You called Saudi Arabia sovereign and France a satellite.
Saudi Arabia is nominally independent, as was Farouk’s Egypt. But there was an event that broke Egypt out of the British and then US colonial structure – Nasser’s revolution. There has been no event that analogously freed Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabis was Egypt’s peer in the Western colonial orbit in 1945. Egypt broke out, at least for a substantial time. Saudi Arabia remains.
You say Jordan is not a colony because Jordan’s colonial status does not benefit the US. Jordan under pro-US rule is necessary for Israel to be viable. That is the benefit. Morocco is further away. I don’t see much benefit to Morocco except that as a colony it does not give inspirational and material assistance to independence movements in the more important Muslim colonies for Israel’s viability such as Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait. But that is benefit enough.
I gather now we agree Saudi Arabia is not as independent as France – even though you consider France a US satellite.
How do you compare Saudi Arabia today to Saudi Arabia of 1940 and Egypt of 1940? I consider all three of them nominally independent and equally subordinate to Western colonial structures.
All three have places on the independence spectrum closer to Vichy France than to modern France. Closer to Qing China than to modern China.
fyi says:
May 20, 2011 at 9:58 am
Thanks for that Amb Freeman’s speech.
I could not help but see strong parallels in Freeman’s arguments vis-a-vis US-China relations, to US-Iran.
Pirouz says:
May 20, 2011 at 9:02 am
I found the program relatively evenhanded until the last segment where Karim Sadjadpour was given the platform to sum up Iran’s position in the region in as negatively as he could.
THERE WAS one point Sadjadpour raised I’d like to double check with you. He said according to an opinion poll of Iraqis, most resent Iran’s influence in Iraq. Do you know the details of the poll he was referring to? I ask because this was the only solid ground Sadjadpour’s depiction of bad, bad, Iran was based on. However, as all polls, it really matters what one is asking. E.g. a poll of French attitudes towards intrusion of American terms, fast food chains, etc might yield very negative results which nevertheless have no bearing on French attitudes towards America as an indispensable ally.
All:
Ambassador Chas Freeman on China, US, etc….
http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/freeman-text.pdf
Arnold Evans says: May 20, 2011 at 1:31 am
I have not given sufficient time to the question of how to characterize the degree of autonomy (independence) that a state enjoys in the international arena.
There certainly is a degree (and limit) to any state’s autonomy – it must be understood in relative terms.
So, I would say that France is more independent than Saudi Arabia because it can produce the weapons to protect herself as well as the technology and the food to maintain her population. Which implicitly brings one to the notion of relative power of the state – the core of its ability to exercise independent action.
I think at least now you agree with me that Saudi Arabia is an independent state, perhaps a weak one with less power for execrcise of independent action than say France or India. But she is not a colony in the sense that India was a colony of Great Britain.
BiBi,
I was contacted by NPR to evaluate “Tehran Rising.” Know what I told ‘em? I said they should have included Hillary Mann Leverett!
I also told them it was entirely too negative.
This is a comment from the Tikkun Olam site, quoting Alan Hart:
http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2011/05/19/denial-is-a-river-running-right-past-bibis-door/#comments
“Alan Hart says:
Excerpt:
Zionism’s assertion that Israel was given its birth certificate and thus legitimacy by the UN General Assembly partition resolution of 29 November 1947 is pure propaganda nonsense, as demonstrated by an honest examination of the record of what actually happened.
In the first place the UN without the consent of the majority of the people of Palestine did not have the right to decide to partition Palestine or assign any part of its territory to a minority of alien immigrants in order for them to establish a state of their own.
Despite that, by the narrowest of margins, and only after a rigged vote, the UN General Assembly did pass a resolution to partition Palestine and create two states, one Arab, one Jewish, with Jerusalem not part of either. But the General Assembly resolution was only a non-binding proposal – meaning that it could have no effect, would not become binding, until and unless it was approved by the Security Council.
The truth is that the General Assembly’s partition proposal never went to the Security Council for consideration. Why not? Because the US knew that, if approved, and because of Arab and other Muslim opposition, it could only be implemented by force; and President Truman was not prepared to use force to partition Palestine.
So the partition plan was vitiated (became invalid) and the question of what the hell to do about Palestine – after Britain had made a mess of it and walked away – was taken back to the General Assembly for more discussion. The option favoured and proposed by the US was temporary UN Trusteeship. It was while the General Assembly was debating what do that Israel unilaterally declared itself to be in existence – actually in defiance of the will of the organised international community, including the Truman administration.
The truth of the time was that Israel, which came into being mainly as a consequence of Zionist terrorism and pre-planned ethnic cleansing, had no right to exist and, more to the point, could have no right to exist unless ….. Unless it was recognised and legitimized by those who were dispossessed of their land and their rights during the creation of the Zionist state. In international law only the Palestinians could give Israel the legitimacy it craved.”
“This evening, I [William O. Beeman] listened to the radio program Tehran Rising produced by America Abroad—a program distributed by Public Radio International—and I must say that I was deeply disturbed by the way the program was framed. The program centers on “spreading Iranian influence” in the Middle East. ”
http://newamericamedia.org/2011/05/debunking-the-top-7-myths-on-irans-middle-east-policies.php
Re Bin Laden data – Yeah, they didn’t bother taking the wives but they took boxes and boxes of data,” from the house with no internet, no phone, no appliances, no clothes, etc. where bin Laden lived with his 3 wives and 13 children. Its a test: How gullible are the Americans. Answer: Plenty.
Here’s a good article on the raid (at May 7 – The Incredible Story is Not Credible
http://g2mil.com/fire.htm
Its such a ridiculous story, SEALS coming down on ropes from hovering helicopters that bin Laden and his Al Qaeda fighters could have easily picked off with their RPGs and AK-47s. But the Americans have “stealth” helicopters that didn’t wake anyone up in the compound. Sure sounds like the stealth helicopters woke the whole neighborhood, just not bin Laden and his 3 wives and 13 children so they could get their guns out and be prepared. And the SEALS are so fabulous that not one of them even got a scratch.
Its a ridiculous story. 9/11 official version is a ridiculous story. Ridiculous that US policy is controlled by billionaire Israel-fanatic kookoos. We are so ridiculous.
Soon it will “Bin Laden Data” shows that Iran knew …… Get the drift. Because no one else has this alleged data, the administration can use it as cover to claim anything about anyone.
fyi:
Are you saying you consider Saudi Arabia more independent than France?
And if, say Russia, empowered a dynasty to rule the United States and protected that dynasty from threats, one of the primary threats being the people of the United States, so that this dynasty would be free to pursue unpopular policies that Russia favors and the people of the United States disfavor, you would consider that United States to be in a “symbiotic” relationship with Russia?
And you would consider that United States to be more independent than the actual Great Britain today?
BiBiJon says:
May 19, 2011 at 10:55 pm
Oh yeah, I forgot, most of them have indeed shown up all over the place, together with their passports which showwed up in the rubble allowing for record fast identificatiion, even though none of the names of the surviving suicide bombers were on UA or AA manifests. These magic-paper documents managed to survive, thank Gawd, in a kerosene fire that somehow got hot enough to melt steel and evaporate all four transponder blackboxes. I guess the suicides who are not enjoying 72 virgins in teh Islamic Republic of the Devil Shi’a are picking up New Zeland accents down under the tribal regions of Pipelinistan.
Funny, you don’t look Libyan.
Western boots on the ground in Libya? Check out the video in this Al Jazeera article, starting at about 18 seconds into it.
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/05/2011519173422863609.html
fyi says:
May 19, 2011 at 4:08 pm
well, I don’t have that much of info about those fields. it’s however true generally that things like climate change, and environmental projects are of priority in Iran. areas like water contamination, pollution…and so on should be of great interest for the government definitely. I am not just sure what climate history really needs. it should be composed of geographic studies which would then need high precision instruments. it might as well need CFD modeling which we have plenty of experts in Iran. they might not need very expensive instruments like accelerators, but still even for those studies you need fairly decent instruments specially when it gets to biological aspects of the projects.
In Iran, we generally have managerial problems. for example, I know a group that has been working on aerodynamics of air plan for a while, but yet to see anything substantial from there.
I think our biggest problem is wrong people being in wrong positions. and it’s not just about politics, which is pretty obvious, rather almost everywhere you go. for example, based on my observations of the industries in the west, the people on the top are the best ones in the field. those directors that I dealt with were extremely knowledgeable, impressive as far as I saw. whereas in Iran it’s somehow reversed. the managers are often not that good in their fields. they got there with links mostly. that goes for the universities too. those depts I have seen closely in the west, their heads where almost the best. I have talked to a head of a dept in Iran recently that he did not know how many graduate fields do they have in their dept.! well, actually two occasions. and they were considered very good ones in Tehran. RISH, and FARMANBARI if you like.
another issue is the number. how many people can work on those areas? we have a huge number in the list.
Responding to Obama’s remarks, Netanyahu has already rejected going back to the 1967 borders.
http://arabnews.com/middleeast/article415506.ece
Unknown Unknowns says:
May 19, 2011 at 9:46 pm
Reza Esfandiari says:
May 19, 2011 at 8:08 pm
Iran implicated in the 911 attack:
*
Apparently, a few did survive the crash.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1559151.stm
UU that accent is not welsh. New Zealand I think.
Do we want an Obama Doctrine?
http://www.amconmag.com/blog/2011/05/19/do-we-want-an-obama-doctrine/
compare and contrast–
M.Ali says: May 19, 2011 at 5:34 am –
Although I have written critically of some of Iran’s policies, I was treated with respect, courtesy and care thoughout my detention there.
My room was spotless, my interrogator flawlessly polite, and the women who looked after me at the Evin Prison Women’s Detention Centre saw to it that my every need was met” :http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/05/2011518184325620380.html
South African academic Na’eem Jeenah detained and deported
by Ayesha Jacub, MD; May 19, 2011
Academic, community leader, author and journalist Na’eem Jeenah has been the latest academic to face detention by Israeli authorities. In his capacity as director AMEC: the Afro Middle East Centre, Jeenah was en route to Palestine to participate in research meetings. AMEC is a South African based think-tank which aims to maintain public discussion and shape public discourse on issues related to the Middle East. At its inception AMEC was headed by Waddah Khanfar, the present General Manager of the Al Jazeera network. AMEC has since established itself as a credible commentator in South Africa on Middle East issues.
This Tuesday, some hours after Mr Jeenah was first detained at Ben Gurion airport, AMEC staff received news of his detention via the South African Ambassador to Israel, H.E Ismail Coovadia. They were also informed about his pending deportation to Istanbul. On Tuesday evening, Israeli authorities were repeatedly refusing to disclose information about Mr Jeena’s location.
By Wednesday, Mr Jeenah was deported to Istanbul after ten hours of interrogation. According to Ambassador Coovadia, “his treatment (by Israeli officials) has been extremely bad”. Jeenah’s passport and personal possessions were not returned.
JFK on the Axis of Weasels (at around minute 1:50):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yNp1vOZRE0&feature=related
I have NO idea what kind of English the announcer is speaking. He seems to have a Welsh accent, but I can’t be sure.
Reza Esfandiari says:
May 19, 2011 at 8:08 pm
Iran implicated in the 911 attack:
*
Good to see you back here, Reza. I thought this was one of the funnier lines in the article:
“After the attacks, the suit contends, Iran and Hezbollah helped Qaeda operatives escape, providing some with a safe haven in Iran.”
I thought they all went down with the planes…
The whole thing is a pack of lies based on the testimony of supposed turncoat Iranian “intelligence” operatives, and reeks, for anyone whose nose still operates as a bullshit detector.
The NYT and other organs of the Axis of Weasels prove time and again that there is no limit as to where they will go to promote their bizarre and really, evil agenda.
this was mentioned on NPR this morning:
“An Egyptian who was once a Special Forces officer has been chosen ‘caretaker’ leader of al Qaeda in the wake of Osama bin Laden’s death,” CNN’s Peter Bergen is reporting.
. . .
The reported choice is Saif al-Adel. As NPR’s Dina Temple-Raston reported on May 3, Adel is among the “rising stars” who bin Laden reportedly put in place to potentially lead al-Qaida after his death. She added that:
“A former colonel in the Egyptian special forces, he rather famously spent nine years under house arrest in Iran. It wasn’t until late last year that he returned to Pakistan to fight with al-Qaida.”
Lars von Trier and the Jewish Lobby
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2011/05/20/lars-von-trier-and-the-jewish-lobby/
Israel’s sole intention is to wipe palestine off the map.
When is it going to sink in that Israel has never wanted peace, it wants the West Bank and Jerusalem without Arabs, and of course, it requires continued hostility to justify the charity and sympathy it receives!
Israel is a serial killer and will continue to kill until and unless the international community collectively make the leaders of Israel accountable for their crimes.
Those of us who condemn Israel’s atrocities believe in Love, justice, fairness and the rule of law in this world and we cannot tolerate to see the criminal and terrorist leaders of Israel to get away with murder.
It is time the international community get together and put sever pressure on this apartheid and racist state, as they did to South Africa.
Iran implicated in the 911 attack:
Court might rule that Iran had foreknowledge and may even have planned the attacks on September 11th 2001.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/20/world/middleeast/20terror.html
I guess the neocons are looking for a casus belli
James, about Hamas, yeah obama started his usual ranting about “how could israle make peace with a group that doesnt recognize their right to exist”..you know the usual likudnik populsitic lying rhetoric. Only problem is that israel refuse to recognize palestinians right to exist, they refuse to recognize a palestinian state..but such uncanny information wont obama mention..hes such a fraud, even bush were a better leader.
I must say I was sorry Obama demonised Hamas in his speech. I hoped for better than that, but of course did not expect it.
Fara,
If you are referring to the idiotic and illegal US invasion of Iraq, I do not see it as a “war on Islam”. Instead, it was an opportunity taken by warmongering neocons to overthrow an implacable enemy of Israel. In short, they saw a chance to dupe the American people and do something they had schemed to accomplish for many many years.
Alnes,
I entirely agree the Arab Peace Initiative is very generous to Israel. And the US has been foolish not to support it.
Peacekeepers would be deployed in Palestine, along borders with Israel. Yes, Israel will not accept peacekeepers.
James, israel have refused peacekeepers before, and they arent interested in peace, the Arab peace initiative is very generous but israel say no.
James Canning says:
May 19, 2011 at 7:07 pm
James, what is happening in Libya is a ‘revolution’ (although I am not even sure about this designation, as compared to what happened in Egypt). But, there is this islamophobia and wars in the islam lands, right?
Alnes,
I would expect tens of thousands of peace-keepers to be deployed on the borders of Israel/Palestine, for many years.
As I said, the key issue is borders, and international recognition of them. Israel will not reduce its powerful war machine in the near term. But over time, this would seem quite possible (assuming peace etc with all Arab countries).
Voice of Tehran,
Many of us might prefer the Taliban to vanish, but this does not seem to be happening.
Yes, the US took out Saddam Hussein. Iran’s idea that this could be accomplished without an invasion, possibly, and that just containing him was better than murderous civil war, was certainly on the moral high ground.
James, thats bizarre, every state have the right to defend its borders, by neglecting such a right for the palestinians we could no longer talk about a soverign independent state. israel could scrap its own weapons before making such a idiotic demand.
Fara,
Where is the “war” against Islam, in Libya? Both sides are Muslim.
Rehmat,
Most Arab leaders recognise that Israel will not allow a Palestinian army, air force or navy. Maybe a small Coast Guard. And police and other security services. This might be a good thing for the Palestinians. Most important issue is borders, and then evacuation of Israeli troops, police etc.
Voice of Tehran says:
May 19, 2011 at 6:10 pm
Twice today, I totally agree with you.
Iran on many occasions has announced it harbors animosity towards no one, except the then apartheid south Africa, and similarly afflicted Israel.
It is, as you suggest, the internal incoherence of fyi’s “axis powers” has them inching towards the vanishing point, in terms of standing allies, credibility, and relevance.
However, I don’t see these events in terms of Iran’s loss or gain. Iran has always articulated policy of support for the oppressed, for the sake of the oppressed, not for her own strategic gain.
I wrote before, Ben-Obama today’s speech was authored by Bibi’s speech writers. Obama’s rant proved that the dude has not grown up. He is still living in the 1980s.
Obama has repeated his two-year-old advice he gave to Palestinian in Cairo – leave terrorism to the Israeli Jews and adopt Jesus’ non-violence themselves to receive a few pieces of crumbs thrown at them by the Zionazi thugs.
Ben-Obama in order to look like an “honest broker” – has proposed a “demiliterized” Palestinian state in the next thirty years. Is he stupid enough to let the world believe that the Zionist regime will get weaken during the next thirty years – that it will not invade Gaza, West Bank, Lebanon, Syria or Iran.
For Obama to grow-up, he should be studying the writings of Jews like, Roger Tucker, Gilad Atzmon and Israel Shamir instead of listening to Senator Joe Lieberman. The foreign Jews occupying Palestine will never live in peace with their neighbors until their neighbors are not secure from Israeli state terrorism.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2010/06/18/palestine-the-third-option/
Voice of Tehran says:
May 19, 2011 at 6:10 pm
BiBiJon says:
May 19, 2011 at 5:00 pm
In 1998, a friend of mine dragged me to a one-hour seminar in Iran, given by the then-former Iranian ambassador to Korea. Although I was not interested in politics and related topics(didn’t even read papers), the speaker caught my attention when it came to the point where he explained there would be revolutions in the Mideast and Africa agaisnt their ruling autocrats. Iran would be immune as she had already gone through that path. He also discussed there would be a war launched agaisnt Islam by the west, i.e. islamophobia (at that time, I wondered and was shocked why and how a war between Islam and the west would look like). However, at the end, he reasoned how Islam would prevail as a result of the war.
To me, things are turning out as anticipated, simply based on the facts on the ground.
Voice of Teheran: Exactly, Iran hasnt fired one bullet, hasnt intervened anywhere, they just sit there watching, even though they get desperately smeared by obama/aipac, funny and tragic at the same time. Its like the US blamed the Russia for everything going bad in the cold-war, did the Latin america choose a socialist leader – the russians were behind it, if the elevator was broken – the russians were behind it etc pure absurdism. US puppets are falling one by one and Iran is doing nothing, the only one breaking down the puppets are the US themselves, Iran is indeed a good chess-player.
ALso obamas speech was desperate and a indication of declination of power in the mideast, this will be their last breath…
BiBiJon says:
May 19, 2011 at 5:00 pm
BiBijon , I tend to think very simplistic.
The US Empire on its ‘ safe ‘ way into demise is ‘ eliminating ‘ Iran’s enemies one by one. Whatever action the Empire takes in order to reverse this trend , is re-reversing to the favor of Iran ; only He , Who Wrote this brilliant Script Knows what is happening .
It started with Saddam , then the Taliban , Mubarak , Yemen , and soon KSA , Bahrain , Jodan etc.
Amazingly , Iran is doing virtually NOTHING !! , she is just ‘ sitting ‘ and watching the enemies vanishing into thin air.
As mentioned , may be this view is too simplistic , but the more I think about it , the more weird it gets .
On 5th May 2011 , Ayatollah Khamenei predicted the ‘Awakening ‘ to reach the heart of Europe and since 15th May , Spain is upside down and I think that from there the unrests will spread all over Europe with unpredictable negative consequences , but I can tell you that it is going to be very very nasty and violent. Consequently the European “Front” against Iran will crumble as well , again without Iran doing the slightest move.
Major events are happening and Iran must stay most vigilant to consolidate its worldwide stance and I think Iran is well prepared for this role.
fyi,
I continue to think Iran does much better to act sensibly and to try to be seen as reasonable. Warmongering neocons, other fanatical “supporters” of Israel, et al., are continually tring to come up with ways to provoke Iran.
The May/June 2011 issue of The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs has a good story by Delinda C. Hanley: “John M. Hrankowski (1946-2011: A USS Liberty Hero Dies Without Seeing Justice”. 34 officers and crew killed, 174 injured, in intentional Israeli attack on the USS Liberty June 8, 1967. A quote: “When the Liberty limped into port, the crew was threatened with courts martial if they discussed the incident, even with their wives and parents.”
What a suprise..not.
“Israel approves 1,500 settler homes in east Jerusalem”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110519/wl_mideast_afp/israelpalestiniansconflictsettlerjerusalem_20110519175049
BiBiJon says: May 19, 2011 at 5:00 pm
You are missing the gist of Mr. Lynch’s analysis.
That the time for the resolution of issues between Iran and US has not yet arrived and will not so at any time soon.
That both US (read Axis Powers please) and Iran are satisfied with where they are.
[For the Axis Powers, this staisfaction is rooted in their recent experience of Cold War - for Iran in her recent experience of continuing to exist in spite of the efforts of the Axis Powers and the Arab States to destroy her.]
You are correct that his policy perscriptions, perhaps incorrectly predicated on inaccurate assumptions, are not feasible.
Certainly no incrmental cooperation with Axis Powers is possible.
[Last week, as I had suggested a few months ago, Dr. Larijani suggested publicly for Iran to reduce her drug interdiction efforts to harm EU.]
Voice of Tehran says:
May 19, 2011 at 4:13 pm
P.S. o justify an A+ grade for Obama on Marc Lynch’s rubric:
Say enough to ensure no meaningful short-term negotiations are possible. Check.
Confine Iran-bashing to at most one paragraph, so as not foreclose future possibility of some sort of accord. Check.
Don’t talk about Iran surviving a Ajax redux in June 2009, giving the region hope that people’s choice of government can survive the best efforts of the people’s enemies. Check.
Harp about human rights. Check.
That is an A+
Voice of Tehran says:
May 19, 2011 at 4:13 pm
VoT jan,
I cannot begin to tell you how disappointed I was reading Marc Lynch’s “Upheaval” report. It is ironic that he kind of acknowledges that while he was writing the report, a good half of US-imposed order on the mid east disintegrated. Indeed, just as he was writing his blog on Foreign policy, Pakistan called China their ‘best friend’ and got 50 Chinese advanced fighter jets for free. Nevertheless, he thinks if Obama quits talking up Iran’s centrality to the Arab spring, and instead communicate Iran’s diminished soft power, is the stuff he wants to fill the void left by the war he insists we should all avoid.
People get so hung up on adjectives that I have in the past recommended folks call things Kentucky Fried Chicken just to avoid the allergic reaction. Iran is an 70 million peoples, with a 1.5 trillion economy located on the entire north coast of the Persian Gulf, and the Arabian sea, with a war-hardened military, and she is a thirty year survivor of everything the West could throw at a nation. Don’t call it central, don’t call it irrelevant, just call it KFC. It will not alter what it is, because it is what it is.
Then there was the good ‘ol human rights. Ya right. Obama, in between his three and a half wars, and drone strikes, and what nots, can harp on human rights deficits in Iran, to resounding resonance in the echo chambers of the West. Wow!
I agree with you. with analysis like Marc’s, who needs mud?
Bent Snowluff says:
May 19, 2011 at 4:16 pm
“I love Robert Fisk’s description of Obama as “a vain and cowardly man””
BS , I liked the article , very straight and intelligent.
I saw the word ” waffle ” , which I had never heard before and I remembered the German word ” Geschwafel ” , which I heard may be 30 years ago.
This is what characterizes Obama . He is a ” SCHWAFLER ” or a “WAFFLER” , how deep has the world sunken , my God.
I love Robert Fisk’s description of Obama as “a vain and cowardly man”
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-presidents-fine-words-may-not-address-the-middle-easts-real-needs-2286077.html
Arnold Evans says: May 19, 2011 at 4:04 pm
You asked:
“The Western European states are satellites of the United States and Saudi Arabia (along with Egypt – for now -, Jordan, UAE, Kuwait and others) is what?”
Saudi Arabia is a satellite, so is Kuwait, UAE and others.
Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Qatar are sovereign – more so than Germany and Italy or Japan which are also satellites of US.
Your colonial theory makes no sense when you get to Egypt, Tunisia, Moroco, Jordan, Lebanon. They are net financial drains on the US Alliance structure and contribute nothing.
The US-Saudi Arabia is a form of mutual protection and benefit – a symbiosis, if you will.
The others are just oil wells with flags.
BiBiJon says:
May 19, 2011 at 2:41 pm
Marc Lynch vs Obama
“Marc Lynch today released his long awaited paper on US approach to Iran. I’d give Obama an A+ if his speech today were an oral test based on Lynch’s paper”
I took the time to read the paper.
And this ‘ masterpiece ‘ of analysis was long awaited ? I think the Iranian leaders have absolutely nothing to worry about , if this is the caliber of analysts , who formulate American foreign policy.
Voice of Tehran says: May 19, 2011 at 2:43 pm
He is alluding to HAARP (http://bestwanted.info/tag/haarpa-signals/).
The fact is that there are drought cycles which are part of the normal (average) behavior of Earth Climate system.
Research in South Western United States has indicated that there have been 70-year drought periods in that part of the world; resulting in the abandonment of their settlements by the “Rock Dwellers”.
Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Central Asia have been suffering from dorought over the last 20 years – intermittently.
Mr. Persian Gulf:
Those who are interested in advancing the state of scientific research in Iran would be well advised to research the climate history of the Iranian plateau. It is of significant interest both to Iran and her neighbours as well as to the Climate Changes Research community outside of Iran. And you do not need expensive instruments such as telescopes or particle accelerators to carry out such research.
fyi:
The Western European states are satellites of the United States and Saudi Arabia (along with Egypt – for now -, Jordan, UAE, Kuwait and others) is what?
Every Western European state is far more independent and far more capable of making policy in line with its people’s perceptions, sensibilities and values than any member of what I describe as the US colonial structure in the Middle East.
Yes, on paper all are sovereign. A lot of dependencies have been de-jure independent, including many members of Great Britain’s colonial empire, especially towards the end of it.
But I believed you to have been arguing that what we call Saudi Arabia is an independent state comparable to post-Mao China.
While I’m here, someone else mentioned the US’ plans to secretly train a 35,000 person force to protect unelected and illegitimate Saudi regime.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hI84j38Kn1p436iTBMuVzmRRv7zQ?docId=f88f3f427d9349e2aaa18a7aa2ec271a
“Saudi” Arabia is not an independent nation and Israel would not be viable as a mandated majority-Jewish state if there was an independent Republic of Arabia.
James Canning says: May 19, 2011 at 3:01 pm
The General Assembly resolution for the creation of the Palestinian state is only useful from a propaganda point of view.
It will make no substantial changes on the conditions of the War in Palestine.
It will certainly push further US and Israel to the corner reserved for the enemies of Islam, Justice, Right of Nations to Self Determinations, Righteousness, Light etc.
EU states might not wish to occupy that position together with US and Israel.
But I suspect that UK would want to join US & Israel there as well as France and Germany.
james, well all such things (trade agreements are secondary for the US), hopefully it will pressure US/israel even more because the resolution will go through i favor of the palestinians but I wouldnt count on any more substantial effect.
fyi,
It will be interesting to see how many European countries vote to recognise Palestine in the UN General Assembly later this year. Remember it was a 14-1 vote in UNSC (resolution condemning growth of illegal Jewish colonies in West Bank).
One reason I was sorry to see “the west” intervene in the Libyan civil war was that I expected it to result in the UK needing to pursue US support for the scheme, undermining the UK’s efforts to have greater distance from neocon-dominated US ME foreign policy.
Amador,
I think it remains to be seen, what significance the UN recognition of Palestine would have in terms of contracts, trade agreements, etc.
I am speechless ??!! , however nowadays NOTHING is shocking anymore.
Thursday 5 May 2011 21:51
‘West plots to cause drought in Iran’
http://www.presstv.com/detail/180745.html
Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says that Western countries are plotting to generate drought in some areas of the world, including Iran.
“According to reports about climate, whose authenticity has been verified, the European countries have used certain equipment to discharge clouds and prevent rain-bearing clouds from reaching regional countries such as Iran,” President Ahmadinejad said on Thursday.
He made the remarks in the inauguration ceremony of a domestically-built dam in the central Iranian province of Arak.
Ahmadinejad said the matter would be pursued by Iran’s legal authorities, IRNA reported.
The Iranian president said such measures by European countries are aimed at creating tension and hostility in the maritime borders of regional countries.
“Just as it was said before, I believe that the war of the future will be the war over water.”
On May 16, President Ahmadinejad inaugurated a 484-megawatt solar thermal combined cycle power plant in the Iranian province of Yazd.
The solar thermal combined cycle power plant is the world’s first combined cycle plant that has used natural gas and solar energy.
Marc Lynch vs Obama
Marc Lynch today released his long awaited paper on US approach to Iran. I’d give Obama an A+ if his speech today were an oral test based on Lynch’s paper.
http://www.cnas.org/files/documents/publications/CNAS_Upheaval_Lynch.pdf
However, Marc Lynch, typical of the foreign policy establishment, continues to insist on making a dozen-egg omelet, when 6 of those eggs are broken on the floor.
James Canning says: May 19, 2011 at 2:15 pm
You wrote: “You appear to be overlooking the influence the US has over so great a multitude of issues, important to the various European countries.”
I think our positions are very close indeed; I call the EU states satellites of US, you call them “influenced on ..multitude of issues” by US.
Strategically, I should think that they are in the same poistion vis-a-vis US as the East European states were vis-a-vis USSR or Italy, Hungary, Romania vis-a-vis Germany.
[Recall that even Romania exhibited some limited autonomy from USSR from time to time. But when Gorbachev told the Romanians to get rid of his, they did so.]
James, well I mean since its not legally binding the world cannot take action against Israel.
James Canning says: May 19, 2011 at 2:08 pm
The adaptation of Western or Eastern ideas, as such, by Muslim polities is not something that I reject or deplore or otherwise oppose.
My statement was that these ideas have to be adopted to the principles of Islam for their acceptance and longevity in Muslim polities.
I offered the example of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Another example from the past is the adaptation of the Chinese decorative patterns and deep blue hues in ceramic bowls of 14-th century Iran.
A third example is the equalization of blood-money for Muslims and non-Muslims in the Islamic Republic of Iran – in 2007 if I recall correctly. Clearly, the impetus had come from the Western concepts of “citizenship”, “state”, and the legal equality of all citizens in the state. However, the justification for breaking with 1400-years of discriminatory practices of the Islamic Law in this respect was achieved by a careful and legalistic argumentation that utilized prior precedents in Islamic Law together with a judicious application of Islamic Jurisprudence.
[Pahrisee Muslims did not dare oppose it; or maybe they were too busy harassing young stylish women to notice that.]
Amador,
I think UN recognition is of enormous significance. Enormous. Who cares if Israel ignores it?
fyi,
Didn’t the entire US Senate try to order the State Department to recognise as “born in Israel” children born in the portions of the West Bank “annexed” by Israel? Even though the US does not recognise that “annexation”? This issue is now going before the US Supreme Court.
James, alright general assembly, but again thats not a binding resolution, I mean…isarel refuse to follow binding resolutions from the security council. So unfortunately, even if the world vote for a palestinian state, it wont matter. Or what do you think?
fyi,
You appear to be overlooking the influence the US has over so great a multitude of issues, important to the various European countries. So, being able to control, to a large degree, US foreign (and economic) policy, gives substantial leverage over the actions of various European countries.
Amador,
The resolution will be adopted in the UN General Assembly and thus no veto by US is possible. Yes, US would veto any UNSC resolution. To my thinking, the way forward is for the entire world to recognise that the ISRAEL LOBBY controls US foreign policy to a degree sufficient to cause the US to attempt to prevent justice for the Palestinians, in order to please rich Jewish campaign donors in the US. So, clearly the world has to go forward without American leadership on this issue.
James Canning says: May 19, 2011 at 2:04 pm
Do you have names or other information regarding these rich and powerful Jews in Italy, Spain, Portugal, Denmark, Germany?
Do you know who they have exercised their influence?
Mere assertions are not sufficient.
I have documented my claims based on the statements of Dr. Khalilzad who actually was directly involved in creating that grand strategy, Gen. Clarck, and others.
I believe I am on a much firmer empirical ground.
fyi,
How does the Islamic world pursue effective investment and economic policies, if “western” ideas are not adopted to some degree? And for that matter, who cares if the ideas are “western” or “eastern” or somewhere in-between?
James, what I understand its the security council and not the general assembly, right?
So US will veto that and a resolution in the general assembly arent binding ones.
Yep, the speech was totally underwhelming.
fyi,
The answer to your question is: rich and powerful Jews, and others, who want to enable Israel to oppress the Palestinians as much and for as long as the government of Israel wants to do so. Many rich and powerful Jews want the Jews to be able to oppress the Palestinians even if the Israeli governemnt wants to stop. This is the crux of the matter. Some of these rich, powerful Jews, and others, would happily see the destruction of the lives of millions of Iranians, if this meant the Jews could keep much of the West Bank into perpetuity.
James Canning says: May 19, 2011 at 1:55 pm
Where they survived, they became Islamic.
Where is Don Besco school in Tehran?
What happened to the American College (Persbyterian) in Tehran?
And you just go to Moroco or Tunisia and see how Western Thought and Technology is surviving there.
Amador,
Let’s hope the UN recognises independent Palestine this year, and that maybe 130 or more countries will support the resolution. Even if this sends Aipac into a frenzy.
James Canning says: May 19, 2011 at 1:41 pm
Why are the EU leaders against Iran?
Are the Iranian warships going up and down the English Channel repeating the mantra: “I will kill you, I will kill you, I will kill you?”.
Are there Iranian basis in Denmark to defend her against possible German aggression?
Are there Iranian missiles with nuclear weapons targeting Madrid, London, Paris, and Rome?
Are there Iranian commentators and journalists who keep up – for over a decade – a constant barrage of propaganda regarding the desirability of overthrowing the legitimately and legally constituted sovereign European states, so that their polities may be organized along the Principle of Islam (no more bra-less young women tanning in Copenhagen parks)?
And today I read that EU states will sanction 100 more Iranian entities.
No my friend: 20 years ago – 1991 – the US Ministry of War created a US Grand Strategy that called, for among other things, the destruction of Islamic Iran. The authors of that document, by their own admission, thought that they had 20 years to achieve those aims before the geopolitical reaction had set in. EU states, the satellites of US, followed suite.
That Grand Strategy is still in operation even though its time is probably past. Due to mental and bureaucratic inertia, I expect US and EU states (the Axis Powers) to adhere to this grand strategy for at least another 10 years.
The war in Libya may be understood, in my opinion, as another opportunistic application of the same grand strategy.
The Axis Powers have declared their war aims, let us see if Iranians can survive and thwart those aims.
From a practical point of view, this war now precludes any possibility of incremental improvement of relations (diplomatic/commercial/cultural) or other gradual and graduated steps.
Castellio,
I think there is zero chance the US would provide tactical nukes to Israel. And in any event, Israel is the greatest military power in the Middle East, in offensive striking power. Israel’s security problems are almost entirely internal. Hezbollah is most unlikley to attack unless Israel attacks first. Egypt and Jordan will almost certainly adhere to their treaties with Israel. And Syria has tried for decades to make peace with Israel.
obama is even a bigger warmonger than bush ever were.
*SAme warmongering approach towards Iran. Same lies. Obama told the world that Iran was hypocrite for supporting the uprisnings. But who are the hypocrite? Who refused to back the people of Bahrain, Yemen, SAudiarabia, Egypt, Oman, Tunis, Morocco, Alger etc. And who supported all these dictators? The US did, and now they try to wash the history off!
*Same bullshit about israel/palestine. No condemnations of israel, just the usual bullshitting about the suppressed palestinians. Also obama said that, how can israel make peace with someone who doesnt recognize their right to exist. Only problem is that in 1988 PLO did just that. Israel have NEVER recgonized palestinians right to exist, israel have NEVER or plan to recognize a palestinian state. The solution is very clear, the whole world on one side supporting the 2state solution (including the palestinians) and israel+US on the other. Also, if this was a democratic world where the voice of majority rules, then the palestinian state would be alive today because a majority of states have already recognized palestinie, but israel refuse.
*This talk was done to get more money from AIPAC which have this meeting in washington this weekened. And tommorow we will see the same rants by netanyahu.
Congrats americans, you got a bought gov that follow someone else states policy.
*Note how obama on the one side condemned whats going on in Syria, Iran, Libya over and over again but refused to condemn Bahrain, Yemen, Saudiarabia, Morocco, Alger, Tunis, Oman, Qatar, israel. Do he think the world is blind for his sheer hypocrisy?!
*Also note that obama annonced billion aid to Tunis and Egypt (also Jordan), which basically mean US is trying to feed a new puppet regime in this nations, such idiotic moves are bound to create new “mubaraks” and will backlash on the US with a revolution like the one created in Iran 1979.
fyi,
Surely the hundreds of hospitals, schools and universities set up by largely American and British Protestants during the 19th and early 20th centuries, showed that institutions created and run (to some degree) by non-Muslims can thrive in the Muslim world.
The New York Times describes Obama’s speech today as endorsing 1967 borders for independent Palestine. Israel needs to accept it can have peace, stability and prosperity with 1967 borders.
According to Robert Burns, the military writer for AP, who is today reporting on a huge under cover expansion of military ties between KSA and the US:
“Saudi Arabia is central to American policy in the Middle East. It is a key player in the Arab-Israeli peace process that Obama has so far failed to advance, and it is vital to U.S. energy security, with Saudi Arabia ranking as the third-largest source of U.S. oil imports. It also figures prominently in U.S. efforts to undercut Islamic extremism and promote democracy.”
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hI84j38Kn1p436iTBMuVzmRRv7zQ?docId=f88f3f427d9349e2aaa18a7aa2ec271a
Dave McLane says: May 19, 2011 at 10:34 am
Muslim historians of the Medieval period referred to the period before the advent of Islam as the Age of Darkness (before the illumination brought forth by Revelations of Islam).
For vast majority of Muslims, excepting Iranians and their echoes of their ancient religion of Light, Culture & Civilization begin and end with Islam. Outside of Islam there is only Darkness, Barbarism, etc.
The practical ramifications of this observation, in my opinion, are that no institution, school of thought, philosophy, form of government, practice etc. can survive for long among Muslims until they are Islamicized.
And by that I do not mean the Pharisee approach.
One such successful Islamicization was the amalgamation of the Principles of (Western) Republicanism with those of Islam by the late Mr. Khomeini.
Many more such alloys remain to be forged.
There is no other way for Muslims.
FYI… the statement “…and Israel must be able to defend itself – by itself – against any threat.” means that the US will continue to supply Israel with all and whatever Israel needs to win any war against any opposition. I think that includes providing tactical nukes, should Israel not have them already.
It does not mean, at all, that the US won’t defend Israel when it comes to the shooting.
fyi,
I continue to disagree strongly with you, regarding your claim the “Axis Powers” want to destroy Islamic Iran. The primary issue, for most of the warmongers in the US who are hostile toward Iran, is Israel, and how to enable Israel to oppress the Palestinians into perpetuity.
fyi,
Yes, no surprise. The Wall Street Journal today had a report on resistance by big Jewish campaign donors, to Obama, due to his being insufficiently supportive toward Israel! Donilon, sadly, is a propagandist.
Rehmat,
I wonder how many Americans are aware that the great majority of Arabs see Israel and the US as the greatest threats to their national security, rather than Iran?
James Canning says: May 19, 2011 at 1:22 pm
No surprises there.
Business as usual; Mr. Danilon is engaging in propaganda.
The Axis Powers and Iran are in a long-term (> 10 years) struggle.
Each side will use whatever tools they have to advance their agenda.
For the Axis Powers, the agenda has been the destruction of Islamic Iran and with no thought to what is supposed to replace it.
For Iran, the agenda has been surviavl and, at the same time, expulsion of the Axis Powers from lands of Islam. That is, the Iranian leaders have understood that the security of Iran cannot be defended solely within her own borders.
30 years ago, the Iranian Agenda for expulsion of Axis Powers was considered an extremist position. Now it is mainstream largely due to what the Axis Powers, and before them, USSR have wrought in those lands.
I expect that the influence and position of the Axis Powers, just like that of USSR, to be expundged from within Muslim states. I cannot tell you when though.
fyi, it was worse, such excessive and ass-licking of israel.
Dave McLane,
Fair and important comment, I think, that Islam is more a matter of culture than religion, as it plays out on the “ground” in various countries (and in various regions of various countries). This was the viewpoint of Fitzroy Maclean who visited the Caucasus many times, even during the years much of it was part of the USSR.
Tom Donilon accused Iran of helping to “destabilise” Syria. If Iran is trying to help Syria contain the unrest, is this helping to “destabilise” Syria? If Donilon in fact would like to see more instability in Syria, and he resents Iranian interference with this programme, he should say so.
Sineva says: May 19, 2011 at 1:16 pm
Not quite.
Mr. Obama stated that “…and Israel must be able to defend itself – by itself – against any threat.”
2 things follow: implicit endorsement of Israel’s nuclear arsenal as well as the implicit US position that US will not defend Israel.
Obumma`s selling the same shit that he did the last time,unfortunatly for him this time everyone knows its shit because it stinks so bad peeeyoooh!!!
fool me once shame on you fool me twice shame on me
Writing in the Financial Times today, David Manning (former UK ambassador to US and to Israel) called for Obama to have US sponsor Palestinian statehood at the UN in the manner the US did more than 60 years ago for Israel. Bravo! And fat chance.
Tom says: May 19, 2011 at 12:37 pm
It was not a bad speech coming from an essentially Right-Wing polity and policy-making apparatus.
He positioned US on the side of Freedom and Democracy, mentioned Bahrain, explicitly reassured Saudi Arabia and GCC states for their security, washed his hands off the War in Palestine, restated US policy towards Iran and others, promised some money to Tunisai and Egypt and expempted Saudi Arabia and GCC states from the Freedom Agenda.
I personaly do not believe that much is going to change.
this man is isane, a true demagogue och liar…
The speech is on, expect anti-Iranian propaganda, anti-Syrian propaganda, anti-resistance propaganda, expect no condemnations of israeli policy, expect that US say they support the people of the region, expect that they wont condemn their allies – Yemen, Bahrain, Saudiarabia, Israel, Qatar, Morocco, Alger. Expect the denouncing of the dictators they have kept alive.
Meanwhile, doctors and nurses in Bahrain who treated wounded demonstrators are being persecuted, with hardly a peep coming from Obama and his “human rights” chest-beaters and hair-pullers . . .
it appears that Obama’s “new” plan for the Middle East is to enroll the Arab Spring states in the international finance system that’s working so well for US, Greece, Ireland, Iceland. Four of the four keys to Obama’s strategy have to do with the economic development of those states.
It’s 1913 all over again. Samuel Untermyer is running amok in Washington and Tel Aviv. Goldman Saks is salivating.
Pirouz, oh dear, using movies as history is not a good thing.
Churchill WAS a terrorist. So was Eisenhower. Watch THIS ‘movie’: John Dower and Sanho Tree, “Cultures of War: Pearl Harbor – Hiroshima 9/11 – Iraq”
or better yet, read Dower’s book. And David Irving’s work on Churchill.
Fio, I often get raised eyebrows for that comparison. But when you look at Germany in 1940, with continental hegemony and puppets in place such as Quisling and Petain, with statements such as “Churchill is a terrorist”, well compare:
Middle East hegemony, puppets in place such as the Abdullahs, with statements such as “Ahmadinejad is a terrorist”, etc.
Britain in 1940 was the holdout, such as Iran for the past 30 years has been the holdout.
There’s a quote in the movie “Battle of Britain” where the British Air Marshall is under extreme pressure, and he exclaims of the Germans: “They’re trying to enslave us!” I can well imagine the Iranian leadership making very similar references, during this ongoing 30 year cold war.
I’m a regular reader of “The Race for Iran” as I spent a fair amount of time in Muslim countries on my way overland from London to Kathmandu in the ’70s: Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan (especially Swat Valley) , Republic of Maldives. My conclusion was and remains to this day that how Islam plays out on the ground has more to do with the culture than the religion itself. I didn’t learn much of anything about the political side of things so I find not only the articles but the discussions interesting.
As for Tom Donilon’s speech, my conclusion is the style matches very closely McCarthy in “The McCarthy Years” as documented on disc 3 of “The Edward R. Murrow Collection” (available on Netflix).
What I mean is, compared to Murrow, McCarthy so often uses the verb “to be” (as in “The impact is real.”) with a couple of “musts” (as in “But we must also remember …”) and little or no actual concrete evidence or examples. In sum, McCarthy’s basic style is unsupported allegations; Murrow’s basic style is to present evidence and let the listener decide for themselves.
The Morning Question on C Span Washington Journal today was, “What would you like to hear Obama say in his speech?”
Here’s what I would like Obama to do: I’d like him to have the courage of Furkan Dogan and Vittorio Arrigoni, and the integrity of Chas Freeman, and to remember that he took an oath to protect and defend the people and Constitution of the United States, not Israel.
Pirouz, I question your use of the Hitler analogies and also, to the extent I understand what you are saying, I question the historical accuracy of this statement:
“economic war being waged against Iran are reminiscent of Hitlerian demands made upon the British regime of 1940.”
Do you mind expanding on that statement?
You are aware, are you not, that in March 1933 “Judea Declared War on Germany,” an economic boycott of Germany that caused profound harm to the German people — many starved to death — and that persisted until 1939. http://www.scribd.com/doc/33501955/Daily-Express-Judea-Declares-War-on-Germany-Boycott-of-German-Goods-en-1933-1-p-Scan
Things are seldom as they seem; Skim milk masquerades as cream.” -Buttercup; HMS Pinafore
This is another reason obama will hold his speech
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1997/international-poll-arab-spring-us-obama-image-muslim-publics
instead of hearing the people obama is trying to create new “mubaraks” i Egypt, Tunis with huge economic aid, but hes no popular because the follow the policy of israeli interest.
Pirouz, exactly if you changed the word Iran in his speech to Israel, you would be told its full blown antisemitism. But when it comes to persians its ok…its sickening.
You know when I read narratives provided by the likes of Donilon, it harkens back to the Hitlerian narratives. Where back then “world jewry” was the consistent explanation for the evil of the day, today in the pro-Zionist camp it is virtually all about Iran.
So too, these demands made by Donilon and his “progress” report on the economic war being waged against Iran are reminiscent of Hitlerian demands made upon the British regime of 1940.
For someone like myself who held out so much hope for the election of Obama, it is awfully disappointing. And I’m American–I can only imagine how the majority of ordinary Middle Eastern peoples feel. Instead of sincere rapprochement, we get the same old tired game of hegemony.
Remember how Iranian President Dr. Ahmadinejad’s speech in October 2005 was mistranslated by Israeli Middle East Media Research Institute (Memri). When properly translated the Ahmadinejad actually called for the removal of the oppressive regimes in Washington and Tel Aviv. He never mentioned the elimination or annihiliation of state of Israel. He called for the greater governance of Palestine. The word ‘map’ did nor even appear in his speech. Ahmadinejad did not deny the Holocaust but questioned its exploitation by the western powers for their colonial ambition – and punishing the Palestinian who did not commit crimes against the Jews during the Nazi era.
Currently, a similar character assassination campaign is carried out against Jewish-born Israeli-Russian writer Israel Shamir based on a recent interview he gave to American Jewish journalist Will Yakowicz. Israel Shamir’s version of his interview can be read here. Will Yakowicz’ version of the interview is published by the Jewish Tablet magazine under explosive title ‘His Jewish Problem’, which could be read here. I will leave to readers to compare and find out who is pulling whose leg!
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2011/05/19/israel-shamir-lost-in-translation/
M. Ali – I hate to burst your Zionist baloon, but it’s Islamic Iran’s assertive Middle East policy which have made the country a regional power and scared the the Hell of the Zionist entity and its western poodles.
It’s Syria which needs Islamic Republic for economic reasons and not the other way around. Even if Assad regime falls, which the Zionist mafia wants to steer Syria away from Lebanese Hizbullah and PA Hamas – according to Tel Aviv, most probably, the outcome would be a new regime with the Zionist-dreaded Muslim Brotherhood as partner.
However, the Zionist regime has shown its preferrence of Assad over any other unknown new leadership. Because history shows that Syria under Hafiz Assad’s Baathist regime never took any military action to protect Lebanon. In fact he sent his army into Lebanon in 1976 under an agreement with Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin and King Hussein of Jordan to make sure the Palestinians in Lebanon will not be permitted to launch any attacks on Northern Israel. According to Israel daily Ha’aretz (April 7, 1995), the April 28, 1976 written agreement is still kept at the Israeli Government archives. Any claim justifying Syrian presence in Lebanon for the protection of the Lebanese Christians is completely false, and has no merit.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2011/05/04/us-no-credible-alternative-for-assad/
The journalist that was imprisoned by Syria and later deported to Iran writes about her experience:
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/05/2011518184325620380.html
The last part is interesting. Time and time again, Iran has proven that it has handled its prisoners more respectfully than other countries.
Richard Silverstein has something to say about US commitments to the Israeli nuclear industry…
http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2011/05/18/arad-exposed-u-s-israel-nuclear-cooperation/
I am speechless, the sheer hypocrisy and warmongering against Iran is just bizarre, this jackass tom is talking endlessly about Iran but refuse to acknowledge that the urge for change has occured in HIS PUPPET STATES! That is Egypt, Morocco, Alger, Jordan, Saudiarabia, Yemen, Bahrain. He even accept when saudi and UAE forces coming into Bahrain to slaughter the innocents. Man these sickos are brainwashed, how much money is pouring into these pockets? Also he says that Iran got the right to nuclear energy but still sanction them, thats illegal and just bullshit policized sanctions.
Prepare to hear alot of anti-Iranian bullshit today and tommorow when that netanyahu talk…and also the next day for the aipac meeting.
That the Obama administration would presume to lecture ANY other regime in the world is shocking. Expected, habitual even, but still shocking.
Iran needs to re-evalute its Middle Eastern policy too. If Syria falls (and Assad needs to start preparing to leave), Iran needs to be smart enough to engage with the change.
Iran also needs to engage with the arab countries, such as the GCC and Jordan. They should not allow their bonds with Iraq, Afghanistan, Turkey, and Lebanon be weakened. They should also start selling themselves as an alternative to USA for Pakistan.
Finally, Iran needs to be invest heavily in its tourist industry, aimed at the middle eastern audience. The more we have the middle easterns in and out of Iran, the more, we will feel closer to our neighbours. But this also means that actual Iranians need to stop having a negative viewpoint of their neighbours.
Interestingly, last year Pew Research poll showed that 82% of people in the Middle East consider Israel being the greatest threat to the region. The same poll put the US No.2 threat to the region while only 10% believed Islamic Iran to be a threat to the region.
As far as Obama’s new speech is concerned – I bet my two Canadian cents – it will be written by the same idiot who had written Benji Netanyahu’s speech going to be delivered to the joint session of the Congress in afew days.
Obama has proven that he is not a ‘leader’ but a ‘poodle of Zionism’.
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2008/12/13/obama-the-first-jewish-president/