They Are Not Going Away Quietly
November 29, 2009
Filed under International politics
Tags: Benjamin Netanyahu, David Wilbank, Hugo Chavez, IAEA, Iran, Israel, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Mohamed ElBaradei, Nuclear energy, Robert Gibbs, Russia, United Nations
No matter how much we might desire it to be so, Iran and its nuclear ambitions are not going anywhere. The United Nations speaks of sanctions, The IAEA wants to inspect, Israel gets worried, Gibbs expresses White House concern. All of these things have occurred over the past few days. But they have also taken place previously. Seems to be the same song, with a higher verse number, maybe#25. I read a comment by David Wilbank that seems to be the best summation of the entire Iranian nuclear stand-off. Wilbank, the British Foreign Secretary, said that “instead of engaging with us Iran choose to provoke and dissemble.” At least, someone recognizes what is happening.
Meanwhile, the outgoing head of the IAEA, Mohamed ElBaradei say the their investigation of Iran’s nuclear facilities is at a dead-end. Interesting that as his term ends, he becomes somewhat more blunt than had previously been the case.
What sparked this latest. Today, Iran announced that it plans to build 10 industrial strength uranium enrichment facilities. This latest was apparently ordered by Hugo Chavez’ buddy, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Now pay lose attention to the following two statements. Press Secretary Robert Gibbs says that time is running out for Iran to address the concerns of the international community, that apparently includes their Russian friends. The newly announced uranium enrichment facilities are going to built inside mountains to enable them to withstand attack(read that from Israel as Netanyahu has hinted at) from abroad.
So, the stalemate lurches along. So far, there has been an unwillingness to impose any type of sanctions.Just have to believe that at some point, the proverbial bullet must be bitten and a negotiated agreement will have to give way to some type of imposed one. How that would work would certainly be a sticky wicket indeed. But given Iran’s recent track record, methinks there will come a time that it must be done.
Secretary Clinton Overdid It
November 2, 2009
Filed under International politics
Tags: Arabs, Barack Obama, Benjamin Netanyahu, Crosby Stills and Nash, Egypt, Foreign Policy, Hilary Clinton, Hosni Mubarak, Iraq, Israel, John Kerry, Jordan, Marrakech, Morocco, Palestinians, Saudi Arabia
Want to know what she overdid ? Sure you do. She overdid her praise for Israel, of course and now she is having a bit of a mea culpa. Madame Secretary was in Marrakech, Morocco to speak to Arab concerns about the “positive reinforcement” she had provided Israel just 2 days earlier. (And you thought Marrakech was just part of a Crosby, Stills and Nash song).
The uproar relates its seems, primarily, to the construction of Israeli settlements and their unwillingness to bring that construction to a halt. This seems to be a major stumbling block regarding Palestinian- Israeli negotiations. Obama had earlier talked tough on the matter indicating that the construction would have to stop-period. She in fact repeated this assertion that the administration does not accept the legitimacy of the settlements. Unfortunately, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu seems disinclined to completely stop the construction. So, we have a conundrum, No wonder, Mrs Clinton was reluctant to make the Middle East trip, anticipating all might not go well. Better watch that thinking or John Kerry might have her job.
Anyway, her new old statements seemed to satisfy a number of the Arab leaders in attendance including individuals from Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and Iraq.
To more fully reinforce her statements today, she will add a previously unscheduled trip to Egypt. There she will meet with President Hosni Mubarak on Wednesday. As of today, there has been no report of what Israel thinks of this” Back to the Future “endeavor . Doubtless, we will hear more.
Didn’t We Fix That Iran Thing?
October 31, 2009
Filed under International politics
Tags: Ali Asghar, Barack Obama, Congress, Democrat, France, International Atomic Energy Agency, Iran, Israel, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, nuclear weapons, Operation Juniper Cobra, Russia, Uranium, Vienna
Iranian Atomic energy Agency Rep, Ali Asghar (courtesy Reuters)
Or, why is this man smiling? The man is Ali Asghar, Iran’s International Atomic Energy agency Ambassador. He just had a meting in Vienna on the Iranian nuclear issue. Short review, the administration was brokering a deal that would get much of Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium out of Iran. Presumably, that would make it much less dangerous and the Iranians would not find it so easy to build a bomb. Russia and France were on board. All looked rosy, except that it wasn’t.
Iran, in the person of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wanted to tweak the agreement a bit, compromise from both sides, if you will. He had previously said that the West had gone from insisting that Iran have no nuclear capabilities to discussing what kind of nuclear capabilities it would have. So Iran had moved up a notch or two or more from the Bush-era.
Quite interesting to note that there was almost universal opposition to the Vienna agreement in Iran. Both the hardliners and reformers were united in their negative response .( Bet Congressional Democrats would love to see that on a certain domestic issue.) Nobody can tell us what to do with our enriched uranium. So, now we have foot-dragging, delaying etc.
Who does this tactic both worry and strengthen? How about Israel who don’t Iran should have any nuclear anything. They can say, we told you this was a bad deal all along. Will it make them more likely to take military action on their own? That is hard to answer even as one of the largest joint US Israel military exercises , Operation Juniper Cobra goes forward.
Perhaps this telling comment from an Israeli military adviser is worth remembering. This, of course, unnamed source called Iran’s maneuvering, “bazaar bargaining at its best.” Wonder who will have the winning hand?
NAMESTAN
October 26, 2009
Filed under History, International politics
Tags: Afghanistan, Baghdad, Barack Obama, CIA, David Cohen, Gen Stanley McChrystal, Harry Truman, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jerusalem, Joel Rosenberg, John Kerry, Mesopotamia, Middle East, Muslims, North Africa, Nouri al-Maliki, Pakistan, Palestinians, Russia, Temple Mount, Tigris-Euphrates, Waqf
The above acronym is often used by Joel Rosenberg in his political/religious thrillers which have been quite successful and eerily prophetic. The letters described a division of the CIA known as North Africa, the Middle East and the stan countries; Pakistan, Afghanistan etc. Fictional or not, the phrase almost epitomizes tough neighborhood in a geopolitical sense.
Look at a map of the area some time and then look at major news headlines from any source of your choosing. While not always the top story, the are seems to carry a weight far beyond its size. This weekend was a real case in point. There were some major suicide bombings in what was considered a relatively secure part of Iraq. Baghdad was the site of two bombings whose death toll approaches 200 with many more injured. And it may have damaged Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki even more.
Travel a relatively short distance to the west to Jerusalem and what do you discover? Israeli police with stun grenades. Palestinian protesters throwing rocks and who knows what else outside the holiest site in all of Israel, the Temple Mount in the center of Jerusalem. What sparked the clash? Probably no one knows. David Cohen, Israel’s national police chief laid blame on Muslim extremists. Muslim leaders claimed there were plots to damage the sites. Israel has controlled the site since 1967 but in a situation that only makes sense in the Middle East allows a Muslim clerical body, the Waqf, to handle day-to-day administration. Tourists and Israelis can only visit at certain times.
And we have Iran, who virtually lives on the front page. Nukes or not, selling enriched uranium to Russia or not ? Will there be talks? What part will Russia play? That is another Big factor when one looks at Russia’s position geographically versus the Middle East.
One more factor is of course Afghanistan. It was the site for deadly helicopter crashes just a few days ago, killing a number of American troops. Will Obama send troops, how many and when? Whose advice is better, Sen Kerry or Gen. McChrystal? Remember that during the campaign,the Afghan war was the one we should be fighting.
It seems that the are is a dominant feature of every president’s foreign policy, from probably Truman through Obama and rightfully so. One thing that is quite easy for us to overlook, given our Western tendency to take a short term view, is that the problems that are there far predate our involvement; by a long time. No, make that a very long time.
My woeful lack of knowledge and historical perspective point up once again my need for te historical study of a region whose importance can hardly be overstated. Try these phrases from your long ago study of history: Mesopotamia, Tigris-Euphrates, pyramids; there are many more and there is much history from which to learn.
Jimmy Carter in Training
October 22, 2009
Filed under International politics, Politics
Tags: Afghanistan, Associated Press, Barack Obama, David Gergen, Hamid Karzai, Hilary Clinton, Jimmy Carter, John Kerry, Massachusetts, military, Robert Gibbs, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Ted Kennedy, White House
Since our greatest former president is beginning to age just a bit, it is about time to train his successor at roaming the world and taking care of everything that needs to be taken care of . Yes, drum roll please, it is the one and only Sen John Kerry, D, Ma. The Senator has just returned from his latest trip to Afghanistan where he persuaded President Karzai to accept a run-off vote.
It seems that Kerry has turned the traditional role of head of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee upside down. Our Clintonite friend, David Gergen says that it is”extremely rare that any president calls on an individual outside the executive branch to do as much representative work and diplomacy as Sen.Kerry.” Should Sec.Clinton be worried that her time is short as her influence seems to be waning a bit? Bear in mind that both Obama and Kerry were mentored by the late Sen Ted Kennedy. Obama burst on to the national stage in 2004 with a speech at Kerry’s nominating convention and seems to hold the senior senator from Massachusetts in high regard.
Now, both Press Secretary Robert Gibbs and the Associated Press go th great lengths to tout Kerry’ s expertise. Says Gibbs, he… is somebody who has a broad range of experience and an in-depth knowldge of issues, ranging from energy and climate change to health care to foreign policy.” Wow, is that a ringing endorsement or what? Plus, he will never dare to challenge me for the White House. Oh, I just tossed that phrase in there as a bonus.
And now, the Associated Press takes a turn. “Obama cherishes, greatly values the experience and insight of JohnKerry. And,last but not least. There is a framed note on the wall of Kerry’s senate office, given to him by Obama on the day of his inauguration. “‘I’m here because of you.” Just about brings a tear to your eye, does it not? Of course, there is a lot of truth there. Had Kerry won the 2004 election, Obama could never have run in 2008.
So, we do we call this great expert? He’s not a Cabinet member, nor a czar, but he needs a title greater than just senator. Uber senator, maybe?
The Peril Of North Korea
October 21, 2009
Filed under International politics, military
Tags: George Bush, Hilary Clinton, North Korea, nuclear weapons, Pacific, Pyongyang, Ri Gun, Robert Gates, Seoul, South Korea, Washington DC
So, now they are a problem. One of the charter members of George Bush’s much maligned “axis of evil” is now a threat. And, furthermore, it poses threats that are” even more lethal and destabilizing” than before. I am unsure what is the significant part of that, lethal and destabilizing or before. I have to ask, before what or perhaps when?
The comments referred to were made by Defense Secretary Robert Gates upon his arrival yesterday in Seoul. In speaking to a group composed of American and South Korean troops, Gates made a clear reference to the unacceptable possibility of North Korea possessing nuclear weapons.
It seems that in rather typical North Korean fashion, mixed messages are being sent. Release detainees (thank you Mr Clinton), engage in short range missile tests.
But, in spite of North Korea’s hinting at being part of the nuclear club, Gates is saying, no way. I applaud that. A nuclear armed North Korea would be a nightmare on several levels. So, Gates affirmation of our support for South Korea is to be commended.
Of course, on this side of the Pacific, Secretary Clinton chimed in with these comments. The United States will never have a normal relationship with North Korea until it abandons its nuclear program. Sanctions will not be relaxed “until Pyongyang takes verifiable, irreversible steps toward complete denuclearization.” Wonder if she intends to meet with North Korea’s #2 nuclear negotiator Ri Gun, when he arrives in Washington?
Could be verrry interesting. We say no more nukes, they say ?
Where is Mahmoud?
October 1, 2009
Filed under International politics
Tags: Hugo Chavez, Iran, Libya, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Moammar Khadafy, NATO, Porlamar, United Nations, United States, Venezuela
The recently concluded UN session provided a lot time for old friends to meet.probably time for old enemies as well. But maybe it also helped change some who were sorta good friends into even better friends. Our favorite Venezuelan, Hugo Chavez and the Libyan thug, loon, take your pick, Moammar Khadafy seem to be cozying up more since the UN meetings.
They have spending time in Chavez neck of the woods lately, in Porlamar, VZ. It was Khadafy’s first trip to Hugoland and all seemed d to go well. They even talked of a NATO of the South. The two combined to lead a summit between South american countries. Economic agreements were signed, potshots taken at the United States, etc.
Both have things in common, being former military men as well as current radicals. But wasn’t one member of their group missing? Where in the world was Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? Oh, that’s right. Working on that nuclear reactor thing, peaceful purposes only. Got it.
Are You A Betting Person?
September 25, 2009
Filed under International politics, military
Tags: Barack Obama, China, G20, George Bush, IAEA, India, Iran, Israel, Natanz, National Council of Resistance of Iran, nuclear weapons, Pakistan, Pittsburgh, Tehran
If you are, I have a bet for you. What if the wager were this? Do you think that Iran will get nuclear weapons? And just to make it interesting, ler’s put a timetable on it. Let’s make it in say, three years. What do you think?
Based on events of the past few days, combined with previous known activities and stated aims and rhetoric, I am afraid that the answer to our hypothetical bet is yes, I may be off on the time frame, but the again, who knows. I don’t think the Administration does.We have just learned or Iran has revealed, take your pick, that Iran has a 2nd uranium enrichment plant and there are also 2 previously unknown sites in and around Tehran being used to build nuclear warheads. This latter info comes from the National Council of Resistance of Iran. The IAEA ( International Atomic energy Agency is looking into theses claims. The NCRI is also the who forced Iran to reveal this previously unknown 2nd uranium enrichment site.The gropu also revealed the existence of site #1 in Natanz.
What does Mr Obama have to say? he spoke today at the G20 summit in Pittsburgh. “All nations have the right to peaceful nuclear energy(betcha hadn’t heard of that right before).Those nations with nuclear weapons must move towards disarmament. those nations without nuclear weapons must forsake them. Let me see if I get this. The nuclear nations club is composed of the United States, Russia, China, Pakistan, India, and Israel as far as we know. Anybody in there planning on disarming? Well us , Russia, we shall see. That is about it.
Now factor in those statements with the earlier Iranian info and mix in this next. Just a couple of years ago, then Senator Obama agreed with the National Intelligence Estimate that said Iran had shelved its nuclear weapons program and had only peaceful intentions and Bush was lying yet again. Fast forward and what do we have? A member of the “axis of evil” who Obama once called too small to be a problem; now being a real problem.
Allow me to close with this. Why would a nation with all the energy resources of Iran ever have planned all this effort just for nuclear energy? Maybe I am greatly oversimplyfing but it just seems that there were red flags all along the way.
So now we say, you have got to stop this or, or what?
Just Another Day at the United Nations
September 23, 2009
Filed under International politics
Tags: African Union, Barack Obama, Cuba, Dr Steven Chu, Fidel Castro, Iraq, Israel, Libya, Mark Helprin, Moammar Khadafy, Rush Limbaugh, Russia, TOTUS, United Nations, United States, Wall Street Journal
Today at the UN has been quite an eventful occasion. Had you been privilged or forced to be in attendance, just think who you could have heard. Of course, there was Obama( great picture of him sitting in the big chair, nicknamed a throne by TOTUS and it does look the part just a bit. There was our old friend Fidel Castro and there was even the head of the African Union, the esteemed Moammar Khadafy. And there were others. But this trio will do.
Beginning in reverse order, what did the Libyan head honcho have to say? Well, here goes. “It’s just a shame that we can’t have Obama as president of the United States forever. We’ve only got a rare moment in time while Obama, an African, is president of the United States to actually fix the problems of the world because once Obama’s gone the American people, the United States, is going to go back to being its ugly self again.” Or as Dr Chu put it, like teenagers who don’t have a clue. Wow, the President’s own speechwriters couldn’t have done any better. Hope that Obama spoke afterwards because that was a whale of an introduction.
What did Fidel have to add ? One correction, Fidel was not actually at the UN but did quote liberally from Obama’s speech He also said this. ” It would only be fair to recognize that no other United States president would have had the courage to say what he said. To what was he referring? Well, the President’ s admission of America;s past errors of course, particularly on climate change.
Now, on to the President’s remarks. By the way, he received a good bit of applause. No wonder, he told theses folks what they wanted to hear. ” I have ordered Gitmo closed.” ( still there for the moment), we are leaving Iraq,we have reengaged the UN, have paid our bills(?) and have joined the human rights council.
Oh, there is much, much more. These next are quite interesting. Read them closely. No balance of power will hold, one nation or group of people cannot be elevated over another, power is a zero-sum game. Oh, those naughty Israelis. Now, if I am Russia, I am loving this stuff. And, perhaps for this reason. I will quote Rush. “He’s serving up the United States on a silver platter to the rest of the world.”
Now, it would be great if all nations and people got along. No alpha dog, no superpowers, etc. An old adage keeps ringing in my ears, something about nature abhorring a vacuum. In terms of power, I believe it to hold true as well. Is he preaching appeasement? Not so much, I don’t think, but I fear he is sending the wrong message, one labeled by Mark Helprin in the WSJ as the politics of concession. What comes from this and when is still to be decided.
Two People and What They Said
September 21, 2009
Filed under History, International politics
Tags: Daniel Silva, Holocaust, Human Rights Watch, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jimmy Carter, Joe Wilson, Johns Hopkins, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Sherlock Holmes, United Nations, United States, WWII, Zbignire Brezinski
Writing this soon about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is not a desirable thing. But something he said ties in all too well with the comments of a former U S foreign policy official and even draws in the infamous or renowned Congressman Joseph Wilson as a bonus.
Ahmadinejad is on record with his denial of the Holocaust that took place during World War II, an event so horrible a s to almost defy description. ( For some excellent historical fiction that deals with the Holocaust, I heartily recommend the works of Daniel Silva. Back to the denier or liar if we can be so forthright. He said today that he is proud to cause international outrage with his comments on the Holocaust. This as he heads back to the UN for a Wednesday speech, his 5th in four years. He is doubtless aware of the controversy that awaits him; those who maintain his election was a fraud prompting a push by Human Rights Watch and others for UN action. All of this aa a backdrop for US – Iranian talks due to start October 1.
Those talks of course will have a heavy nuclear emphasis. What is Iran trying to do; weapons or no weapons, etc. During a Friday speech in Iran, he perhaps attempted a diversionary tactic by reiterating his denial claims adding the tidbit that it was a pretext by the Jews aimed at tricking the west into support of an Israeli state. He said it was created out of ” a lie and a mythical claim.” Of course, we called it “hateful” and Israel called it shameful among other things. But, what does it matter to him when he says “the anger of the world’s professional killers is a source of pride for us.”
So, he has really set the stage up well, has he not. Now, against that backdrop, consider the following by a former foreign policy advisor to President Carter and currently a Johns Hopkins professor. He said these words. if Israeli jets were to overfly our airspace in Iraq bent on attacking Iran, we should shoot them down. I have read this a number of times and must admit I don’t get it. What do you think they would do if we shot down one or more of their planes? Turn around, say sorry, and go home. Highly unlikely, Sherlock. Oh, almost forgot to identify this individual, Zbigniew Brezinski. Wonder if his advice is still sought or heeded , don’t know. I do not have much of a response, quire frankly.
So, to summarize, we have a contented liar from Iran headed for the UN and A foreign policy expert who thinks shooting down the planes of an ally might be a good idea. Ahhhh.
