Category Archives: US Foreign Policy

Obama Goes Nuclear in Israel: Pushes Iran Threshold Beyond 1995 and 2001 and 2007 and 2013 and……………

         


 Follow ArabiaDeserta on Twitter      

President Barack Obama says it would currently “take over a year or so for Iran to actually develop a nuclear weapon.” In a Thursday interview with Israel’s Channel 2 TV ahead of his upcoming visit to the country, Obama says he doesn’t want to “cut it too close” and therefore all options remain on the table in countering the Iranian nuclear program. The issue has been one of the most fraught between Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Israel has repeatedly threatened to act militarily should Iran appear to be on the verge of obtaining a bomb, while the U.S. has pushed for more time to allow diplomacy and economic sanctions to run their course. In the interview, aired Thursday, Obama says he still favors diplomacy over force…………

  • Of course he favors diplomacy over force, because there will be no use of force. There can’t be a unilateral Western use of force, mainly because it will become a long war of attrition and it can achieve nothing beyond more destruction in the Middle East. Now that the 2012 elections are over, the price of the Israeli bride can be reduced, she is not as desirable as she was last years. But she may become desirable again in future cycles, in 2014 and in 2016. 
  • All this “all options are on the table” talk is pure political nonsense. Mr. Obama speaks like he is on the campaign trail, which he is of course since he is heading to Israel. The United States will not go to war just to keep Iran from having the “capacity” to develop a nuclear bomb. Mainly because nobody knows how to destroy the capacity or ability to develop a bomb. Mainly because a military attack will fail and just make the mullahs go nuclear: decide to militarize. The Iranians have been saying loudly, including issuing a fatwa, that a nuclear bomb is haram, meaning not kosher (in Likud-ese language). 
  • Anyone who knows anything about nuclear physics probably knows that the Iranians cannot keep it a secret (even I know it, and I have forgotten most of my physics beyond how to enrich Uranium to more U-235 isotope content).
  • So, Mr. Netanyahu keeps talking about the nuclear danger of Iran, although he doesn’t claim that Iran will have the bomb by 1995 anymore, nor by 2001 anymore, nor by 2007 anymore, nor by 2014 anymore, nor by…………..
  • No more nuclear “slam dunk” is possible. People are smarter than that now, although most of the Western media seems to be as dumb as in 2003.
  • The Saudi princes still claim not so secretly that they suspect Iran plans to develop the bomb soon. How do they know that? They read Israeli media, well mainly the Jerusalem Post, or maybe their Mufti told them so.

Cheers
mhg

[email protected]




Iran and Pakistan and Clinton: Controversial Pipeline? What Controversial Pipeline?…….

         


 Follow ArabiaDeserta on Twitter      

“President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad launched the project with his Pakistani counterpart Asif Ali Zardari at a ceremony on the border, hailing a blow to US-led sanctions targeting his country’s oil and gas sector. The two leaders unveiled a plaque before shaking hands and offering prayers for the successful conclusion of the project, which involves the laying of a 485 mile section of the pipeline on the Pakistani side, expected to cost some $1.5 billion. “The completion of the pipeline is in the interests of peace, security and progress of the two countries … It will also consolidate the economic, political and security ties of the two nations,” they said in a joint statement……………….”

This agreement on the gas pipeline was one of Hillary Clinton’s biggest foreign policy failures. She and her State Department worked hard to derail it. It did not threaten the security of the United States; it did not even threaten the more important security of Israel. Yet she tried all kinds of extremely expensive alternatives that would bypass Iranian gas fields. Every alternative was very uneconomical: Iran probably sits on the world’s second largest reserves of natural gas (possibly the largest). No doubt the Iranians also paid a price for the pleasure of thumbing their noses at the West.
Controversial? Only in the United States media since it is not against any United Nations sanctions.

Cheers
mhg

[email protected]




Wars R Us: Another Warmonger Joins AEI, Lieberman Decides against WINEP…………

         


 Follow ArabiaDeserta on Twitter      

“In a bid to lend a patina of “bipartisanship” to its ideas, the neoconservative American Enterprise Institute (AEI) has made former Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT) the co-chair of its newest foreign policy initiative. The move has been met with raised eyebrows, as progressives have not considered Joe Lieberman an authentic representative of their foreign policy positions for quite some time, if they ever did in the first place. Lieberman will co-chair the new “American Internationalism Project” with former Senator John Kyl (R-AZ). As the project is intended to “rebuild and reshape a bipartisan consensus around American global leadership and engagement,” Lieberman’s participation is aimed at blunting the perception that anything coming out of AEI is a dogmatically Republican plan. AEI generally hews to a hardline neoconservative standard on foreign policy; its staff in the area includes former Bush Administration officials John Bolton, Richard Perle, and Marc Thiessen………………..”

Joe Lieberman is a one-issue guy as far as foreign policy is concerned. His focus is on that one issue and other peripheral issues that touch on it. Yet he has picked to join a different special interest institute than the house that AIPAC built (Washington Institute for Near East Policy). But he fits in right with that other one-issue guy, John Bolton. Mr. Bolton is so extreme that even a Republican U.S. Senate refused to confirm him as Bush’s ambassador to the UN. He had to be appointed for only one year during a recess. Bolton has one other issue, besides cultivating his mustache: pushing for a new war of choice in the Middle East, a war that even Bush-Cheney were not stupid enough to start. In this issue, Lieberman and Bolton are in complete agreement.
Lieberman spent the past few years in the US Senate trying to subvert its resolutions toward another war in our region. Until his very last month. Not that he needed much hard work to do it.

With Jon Kyl as part of the team, we might as well call it :Wars R Us.

Cheers
mhg

[email protected]




If the British Misunderstood Islam: then Who in the West Can? Zionists for Arabists …….

         


 Follow ArabiaDeserta on Twitter      

“Labour has conceded for the first time that a “primitive understanding” of the Islamic world caused some of the problems faced by the west in Iraq and Afghanistan, and warned David Cameron his response to the terrorist crisis in north Africa shows he has not learned the painful lessons from those conflicts. In a speech on Thursday, Jim Murphy, the shadow defence secretary, will suggest the Blair government did not appreciate what it was getting itself into after the September 11 attacks, as British forces joined the international effort to overthrow the Taliban and hunt down Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaida network……….. In Iraq, he will say, “there was a serious deficit in Western comprehension of the Sunni-Shia or intra-Shia dynamics. We know that de-Baathification left a lethal vacuum.”………..…”

It said:
“a primitive understanding of Islam”!
The British
created modern Iraq, patched it together with a view toward their own control of it, as part of their empire. Gertrude Bell, Percy Cox, Churchill, and others decided early on to hand power to the same class of natives (Sunni Arabs) who had served the Turkish Ottoman occupation well both in the bureaucracy and in the military. They thought the same class would serve British interests well, which they did for a while. Of course there was the small matter of the restive Kurds, who were in fact reportedly gassed by the Royal Air Force, and the majority Shi’as, who were disregarded as ‘hostile to British interests’. Iraq has been unstable ever since 1917.
Now if the British can’t understand Islam and the nuances of its various sects, then how could other Westerners think they could unravel that complex (to Western eyes) issue? Certainly not the Israeli lobbyists that have edged out the old Arabists in the U.S. State Department and other policy-making institutions and think-tanks. They have no interest in delving deeply into Arab or Muslim culture: they seem to be limited by the motto of “Israel right or wrong“, as shown for example by Susan Rice at the UN. It is almost correct now to say that the Arabists have been almost completely replaced by Zionists in the American foreign policy establishment and the institutions that feed it with advice.

De-Baathification, like de-Nazification after World War II, was not a bad idea to start with. But that policy in Iraq was carried too far beyond the senior level of bureaucrats, which created political, economic, security, and other problems. Besides, all the Baathist military and security services melted away before the fall of Baghdad. They went AWOL, like deserters during war. The military and security did not even bother to defend its capital against invasion. So how much good could it have been: it was good at repressing the people but not to face a foreign attack.
Cheers
mhg

[email protected]


North Korean Bomb: Israeli Speculation, Iranian Angle, Joe Stalin and the Rosenbergs, Frying Burgers at the Sing Sing Greasy Spoon……….

         


 Follow ArabiaDeserta on Twitter      

“In addition to provoking the West, North Korea’s nuclear test on Tuesday may have also been carried out on behalf of Iran, and in the presence of Iranian atomic scientists, a security expert warned on Tuesday. North Korea is making progress both in its nuclear weapons capabilities and its ICBM missile research, Dr. Alon Levkowitz, coordinator of Bar-Ilan University’s Asian Studies Program and a member of the BESA Center for Strategic Studies, told The Jerusalem Post. “The most disturbing question is whether the Iranians are using North Korea as a backdoor plan for their own nuclear program. The Iranians didn’t carry out a nuclear test in Iran, but they may have done so in North Korea,” Levkowitz said. “There is no official information on this… but Iran may have bypassed inspections via North Korea. If true, this is a very worrying development.”………………”

This is purely Israeli speculation. But it is to be expected under the circumstances. It would be stupid not to speculate on this issue, even if the speculator is the right-wing Jerusalem Post which has an axe (possibly even ax) to grind. After all: it was Pyongyang which provided Bashar Al-Assad with all those nuclear facilities that probably existed only in Western and Saudi media but the Israelis bombed anyway for mysterious reasons.

Besides, does anyone know any country that willingly provided either nuclear weapons or nuclear weapons technology to another country? Other than the USA giving it to Joe Stalin, something which exposed both the two Rosenbergs to the undeniably barbaric horrors of the electric chair at Sing Sing. Justly or unjustly, I don’t know. A few years earlier, the Nazis would have tortured then beheaded them on the guillotine for it (or just for being there). But the electric chair must be more barbaric than beheading (provided the blade is sharp and the executioner is sober). I read somewhere that it took long minutes to die on the chair in those Rosenberg days. Like frying a burger at a greasy spoon. I don’t think anyone uses ‘the chair’ it anymore, I hope not, probably not even Texas nor any God-fearing neighboring states that we see in those BP commercials on TV. Executions of any kind  are barbaric and only some theocracies (Muslim and Christian and other) in third world countries and the USA impose them.
(Speaking of pushing nuclear weapons technology: I know there were reports about nuclear ‘pusher’ A.Q. Khan of Pakistan, who became their national hero, even more so than Osama Bin Laden. There have even been reports of the Pakistanis promising to supply the Al-Saud and the Wahhabi Mufti with nukes at some future date, if and when the princes decide to become a world power).

Cheers
mhg

[email protected]




Saudi Arabia: a Popular Revolution or a Potential Palace Revolt by Princes…………..

         


 Follow ArabiaDeserta on Twitter      

“You say you want a revolution
Well, you know
We all want to change the world
You tell me that it’s evolution
Well, you know
We all want to change the world
But when you talk about destruction
Don’t you know that you can count me out
Don’t you know it’s gonna be all right………..

You say you’ll change the constitution……….”

                                  
Revolution (The Beatles)


“Unfortunately, notwithstanding the stakes, the United States has no serious option for heading off a revolution in the Kingdom if it is coming. Since American interests are so intimately tied to the House of Saud, the U.S. does not have the choice of distancing the United States from it in an effort to get on the right side of history. Nevertheless, you should try to reestablish trust with the King and urge him to move more rapidly on his political reform agenda, while recognizing that this effort is likely to have limited results………. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a proven survivor. Two earlier Saudi kingdoms were defeated by the Ottoman Empire and eradicated. But the House of Saud came back. They survived a wave of revolutions against Arab monarchies in the 1950s and 1960s. A jihadist coup attempt in 1979 seized the Grand Mosque in Mecca but was crushed. Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda staged a four-year-long insurrection to topple the royal family and failed less than a decade ago. Nevertheless, al Qaeda cadres remain in the Kingdom and next door in Yemen…………. Much more disturbing to the royals would be protests in Sunni parts of the Kingdom. These might start in the so-called Koran belt north of the capital where dissent is endemic or in the neglected Asir province on the Yemeni border. Once they start they could snowball and reach the major cities of the Hejaz………………”

Reform will not do it in the Arabian Peninsula. There is no such thing as a “political” reform in an absolute tribal monarchy that is also a theocracy. Nor can meaningful “reform” happen. When you have thousands of princes living in a certain style by effectively looting the wealth of the country, it is nearly impossible to get them to give it up for “reform”.
Saudi Arabia has the biggest and most generous entitlement program in the world, but it is welfare for the Al Saud princes and their retainers. (I must add that it is not for all princes, just for a few thousand of them, the ones that matter. I was told by a source that there are some ‘distant’ princes who are “middle class”). No serious attempt at reform and accountability is possible under the Al Saud system. For the princes, accountability and freedom of speech would kill the Golden Goose. Any monarch or potentate that tries serious reform will face a ‘palace revolution of princes’. Can you ask the Forty Thieves to give up the cave and its treasures to Ali Baba? Besides, they are not only “forty” thieves, they are thousands of thieves and hence it is impossible to get a consensus.
There can and will be some cosmetic reforms. Women will be, they are, used as a substitute for real change. Women appointed to the appointed Shoura Council. Women allowed to drive within certain areas. Limits will be put on a girl’s marriage age (I am guessing 12 or 13 will be the best limit they can do, for historical reasons). These will be cheered in the West as “reforms” while the princes monopolize the politics, such as they are, and continue to rob the resources (oil and land) of the people.
I have opined (succinctly and insightfully, I might add) in the recent past on the prospects for a Saudi “revolution”. Some of my more recent posts on this topic are linked here, both for my archival purposes and for your dubious reading pleasure:

The Saudi Uprisings: Shi’a Opposition, Wahhabi Opposition, Lost Liberals

Gangs of Arabia: Oil Fiefdoms and Turf Wars, Ivanhoe and Isaac of Qatif

Saudi Legs and Bellies: Roots of Instability, the Coming Age of Warlord Princes

The Coming Brawl for Saudi Succession: a Kingdom of Principalities

Saudi Arabia: the Most Ignored Arab Uprising

Lion of Sunnis, King of Falafel, Pious Prince of Baba Ghannouj

Who is Running Saudi Arabia: Retainers or a Cabal of Desperate Housewives?

Saudi Mufti Diagnoses Arab Uprisings: Sectarian Fitna, Sinful Anarchy, Ali and the Umayyads

PR Nation: Saudi King Appoints Women to Advisory Council

Holy Greed: Paris Hilton Does Mecca, Takes Over Prophet Mohammed’s Childhood Home

A Saudi Timeline for Arab Spring: Omitting Bahrain and Qatif and Hijaz and Nejd

Impact of Lower Oil Prices on Gulf Potentates, Gross Princely Product

Gulf Poverty: Ali Baba and the Potentates, Shameless Hungry Saudi Kingdom of Arabia

The Mufti as Theoretician of Arab Uprisings and Activist of Private Lives

A Saudi Al-Basoos War on Twitter, Mujtahidd and the Royal Court

Saudi Activist Goes Mad, Claims All Princes Want Democracy, Wants Future King Tried

Battle of Saudi Succession Heats Up, Rectal Prince Promoted

Cheers
mhg

[email protected]


Iran and the West: Three Elections that may Determine War or Peace, Likud Nuts on a Persian Fire………….

   


    Follow ArabiaDeserta on Twitter                          
                                Neck of the woods

“The question of an attack on Iran has become the subject of intense debate over the past few months. What is puzzling about this debate is that it has not centered on Iran’s nuclear program or whether Iranians seek to obtain a nuclear bomb, but rather on whether Israel or the US (or both) will attack Iran to prevent this. The re-election of Barack Obama to a second term is important, yet the situation vis-à-vis Iran and Israel has not changed significantly. Iran still faces harsh sanctions and its economy is on the brink of collapse; nevertheless, its nuclear program continues to advance unchecked and the regime does not show signs of weakening its grip on power. Likewise, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faces elections in January 2013, but is likely to win a resounding victory; Iranians will also go to the polls in 2013 to elect a new president and Majlis (parliament). The outcome of these elections will neither change the overall threat Iran’s nuclear program poses to Israel nor the military threat Israel poses to Iran. Caught between the risk of an Israeli attack on Iran or an Iranian attack against Israel is the United States, desperately trying to avoid the outbreak of an Iranian–Israeli war, the consequences of which are unpredictable…………………”

Israeli politicians sometimes go to war before elections. They did it in Gaza two years ago. Mr. Netanyahu must be tempted to drag the United States into another Middle East war, but he will hesitate. He knows the USA will intervene to help his country if its war on Iran fails, which it almost certainly will. But Mr. Obama owes Netanyahu nothing: he gambled on the American right winning the elections. Obama just may let Bibi’s nuts roast a little on the Persian fire before intervening either to join him or to stop the madness. Besides, American and Israeli interests don’t always coincide, in spite of the election year political rhetoric. And nobody knows for certain the exact consequences of an attack on Iran on Western interests and economies.
The American elections are done, with the next round coming in 2014 (Democrats will most likely regain control of the Congress). Iran will hold two separate elections in 2013: parliamentary and presidential. Israel seems heading toward new elections soon. It is a safe bet that the Israeli and Iranian elections will not change anything: the right wing will win in both countries. Especially in Iran if the reformists continue to be persecuted and their followers demoralized. Israeli elections are somewhat less predictable: they are now between the right wing AND the extreme right wing.
Then there are the Saudi and Qatari elections: it is not clear who will win the positions of King and Emir. I think I was just kidding………..

Cheers
mhg

[email protected]


From America to France to the Middle East: Active Generals and Risky Sex, Catfights and the Federal Religious Police …….………

   


    Follow ArabiaDeserta on Twitter                          
                                Neck of the woods

“The FBI is making a new push to determine how a woman who had an affair with retired Gen. David H. Petraeus when he was CIA director obtained classified files, part of an expanding series of investigations in a scandal that also threatens the career of the United States’ top military commander in Afghanistan. Senior law enforcement officials said that a late-night seizure on Monday of boxes of material from the North Carolina home of Paula Broadwell, a Petraeus biographer whose affair with him led to his resignation last week, marks a renewed focus by investigators on sensitive material found in her possession. “The issue of national security is still on the table,” one U.S. law enforcement official said. Both Petraeus and Broadwell have denied to investigators that he was the source of any classified information…………….”

The Petraeus media reports highlight the cultural differences between various parts of the world. Besides all the strange FBI investigations of a private affair and the house raids (at least one so far), there the broader issues. You’d think the FBI are the American equivalent of the Saudi Commission for the Propagation of Vice (the Religious Police,) the way they have undertaken to dismantle not only the professional lives but also the private lives of the people involved. All for being involved in a relationship that is not against the law. So let’s compare:


  • USA. Freedom of consensual liaisons between adult humans is guaranteed. But the remnants of that old Puritan Ethnic are hard to shake off. The shadow of John Winthrop hangs over many hooked up couples, whether they were in the back of a car in the old days or in a motel or a hotel, or at someone’s home. Americans concede that ‘it’ is part of life, even most Republicans concede that, but it is wise not to get caught doing it. If an aggrieved partner or rival doesn’t bloody you, then there is the brutal schadenfreude, which can and does ruin the ‘afterglow’. Then there is General Allen, who exchanged emails with some other chick. He called her ‘sweetheart’ and the Religious Police apparently interpreted that as tantamount to consensual sex. Shouldn’t these guys be catching terrorists, real or created or encouraged, rather than worry about emails and bedrooms? Then there are the and drug lords and traffickers , etc., etc.
  • France. Sex is a red line in France, even if it often becomes public. It is not haram to have sex before, during, after, inside, outside, and around marriage. It is haram to meddle in it, ban it, moralize about it, or use it in politics. A general can have all the mistresses he wants, all the mistresses who are willing to seduce him, all who accept his “attentions”, all that he can afford, as long as he performs well in the field (field of battle or whatever it is French generals are supposed to do at the office). That is part of French-ness: the French Tea Party and the French Salafis would insist on it. French Evangelicals would insist on it. Even Marine Le Pen would insist on it.
  • Britain. The Brits get really kinky and off the “beaten track” in their sex scandals of high officials. Quite interesting for a people known (perhaps mistakenly) for eschewing public sex. The mildest scandal involves at least hookers (i.e. prostitutes) and progresses to foreign spies, Russians, Chinese, Abominable Snowmen, and it degenerates and gets worse (or is it considered “better” over there). 
  • Middle East. Oh, never mind. Forget about it. In some ways we are more advanced: we have institutionalized it all. You can get thrown in prison or flogged publicly for being alone with a woman in a car or at the beach or even at a cafe in some countries. Yet a General Prince Bin Technocrat Al-Kleptocrat can lead his ‘private’ life as he pleases without, er, interruption. So can a Field Marshal Shaikh Bin Kleptocrat Al-Technocrat. But we also have our public solutions to the natural order of things. Polygamy, temporary marriages, part-time marriages, sex-only no-cohabitation no-responsibility marriages, and other creative “halal”, “kosher” if you prefer, sexual arrangements that take care of it all. We are, after all, more moral and holier than thou (that means you heathens).


Cheers
mhg

[email protected]


Hollande Triggers Syrian Retaliation: From the Gulf to Paris to Kentucky…………..

   


    Follow ArabiaDeserta on Twitter                          
                                Neck of the woods



Media report that French President has decided today to “elect” the new Syrian National Coalition as the sole representative of the Syrian people. The French president is also reported to have recognized the Al-Saud clan as the sole representatives of the “Saudi” people, and the Al-Khalifa clan as the sole representative of the Bahrain people, and Saad Hariri as the sole representative of all the Lebanese people. 
The Al-Assad regime for its part, in retaliation, has decided to recognize Nicolas Sarkozy and Carla Bruni as the sole representatives of the French people. The Syrian regime has also threatened that if the Obama administration recognizes the new Syrian National Coalition as the sole representative of the Syrian people, Damascus will retaliate accordingly. The Syrians will announce that Senator Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky), Elaine Chow, and Newt Gingrich (WTF-Georgia) are recognized as the sole representatives of the true American people.
Cheers

mhg

[email protected]


Syria: New Ineffectual Coalition, Little Arab Napoleons with Shadow Clerics …………..

   


    Follow ArabiaDeserta on Twitter                          
                                Neck of the woods

“Until now, concerted action on Syria has been thwarted by divisions within the opposition, as well as by big power rivalries and a regional divide between Sunni Muslim foes of Assad and his Shi’ite allies in Iran and Lebanon. Cajoled by Qatar and the United States, the ineffectual Syrian National Council, previously the main opposition body based abroad, agreed to join a wider coalition on Sunday. “What happened in Doha is a step forward,” Jean-Yves Le Drian told reporters in Paris. “It is still not sufficient to constitute a provisional government that can be recognised internationally. But it’s on the right track.” Britain’s foreign minister, William Hague, also said more needed to be done to rally support inside the country before London would recognise the coalition led by AlKhatib as the rightful government of Syria. “It is a very important milestone,” Hague told reporters at the meeting of Arab and European  ministers at the Arab League………………….”

Western powers gave lukewarm encouragement to yet another alleged representative body of the “Syrian people”. That was wise. This new body, Syrian National Coalition, confirms the Islamist take-over of Syria‘s exile opposition even as it claims to be seeking to broaden its appeal. That is all fine and dandy. This new body, like the old body, will get a lot of money and diplomatic support from our freedom-loving potentates of the Gulf GCC. They will get to “mobilize” media and exiled politicians and try to get NATO to liberate Syria in the way it liberated Iraq in 2003. But this still does not make the Syrian uprising a “liberation” movement. Successful liberation movements are unified: this cannot be said of Syria.

Clearly the gangs and bands of the so-called Free Syrian Army (FSA) are not going to coordinate with or take orders from this exile ”Coalition” or its “Council” part. They will continue to do what they do on the ground: attacking regime forces, kidnapping people they suspect and people they don’t like, slitting throats and beheading and doing what they have been doing. They have their own shadowy sources of money and weapons and volunteers.

Once

broken away from the Al-Assad grip, every Syrian captain or major or colonel thinks of himself an a Napoleon, before Waterloo. Before this civil war is over, every FSA captain or major or colonel will have a Muslim cleric shadowing him. Some already have their clerical shadows who apply the new “law” of the land according to their own unique interpretation of the Holy Book and Hadith.
As I wrote last month: the old tolerant secular Syria is no more.


Cheers
mhg

[email protected]