twitter facebook donate

News Release Archive - War: Info, Analysis, Policy Options

Kerry’s Judgement Questioned Because of Pro-War Vote

December 21, 2012

The New York Times is reporting: “President Obama plans to nominate Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts as secretary of state, a senior administration official said. He would succeed Hillary Rodham Clinton and become the first member of Mr. Obama’s second-term national security team.”

STEPHEN ZUNES [email]
Professor of politics and chair of Middle Eastern Studies at the University of San Francisco, Zunes said today: “John Kerry’s attacks on the International Court of Justice, his defense of Israeli occupation policies and human rights violations, and his support for the U.S. invasion of Iraq raise serious questions about his commitment to international law and treaty obligations. His false claims of Iraqi ‘weapons of mass destruction’ and his repeated denial of human rights abuses by allied government well-documented by reputable monitoring groups raise serious questions about his credibility. …

“Kerry’s vote to authorize the invasion of Iraq was not simply a matter of poor judgment. It demonstrated a dismissive attitude toward fundamental principles of international law, and disdain for the United Nations Charter and international treaties which prohibit aggressive war. Kerry revealed a willingness to either fabricate a non-existent threat or naively believe transparently false and manipulated intelligence claiming such a threat existed, ignoring a plethora of evidence from weapons inspectors and independent arms control analysts who said that Iraq had already achieved at least qualitative disarmament.” Zunes wrote the piece: “While Criticizing Implementation, Kerry Endorses Bush’s Unilateralist Agenda.”

SAM HUSSEINI [email]
Communications director for the Institute for Public Accuracy, Husseini said today: “Kerry’s reported nomination continues a pattern: Barack Obama, who originally got the Democratic nomination in 2008 based largely on his having given a speech critical of the Iraq invasion before it took place (though he didn’t have to vote on it) has without fail appointed individuals to top foreign policy positions who voted for or otherwise backed the invasion. This includes Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice, Robert Gates as well as Chuck Hagel, who is reportedly under consideration to head up the Pentagon. There were 23 senators and 133 representatives who voted against giving Bush authorization. Diplomats who resigned in protest against the invasion, such as Ann Wright, have remained outside of government — and critical of it.”

“Particularly noteworthy are the contortions individuals like Kerry have gone through. For example, when I questioned him in 2011 about voting to authorize the Iraq war, he said: ‘I didn’t vote for the Iraq war. I voted to give the president authority that he misused and abused. And from the moment he used it, I opposed that.’ [Video at WashingtonStakeout] However, a look at the record shows that after the Iraq invasion, Kerry did the opposite, outflanking Bush’s war stance in 2003: ‘I fear that in the run-up to the 2004 election the administration is considering what is tantamount to a cut-and-run strategy.’”

Background — John Kerry: “Why is Saddam Hussein attempting to develop nuclear weapons when most nations don’t even try? … According to intelligence, Iraq has chemical and biological weapons … Iraq is developing unmanned aerial vehicles capable of delivering chemical and biological warfare agents. …” (Oct. 9, 2002) See 2008 IPA news release: “Anti-War Candidate, Pro-War Cabinet?“

Filed Under:

Congo: 5 Million Dead; Calls for Changing U.S. Policy

December 18, 2012

On Wednesday, the Armed Services Committee will have a hearing on the current situation in the Congo.

In a piece titled “The World’s Worst War,” The New York Times reported on Sunday: “Congo has become … one of the bloodiest conflicts since World War II, with more than five million dead. It seems incomprehensible that the biggest country in sub-Saharan Africa and on paper one of the richest, teeming with copper, diamonds and gold, vast farmlands of spectacular fertility and enough hydropower to light up the continent, is now one of the poorest, most hopeless nations on earth.”

MAURICE CARNEY [email]
Executive director of Friends of the Congo, Carney said today: “It is past time that the United States cease its support of strongmen in Africa, particularly Paul Kagame of Rwanda and Yoweri Museveni of Uganda whose repeated invasions and support of proxy rebel militia inside Congo over the past 16 years has resulted in the death of millions of Congolese.”

DAVID WILEY [email]
 Wiley is professor of sociology at Michigan State University and chairperson of the militarization task force for the Association of Concerned Africa Scholars, which has just released a petition signed by over 200 Africa specialists calling on President Obama to:

- “Support a UN Security Council resolution requiring Rwanda and Uganda to immediately withdraw any support to the M23 armed group. …

- “Press the Congolese government to stop violations being committed by the Congolese army as well as entering into alliances with armed groups and fully implement Public Law 109-456: The DRC Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act of 2006 [This is a law that then Sen. Obama introduced and was signed in 2006]. …”

Filed Under:

“Syria is Being Destroyed”

December 13, 2012

CHARLES GLASS[email]
Recently in Damascus and Aleppo, the country’s largest city, Glass is author of the book on Syria, “Tribes With Flags.” He was ABC News Chief Middle East correspondent and recently wrote the piece “Aleppo: How Syria Is Being Destroyed,” which states: “I wanted to visit the souks in the morning, but my friend told me that continued fighting there made it impossible. Who burned the souks a few weeks earlier? ‘That was the Free Syrian Army,’ my friend said. ‘We are caught between two bad powers. As you know, I don’t like the dictatorship. But these people are showing themselves as worse.’ …

“Aleppo is under siege. Transporting heating oil for people to survive the winter has become a dangerous task. The price of mazout, the cheap fuel that heats most Aleppo homes, is now double what it is in Damascus, when people can find it. In Aleppo’s center, where the Syrian army maintains control with fortified positions, roadblocks, and regular patrols, the only commodity that seems to arrive without hindrance is food. Plentiful produce from local farms is on display on the open sidewalks that have replaced the burned-out fruit and vegetable stalls in the old souks.

“The government’s brutal suppression of the rebels, especially the aerial bombardment of densely populated urban areas, has pushed some regime supporters into the arms of the opposition. One young woman, who told me in April that she loved Bashar al-Assad, said that she wept when she saw his air force bombing Aleppo. A physician, whose anti-regime views were familiar to me, said, ‘The majority of the Syrian people don’t want Bashar al-Assad because of what happened in the last ten years. We want change, but not like this.’ This is a topsy-turvy war in which loyalties and animosities can no longer be predicted.”

Glass recently appeared on Democracy Now! His past pieces on Syria include “Syria’s Many New Friends are a Self-Interested Bunch.”

See from FAIR: “This Time, Trust Anonymous WMD Claims — They’ve Got ‘Specific Intelligence’” about recent media and government claims about the Syrian government preparing to use chemical weapons.

Filed Under:

Protests Against Betrayal of “Nobel’s Will”

December 10, 2012
Reuters reports today: “Around a thousand members of left-wing and human rights groups marched in Oslo on Sunday to protest against the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to the European Union. … Past prize winners Desmond Tutu, Adolfo Perez Esquivel and Mairead Maguire have also said the EU does not deserve the award.”

The three Peace Prize recipients recently wrote: “The European Union, announced by the Norwegian Nobel Committee as the winner of the peace prize for 2012, clearly is not one of ‘the champions of peace’ Alfred Nobel had in mind when he described the purpose in his will. We ask the Board of the Foundation to clarify that it cannot and will not pay the prize from its funds. …The purpose of the peace prize is clarified by recent research. In 2008 Fredrik S. Heffermehl, a Norwegian lawyer and author and a former IPB [International Peace Bureau] Vice President, published the first known legal study of the prize and its purpose. In 2010 he published “The Nobel Peace Prize: What Nobel Really Wanted” (Praeger, 2010), with later updates in Chinese, Finnish and Swedish (Leopard, 2011).” See full text of their letter.

FREDRIK HEFFERMEHL, [email]
Author of ”The Nobel Peace Prize: What Nobel Really Wanted,” Heffermehl said this morning on the program Democracy Now!: “The Prize has come to serve the exact opposite of what it was intended to serve … to support the work for breaking the military tradition and creating global peace or demilitarized global peace order. It’s a very radical idea.”
Heffermehl said today: “A summit of the European Union that today receives a prize that pretends to serve Alfred Nobel´s peace plan, will this coming Friday adopt a military cooperation program that spits in the face of the peace by disarmament ideas Nobel wished to support by his prize for a global demilitarization of international relations. … The peace movement Nobel wished to support has protested against the prize to the EU and — if the Swedish authorities fail to intervene and stop payment — is considering legal action against the Nobel Foundation in protection of their rights.

“Nobel wished to support the peace movement in political opposition to traditional official military and power politics. In his will Nobel calls the recipients the ‘champions of peace’ (fredsförfäktare, Friedensverfechter) no doubt having in mind the movement working for a demilitarized global peace order (eine entmilitarisierte ‘Völkerverbrüderung’).”

See full text of Nobel’s will, which calls for the Peace Prize to be awarded to those who have done the most “…for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.”
Filed Under:

Israel Hitting Palestinian Infrastructure

November 20, 2012

AP reports that Israeli “missiles also knocked out five electricity transformers, plunging more than 400,000 people in southern Gaza into darkness, according to the Gaza electricity distribution company.”

MARK ZEITOUN, m.zeitoun at uea.ac.uk, www.uea.ac.uk/dev/People/Academic/zeitoun
Zeitoun is author of “Power and Water in the Middle East: The Hidden Politics of the Palestinian-Israeli Water Conflict.” He is at the School of International Development at the University of East Anglia in the UK.

DANNY MULLER, fugedaboutit at gmail, http://www.mecaforpeace.org
Muller focuses on disaster management and response in the Middle East and Haiti. He was in Gaza in the summer of 2012 and is returning in the coming weeks to coordinate humanitarian aid with the Middle East Children’s Alliance.

He said today: “It’s been reported Israeli air attacks knocked out five electricity transformers, cutting off power to more than 400,000 people. These same people have been living under siege and were only receiving four hours a day of electricity since Israel bombed the electrical infrastructure during Operation Cast Lead. Civil engineers in Gaza tell me that with nonstop attacks it’s very difficult to estimate the damages, and they can only respond to emergencies in coordination with The Red Cross to close major leakages of broken pipes and to replace transformers — hundreds of distribution lines were broken (water, sewage, electricity), as well as water wells, transformers and roads.

“This is collective punishment. These air strikes are directly targeting the civilian population and are war crimes. The United States is culpable for this through its blind support for Israel and its annual $3 billion in aid. The Jerusalem Post recently reported the Israeli army’s chief of staff stating that in the past three years, ‘U.S. taxpayers have contributed more to the Israeli defense budget than Israeli taxpayers.’ This is America’s war against children as much as it is Israel’s.”

See in the Israeli papaer Haaretz “Gaza’s 96 dead include farmers, water sellers and the girl next door.” http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/gaza-s-96-dead-include-farmers-water-sellers-and-the-girl-next-door.premium-1.479110

Filed Under:

Secret Pentagon Docs Reveal Pre-War Plans to Get Big Oil into Iraq

July 17, 2012

Bloomberg reports: “Iraq’s crude production overtook Iran’s last month for the first time in more than two decades… The rising rate of Iraqi production comes as foreign investors such as ExxonMobil Corp. and BP are developing new fields and reworking older deposits.”

GREG MUTTITT, dlee at thenewpress.com
Currently touring the U.S., Muttitt (based in London) is author of the just-released Fuel on the Fire: Oil and Politics in Occupied Iraq. He said today: “Government officials meeting in the Pentagon before the Iraq war planned to use the U.S. occupation to open the country to Big Oil. The documents, marked SECRET/NOFORN, were obtained under the Freedom of Information Act and reveal for the first time the role of the Energy Infrastructure Planning Group, which was established in 2002 by Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith to plan how to run the Iraqi oil industry under the Coalition Provisional Authority.

“In a November 2002 presentation to the Deputies Committee of the National Security Council, EIPG proposed not to repair war damage to oil infrastructure, as doing so ‘could discourage private sector involvement” in rebuilding the industry. That proposal however was rejected, in order to ‘minimize disruptions and promote confidence and stability in world markets’ and to maximize revenues to finance the administration of Iraq.

“In January 2003, EIPG instead proposed a new strategy under which initial repairs — carried out by Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown & Root — would be followed by long-term contracts with multinational companies to expand Iraqi oil production to five million barrels per day, awarded by the U.S. occupation authority. Although noting that many believed such decisions should be left to a future Iraqi government, EIPG argued that this expansion held advantages including putting ‘long-term downward pressure on [the oil] price’ and forcing ‘questions about Iraq’s future relations with OPEC.’ With private companies operating in Iraq since 2010, those questions have already begun to surface: last month analysts noted that Iraq’s rising production could constrain OPEC’s ability to influence oil prices.

“At the same time as making these proposals, EIPG recommended the government state publicly that ‘We will act, through our administration, so as not to prejudice Iraq’s future decisions regarding its oil development policies; its relations with international organizations; [or] the future ownership structure of its oil industry’ — a public position directly contrary to the substantive policy it proposed.

“These documents provide conclusive proof that control of Iraq oil was a critical consideration at the highest levels of the U.S. government while it was planning the Iraq war. There was little regard for the welfare of Iraqis, but the welfare of companies like ExxonMobil was central to the administration’s thinking. It is particularly troubling that the EIPG recommended the government mislead the public on its oil plans.

“The British government repeatedly met BP and Shell in late 2002, to discuss how to help them achieve their aims in post-Saddam Iraq. BP said it was ‘desperate to get in there;’ the Trade Minister said she believed that if Britain participated in the war its companies should get a share of the spoils. The U.S. government in 2006 hired a lawyer to draft a new Iraqi law to reverse the country’s oil nationalization of the 1970s. Getting this oil law passed became the Bush administration’s top priority in 2007, and was closely tied to the ‘surge’ strategy. After BP won a contract to run Iraq’s largest oilfield in 2009, following an apparently transparent process, its terms were renegotiated in secret, such that the Iraqi government would take the major risks and BP’s profits be guaranteed. In spite of all these pressures, Iraqi civil society groups achieved surprising successes in thwarting the U.S. oil plans through popular campaigns, unreported in the West.”

Muttitt was interviewed Monday on Democracy Now.

Filed Under: , Tagged With: Greg Muttitt, Iraq, Middle East, oil,

* Syria * Supreme Court and “Gutted Habeas Corpus”

June 12, 2012

ELAINE HAGOPIAN, echagop at verizon.net
Hagopian is a Syrian-American sociologist, a professor emeritus of sociology at Simmons College in Boston and political interviewer for Arabic Hour TV. She said today: “The situation in Syria has intensified. The regime is determined to defeat the militarized opposition and the fractured and incoherent militarized opposition, which is trying to develop a united strategy, is determined to bring down the regime. Both parties refuse to accept a cease fire as part of the Annan plan, blaming each other for its failure. Each blames the other for the series of massacres that have taken place. But there are conflicting reports on these, and the UN monitors have confirmed the massacres, but have not stated who committed them. They did identify artillery shells that were fired in the area by the regime, but did not connect the up close murders of civilians to the regime. A leading German daily, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ), reports that the rebels did the killing, and the victims were Alawites. Mainstream media report that the Shabiha (civilian Alawite mafia) did it on behalf of the regime. Who to believe? Two things are clear, both the regime and the militarized opposition lie, and both commit atrocities. In the meantime, the original, non-violent reform movement, now calling for Assad to step down as well, has been overshadowed by the violent exchanges going on between the regime and the militarized opposition. As Syria deteriorates and feels the pressures of the economic sanctions, the violence escalates. Russia and the U.S. suggest different ‘solutions,’ but have not found common ground to move toward halting the violence…”

ANDY WORTHINGTON, andy at andyworthington.co.uk
The New York Times reports: “The Supreme Court on Monday, June 11, refused to hear appeals from seven men contesting their imprisonment at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, passing up an opportunity to clarify its last Guantanamo decision, in 2008.”

Worthington is author of The Guantánamo Files: The Stories of the 774 Detainees in America’s Illegal Prison. He is co-director of the film “Outside the Law: Stories from Guantanamo.”

He said today: “The Supreme Court’s refusal to rebuke the right-wing judges of the D.C. Circuit Court, who have gutted habeas corpus of all meaning, has led to a situation in which, although 87 of the remaining 169 prisoners at Guantanamo have been cleared for release — some as long ago as 2004 — it is probable that none of them will ever be released, as they have been failed by every branch of the U.S. government.” Worthington was on Democracy Now this morning.

Filed Under: Tagged With: Andy Worthington, Arab Spring, civil liberties, Elaine Hagopian, Guantánamo, Middle East, Syria,

U.S. Supporting Rwanda as it Destabilizes the Congo — Again

June 11, 2012

BBC is reporting “The UN says it has evidence that a rebellion in the Democratic Republic of Congo is being fueled by recruits and support from neighboring Rwanda.” Human Rights Watch reports that “Rwandan army officials have provided weapons, ammunition, and an estimated 200 to 300 recruits to support Ntaganda’s mutiny in Rutshuru territory, eastern Congo.” A leading Congolese newspaper, Le Potentiel notes “The mutiny underway in the eastern DRC receives support in manpower and logistics from Rwanda, in the face of astonishing passivity from the international community (U.S., Britain, EU, etc.).”

JACQUES BAHATI, bahati at afjn.org
Bahati, a policy analyst at the Africa Faith and Justice Network says “DRC has been the playground of Rwanda since 1996 and this will never change if serious reforms are not made. On a long list of problems needing urgent solutions, DRC must address corruption in its leadership, army reform and make a priority the grievances of all warring parties.”

EMIRA WOODS, emira at ips-dc.org
Woods, co-director of Foreign Policy In Focus at the Institute for Policy Studies, said today: “Rwanda’s role in destabilizing the Congo has contributed to the millions who have perished as result of the conflict since 1996 and the 100,000 displaced persons since March of this year. It is time that the United States, which provides significant funding to the Rwandan government, uses its leverage to hold Rwanda accountable for its destructive actions in the Congo.”

MAURICE CARNEY, info at friendsofthecongo.org
Carney, executive director of Friends of the Congo, said today: “The Rwandan government has acted as a major destabilizing force in the east of the Congo since 1996. However, as a staunch ally of the United States and the United Kingdom, the Rwandan government has benefited tremendously from the diplomatic cover and protection that accompanies its relationship with such powerful nations.”

Filed Under: Tagged With: Africa, Congo, Emira Woods, Jacques Bahati, Maurice Carney, Rwanda,

* Syria * Ireland Referendum * Charles Taylor Conviction

May 31, 2012

CHARLES GLASS, [in London, 5 hours ahead of U.S. ET] charlesmglassmail2003 at yahoo.com
A noted journalist, Glass was ABC News Chief Middle East correspondent and just wrote the piece “Syria: The Citadel & the War” for the New York Review of Books.

Yesterday, he was featured on Democracy Now.

IARA LEE, iaralee at culturesofresistance.org
A filmmaker, Lee is currently in post-production on her new documentary, “The Suffering Grasses,” which was filmed at the Syria-Turkey border. She recently wrote the piece “The Only True Revolution in Syria Is Nonviolent.”

ROGER COLE, pana at eircom.net, Skype: silchester52,
AP is reporting: “Irish voters were deciding Thursday whether their government can ratify the European Union’s fiscal treaty.”

A spokesperson for the Campaign for a Social Europe, Cole said today: “Legally, Ireland has its own constitution that ensures the Irish people are sovereign, as a consequence of our war of independence — unlike the rest of Europe — so we have a referendum about matters regarding the European Union. The issue is that this referendum is being pushed by the current government based on fear. The vast majority of people in Ireland don’t like how the EU is progressing — it’s dominated by German and French bankers. The previous Irish government took on the debt of the Irish banks that became indebted to the big German and French banks and the Irish people are getting crucified for this, having to pay back money they didn’t benefit from — with interest. So a ‘Yes’ on the referendum is being pushed by fear — the ‘Yes’ side states if Ireland says ‘No,’ then the situation could spiral out of control like in Greece. But a ‘Yes’ vote does not insure stability either. And countries that have defaulted after a tough few years, like Argentina and Iceland, have done well.”

BENJAMIN DAVIS, ben.davis at utoledo.edu
Associate professor of law at the University of Toledo College of Law, Davis said today: “I was born in 1955 in Liberia where my parents were stationed for the U.S. State Department. Liberia is close to my family and my heart. With the conviction and sentencing of Charles Taylor, another former head of state is held accountable at the international level for his depredations and I welcome that result. Charles Taylor is quoted as comparing his treatment with that of former President George Bush and questions whether there is a double standard. For years now, people in the U.S. of goodwill have raised the issue of criminal prosecution in federal and state courts, foreign courts, and international tribunals of former President Bush and others for the torture and war on false pretenses in Iraq. We are insisting that there not be a double standard. …

There is no structural flaw in the Constitution but a failure of character of our leaders and intelligentsia who loathe even the idea of criminal accountability for high-level governmental officials.”

See: “Taylor: Prosecute George Bush, Too.“

Filed Under: , Tagged With: Africa, Arab Spring, Benjamin Davis, Charles Glass, Charles Taylor, Charles Taylor War Crimes, Europe, Iara Lee, Ireland, Liberia, Roger Cole, Syria, UN Convicts Charles Taylor,

U.S. “Escalating Military Presence in Honduras”

May 23, 2012


Associated Press is reporting: “Villagers say the drug bust that left four passengers of a riverboat dead after helicopters mistakenly fired on civilians continued into the predawn hours when commandos, including some they think were Americans, raided their town. … Jose Ruiz, a spokesman for the U.S. Southern Command, which oversees the U.S. military in Honduras, said there were no American troops there. ‘We can confirm there were no U.S. military personnel or U.S. military assets involved in any way. Our joint task force occasionally supports DEA, but they had no personnel or equipment in that particular mission,” Ruiz said. …

“Several villagers, however, told The Associated Press that some of the masked agents were gringos. ‘They spoke in English among themselves and on the radios,’ said Zavala, whose husband was held at gunpoint. ‘They had brought a computer and they put in the names of everyone and sought identification for everyone.’”

DANA FRANK, danafrank at ucsc.edu
Available for a limited number of interviews with larger media outlets, Frank is professor of history at the University of California, Santa Cruz. She is the author of several books, including “Bananeras: Women Transforming the Banana Unions of Latin America,” which examines the banana workers’ unions of Honduras. She writes in the cover article in The Nation this week: “In the early hours of the morning on May 11, a group of indigenous people traveling by canoe on a river in the northeast Mosquitia region of Honduras came under helicopter fire. When the shooting was over, at least four persons lay dead, including, by some accounts, two pregnant women. In Honduras, such grisly violence is no longer out of the ordinary. But what this incident threw into stark relief was the powerful role the United States is playing in a Honduran war.

“U.S. officials maintain that the Drug Enforcement Administration commandos on board the helicopters did not fire their weapons that morning; Honduran policemen pulled the triggers. But no one disputes that U.S. forces were heavily involved in the raid, and that the helicopters were owned by the U.S. State Department.

“The United States has, in fact, been quietly escalating its military presence in Honduras, pouring police and military funding into the regime of President Porfirio Lobo in the name of fighting drugs. The DEA is using counterinsurgency methods developed in Iraq against drug traffickers in Honduras, deploying squads of commandos with U.S. military Special Forces backgrounds to work closely with the Honduran police and military. The U.S. ambassador to Honduras, Lisa Kubiske, recently said, ‘We have an opportunity now, because the military is no longer at war in Iraq. Using the military funding that won’t be spent, we should be able to have resources to be able to work here.’”

ALEX MAIN, via Dan Beeton, beeton at cepr.net
Senior associate for international policy at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, Main said today: “The U.S. involvement in the shooting incident earlier this month on Honduras’ Patuca River, in which pregnant women and others were killed, and the subsequent commando raid on people’s homes, raises a number of troubling questions. Among these are, what are the guidelines under which U.S. DEA and other forces are operating? What kind of violence is permitted in going after drug traffickers? And is it applicable to unarmed, or just armed traffickers? And what constitutes a drug trafficker? What are the parameters for using deadly force in populated areas?

“It is also disturbing that the U.S. State Department does not appear to know whether the Leahy law, which cuts off U.S. police and military assistance to known human rights abusers, is even being applied in Honduras. If there were evidence that it is, we would probably know about it. But the fact is that the U.S. government is ramping up aid to a police force that murders civilians with impunity, and that according to credible high-level officials is tainted by corruption and drug-trafficking itself.”

See Los Angeles Times editorial: “In Honduras, U.S. should tread lightly: Military assistance to Honduras may exacerbate its drug problems rather than helping solve them.”

Filed Under: Tagged With: Alex Main, Dana Frank, Latin America, military,
« Older Posts