Most of the US media are still caught up in euphoria over the proposed Obama strategy on Afghanistan and Pakistan, concentrating on the headlines of expanded US military presence, aid, and civilian participation instead of considering how local groups and communities will responded to an increased American intervention.
Once again, Gareth Porter — who chronicled the internal Obama Administration debates over the strategy — offers a different perspective. Writing for Inter Press Service, He lays out the concerns of those who think that expanded US strikes on northwest Pakistan will enhance, rather than diminish, the position of Al Qa’eda and local insurgents.
Some Strategists Cast Doubt on Afghan War Rationale
The argument for deeper U.S. military commitment to the Afghan War invoked by President Barack Obama in his first major policy statement on Afghanistan and Pakistan Friday – that al Qaeda must be denied a safe haven in Afghanistan – has been not been subjected to public debate in Washington. Read the rest of this entry »
Two days after the withdrawal of the nomination of Charles Freeman as head of the National Intelligence Council, primarily because of his views on the Middle East and specifically the Israel-Palestine situation, the unspeakable is being spoken:
One of the sharpest, strongest reactions to the withdrawal of the nomination of Charles Freeman (pictured) as head of the US National Intelligence Council has come from Stephen Walt in his blog on the Foreign Policy website. I generally share his views, but a reader offers further useful critique: “All good points, but a bit polemical. You know how this game works: I don’t think Walt does Freeman any favours by framing the appointment as a victory over Zionists or as a balance to [the appointment of the State Department's Dennis] Ross. It would have been better to explain why Freeman was a worthy choice in the first place with his other experience and ability.”
On Chas Freeman’s withdrawal
STEPHEN WALT
First, for all of you out there who may have questioned whether there was a powerful “Israel lobby,” or who admitted that it existed but didn’t think it had much influence, or who thought that the real problem was some supposedly all-powerful “Saudi lobby,” think again. Read the rest of this entry »
For many people, this story will never be known. They will not have heard of the American diplomat, Charles Freeman, or the National Intelligence Council, which he was nominated to lead. The withdrawal of that nomination yesterday will not make CNN Headline News or the front pages of US newspapers.
Make no mistake, however. As a story of how US foreign policy is limited and re-structured — courtesy of Congress, a network of private groups, and American political culture — it offers an essential lesson. “Israel” continues to set limits on the “acceptable” in US foreign policy. Read the rest of this entry »
The Director of National Intelligence, Dennis Blair (pictured) —- on the same day that the Obama Administration had to withdraw the nomination of Charles Freeman as Chair of the National Intelligence Council — has just set the scene for another political battle in Washington.
The overall situation — and the intelligence community agrees on this — [is] that Iran has not decided to press forward . . . to have a nuclear weapon on top of a ballistic missile. Our current estimate is that the minimum time at which Iran could technically produce the amount of highly enriched uranium for a single weapon is 2010 to 2015.
Blair’s assertion that Israel was envisaging a “worst-case scenario” about Iranian plans for nuclear energy was echoed by the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Lieutenant General Michael Maples, “The Israelis are far more concerned about [the Iranian programme].” Read the rest of this entry »
There is a special irony in having been accused of improper regard for the opinions of foreign governments and societies by a group so clearly intent on enforcing adherence to the policies of a foreign government – in this case, the government of Israel. I believe that the inability of the American public to discuss, or the government to consider, any option for US policies in the Middle East opposed by the ruling faction in Israeli politics has allowed that faction to adopt and sustain policies that ultimately threaten the existence of the state of Israel. It is not permitted for anyone in the United States to say so. This is not just a tragedy for Israelis and their neighbors in the Middle East; it is doing widening damage to the national security of the United States. Read the rest of this entry »
This morning we evaluated the significance of the withdrawal of Charles Freeman’s nomination to head the National Intelligence Council, including the place of Israel in US foreign policy.
Those scouring the Internet to document Freeman’s alleged anti-Israel position have focused on a speech he gave in October 2006 to a conference on co-operation between the US and the Gulf Cooperation Council. To ensure the full context for Freeman’s remark, we reprint the speech in full below. This, however, is the key extract:
Finally, let me allude briefly to the issue of Israel, a country that has yet to be accepted as part of the Middle East and whose inability to find peace with the Palestinians and other Arabs is the driving factor in the region’s radicalization and anti-Americanism. Read the rest of this entry »
Current Obamameter Reading: Cloudy with Signs of Thunder
7:45 p.m. “The Cable” reports that US intelligence analysts from the office of the Director of National Intelligence and the National Intelligence Council will hold a closed/Top Secret/Codeword briefing on Iran for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Thursday afternoon.
5:20 p.m. Complications and possibly worse from Sunday’s provincial elections in Iraq. Tribal leaders in Anbar Province, upset at the apparent dominance of the Sunni religious Iraqi Islamic Party, have claimed widespread fraud and threatened violence if the results are upheld. The head of the Anbar Tribes List warned:
We will set the streets of Ramadi ablaze if the Islamic Party is declared the winners of the election. We will make Anbar a grave for the Islamic Party and its agents. We will start a tribal war against them and those who cooperate with them.
The turnout in parts of Anbar was as low as 25 percent.
5:15 p.m. More trouble in Somalia, only days after the election of a new President. Reports of 16 to 39 dead after a roadside bomb targeting African Union peacekeepers exploded, and the soldiers opened fire in response.
Most of the US media are still caught up in euphoria over the proposed Obama strategy on Afghanistan and Pakistan, concentrating on the headlines of expanded US military presence, aid, and civilian participation instead of considering how local groups and communities will responded to an increased American intervention.
Comments Off 
Two days after the withdrawal of the nomination of Charles Freeman as head of the National Intelligence Council, primarily because of his views on the Middle East and specifically the Israel-Palestine situation, the unspeakable is being spoken:
One of the sharpest, strongest reactions to the withdrawal of the nomination of Charles Freeman (pictured) as head of the US National Intelligence Council has come from Stephen Walt in 
For many people, this story will never be known. They will not have heard of the American diplomat, Charles Freeman, or the National Intelligence Council, which he was nominated to lead. 
The Director of National Intelligence, Dennis Blair (pictured) —- on the same day that the Obama Administration had to withdraw the nomination of Charles Freeman as Chair of the National Intelligence Council — has just set the scene for another political battle in Washington.
There is a special irony in having been accused of improper regard for the opinions of foreign governments and societies by a group so clearly intent on enforcing adherence to the policies of a foreign government – in this case, the government of Israel. I believe that the inability of the American public to discuss, or the government to consider, any option for US policies in the Middle East opposed by the ruling faction in Israeli politics has allowed that faction to adopt and sustain policies that ultimately threaten the existence of the state of Israel. It is not permitted for anyone in the United States to say so. This is not just a tragedy for Israelis and their neighbors in the Middle East; it is doing widening damage to the national security of the United States.
This morning we evaluated the significance of the withdrawal of Charles Freeman’s nomination to head the National Intelligence Council, including the place of Israel in US foreign policy.
Entries (RSS)