Home » Posts tagged 'us foreign policy' (Page 4)

Tag Archives: us foreign policy

Olduvai
Click on image to purchase

Olduvai III: Catacylsm
Click on image to purchase

Post categories

Post Archives by Category

US Still Won’t Confirm Israeli Nukes

July 8, 2015

US Still Won’t Confirm Israeli Nukes

Among the more absurd aspects of U.S. foreign policy is the persistent refusal to confirm that Israel has a nuclear arsenal, even as U.S. officials threaten and even attack other countries for allegedly harboring the intent to build a single bomb, hypocrisy that Sam Husseini dissects.

Retired Gen. (and former CIA Director) David Petraeus — who despite recent scandals is (according to CNN) still advising the White House — was asked at a recent Aspen Institute event about Israel’s nuclear weapons arsenal and replied “I can’t comment.”

This seems to be part of long-standing U.S. and Israeli government policy not to confirm the existence of Israel’s nuclear weapons arsenal. This policy has apparently taken the form of official gag orders on the issue, as Grant F. Smith, director of the Washington, D.C.-based Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy, has noted.

A photograph of a control room at Israel's Dimona nuclear weapons plant in the 1980s. (Photograph taken by nuclear technician Mordechai Vanunu, who was later kidnapped and imprisoned by Israel as punishment for revealing its secret nuclear arsenal.)

It’s particularly absurd that someone like Petraeus, who presumes to engage in tough straight talk and allegedly shows bravery, is incapable of saying that Israel has a nuclear weapons arsenal.

Similarly, Philip Gordon, former special White House assistant on the Middle East and now at the Council on Foreign Relations, was recently asked on C-Span if it “isn’t time for the U.S. to stop officially pretending that it doesn’t know whether Israel has nuclear weapons?”

Gordon replied that there’s not a lot of doubt about the “the existence of a nuclear weapons capability in Israel,” but that a U.S. acknowledgement of that fact would be irrelevant. For instance, he argued that “Iranian nuclear aspiration is driven significantly by their insecurity” resulting from U.S. actions in the region, not Israel’s nuclear weapons. (Transcript below)

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

 

Russia, China and the Battle Against Dollar Hegemony

June 11, 2015

Russia, China and the Battle Against Dollar Hegemony

The Internal Contradictions of US Foreign Policy
The Saker: We hear that the Ukraine will have to declare a default, but that it will probably be a “technical” default as opposed to an official one. Some say that the decision of the Rada to allow Iatseniuk to chose whom to pay is already such a “technical default”. Is there such thing as a “technical default” and, if yes, how would it be different in terms of consequences for the Ukraine for a “regular” default?

Michael Hudson: A default is a default. The attempted euphemism of “technical” default came up with regard to the Greek debt in 2012 at the G8 meetings. Geithner and Obama lobbied the IMF and ECB shamelessly to bail out Greece, simply so that it could pay bondholders, because U.S. banks had issued credit default insurance (CDS) against Greek bonds and were on the hook for a big loss if a default occurred. The ECB suggested euphemizing default as a “voluntary renegotiation,” asking banks and other bondholders to agree to write down the debt.

But according to the international bondholders’ organization – the International Swaps and Derivatives Association (ISDA) – credit defaults can be triggered if a debt restructuring is agreed between “a governmental authority and a sufficient number of holders of such obligation to bind all holders,” making it mandatory. According to the ISDA’s definitions: “The listed events are: reduction in the rate of interest or amount of principal payable (which would include a ‘haircut’); deferral of payment of interest or principal (which would include an extension of maturity of an outstanding obligation); subordination of the obligation; and change in the currency of payment to a currency that is not legal tender in a G7 country or a AAA-rated OECD country.”[1]

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

CIA Director John Brennan Admits U.S. Foreign Policy Could Spur Terrorism

June 7, 2015

CIA Director John Brennan Admits U.S. Foreign Policy Could Spur Terrorism

John Brennan, director of the Central Intelligence Agency, went on “Face the Nation” last Sunday and did something weird: he acknowledged that U.S. foreign policy might sometimes cause terrorism. Of course, he didn’t word it exactly like that, but close enough:

BRENNAN: I think the president has tried to make sure that we’re able to push the envelope when we can to protect this country. But we have to recognize that sometimes our engagement and direct involvement will stimulate and spur additional threats to our national security interests.

This is notable because the people who run our foreign policy usually tell us that terrorists are like zombies, driven by some incomprehensible force to kill and kill and kill until we take them out with a head shot/drone strike. Brennan himself did this five years ago while “answering” questions from the late reporter Helen Thomas about Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the 23-year-old Nigerian man who tried to blow up a Northwest flight over Detroit:

THOMAS: And what is the motivation? We never hear what you find out on why.

BRENNAN: Al Qaeda is an organization that is dedicated to murder and wanton slaughter of innocents …

THOMAS: Why?

BRENDAN: I think this is a — this is a long issue, but al Qaeda is just determined to carry out attacks here against the homeland.

The next year Abdulmutallab explained at his sentencing what had motivated him:

I [attempted] to attack the United States in retaliation for U.S. support of Israel and in retaliation of the killing of innocent and civilian Muslim populations in Palestine, especially in the blockade of Gaza, and in retaliation for the killing of innocent and civilian Muslim populations in Yemen, Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan and beyond, most of them women, children, and noncombatants.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

 

Isolated – China and Russia Demonstrate Closer Relationship with Joint Military Exercises

May 10, 2015

Isolated – China and Russia Demonstrate Closer Relationship with Joint Military Exercises

BEIJING — When a Chinese honor guard joins a military parade in Russia’s capital this weekend, watched by China’s President Xi Jinping, it will mark more than just a symbolic recognition of the two countries’ contributions to the Allied victory in 1945.

China’s participation also reflects an upgrade of its military ties with Russia, including joint naval exercises and a revival of arms purchases, that could complicate U.S.-led efforts to counter both nations’ expanding military activities, analysts and diplomats say.

They’ve basically come to a consensus that despite their differences over some national interests, they really face the same common enemy,” said Gilbert Rozman, an expert on China-Russia relations at Princeton University.

– From the Wall Street Journal article: China Parades Closer Ties in Moscow

One of the key themes here at Liberty Blitzkrieg has been the carelessness and ineptitude of those in charge of crafting U.S. foreign policy. I’m not naive, and I fully understand that the world is a dangerous place. Just as I believe individuals should have the right to defend themselves and their families with the right to bear arms, I also understand the importance of strong national defense.

The problem with current U.S. foreign policy is that it is not defensive in nature. Rather, all indications are that the U.S. government is acting offensively; primarily driven by ego and the will to dominate. Much of the world has come to see the U.S. not as a powerful partner, but as a narcissistic master. What American leadership fails to understand, is that by taking such a posture it is simply making others overseas feel paranoid and threatened, thus drawing them closer to each other and farther from the U.S.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Military Contractors Behind New Pressure Group Targeting Presidential Candidates

May 10, 2015

MILITARY CONTRACTORS BEHIND NEW PRESSURE GROUP TARGETING PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES

Former House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers has formed anew pressure group, now active in Iowa and New Hampshire, to serve as the “premiere national security and foreign policy organization during the 2016 debate” and to “help elect a president who supports American engagement and a strong foreign policy.”

Roger’s group, Americans for Peace, Prosperity, and Security, is hosting candidate events and intends to host a candidate forum later this year. The organization does not disclose its donors. But a look at the business executives helping APPS steer presidential candidates towards more hawkish positions reveals that many are defense contractors who stand to gain financially from continued militarism:

  • Advisory Board Member John Coburn is chairman and CEO of VT Systems, a company that delivers communications technology for the Defense Department.
  • Advisory Board Member Stephen Hadley is a principal at the consulting firm RiceHadleyGates and serves as a board member to defense contractor Raytheon, a position that pays him $228,007 in annual compensation.
  • New Hampshire Board Member Rich Ashooh lists his employment as Director, Strategy at BAE Systems.
  • New Hampshire Board Member James Bell is the chief executive of EPE Corporation, a manufacturing company that says it is a “premier supplier to the defense community.”
  • Advisory Board Member John Engler, the president of the Business Roundtable, a lobbying group for major corporations, including defense contractors such as Lockheed Martin, Boeing, United Technologies, Northrop Grumman.
  • New Hampshire Board Member Ken Solinksy is founder of Insight Technologies, a night vision and electro-optical systems firm acquired by L-3 Communications.
  • New Hampshire Chairman and Advisory Board Member Walt Havenstein is the former chief executive of BAE Systems and SAIC, two of the largest defense contractors in America. Havenstein, who left SAIC in 2012, was paid partially in company stock options.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

 

 

Washington Has Resurrected The Threat Of Nuclear War

February 25, 2015

Washington Has Resurrected The Threat Of Nuclear War

Foreign Affairs is the publication of the elitist Council on Foreign Relations, a collection of former and current government officials, academics, and corporate and financial executives who regard themselves as the custodian and formulator of US foreign policy. The publication of the council carries the heavy weight of authority. One doesn’t expect to find humor in it, but I found myself roaring with laughter while reading an article in the February 5 online issue by Alexander J. Motyl, “Goodbye, Putin: Why the President’s Days Are Numbered.”

I assumed I was reading a clever parody of Washington’s anti-Putin propaganda. Absurd statement followed absurd statement. It was better than Colbert. I couldn’t stop laughing.

To my dismay I discovered that the absolute gibberish wasn’t a parody of Washington’s propaganda. Motyl, an ardent Ukrainian nationalist, is a professor at Rugers University and was not joking when he wrote that Putin had stolen $45 billion, that Putin was resurrecting the Soviet Empire, that Putin had troops and tanks in Ukraine and had started the war in Ukraine, that Putin is an authoritarian whose regime is “exceedingly brittle” and subject to being overthrown at any time by the people Putin has bought off with revenues from the former high oil price, or by “an Orange Revolution in Moscow” in which Putin is overthrown by Washington orchestrated demonstrations by US financed NGOs as in Ukraine, or by a coup d’etat by Putin’s Praetorial guards. And if none of this sends Putin goodbye, the North Caucasus, Chechnya, Ingushetia, Dagestan, and the Crimean Tarters are spinning out of control and will do Washington’s will by unseating Putin. Only the West’s friendly relationship with Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakstan can shield “the rest of the world from Putin’s disastrous legacy of ruin.”

 

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

The US’ Suicidal Strategy On Ukraine

February 12, 2015

The US’ Suicidal Strategy On Ukraine  

We’re alienating allies & risking a much larger war

Ukraine is back in the news cycle and for good reason. The cease-fire has broken, fighting is intensifying, and the western-supported and installed leadership in Kiev is losing the campaign.  At this point, the West’s choice is to either double down and bet even more on a badly failing set of policies, or admit it has lost this round and seek to deescalate the situation.

Meanwhile, Europe has finally woken up to the risks and seems to be ready to carve out a different path than the US. A lot hinges on the high level talks that are currently underway between Russia and Europe’s leaders.

As the President Hollande of France put it on Feb 7th, “If we don’t find not just a compromise but a lasting peace agreement, we know perfectly well what the scenario will be. It has a name, it’s called war.”

He’s not simply referring to an escalation of the factions fighting within Ukraine. He’s warning about the real deal:  a wider conflict that could easily spread into Europe, and possibly, the embroil powers across the world.

 

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Will Islamic State Cripple the Pivot? | The Diplomat

November 16, 2014

Will Islamic State Cripple the Pivot? | The Diplomat.

The “pivot to Asia,” also known as the “rebalance,” is the most important geopolitical shift in U.S. strategy since the declaration of the “long war” (against terrorism) after September 11, 2001. Yet try as it might, the U.S. seems permanently bogged down in the Middle East. As Fred Kaplan has noted, the campaign against the Islamic State (also known as ISIS or ISIL) has “already lost its way.” After just a month, the U.S. already seems adrift; it is becoming painfully clear that America is once again fighting a war in the Middle East with no clear goal, strategy, or exit pathway. There is growing talk of a ground intervention that would suck the U.S. much more deeply into Iraqi, Syrian, and regional affairs. If this all seems familiar, it should. This has been the U.S. way of war in the region for more than two decades.

Why is this relevant to the pivot? Because it illustrates a major U.S. foreign policy trend I think will permanently hobble America’s ability to rebalance toward Asia: the post-9/11 U.S. seems simply incapable of abstaining from Middle East conflicts. The U.S. foreign policy establish is deeply committed to the Middle East (for questionable reasons at best) and to the regular use of force there. As Martin Indyk put it in an article baldly titled “The Re-Pivot” (just a year after the “rebalance” was announced): “Forget Asia. It’s time for Obama to put his focus back on the Middle East… Thank goodness President Barack Obama overcame his pivot penchant to Asia.” Even wars as obviously paranoia-driven, thrown-together, and only dimly related to U.S. security as this anti-ISIS struggle, seem all but unavoidable. William Kristol captured this blasé, “of course we’ll be fighting in the Middle East indefinitely” attitude perfectly when he famously said “we should just bomb ISIS for a while and see what happens.”

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Post navigation

Newer posts →

Olduvai IV: Courage
Click on image to read excerpts

Olduvai II: Exodus
Click on image to purchase

Click on image to purchase @ FriesenPress