[Peace-discuss] Just Foreign Policy News, August 14, 2006

[Robert Naiman]

Just Foreign Policy News
August 14, 2006

In this issue:
1) Washington's interests in Israel's war.
2) Colbert: Lamont's Extremist Supporters
3) As Mideast Smoke Clears, Political Fates May Shift
4) Israel Seeks Hint of Victory
5) Hard-line Neo-Cons Assail Israel for Timidity
6) Hezbollah gaining strength where democracy once dwelt
7) Breaking An Impasse; In a Political Move, Lebanon Offers an Army
That All of Its Sects Can Accept: Its Own
8) Editorial; Still Spinning
9)  The Cease-Fire; U.N. Council Backs Measure to Halt War in Lebanon
10) The UN Mideast Ceasefire Resolution Paragraph-by-Paragraph
11) Bye-Bye, Joe: Now Hillary's the Target
12) Rally Near White House Protests Violence in Mideast
13) Cease-Fire Takes Effect; More Fighting Expected
14) US neocons hoped Israel would attack Syria
15) What the Hell has happened to the Army? -Avnery
16) Iranian Dissident Akbar Ganji, at Liberty to Speak His Mind, at
Least Until He Goes Back Home
17) Is an Armament Sickening U.S. Soldiers?
18) Lieberman, Cheney and the War in Iraq
19) Iranian President Lambasts US on New Blog
20) Mexican Runner-Up Sees Years Of Protest

Contents:
1) Washington's interests in Israel's war.
Seymour M. Hersh
New Yorker
Issue of 2006-08-21
Posted 2006-08-14
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060821fa_fact
Interview today on Democracy Now:
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/14/1358255
The Bush Administration was closely involved in the planning of
Israel's retaliatory attacks. President Bush and Vice-President Cheney
were convinced that a successful Israeli Air Force bombing campaign
against Hezbollah's heavily fortified underground-missile and
command-and-control complexes in Lebanon could ease Israel's security
concerns and also serve as a prelude to a potential American
preëmptive attack to destroy Iran's nuclear installations, some of
which are also buried deep underground.

2) Lamont's Extremist Supporters
Stephen Colbert
The Colbert Report
http://www.comedycentral.com/sitewide/media_player/play.jhtml?itemId=72810
Lamont's supporters are against the war, a position so extreme, only
86% of Democrats agree with it.

3) As Mideast Smoke Clears, Political Fates May Shift
Robin Wright
Washington Post
Sunday, August 13, 2006; A10
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/12/AR2006081200995.html
The future of the Middle East may be markedly different as a result of
the bloody drama that erupted July 12 after the seizure of two Israeli
soldiers by Lebanon's Shiite militia. So, too, the image of the United
States. Big losers at this stage appear to be Israel's government, the
Lebanese people, and the Bush administration's struggle against
terrorism and its campaign for democracy. The big winner may be
Hezbollah leader Hasan Nasrallah -- for now. One surprise has been the
strong leadership of Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora. "This is a
war that has not had a clear logic, but it does have a large number of
casualties and losers," said Robert Malley of the Brussels-based
International Crisis Group. "Israel's government is in trouble.
Lebanon as a country has lost a lot. U.S. standing is worse. Democracy
promotion has been hurt. The credibility of the U.N. Security Council
has been eroded. Even the anti-terror agenda has lost. So on almost
every count, you see diminished assets and credibility." Israel lost
by failing to achieve its strategic objectives in response to the
capture of its soldiers. "The pressure is rising in Israel to
interpret this as a debacle. Israel is nowhere close to having
achieved its goal of destroying Hezbollah or its arsenal. It will also
have to deal with the moral and humanitarian crisis that it caused,"
said Ellen Laipson, president of the Henry L. Stimson Center.

4) Israel Seeks Hint of Victory
Steven Erlanger
New York Times
August 13, 2006
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/13/world/middleeast/13israel.html
Israel's significant increase of its ground forces in Lebanon a day
before accepting a cease-fire has two goals: to damage Hezbollah and
to conclude the conflict with something that could be called a victory
for an Israeli government under domestic pressure. [Elsewhere it was
speculated that the Israeli government wanted to have a force in
Lebanon equal in number to the combined UN/Lebanese force, so that it
could trade withdrawal for deployment one-for-one; see the
paragraph-by-paragraph analysis of the ceasefire resolution, item #10
below. -JFP] Having begun the war proclaiming that the aim was the
destruction and disarmament of Hezbollah, Prime Minister Olmert will
be able to claim only that Hezbollah is badly hurt and effectively
restrained, even without the robust new international force or
disarming of the militia that Israel initially demanded. Olmert and
Defense Minister Peretz have been wounded by the perception that they
mishandled the war. The life of the government is likely to have been
shortened. In a familiar pattern of backbiting - the best indication
that the war has not gone well - the army leadership is complaining
that the politicians did not let the military do its job, and the
politicians are complaining that the army promised that the task could
be accomplished in a week or two and largely with air power. The
army's performance against Hezbollah will lead to considerable
introspection and criticism. There will also be sharp criticism of
governmental preparedness, with the image of many thousands of poorer
Israelis huddling for a month in decrepit bomb shelters with
inadequate public services and supplies. Itamar Rabinovich, a former
ambassador to Washington, said bluntly: "Two notions have died. First,
unilateralism, and second, separation by the fence. Missiles dwarf the
fence." Israelis also fear there has been damage done to their
relationship with the US, where some may complain that the Israelis
were given time to clobber Hezbollah and did not get the job done.
"Part of the reckoning will be our reputation as a strategic partner,
when we tell the Americans, 'Give us the tools and we'll do the job,'
" he said. "Part of our self-image is of military miracle workers, and
we didn't do that this time."

5) Hard-line Neo-Cons Assail Israel for Timidity
Jim Lobe
Inter Press Service
Saturday, August 12, 2006
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0812-04.htm
While much of the world has criticized Israel for carrying out a
"disproportionate" war in Lebanon, neo-conservatives have attacked the
government of Prime Minister Olmert for timidity. As noted by
diplomatic correspondent Ori Nir in this week's edition of The
Forward, the Israeli government has been subjected to unusually harsh
criticism, including the charge that, by failing to wage a more
aggressive war, they were jeopardizing Israel's long-term strategic
alliance with Washington. "(Hezbollah) is today the leading edge of an
aggressive, nuclear-hungry Iran," wrote Washington Post columnist
Charles Krauthammer earlier this week. "...(Olmert's) search for
victory on the cheap has jeopardised not just the Lebanon operation
but America's confidence in Israel as well." Krauthammer and other
leading neo-conservatives have assailed Olmert for not launching a
massive ground invasion from the outset which, in their view, could
have effectively crushed Hezbollah's military capabilities. "Hezbollah
can only be destroyed by a ground campaign," wrote National Review
columnist Jonah Goldberg. "If Israel doesn't launch one, it will be
worse off." Still others attacked him for failing to widen the war
beyond Lebanon to Hezbollah supporters, Iran and Syria.

6) Hezbollah gaining strength where democracy once dwelt
Rashid Khalidi, professor of Arab studies at the Middle East Institute
at Columbia University
Chicago Tribune
August 13, 2006
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-0608130457aug13,1,1047240.story
President Bush recently said that it was necessary to get to "the root
of the problem" in Lebanon. By this, Bush certainly did not mean
Israel's 18-year occupation of south Lebanon that created Hezbollah
following the 1982 invasion. Nor did he mean Israel's 39-year-plus
occupation in Palestine. For him, the problem is Hezbollah's nature as
a "terrorist organization," which is how it is framed in most of the
American media. It is worth considering how Hezbollah is now regarded
elsewhere. A month after Israel unleashed its air force against
Lebanon, killing more than 700 civilians, there is near-unanimity
among Lebanese in supporting Hezbollah's resistance to the grinding
advance of Israeli troops in the south, the third such invasion in 28
years. Hezbollah is once again seen by almost all Lebanese as a
resistance movement, as it was after it succeeded in 2000 in forcing
Israel to evacuate occupied territory.

7) In a Political Move, Lebanon Offers an Army That All of Its Sects
Can Accept: Its Own
John Kifner And Jad Mouawad
New York Times
August 14, 2006
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/14/world/middleeast/14lebanon.html
Prime Minister Siniora's offer to send the Lebanese Army into the
Hezbollah-dominated south proved central to breaking the diplomatic
impasse over Israel's invasion. But it is an almost entirely political
gesture. The army, for many years the least bellicose group of armed
men in a country otherwise filled with them, is more suited to
internal security than to facing outside threats. It has no modern
tanks, no air force, and its modest budget goes mostly for salaries.
The resolution on a truce adopted by the United Nations Security
Council on Friday calls for 15,000 Lebanese soldiers to patrol
southern Lebanon, once Israeli troops withdraw, in concert with an
international peacekeeping force of the same size. The Lebanese Army
has about 3,000 crack troops, Lebanese officers say, in units that
specialize in tasks like commando operations and hostage rescue, aimed
primarily at dealing with fractious local elements like Palestinian or
Islamic militants. The army was once divided into brigades by religion
— the Sixth Brigade, made up of Shiites trained by Americans, was
saddled with the motto "we serve and defect" when it went over to
local militias in the early 1980's. But in recent years, the army has
been transformed into a national force, with the various sects
integrated in the units. Its deployment, some hope, could help soothe
Lebanon's fragmented politics and strengthen the government's shaky
legitimacy.

8) Still Spinning
Editorial
New York Times
August 14, 2006
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/14/opinion/14mon2.html
President Bush — who just days ago was trumpeting the war in Lebanon
as an opportunity for remaking the Middle East — may find a
nuclear-empowered Iran his real legacy. Iran is acting as if it has
won already, with officials calling the Security Council's resolution
legally and morally void. Looking more responsible than President
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad shouldn't be hard. But it is a measure of how much
damage Iraq and now Lebanon have done to America's standing that the
United States would find itself competing.

9)  THE CEASE-FIRE; U.N. Council Backs Measure to Halt War in Lebanon
Warren Hoge And Steven Erlanger
New York Times
August 12, 2006
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/12/world/middleeast/12nations.html
The Security Council agreed unanimously on Friday on a measure calling
for a full cessation of hostilities in Lebanon, deploying 30,000
Lebanese and United Nations forces in southern Lebanon and calling
upon Israel to withdraw its forces "in parallel."

10) The UN Mideast Ceasefire Resolution Paragraph-by-Paragraph
Anthony Amato, Leighton Professor of Law at Northwestern University
Jurist, University of Pittsburgh School of Law
August 13, 2006
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forumy/2006/08/un-mideast-ceasefire-resolution.php
Hezbollah's surprising television announcement accepting the terms of
the UN Ceasefire Resolution means that the precise wording of the
Resolution will be under strict diplomatic scrutiny for weeks or
months to come. The following is my paragraph-by-paragraph commentary
(in regular text) on the complete text (in italics) of UN Security
Council Resolution 1701 (11 August 2006).

11) Bye-Bye, Joe: Now Hillary's the Target
Sarah Baxter
Sunday Times/UK
Sunday, August 13, 2006
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0813-05.htm
The defeat of Joe Lieberman by an anti-war political novice was a
spectacular coup for the "netroots": the grassroots,
anti-establishment, anti-war left that had mobilised opposition on the
internet to the political grandee. The same activists are now seeking
to bend Senator Hillary Clinton to their anti-war side or face defeat
in the Democratic presidential primaries. Her supporters are concerned
that the "jihadist" left, galvanised by the victory Ned Lamont, are on
the rise in the Democratic party, starkly affecting its national
electoral prospects.

12) Rally Near White House Protests Violence in Mideast
Robert Pear
New York Times
August 13, 2006
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/13/washington/13protest.html
Thousands of people rallied near the White House on Saturday to
protest what they described as Israeli aggression in Lebanon and the
United States' unwavering support for Israel. The diverse crowd
included many Arab-Americans and Muslims, college students and
families, as well as veterans of prior demonstrations against the war
in Iraq.

13) Mideast Cease-Fire In Effect Amid Skirmishes
Olmert Heckled During Parliament Address
Molly Moore and Edward Cody
Washington Post Foreign Service
Monday, August 14, 2006; 1:10 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/14/AR2006081400179.html
The Israeli military halted combat operations in southern Lebanon and
Hezbollah rockets stopped raining on Israel early Monday morning as a
tenuous U.N.-imposed cease-fire took effect. Tens of thousands of
displaced Lebanese began streaming back toward their ruined villages
and towns in the south despite Israeli military warnings that it is
still banning vehicles from using roads in southern Lebanon. Israeli
military officials also said aerial and naval blockades in Lebanon
"will remain in effect until a system is established to monitor and
prevent the smuggling of weapons into Lebanon." The U.N. resolution
calls for 15,000 foreign troops and 15,000 Lebanese soldiers to be
deployed in southern Lebanon. The resolution also calls for the causes
of the current conflict to be addressed "urgently," but it leaves
Hezbollah's fate and a dispute over the Shebaa Farms area to a future
political settlement. Israel pummeled the southern suburbs of Beirut
on Sunday with bombardments that rattled the city, while Hezbollah
fired 220 rockets into Israel, killing an 83-year-old man. The ground
combat in southern Lebanon was also some of the most violent of the
war as Israeli forces struggled to dominate as much territory as
possible before the cease-fire deadline at 8 a.m. Monday. At least 17
people were killed Sunday in Lebanon. On Saturday, 24 Israeli soldiers
were killed -- Israel's heaviest single-day toll in the war. On
Sunday, at least five more were killed. Many of the soldiers were
killed by Hezbollah antitank missile fire. Beirut residents who had
been buoyed by news of the U.N. cease-fire agreement were shaken back
to the reality of more fighting by the first brace of blasts.

14) US neocons hoped Israel would attack Syria
Israel considered expansion of conflict in Lebanon 'nuts.'
Tom Regan
Christian Science Monitor
August 9, 2006 at 12:00 a.m.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0809/dailyUpdate.html
The White House, and in particular White House advisors who belong to
the neoconservative movement, allegedly encouraged Israel to attack
Syria as an expansion of its action against Hizbullah, in Lebanon. The
progressive opinion and news site ConsortiumNews.com reported Monday
that Israeli sources say Israel's "leadership balked at the scheme."
One Israeli source said Bush's interest in spreading the war to Syria
was considered "nuts" by some senior Israeli officials.

15) What the Hell has happened to the Army?
Uri Avnery
Gush Shalom
08/12/2006
http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/avnery/1155419483/
SO WHAT has happened to the Israeli army? This question is now being
raised not only around the world, but also in Israel itself. Clearly,
there is a huge gap between the army's boastful arrogance, on which
generations of Israelis have grown up, and the picture presented by
this war.

16) Iranian Dissident Akbar Ganji, at Liberty to Speak His Mind, at
Least Until He Goes Back Home
Robin Wright
Washington Post
Monday, August 14, 2006; Page C01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/13/AR2006081300718.html
Akbar Ganji is free -- for now. He does not expect his liberty to last
long. Ganji is an Iranian writer who has taken on the world's
mightiest theocracy and its thundering ayatollahs. Released in March
after six years in prison -- a good chunk of that time in solitary
confinement -- he is today the most radical democrat in Tehran. Ganji
is no fan of the White House. Bush administration support is dangerous
for Middle East democrats these days. "I was in solitary confinement
in prison and had no contact with anyone when Bush announced support
for me," Ganji recalled. Interrogators, however, "talked to me as if I
had had dinner with Bush the previous evening." U.S.-backed wars in
the Middle East, he added, are not helping democrats in the region. In
a speech last month, Ganji warned that Iran's democracy movement does
not support military action by either local or foreign forces to
produce change. "Violence and force can never by themselves create
genuine beliefs," he noted. During a conversation in Washington, Ganji
reflected: "No one trusts Western governments now. Many world leaders
wanted to meet me. But all the dissidents in Iran asked me not to.
This shows the Iranian perception of Western governments." Ganji also
scoffs at the $75 million that the Bush administration has allocated
for programs to encourage Iran's democracy movement. He said the funds
would be better used for Iranian- or Islamic-studies centers at
American universities.

17) Is an Armament Sickening U.S. Soldiers?
Deborah Hastings
Associated Press
Saturday, August 12, 2006
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0812-06.htm
An estimated 286 tons of depleted uranium munitions were fired by the
U.S. in Iraq and Kuwait in 1991. An estimated 130 tons were shot
toppling Saddam Hussein. About 30 percent of the 700,000 men and women
who served in the first Gulf War still suffer a baffling array of
symptoms. Depleted uranium has long been suspected as a possible
contributor to Gulf War Syndrome, and in the mid-90s, veterans helped
push the military into tracking soldiers exposed to it. It will take
years to determine how depleted uranium affected soldiers from this
war. In 2002, Congress established the Research Advisory Committee on
Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses — comprised of scientists, physicians and
veterans advocates. Its mandate is to judge all research and all
efforts to treat Gulf War Syndrome patients against a single standard:
Have sick soldiers been made better? The answer, according to the
committee, is no.

18) Lieberman, Cheney and the War in Iraq
The White House recognizes a vote of noconfidence.
Editorial
Minneapolis Star Tribune
Sunday, August 13, 2006
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0813-21.htm
Someday Americans will know for sure whether Joseph Lieberman's defeat
was a turning point in American attitudes toward Iraq or just a
footnote in Connecticut history. But it's plain that the Bush
administration has drawn its own conclusions and regards the election
as an important and worrisome vote of no-confidence in its own foreign
policy. Exhibit A is the astonishing behavior of Dick Cheney. The
normally reclusive vice president took time off from vacation in
Wyoming to conduct a conference call with reporters on Wednesday and
accuse Connecticut Democrats of subverting national security and
giving comfort to "Al-Qaida types." It's bizarre enough that a sitting
vice president would decide to meddle in the politics of the
opposition party and try to tell Democrats how to choose their own
candidate for U.S. Senate. But it's downright outrageous that Cheney
would yet again try to draw misleading parallels between Saddam
Hussein and Al-Qaida. Time and again White House officials have backed
off that assertion when challenged frontally -- only to find some new
way to insinuate it again a day or a week later. For the record, one
investigation after another has shown that Saddam regarded Osama bin
Laden as a rival, not an ally, and that Al-Qaida took root in Iraq
only after the U.S. invasion created fertile soil for terrorists
there. If Ned Lamont's victory does have any lasting significance it's
precisely because it was a referendum on the Bush policy toward Iraq.
Americans now understand that the invasion of Iraq was not crucial to
the fight against Al-Qaida; it was a terrible and costly distraction
from it. They understand that the Bush administration has made a gross
miscalculation about the way to advance democracy and stability in the
Middle East.

19) Iranian President Lambasts US on New Blog
Reuters
August 13, 2006
Filed at 12:21 p.m. ET
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/international-iran-president-blog.html
Iran's president has launched a Web log, using his first entry to
recount his poor upbringing and ask visitors to the site if they think
the United States and Israel want to start a new world war. Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad, whose speeches are riddled with anti-U.S. rhetoric, also
described how he was angered by American meddling in Iran even when he
was at elementary school. Ahmadinejad swept to a surprise victory in
last year's presidential race by promising the country's poor a fairer
share of Iran's oil wealth and emphasizing his own humble origins that
led many to vote for him as an "outsider'' to Iran's ruling elite. As
well as promising a better life to the poor, Ahmadinejad has sought to
bolster support by refusing to bow to Western pressure to stop Iran's
civilian nuclear program. His defiance in the stand-off with the West
has often played well in the Muslim world, where many are angered by
U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Analyst Saeed Laylaz said the
site -- available in Persian, Arabic, English and French at
www.ahmadinejad.ir -- may be seeking to win support from abroad.

20) Mexican Runner-Up Sees Years Of Protest
Manuel Roig-Franzia
Washington Post
Monday, August 14, 2006; A14
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/13/AR2006081300367.html
Andrés Manuel López Obrador said Sunday that the protests that have
shackled this city's downtown could last for years even though a
partial recount appears to be confirming his narrow loss. The recount,
which was expected to end late Sunday or early Monday, has barely
budged the 244,000-vote, or half-percentage-point, lead of Felipe
Calderón. Still, López Obrador told followers Sunday that enough
evidence of irregularities has been unearthed to warrant an annulment
of votes cast in 5,000 of Mexico's 130,000 polling places. "We will
not accept an illegitimate government and a counterfeit president,"
López Obrador told supporters. López Obrador's battle to overturn the
results of the July 2 election has recently shown signs of losing
momentum. His crowds have been dwindling, dropping from estimates of
more than a million to as few as 20,000 on Sunday. López Obrador, of
the Democratic Revolutionary Party, and his top lieutenants say the
recount has confirmed their fraud suspicions and exposed the
"disappearance" of 80,000 ballots. Arturo Sarukhan, a top Calderón
adviser, painted a different picture in an interview Sunday, saying
the recount revealed no changes in more than 90 percent of the
recounted polling places. Mexico's special electoral court has until
Sept. 6 to certify a winner. López Obrador said Sunday that if Mexico
tries to install Calderón as president, he and his followers will be
there to block the way.

--------
Robert Naiman
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org