Obama’s Iraq speech: An exercise in cowardice and deceit

By Bill Van Auken:



President Barack Obama’s nationally televised speech from the White House Oval Office Tuesday night was an exercise in cowardice and deceit. It was deceitful to the people of the United States and the entire world in its characterization of the criminal war against Iraq. And it was cowardly in its groveling before the American military.

The address could inspire only disgust and contempt among those who viewed it. Obama, who owed his presidency in large measure to the mass antiwar sentiment of the American people, used the speech to glorify the war that he had mistakenly been seen to oppose.

The most chilling passage came at the end of the 19-minute speech, when Obama declared, “Our troops are the steel in our ship of state,” adding, “And though our nation may be traveling through rough waters, they give us confidence that our course is true.”

It is for this statement, rather than all the double-talk about troop withdrawals, that Obama’s miserable speech deserves to be remembered. It was rhetoric befitting a military-ruled banana republic or a fascist state. The military—not the Constitution, not the will of the people or the country’s ostensibly democratic institutions—constitutes the “steel” in the “ship of state.” Presumably, the democratic rights of the people are so much ballast to be cast overboard as needed.

The occasion for the speech was the artificial deadline fixed by the Obama administration for what the president termed the “end of our combat mission in Iraq.” This is only one of the innumerable lies packed into his brief remarks.

Some 50,000 combat troops remain deployed in Iraq. While they have been rebranded as “transitional” forces, supposedly dedicated to “training” and “advising” Iraqi security forces, their mission remains unchanged.

Indeed, barely a week after the media turned the redeployment out of Iraq of a single Stryker battalion into a “milestone” signaling the withdrawal of the last combat troops, 5,000 members of the 3rd Armored Calvary Regiment, a combat unit, were sent back into the occupied country from Ft. Hood, Texas.

Washington has no intention of ending its military presence in Iraq. It continues to build permanent bases and is determined to continue pursuing the original agenda behind the war launched by the Bush administration in March of 2003—the imposition of US hegemony in the oil-rich Persian Gulf.

Obama’s speech was both incoherent and groveling. The president sought, dishonestly, to take credit for fulfilling his campaign promise on Iraq. As a candidate he had pledged to withdraw all US combat troops from the country within 16 months of taking office. In the end, he merely adopted the time table and plan crafted by the Pentagon and the Bush administration for a partial withdrawal, leaving 50,000 combat troops in place.

The Democratic president felt obliged, under the mantle of paying tribute to “our troops,” to fundamentally distort and whitewash the entire character of the war they were sent to fight, painting one of the blackest chapters in US history as some kind of heroic endeavor.

“Much has changed” since Bush launched the war seven-and-a-half years ago, Obama stated. “A war to disarm a state became a fight against an insurgency” in which American troops battled “block by block to help Iraq seize the chance for a better future.”

The speech was crafted as if the president were addressing a nation of amnesiacs. Do they really think that no one remembers it was a war launched on the basis of lies? The American people were told that an invasion of Iraq was necessary because the government of Saddam Hussein had developed “weapons of mass destruction” and was preparing to place them in the hands of Al Qaeda to set off “mushroom clouds” over American cities.

There were no “weapons of mass destruction,” nor were there any ties between the Iraqi regime and Al Qaeda. These were inventions of a government that was determined to carry out a war of aggression to advance US imperialist interests.

These lies were thoroughly exposed and contributed to the growth of overwhelming hostility to the war among the American people. All of this is to be forgotten, dismissed as meaningless details.

The Iraqi people are presented by Obama as the fortunate beneficiaries of American self-sacrifice and heroism, which bestowed upon them the “opportunity to embrace a new destiny.”

One would hardly imagine that over a million Iraqis lost their lives as a result of this unprovoked US war; that some 4 million have been driven from their homes by violence, either forced into exile or displaced within the war-torn country itself. Every institution and essential component of social infrastructure was laid waste by the US invasion, which unleashed what can most accurately be described as sociocide—the murder of an entire society. The devastation wrought by US militarism has left a shattered nation of widows, homeless, unemployed and wounded.

While a temporary reduction in armed resistance to the US occupation was achieved by bleeding the Iraqi people white, what has been left is an unviable society and political system, dominated by sectarian divisions and overshadowed by the continuing US presence.

Among the more stomach-churning sections of the Obama speech was his gratuitous tribute to his predecessor, George W. Bush. While acknowledging that they had “disagreed about the war”—a disagreement he had no desire to spell out—Obama insisted that “no one could doubt President Bush’s support for our troops, or his love of country and commitment to our security.” This proved, he continued, that “there were patriots who supported this war, and patriots who opposed it. And all of us are united in appreciation of our servicemen and women.”

Bush launched a war that was illegal under international law. He and the other leading figures in his administration—Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice—dragged the American people into a war crime, essentially the same act for which the Nazis were tried and convicted at Nuremberg—the planning and waging of a war of aggression.

Obama told his audience that he had spoken to Bush that afternoon, apparently expressing his solidarity with a war criminal who belongs on trial at The Hague.

Inevitably, out of that essential crime, a host of other crimes followed. The American “servicemen and women,” whose honor is constantly invoked to justify mass killing, became participants in hideous crimes.

The people of the United States and the world were revolted by the images that emerged from Abu Ghraib. But the Obama administration has intervened in court to prevent the exposure of evidence of other criminal acts that are even more unspeakable.

The troops were themselves victims of this war. Nearly 4,500 lost their lives in the aggression launched by the Bush administration, with 35,000 more wounded. Hundreds of thousands have suffered psychological trauma as a result of being thrown into a dirty colonial war.

“The greatness of our democracy is our ability to move beyond our differences, and to learn from our experiences as we confront the challenges ahead,” Obama continued. What a travesty!

The reputation of American democracy was built upon constitutional principles and rights that were shredded by the Bush administration in the name of a “global war on terrorism.” The Obama administration has fully embraced these attacks on democratic rights, defending domestic spying, rendition, imprisonment without charges or trial and even arrogating to the executive branch the right to designate US citizens as terrorist suspects and order their extrajudicial execution.

The twisted path of the speech led Obama from Iraq to Afghanistan. Here he claimed, was a war that could be supported by “Americans from across the political spectrum,” because it is supposedly being waged against Al Qaeda, which “continues to plot against us.”

He declared that the “drawdown in Iraq” had allowed greater resources to be dedicated to this war, resulting in “nearly a dozen Al Qaeda leaders” being “killed or captured all over the world.”

What this has to do with the tripling of the number of US troops deployed in Afghanistan since Obama entered the White House was not explained. According to US military and intelligence officials, there are less than 100 Al Qaeda members in all of Afghanistan, which is now occupied by nearly 100,000 US and another 40,000 NATO and other foreign troops.

Obama went on to acknowledge that US forces “are fighting to break the Taliban’s momentum,” without bothering to even make a case for a connection between that and “taking out” Al Qaeda members around the globe. The reality is that in Afghanistan, US forces are fighting Afghans who are resisting foreign occupation. The aim is not defeating “terrorism,” but establishing US dominance in Central Asia, with its geo-strategic importance and vast energy resources.

Finally, after acknowledging that the Iraq war has contributed to bankrupting the country, Obama suggested that the change he has ordered in the military deployment in Iraq is somehow linked to a determination on the part of his administration to shift its focus to resolving the crisis that confronts more than 26 million American workers who are either unemployed or unable to find full-time jobs.

“Today, our most urgent task is to restore our economy, and put the millions of Americans who have lost their jobs back to work,” he said. “To strengthen our middle class, we must give all our children the education they deserve, and all our workers the skills that they need to compete in a global economy.”

This is one more lie. While the administration has handed over trillions of dollars to bail out Wall Street, it has repeatedly made clear that it will do nothing to create jobs for the unemployed. As for education, the federal government is continuing to cut funding, ensuring increased layoffs of teachers and more school closures.

Behind the duplicitous rhetoric one thing is underscored by the speech: the decisions in Iraq and Afghanistan have been dictated by the military brass and obediently implemented by the Obama White House. This is a government that has no independent policy, much less convictions. It implements policies that are worked out elsewhere—on Wall Street and within the Pentagon—and is dedicated to the defense of the financial aristocracy at the expense of the American people.

1 September 2010

wsws

Bahamas Blog International

US defense secretary says Obama administration 're-engaging with Caribbean'

BASSETERRE, St Kitts (CUOPM) -- United States Secretary of Defense Robert M Gates said he hopes Friday’s regional security summit in Barbados and President Barack Obama’s Caribbean Basin Security Initiative send a strong signal that “the United States is reengaging with this region” after drawing down its presence following the 9/11 terror attacks.

Speaking at a joint news conference Friday with seven Caribbean government and national security leaders Gates said he’s impressed by the innovative approaches being taken to promote collective security through the initiative.

Following what he called a “very productive” meeting to discuss furthering those efforts, Gates lauded the Caribbean nations’ work toward marshalling limited resources to address common threats such as narco-trafficking and violent crime.

These challenges touch US shores as well, and demand that regional nations mount a united front to confront them, Gates said during a joint news conference with Barbadian Prime Minister David Thompson and St Kitts and Nevis Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of National Security, Sam Condor.

Gates conceded that the drug trafficking problem has worsened due to the success of the Merida Initiative and Mexico’s crackdown on drug cartels there.

“Narco-trafficking is a problem for the hemisphere as a whole,” he said, “and wherever you put pressure, the traffickers will go where there is less resistance and where there is less capability.”

Going forward, Gates said he would like to see broader efforts to connect the regional security system here with efforts under way outside the Eastern Caribbean. This includes efforts by the French, Dutch, Colombians, Peruvians and US Southern Command’s Joint Interagency Task Force.

The secretary praised Barbados as a strong US security partner and a leader in promoting security cooperation in the Eastern Caribbean.

“The United States stands steadfastly with you as you pursue long-term solutions to these problems,” Gates said after meeting with the Prime Ministers and national security ministers.

Much of that support is provided through the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative that President Barack Obama proposed last April during the Summit of the Americans in Trinidad and Tobago.

The initiative has been built with extensive input from Caribbean nations with a central role for the regional security system, Gates noted Friday, all aimed at helping regional governments face up to transnational threats.

The $45 million the United States has committed to the effort this year will help improve regional maritime patrol and interdiction capabilities and domain awareness and provide for additional joint training and exercises, he said.

Gates said details about how these funds will be allocated are being hammered out by technical working groups, with one convened Friday in Washington.

He emphasized that regional nations will be the ones to help determine how the funding can be most effective. The United States already has committed three interceptor boats and communications equipment, but Gates said he heard suggestions on Friday about the need for more law enforcement training and the stand-up of major crimes units.

However, Gates emphasized that the Caribbean initiative represents more as it provides a comprehensive approach to regional security. Its scope extends beyond military and security assistance to address equally critical components of the region’s economic and social stability.

The initiative aims to provide, “not just improved security capabilities to confront immediate threats, but also development assistance in hopes of addressing the root causes of regional problems, such as the lack of educational and employment opportunities, particularly for youth,” Gates said. “That is a strategy we strongly support.”

Fifteen Caribbean Basin nations are included in the security initiative: Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, St Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, St Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname, and Trinidad and Tobago.

April 17, 2010

caribbeannetnews

Bahamas Blog International

Mr Obama's Nobel Prize

There is much global debate, as the Nobel Peace Committee would have expected, over its award of this year's Peace Prize to US President Barack Obama, a mere nine months into office and with the nominations having closed only weeks of Mr Obama formally taking up the job.

Beyond the uncharitable nastiness of the responses of some of Mr Obama's virulent critics on the American right, who allow political partisanship to trump decency and goodwill, there are those, even among the president's supporters, who argue, with cogency and legitimacy, that the prize may be premature. Mr Obama, it is felt, does not as yet have concrete achievements in any of his initiatives towards a sustainable global peace.

This newspaper is not hostile to those who hold such a position, but appreciates the decision by the Nobel Peace Committee on two fronts: first, as a repudiation of the Bush doctrine of America's iron-fisted, unilateralist exertion of its power and second, and more important, an investment in the promise of Barack Obama. Indeed, it is not uncommon for the Nobel Committee to use the prestige of the Peace Prize to bring attention and impetus to important issues, as was the case with its award to the former US vice president for his efforts in combating global warming.

In fact, the Nobel Committee signalled as much in its citation. Not only did it note the US president's "extraordinary effort to strengthen international diplomacy and co-operation between peoples", but his place as an inspirational figure.

"Very rarely has a person, to the same extent as Obama, captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future," the committee said.

rekindling hope

And therein lies the substance of the award: the rekindling of hope, and for a world beyond a single polity.

Perhaps the most critical factor so far in the debate is Mr Obama's apparent appreciation of the intent of the Nobel Prize: as the world's downpayment on his leadership of an America reintegrated into a world of multilateralism, where its might is best displayed by its power of persuasion and the correctness of its values rather than swagger of its gait or the show of its "iron".

"I do not view it (the Nobel Peace Prize) as a recognition of my own accomplishments," Mr Obama said, "but rather, an affirmation of American leadership on behalf of aspirations held by people in all nations."

This is where Mr Obama's job becomes difficult - the need to balance global responsibilities against the contending arguments of domestic political constituents, including a substantial minority, who views as effete and weak the administration's emerging foreign policy of broader international engagement.

In this regard, Mr Obama may find in the Nobel Prize, and the legitimacy it affords, a fillip for the initiatives that he has promoted, not least being a just peace in the Middle East, including a viable Palestinian state.

He may find it easier to pursue nuclear non-proliferation, without undermining the rights of perceived enemies to the peaceful use of nuclear energy, while at the same time finding a credible formula for ending America's conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan without weakening US security.

And as he does these things, he has to set right America's wobbling economy. For around the corner will be the critics who will claim that Mr Obama's response is to the wrong constituency.

October 11, 2009

jamaica-gleaner

Bahamas Caribbean Blog International

U.S. Congress Urged to End Ban on Cuba Travel

By Maria Peña:

WASHINGTON – Activists lobbied on Capitol Hill Wednesday for a bill that would remove restrictions on travel to Cuba for all Americans, arguing it would be in keeping with President Barack Obama’s pledge to change U.S. policy toward the communist-ruled island.

During a meeting at the House of Representatives’ Rayburn House Office Building, several congressional leaders and more than 70 activists from a dozen states said the travel ban violates Americans’ basic rights.

Supporters of the Freedom to Travel to Cuba Act, including Democratic Reps. Charles Rangel and Bill Delahunt and Republican Congressman Jeff Flake, say Washington has tried for more than four decades to isolate Cuba economically and diplomatically without achieving the desired result.

They added that now is the time to try something different and that the bill has enough support in the House and Senate to be approved before year’s end.

The measure, submitted in March, would allow all Americans to travel to the island, not only Cuban-Americans with family members living there. Only in the event of war or imminent danger to Americans could travel to Cuba be disallowed.

While hearings on the legislation could begin next month, the proposal faces opposition from Republicans and Cuban exiles, who denounce the continued violation of human rights on the island.

In April, Obama lifted restrictions of Cuban-Americans’ travel and remittances that had been imposed by the Bush administration and allowed U.S. telecommunications companies to apply for licenses to operate in Cuba.

In an exception to the economic embargo imposed in 1962, Washington for several years has allowed the sale of U.S. farm products to Cuba. The value of those transactions averages around $500 million a year.

Some experts who took part in Wednesday’s meeting told Efe that the measures Obama has adopted thus far are limited and insufficient.

“It disappoints me that more things aren’t being done more quickly, because most Americans support a relaxation of the embargo. We have nothing to show for the embargo, which has been in place for decades,” said John Block, agriculture secretary under the Ronald Reagan administration.

“We travel to and do business with China and Vietnam. Aren’t we being hypocritical with this? We should open up trade with Cuba because this embargo is only providing the regime in Havana with an excuse” for the island’s economic woes, Block said.

For his part, Wayne Smith, who served from 1979-1982 as chief of the U.S. Interests Section in Havana, said that Obama “hasn’t done anything” and that, as a step toward change, “we should start a dialogue and lift the travel restrictions.”

“It’s disgraceful for a handful of lawmakers to block legislation when most Americans and the new generation of Cuban-Americans want relations with Cuba to improve,” Smith said.

Obama has said he will not consider lifting the embargo – imposed three years after Fidel Castro took power – unless Cuba frees political prisoners and undertakes democratic reforms.

Wednesday’s lobbying effort, described by organizers as an “education day for lawmakers,” comes amid a possible thaw in relations between the United States and Cuba, which have resumed talks on immigration, suspended in 2004, and are mulling the possible resumption of postal service after 46 years.

Bisa Williams, deputy assistant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere Affairs, met recently in Havana with high-ranking Cuban officials to discuss a range of issues. She visited an agricultural facility and areas affected by the three hurricanes that battered the island last year, the State Department said Tuesday.

She was the highest-ranking State Department official to visit Havana since 2002.

Leaders of Cuba’s dissident movement said Wednesday that they met with Williams during her stay on the island.

The chairman of the Cuban Commission on Human Rights and National Reconciliation, Elizardo Sanchez, told Efe that encounter took place over lunch at the U.S. Interests Section in Havana.

Miriam Leyva, founder of the Ladies in White, a group comprising relatives of political prisoners, said Williams encouraged them to express their opinions and “showed solidarity at all times.”

Among the issues discussed, Leyva said, was the plight of Cuba’s 208 political prisoners, the government’s repression of the opposition and the situation in general on the island.

Also present for the lunch were prominent dissidents Vladimiro Roca, Oscar Espinosa Chepe, Laura Pollan and Marta Beatriz Roque. EFE


laht.com

Bahamas Caribbean Blog International