One autocrat got the message. There is a new foreign policy sheriff in town. Erdogan's Turkey is a member of NATO that bought missiles from another autocratic regime. Russia, an adversary and cyber attacker of the US. Biden was not pleased and still is not completely pleased as Turkey returns the experts Russia sent with their missiles, but not the missiles. More to come. Putin massed his military at the Ukraine border, implying a threatened invasion and testing Biden's intent to resist. Biden and NATO reaffirmed their commitment to defend Ukraine's embryonic democracy on the border with other NATO members. Quietly, Putin withdrew his troops after a telephone conversation with Biden. . Next, there were threats by Russia to move their influence into the Balkans through Serbia. Slovenia proposed eliminating the autonomy of Bosnia and dividing it up. That was a concept the US slapped down. That has been met as well by calls to fast-track membership of countries there not already members of NATO, including Bosnia. Most in the Balkans already are NATO members, including Montenegro with its best submarine port in the Mediterranean. The Balkans are still a work in progress. Biden is no fool, nor is he ignorant, having served both as chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for years and as vice-president. He will be meeting with both Turkey and Putin this summer. That should be interesting and maybe tense. This is a significant change from the Trump era, whose foreign policy was bootlicking and praising nuclear powers governed by autocrats, mostly adversaries of the US. The technique resembled appeasement, and the autocrats were emboldened to expand and rearm further from Russia to Iran to North Korea. His ending treaties designed to restrain China's expansion into the southeastern Pacific, and Iran's military nuclear ambitions backfired. Both China and Iran took advantage of the opportunity Trump's foreign policy gave them to expand economic and military interests into sensitive areas..of the South China Sea and Hamas and nuclear re-armament in the mid-east. Since Trump backed out of the Iran nuclear deal, it has increased its enriched uranium stockpiles. It has, however, agreed to international inspections fearing more international backlash and economic sanctions. Trump was a fool who thought flattery got him somewhere because he craved flattery himself. In foreign policy, that tomfoolery may have kept the guns from firing. Yet, it gave our adversaries a chance and breathing space to creep into our national interests and fill the void left by Trump's isolationist policies. In foreign policy, brute power and economic self-interest count above anything else.
WELCOME TO THE BLOG This blog reflects my views of current political issues.. It is also an archive for columns in the Sky Hi News 2011 to November 2019. Winter Park Times 2019 to 2021.(paper publishing suspended in 2021) My Facebook page, the muftic forum, posts blog links, comments, and sharing. Non-political Facebook page: felicia muftic. Subscribe for free on Substack: https://feliciamuftic.substack.com Blog postings are continuously being edited and updated.
Showing posts with label Iran nuclear deal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Iran nuclear deal. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 1, 2021
Biden's quiet, muscular diplomacy: A new foreign policy sheriff in town
If I have any bone to pick, it would be Biden turning over Afghanistan to the Taliban as he pulled out our skeleton force there. Whether Afghanistan will be a terrorist threat in the future to the US remains to be seen. However, the damage it will do to the rights of women there is going to be heartbreaking. The US has spent the past 20 years empowering and educating girls and women, and they will be the Taliban's first victims.
Monday, February 4, 2019
Trump gives "intelligence" a bad name.
A version of this was published on line at the Sky Hi News, February 5, 2019
https://www.skyhinews.com/news/opinion-muftic-trump-gives-intelligence-a-bad-name/
https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/16/politics/donald-trump-putin-helsinki-summit/index.html
https://www.skyhinews.com/news/opinion-muftic-trump-gives-intelligence-a-bad-name/
Aside from reports Donald Trump has a short
attention span and poor reading comprehension skills, there is another disturbing meaning to Trump's definition of
"intelligence". Those
who have tried to brief him, including his former secretary of state,
reportedly called him a “***moron “. There are recent reports by other
intelligence briefers who said he was "willfully ignorant" and he
exploded in anger when he was given information that contradicted his public
statements and agenda. Not only is he
ignoring and dismissing his own intelligence agencies' conclusions, he is
forging US foreign policy based on something other than rational use of any objective
real-world facts supplied by his own agency appointees. If our country survives
the next two years without a major foreign policy blunder, we can count
ourselves lucky.
He
has recently dismissed the conclusion presented in their annual report on
threats to national security to Congress by US intelligence heads that contradicted
his own assertions. No, Mr. President, ISIS is not dead; no, Iran is abiding by
their disarmament agreement, and, no, North Korea will not give up nuclear
capability because it is too basic to their regime's survival. The
"crisis" at the Southern border did not even register in their list of
top ten security threats. Trump called
the intelligence chiefs “naive”, he sent them "back to school”, and now he
termed in press remarks their findings are just opinions with which he can disagree,
as if these professionals were writing an op ed piece with an ideological
agenda. Thousands of agents risk their
lives to gather such facts and awesome technology provides even more
information. That gulf between Trump's words and the intelligence agencies' conclusions
is enough to make us wonder where he ever got some of his ideas. Could he be
listening to foreign intelligence service findings whispered in his ear
by even Russian President Vladimir Putin himself? He has had several one on one
secret meetings with him. After all, he has taken Putin's word over our own
services in public before. Last July in
Helsinki, Trump dissed US intelligence agency reports that Russia interfered in
the 2016 elections, and instead accepted Putin’s words of denial as the truth.
There are good reasons to suspect Trump has
been listening to Putin because the foreign policy he is conducting supports
Russia’s goals. Trump and Russia do not support US security policies that have
created peace and prosperity in Europe post-Soviet era. Trump's foreign policy
initiatives aid Russian actions to expand their influence and control to former
Soviet spheres of interest. Putin's
stealth invasion of Ukraine and his Crimea annexation resulted in the West
imposing punishing sanctions on Putin’s oligarch friends. Trump just lifted
sanctions on one oligarch, and would like to remove all sanctions, period.
While repeating Putin’s very words, Trump called NATO “obsolete” and he
threatens to pull out from NATO, a mutual defense treaty, which would clear the
way for Russia to try Ukraine /Crimea - like takeovers in the Baltics and
Balkans without triggering an automatic military response. US pulling out of
Syria would leave Russia with greater influence the Middle East. Trump’s recent pulling out of the IMF treaty
will allow Russia to develop their mid-range nuclear capability out in the
open. No IMF treaty? No sweating compliance or fearing punishment when or if
they have been outed and making this a much more dangerous world.
Trump's disdain for US intelligence services
has a history in the Iraq war and
faulty US intelligence verification that there were indeed weapons of
mass destruction in Iraq. There were at
that time no international inspectors on the ground in Iraq. Saddam cleverly
created the fiction he had the capability in order to deter future attackers.
The situation is very different in Iran. Thanks to the multinational Iran
nuclear deal, that country has been constantly monitored by inspectors on site
and shipments of nuclear material into Iran have been subject to inspection and
control. Trump pulled out of the
deal. Some fear Trump may be cooking up
a reason to invade Iran, egged on by hawkish advisers. Destroying the Iran nuclear deal would end those
inspections, but fortunately other signators continue the program without us.
https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2019/01/intelligence-chiefs-diverge-trump-main-threats-us/154511/
Wednesday, May 9, 2018
Iran deal pullout: war, peace or self-inflicted wound
A version of this was published in the Sky Hi News May 16, 2018
https://www.skyhinews.com/news/muftic-iran-deal-pullout-war-peace-or-a-self-inflicted-wound/
Update: 5 13 18:
A version of this posting below was published in the Sky Hi News May 16, 2018.
Only President Donald Trump and Israel think Iran is on the brink of gaining nuclear weapons, so President Trump announced the US will pull out of the Iran deal.. The international inspectors there on the ground, our own intelligence services, and all of our European allies agree: the deal is working. However, Trump made a campaign commitment to pull out, so now he has had to fabricate a reason to break the Iran agreement . Israel has its own agenda. It always opposed the Iran deal and believes bombing facilities or threatening it is the answer. Israel provided Trump an excuse that flies in the face of every other intelligence service and UN inspector findings. The Israeli claim was based on old intelligence information, and was parsed on debatable verb “tenses”, whether Iran HAD the capability to restart its nuclear program versus whether it HAS that capability now and in the future in spite of the deal.
https://www.skyhinews.com/news/muftic-iran-deal-pullout-war-peace-or-a-self-inflicted-wound/
Update: 5 13 18:
This is truly a way to destroy the Atlantic Alliance. Originally the sanctioned
appeared to be those who supplied nuclear material for production..a challenge since we have already sanctioned Russia for other things without any behavior modification resulting and China, both signers..
Now it appears to trading anything "with the enemy" is included with the threat.
.The rest are our closest allies in Europe and they are making it clear they will
not abide. This is making America a jackass again.
appeared to be those who supplied nuclear material for production..a challenge since we have already sanctioned Russia for other things without any behavior modification resulting and China, both signers..
Now it appears to trading anything "with the enemy" is included with the threat.
.The rest are our closest allies in Europe and they are making it clear they will
not abide. This is making America a jackass again.
A version of this posting below was published in the Sky Hi News May 16, 2018.
Only President Donald Trump and Israel think Iran is on the brink of gaining nuclear weapons, so President Trump announced the US will pull out of the Iran deal.. The international inspectors there on the ground, our own intelligence services, and all of our European allies agree: the deal is working. However, Trump made a campaign commitment to pull out, so now he has had to fabricate a reason to break the Iran agreement . Israel has its own agenda. It always opposed the Iran deal and believes bombing facilities or threatening it is the answer. Israel provided Trump an excuse that flies in the face of every other intelligence service and UN inspector findings. The Israeli claim was based on old intelligence information, and was parsed on debatable verb “tenses”, whether Iran HAD the capability to restart its nuclear program versus whether it HAS that capability now and in the future in spite of the deal.
Give Trump credit. He is is living up to his campaign promise to pull out of the Iran deal. However one of his campaign promises he could break is that we would not get involved in a useless war in the middle east. This pullout approach could be a risk with huge consequences to our blood and treasure and a self inflicted wound, shooting our national interests in the foot.
Critics of the pullout have been vocal. Some call it an historical blunder like invading Iraq to search of WMD. So now, we will have no inspectors and we will slam economic sanctions on Iran? What did we replace inspections with? Nothing. What did we gain as a country? Nothing. What are we losing as a country? Ten years of Iran not restarting their full blown nuclear program and a plan for indefinite inspections continuing forever. What will be the unintended consequences? North Korea will play Trump and know all the while any agreements with him are to be signed with a wink and a nod.. Now our Arab allies will have the green light to begin their own nuclear weaponization, an arms race in the most war conflicted space on earth. Does this move to pull out of the Iran deal have a hidden intent, critics ask, to unleash Israel and their strange bedfellows, the Sunni Arabs, to start a war with Iraq and then sucker in the US to fight it for them?
The theory of the ultrahawks’ and Trump’s reasoning for pulling out is that such a threat of war will keep Iran from restarting their nuclear program. The Iranians think there is a crazy man in the White House, so Iranians are motivated to keep their nuclear development in cold storage. Really? Re-instating sanctions and trying to cripple their international banking will bring Iran to its knees, force them to renegotiate, and foment a desperate population to bring on regime change. That theory has some major flaws in practice.
The theory of the ultrahawks’ and Trump’s reasoning for pulling out is that such a threat of war will keep Iran from restarting their nuclear program. The Iranians think there is a crazy man in the White House, so Iranians are motivated to keep their nuclear development in cold storage. Really? Re-instating sanctions and trying to cripple their international banking will bring Iran to its knees, force them to renegotiate, and foment a desperate population to bring on regime change. That theory has some major flaws in practice.
Trump's strategy will only work if our other partners in the deal pull out, too, and restart sanctions, but that is not happening. So far the Western European signers say they will stand by the deal. The US has had virtually no trade with Iran since the fall of the Shah so our solo sanctions would have zero impact on Iran.. We will become instead a bellacose supporter of those now unleashed to use military strikes, risking a wider war and an Arabian nuclear arms race as the rest of the world , including China and Russia, continues buying Iranian oil and products.
Friday, February 3, 2017
What is world leadership and Trump's bad start to be a world leader.
So much is what is your definition of a world leader? One who cuts and runs and leaves the field to others or one who provided the leadership to assemble many countries to meet a common goal? In the first couple of weeks, Trump has managed to try to bully Australia, Germany, Mexico and put the English PM in trouble back home, and ticking off others with the Muslim ban by another name as a way to achieve foreign policy goals. This may be his making of a deal, but the deal it has raised has been bad will, a great deal of it.
In response to a facebook posting, a reader responded: "After the debacle of 8 years of Obama, it will be very difficult to re-establish our role as world leader. Obama virtually did away with NATO, totaled screwed up the situation in Syria, botched the Crimean problem and drove a dagger in the heart of Israel. How's that, for world leadership?"
My response: "He declares NATO obsolete as a mutual defense pact, wants to lift sanctions against Russian encroachments in Crimea and Ukraine, sanctions that Obama negotiated, Leaves the TPP, action that will only enhance Chinese trade and influence in SE Asia, a treaty which Obama negotiated; wants Russia to take over the Syrian war and thereby strengthening Iran's hand; ..How is all of this making the US a world leader? It is simply leaving the world with a vacuum to be filled by Russians and China. " That is not world leadership by any definition.
World leadership is also not delivering muddled messages. Recently the Trump administration announced "it was putting Iran on notice" after a ballistic missile test. Does that mean throwing out the Iran nuclear deal as Trump proposed in his campaign, or keeping it and making Iran stick to the agreement?
It is also issuing executive orders that result in chaos and misunderstandings with the enforcers. Incompetence was the case in the recent order to halt incoming people even with legal entry who come from the seven Muslim countries.
It may not only be poor leadership and an inconceived, messy , confusing rollout, but also may be unconstitutional. A Seattle federal court issued a restraining order, halting the ban from the seven Muslim countries on the basis that it was not issued on the basis of fact since none of the acts of terror committed on US soil were by anyone from those countries and noted that where the 9/11 terrorists came from, used to justify the ban, was from Saudi Arabia, not on the ban list. Others have observed that the Muslim countries escaping the ban list were those in which the Trump organization had business interests.
The fallout from these first few weeks in office indicate trouble down the road as Trump tries to reshape US foreign policy. If the US sees it in its national interest to get involved militarily, by ticking off our closest allies, we could , be on our own, meaning it will be our blood and treasure alone that will be on the line.
There is also a nagging fear that Trump could use such a military adventure for domestic political reasons if he needs to increase his favorable ratings Right now, 53% of Americans disapprove of his handling the office since he was sworn in. 44% approve. Those are historically low ratings for the beginning of an administration. One thing we know about TV star Trump is that he relishes his ratings above all and that he would take action to boost them is not out of the realm of possibility.
Bernie Sanders, speaking in Arlington Virginia recently, as reported by Yahoo News, expressed a fear I have heard from others personally around me. The question is what leadership position would a Trump take if he finds his poll numbers falling and the rest of the world refusing to take his lead? We have seen this movie again and again over history: start a war so everyone rallies around the flag (i.e.Trump). Said Sanders, "ARLINGTON, Va. — Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, speaking at a conference on the “Politics of Love” Thursday evening, said he feared that President Trump would plunge the nation into war.
re: incompetence in the "Muslim" ban order process: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQCrSPXujwU&utm_
https://www.yahoo.com/news/seattle-judge-blocks-trump-immigration-order-000739102.html
https://www.aol.com/article/news/2017/01/29/trump-s-muslim-ban-excludes-muslim-countries-linked-to-his-busin/21702521/
In response to a facebook posting, a reader responded: "After the debacle of 8 years of Obama, it will be very difficult to re-establish our role as world leader. Obama virtually did away with NATO, totaled screwed up the situation in Syria, botched the Crimean problem and drove a dagger in the heart of Israel. How's that, for world leadership?"
My response: "He declares NATO obsolete as a mutual defense pact, wants to lift sanctions against Russian encroachments in Crimea and Ukraine, sanctions that Obama negotiated, Leaves the TPP, action that will only enhance Chinese trade and influence in SE Asia, a treaty which Obama negotiated; wants Russia to take over the Syrian war and thereby strengthening Iran's hand; ..How is all of this making the US a world leader? It is simply leaving the world with a vacuum to be filled by Russians and China. " That is not world leadership by any definition.
World leadership is also not delivering muddled messages. Recently the Trump administration announced "it was putting Iran on notice" after a ballistic missile test. Does that mean throwing out the Iran nuclear deal as Trump proposed in his campaign, or keeping it and making Iran stick to the agreement?
It is also issuing executive orders that result in chaos and misunderstandings with the enforcers. Incompetence was the case in the recent order to halt incoming people even with legal entry who come from the seven Muslim countries.
It may not only be poor leadership and an inconceived, messy , confusing rollout, but also may be unconstitutional. A Seattle federal court issued a restraining order, halting the ban from the seven Muslim countries on the basis that it was not issued on the basis of fact since none of the acts of terror committed on US soil were by anyone from those countries and noted that where the 9/11 terrorists came from, used to justify the ban, was from Saudi Arabia, not on the ban list. Others have observed that the Muslim countries escaping the ban list were those in which the Trump organization had business interests.
The fallout from these first few weeks in office indicate trouble down the road as Trump tries to reshape US foreign policy. If the US sees it in its national interest to get involved militarily, by ticking off our closest allies, we could , be on our own, meaning it will be our blood and treasure alone that will be on the line.
There is also a nagging fear that Trump could use such a military adventure for domestic political reasons if he needs to increase his favorable ratings Right now, 53% of Americans disapprove of his handling the office since he was sworn in. 44% approve. Those are historically low ratings for the beginning of an administration. One thing we know about TV star Trump is that he relishes his ratings above all and that he would take action to boost them is not out of the realm of possibility.
Bernie Sanders, speaking in Arlington Virginia recently, as reported by Yahoo News, expressed a fear I have heard from others personally around me. The question is what leadership position would a Trump take if he finds his poll numbers falling and the rest of the world refusing to take his lead? We have seen this movie again and again over history: start a war so everyone rallies around the flag (i.e.Trump). Said Sanders, "ARLINGTON, Va. — Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, speaking at a conference on the “Politics of Love” Thursday evening, said he feared that President Trump would plunge the nation into war.
“This is one of the things that scares me most: For a demagogue to succeed, they need to cultivate hatred. Now the hatred may be against immigrants — we’re all supposed to hate immigrants, and maybe it’s other minorities, African-Americans, Latinos,” Sanders said. “But also I worry that the hatred will spill over to foreign affairs, and that we are maybe entering into a situation where a Trump needs a war — and war and war — to rally public support.”
http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/03/politics/donald-trump-approval-rating/index.html?sr=fblead0203trumppoll
https://www.aol.com/article/news/2017/01/29/trump-s-muslim-ban-excludes-muslim-countries-linked-to-his-busin/21702521/
http://www.denverpost.com/2017/01/27/is-trump-abandoning-americas-role-as-a-world-leader/
Monday, January 18, 2016
The presidential race will be decided more than ever by the middle
The way it appears in January 2016, the likely outcome of
the presidential general election will be decided by the middle. A large number
of Democrats, independents, and Republicans will have to choose between either
extremes or settle for the least extreme. The middle, while shrinking in the recent
years, will be larger because both parties’ bases have swung to their farthest
ideological corners and their disparate positions split the anger vote. The
result is to give the advantage to a candidate who appeals to a majority of the
swing middle.
The Iran deal and its initial success has highlighted the
power of diplomatic and economic tools that required the building of alliances,
even including the Russians and the Chinese.
The anti- Muslim rhetoric by the extremes in the Republican party have
made that kind of diplomacy nearly impossible
by alienating or insulting European and
middle eastern allies needed to forge those diplomatic agreements. Left as a
tool in the US quiver would be near solo military action a la Iraq. We know how
Iraq turned out ,fueling the rise of ISIS, eliminating Iran’s chief enemy,
Iraq, and the cost in blood and billions
in dollars. The new blood would be contributed
by this current generation of younger voters.
Adding to the GOP’s extremist problem is a sizeable chunk of
GOP voters supporting either Donald Trump
or Ted Cruz. Both have alienated Hispanics who are swing votes in states
crucial to winning the electoral college. It is still GOP litany that
government control of health care is bad and Obamacare should be repealed, leaving 19 million without affordable coverage
and no economically veto feasible way to provide coverage of pre-existing conditions.
The Democratic debate last Sunday was between the more
pragmatic Hillary Clinton and the idealism of Bernie Sanders about whether to
improve on Obamacare (Clinton) or support
Sanders’ radically changing the entire health care system to a single payer government
controlled program eliminating private health insurers. Sanders plans to pay
for his single payer system completely government controlled with a variety of higher
taxes on even the middle class in exchange for lower out of pocket and system
costs. It is unclear if Sanders’ earlier proposal continues, that states would
agree to chip in 14% of the cost. Getting
Obamacare’s nearly free Medicaid expansion has met with significant numbers of
states not participating. Most state governments are controlled by the GOP.
For the Democrats, a
bird in the hand should be worth two in the bush. It has been nearly six years since the Sanders’ approach and a
“public option” giving consumers a choice of a government plan or a private
insurance one, were debated and rejected.
Then both houses of Congress and the White House were in the hands of
Democrats. Chances of a Sanders’ proposal
succeeding now is even dimmer .The House is and will be in the hands of the tea
party protected by gerrymandered ‘safe seats” . The Senate control of either
party is up for grabs. Opening the debate on health care again is a gamble. Democrats could be divided. A united GOP could succeed in altering or killing
Obamacare, especially if their legislation is veto proof or signed by a GOP
president
A versiion of this was published in the www.skyhidailynews.com January 22, 2016
A versiion of this was published in the www.skyhidailynews.com January 22, 2016
Monday, October 5, 2015
The GOP's logic on the Iran deal and same sex marriage escape me
There are some public policy positions being promoted by a
variety of politicians that just do not seem logical. Often good politics trump reason, especially
when they invigorate the juices of their
political bases. Take the examples of
the failed attempt in Congress to block the Iran nuclear deal and some freedom
of religion arguments advanced by the GOP.
The logical element
of the Iran deal is that it will keep war from happening immediately, and maybe
even in a distant future, though much can change in a decade for better or for
worse. On the other hand, failure to
pass the deal would have freed all other participants to drop any sanctions and
they had made that clear they would do so. Clearly sanctions by one country,
the US, would not be effective in changing Iran’s behavior any more than they
were against Cuba. Sanctions by the larger international community were the
only leverage against Iran. Iran could
develop nuclear weapons in a few months. Past cyber attacks, assassinations of scientists, and
bombing runs caused only temporary setbacks. With the deal, violations of sanctions will
trigger automatic reinstatement of international sanctions and military action
is still an option. There will be constant monitoring of nuclear sites capable
of nuclear weapons production and supply lines, with some level of inspections
lasting past the ten year period.
Opponents to the deal
ginned up fear, not reason. Their argument: Iran’s government had bad policies toward its
people and was untrustworthy. The deal does not rely on trust or love. Inspections
are regarded by the international community as the most stringent ever imposed
on any country. Unable to refute that,
the opponents just ignored or distorted the inspection protocols in their multi-
million dollar ad campaign full of misleading statements and instead, scared
the public into opposing the deal.
In preparation for the 2016 elections, a fear mongering ad
is running against Colorado Democratic Senate incumbent, Michael Bennet claiming
he will be responsible for a nuclear holocaust caused by his vote in favor of
the Iran deal. This ad, with multi lingual countdown by children, is similar to
the one Democrats used effectively against GOP presidential candidate Barry
Goldwater in 1964 who had indicated a willingness to use nukes. It depicted a
child counting daisy petals followed by a nuclear blast. Bennet has a reasoned case to make the Iran
deal would immediately make a nuclear war less likely.
Also illogical is the GOP’s freedom of religion argument
that same sex marriage destroys religious freedom. Same sex marriage is contrary to religious beliefs
held by many who would like government to force others to uphold their views
and step on others ’rights. In 2014 the Supreme Court ruled same sex couples
must be allowed to marry nationwide regardless if state laws permit marriage
only by heterosexual couples. The ruling was particularly pertinent to
officials issuing marriage licenses. A county clerk was jailed when she refused
to issue licenses to same sex couples because it violated her religious
beliefs. She has always been free to resign or run for another office, and she
is still protected by the Constitution to continue her crusade elsewhere.
Noticed: the ruling did not prevent heterosexual marriage.
A version of this was published in the Sky Hi Daily News (www.skyhidailynews.com) October 8,9, 2015
A version of this was published in the Sky Hi Daily News (www.skyhidailynews.com) October 8,9, 2015
For more, visit the July 19, 2015 posting “The GOP comes out swinging against the
Iran deal…. Also see the 8/2/15 blog posting: Heads up, spinners at work on the Iran deal....for a critique of the anti Iran deal ads
Felicia Muftic is a former Denver County Clerk who was sworn
in to uphold the Constitution and the rule of law.
http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/national/supreme-court-opinion-on-same-sex-marriage/1605/
Sunday, August 9, 2015
GOP candidate debate: sins of omission
In watching the GOP candidate debates, I was struck by how
little the needle was moved on the issue meter. There were no surprises or
taking back of the individual candidate positions enunciated before the debates. What was not said was also noteworthy. Especially ignored were alternatives to
Obamacare and the effectiveness of the verification provisions of the Iran
deal. In 2012, jobs and the economy were
the overwhelmingly hot topic, though not quite as front and center in this
debate. Perhaps the improving economy and jobs picture took winds out of those
red sails.
The shades of
conservatism were on display in spite of Donald Trump’s hogging more minutes on
the clock than others. The Fox
inquisitors put each on the spot to respond to and clarify their past
statements that could be seen as controversial or defining of their deviation
from the rest of the herd. Trump’s post- debate objection insulted a FOX news
anchor. Both John Kasich and Jeb Bush made brief, but clear and convincing
defense of such positions, Bush on common core and immigration, and Kasich
caring about the poor in context of Medicaid expansion.
What the Fox questioners did not do is to ask the candidates
to rebut Democratic positions at the top of the Democratic issue priority list,
including environment, global warming, income inequality, voter suppression, and
financial services reform. However, the
candidates supported defunding Planned Parenthood, a guaranteed turn-off of
young women voters.
The most glaring sin of omission concerned the Iran deal,
condemned by nearly all on the stage. Rarely did the word “verify” pass their
lips. Repeated charges that Obama was naïve
to trust Iran completely ignored the entire text of the agreement which was about the verification process approved by
all nuclear and non- proliferation
experts in the world, hardly the naïve ones. Candidates like other anti- deal
critics remained intentionally ignorant of the details. The exception was GOP’s amateur hour politicians
citing the 24 day permission request for inspection. That had been defended by
the nuclear experts as way to put a cap on delay tactics and clandestine
nuclear development traces could not be destroyed in that time period.
Complained the
candidates and others, the deal failed because Iran’s behavior toward Israel
would not be changed. Those were never the goals. Stopping Iran from getting
the bomb was. That without the deal Iran could have nuclear weapons in months
was simply ignored. It seemed less important to the candidates than there was a
chance Iran could have nuclear weapons in ten years. Do they really mean that
short term nuclear proliferation was not a concern, but long term was? Or do
they mean war now was the only alternative to keeping Iran from nukes? How is
another mid- east war in US interests?
Another sin of omission was the mantra shared by all GOP
candidates: repeal and replace
Obamacare. Once simply kill Obamacare
was the line. Promoting a replacement is at least an acknowledgement of the
effectiveness of Obamacare in getting 11 million more insured. What was glaringly missing was with what they
would replace it, including details of
costs and who would lose/keep/gain affordable coverage.
Sunday, August 2, 2015
Heads up: the issue spinners are at work
It is bad enough that the issues facing America are complex,
the decisions consequential to our security or to the lives of citizens, but
when advocates for one side or the other tell untruths, mislead, or leave out
important details, it becomes difficult for citizens to form rational opinions
based on facts. Issues with highly
technical components are especially vulnerable to abuse by false advertising.
There are two issues hot on the burner these days which are
rife with spin doctors plying their trade. One concerns the Iran nuclear deal
and the other, defunding Planned Parenthood. Whatever your position on either
issue, heads up. Media fact checkers are
blowing the whistle.
Much of the Iran nuclear deal is very technical. You may
have seen the commercial claiming the Iran nuclear deal is a bad deal, ending
with “we need a better deal”. There is
very little in the ad that is not misleading.
The ad claims that there will be no inspection of 50 military sites. In Arizona,
television station ABC15 ‘s fact checker
consulted experts and found there will indeed
be inspection of military sites that are nuclear development capable. Other heavyweight experts
agree. Not all military sites are appropriate for inspection. If the inspection
request is refused, sanctions would be re- imposed. Touts the ad, Iran can build a nuclear weapon
in two months because Iran keeps nuclear facilities. Experts looking at the deal say because the centrifuges
needed to build a bomb are mothballed and enriched uranium is limited or
destroyed, it would take at least a year.
The ad is paid for by Citizens for a Nuclear Free Iran, an
ironic name because the result would be a nuclear Iran sooner than much later,
if at all. The ad purports to support negotiating a better deal. We note while we reinstate sanctions and try
to reassemble any willing negotiators, Iran could build their bomb within
months, and no inspectors would be there to detect it. Threat of sanctions is not the only enforcer.
If Iran breaks the deal, nothing in the agreement prohibits a military strike,
per Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter.
Selective editing of undercover video is a technique as old
as video. Such is the case of the film
used to convince lawmakers and the public that Planned Parenthood sells fetal
tissue for a profit. Factcheck.org, an
independent non- partisan fact checking group, looked at the original video of
an “interview” of a Planned Parenthood official and compared it to the version
widely circulated in the media used as a pretext by anti- abortion activists to
motivate Congress to defund the organization. Left out of the version often
repeated on news reports is the part in which the official carefully explains
that the fetal tissue is used for research and that there is no profit. Factcheck.org cites experts who calculate that
Planned Parenthood’s charges probably do not even cover expenses. That Planned
Parenthood makes a profit on donated fetal tissue is not true. Of course, federal money by law cannot be used
for abortions and the federal money now goes only for cancer screening and
other women’s health services, which would be defunded.
A version of this was run as a column in the www.skyhidailynews.com August 6, 7 2015
A version of this was run as a column in the www.skyhidailynews.com August 6, 7 2015
http://www.bloombergview.com/quicktake/irans-uranium-enrichment (destroys 2/3 centrifuges and limits all but 3.67% enriched
uranium stores; limit refining metal to 5% over 15 years; after 10 years can
build some centrifuges)
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/03/31/carter-says-iran-nuclear-deal-would-not-limit-us-military-option.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/07/15/how-the-nuclear-deal-can-keep-iran-from-cheating-according-to-a-former-u-n-inspector/
Sunday, April 12, 2015
On the Iran deal..looking out for number one. The deal is in US interests.
Looking out for number one should be the primary concern of
Congress’ position on the Iran nuclear deal. Number one means us, the United States. A deal as outlined in the framework is in the
interest of our country because it is
the best way to avoid getting involved in another ground war in the Middle
East. The alternative is to remove any
constraints on military conflicts with a march to war and an inevitable risk
the US will find its boots on the ground as we fight on behalf of our allies in
the region whose backs we have pledged to protect.
All out military conflict would be in no one’s interest,
especially the civilians from Israel to Iran who will bear the brunt of the
carnage. There is a body of thought that bombing Iran’s physical facilities
would also require boots on the ground to be effective. Whose boots? Ours?
The devil is in the
details still in process of being negotiated.
The fat lady has not sung and there are those both in the US and Iran
who are out to sabotage the framework without waiting for the final aria. Those attempting to abort the embryonic deal
are US neocons such as John Bolton who want to do a pre-emptive military strike
against Iran now, those who do not trust any verification methods to work, and
hard liners in Iran who do not want to give up their ability to develop their
nuclear weapons.
Those U.S. neocons are the same ilk who talked us into
invading Iraq. If we did not learn anything
from Iraq, the futility, the loss of blood, the heartbreak of wounded warriors,
and the $6 billion in treasure, then there is no hope for this country ever
acting rationally. However, the US killing the deal would leave drummers for
war as the ones in the drivers’ seat in Iran, with our Middle East allies, and in
Congress, since there would be no restraints or constraints or alternatives
left.
One possible scary outcome is that both Iran and Israel, who
already has nuclear WMD, would be at a standoff of reminiscent of the cold war’s
mutually assured self- destruction. We would then see Sunni Arabs race to get
their own bombs. One itchy finger on a nuclear trigger could unleash the unthinkable.
The simplistic alternative, to reinstate the sanctions,
works only if Iran is the one to scuttle the deal. If the US kills it, it is doubtful our
partners in negotiations, France, Germany, United Kingdom, the EU, Russia and
China, would continue since the purpose of the sanctions was to get Iran to
negotiate and their chief partner, the US, was an unreliable negotiator.
Republicans and some Democrats in Congress have become deaf
to credible safeguards against Iran cheating. The reassurance of one of our chief
negotiators, the Secretary of Energy, Ernest Moniz, a nuclear physicist,
carries more weight than politicians’ partisan speculations. Congress is also
deaf to those they represent. The
American people support a nuclear deal by a nearly 2 to 1 margin per a
Washington Post/ABC News March 30 poll.
Verson of this post published in www.skyhidailynews.com 4 17 15
Verson of this post published in www.skyhidailynews.com 4 17 15
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/poll-2-to-1-support-for-nuclear-deal-with-iran
http://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2015/04/09/could_air_power_stop_iran_107858.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)