China and Human Rights

China has come under intense criticism lately for Tibet, its role in Africa, its contribution to global warming and its own domestic human rights problems. China's de-facto annexation of Tibet is terrible. Its contribution to conflict in many parts of Africa, including Khartoum's brutal war in Darfur is horrible. China's recent attempt to ship arms to Zimbabwe, while Mugabe's government cracks down on the opposition is intolerable. Its domestic repression, deplorable. No doubt, China pursues its economic interest at expense of human rights and the environment.

Unfortunately, the human rights community has chosen a strategy that doesn't work. The old name and shame game. The problem is, China's leadership doesn't care very much. Sure, they will send out envoy's to refute the claim that China hasn't done enough to help stop the war in Darfur. And they will complain that the U.S. went through its major industrial revolution vis-a-vis cheap energy and with little concern for the environmental consequences. And they are right on that point. But in the end, Beijing's actions reveal what they care about. International prestige. Becoming a major world player on the world scene.

The U.S. is presented with a dilemma. Continue to slam China's human rights record and its dirty economy; while leading the world in arms exports to places like Pakistan, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia, consuming the bulk of the world's resources and undercutting international law. Continue that trend, and prepare for a new war over power and the last drop of oil in Africa, which will soon surpass the Middle East in oil exports.

The alternative is U.S. adherence to international law, especially the Kyoto environmental framework. Reducing U.S. emissions while developing a clean energy economy will show leadership and give the U.S. the credibility to urge China and India to develop their economies in a sustainable way.

Isolationists and neo-cons argue that applying international law undercuts U.S. national security and in the case of the Kyoto protocol, our economy. This is simply false.

International law is a tool. It is a worthless tool if the United States undermines the law. We lose our ability to coerce bad actors like the Chinese into stopping arms flows to dictators, and pursuing a more sustainable development strategy if we are the world's leading supplier of weapons and the world's leading emitter of green house gases. The only way to stave off future wars over energy and water is to look towards frameworks and laws which provide equitable resource and power-sharing agreements. U.S. adherence to these frameworks is needed now. The very first step the U.S. Congress can take - pay down our debt to the United Nations.

Earth Day!

The Washington Post says that earth day is dead. I don't know about that, but I do know that something as changed. With more and more of us coming to the realization that the earth is in real peril, today's earth day may not be as carefree as those of yester-year (my first memory of an earth day celebration involves going to the local nature preserve to bounce a huge ball painted like the world from kid to kid -- I'm surprised none of us were crushed by it) I still think they're pretty fun.

So, in honor of the day, and in lieu of a huge ball, I give you the playlist that a local blog-about-town put together:

http://www.brightestyoungthings.com/music/playlisting-for-the-earth/

Enjoy, and tell us here at Of Peace and Politics what activities you took part in for this year's celebration.

What did you do to prevent the war?

I'm a history nut, and today I read an article that brought together my work at FCNL and my zest for the past. In What Have We Learned, If Anything? Tony Judt frets that the United States is trying to forget the past century, a time during which the rest of the world because intimately acquainted with the devastation of war.

According to Judt, the U.S., because we haven't had war on our soil, and don't understand the tragedy of civilian casualties, took a very different message away from the last hundred years of the millennium:

"For many American commentators and policymakers the message of the twentieth century is that war works. Hence the widespread enthusiasm for our war on Iraq in 2003... For Washington, war remains an option- on that occasion the first option. For the rest of the developed world it has become a last resort."

So what are we to do to change the paradigm of militarism and war that rules U.S. society? Judt argues, as I, the history enthusiast would as well that,

"Far from escaping the twentieth century, we need, I think, to go back and look a bit more carefully. We need to learn again—or perhaps for the first time—how war brutalizes and degrades winners and losers alike and what happens to us when, having heedlessly waged war for no good reason, we are encouraged to inflate and demonize our enemies in order to justify that war's indefinite continuance. And perhaps, in this protracted electoral season, we could put a question to our aspirant leaders: Daddy (or, as it might be, Mommy), what did you do to prevent the war?"

Well, what are we doing to prevent war? How can we get people to understand the costs of war? Will take the U.S. going through the destruction and decline that comes with war to finally get it? If that is the case, we might not learn the lesson until too late.

It's True: Immigration is costing Amerians their jobs.

It's just not costing them jobs in the way most think it is. In my last post, I linked the tanking economy to the war in Iraq. No doubt spending trillions to tear down a country is making it a tad hard for the U.S. to meet the needs of its citizens at home. But it seems there is another culprit-- immigration.

Unless you're paying attention, you probably don't know that for the past year the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has been exacting its revenge upon immigrant communities across the country. Raid after raid, measure by measure. Immigrant communities are in crisis. Folks are returning to their country of origin, telling their families not to come -- life is hard in the U.S. and getting harder.

What does this mean for the U.S. economy? Well, as predicted last year by the Secretary of Homeland Security himself, cracking down on immigration without providing people with legal pathways to work is BAD for the economy. When he announced the crackdown last August, Chertoff noted that stricter work-site enforcement, more border agents and harsher penalties for employers could wreck havoc in immigrant-dependent industries like agriculture, hospitality and healthcare (minor industries indeed). He acknowledged to the LA Times, "There will be some unhappy consequences for the economy out of doing this." But by the twisted logic of the Bush administration, shooting down the economy would bring about comprehensive immigration reform. According to oh-so-genius Chertoff, it wouldn't take long before corporate conglomerates would be banging on Congress' door for relief and voila, comprehensive reform would appear.

But what has the real result been? In Chicago, Polish native Andrezj "Peter" Derezinski is being deported back to Poland after 18 years in the U.S. Nevermind that the 41-year-old father of three (U.S. citizens) owns two homes, some commercial property and a thriving heating and cooling business here. And the raids continue. So if you're wondering why the price of groceries has gone up, you might look to the food rotting in the fields because there aren't enough laborers for harvest. If you're wondering why unemployment is jumping higher and higher, you might look at the boarded up shops in Latino neighborhoods and the absurd deportation of successful, hard-working folks.

Or you can blame it on Iraq, either way, it's time for change.

Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos need to consult FCNL's website

I'm currently watching the Democratic debates -- I have never heard such a series of absurd and pointless questions.

I think CG and GS need to check out our "Questions for Candidates" to construct a serious debate.

Seriously.

Also, I take exception to Mr. Gibson quoting sections of the Constitution that are no longer used because they didn't work.

This primary needs to end, or someone has start asking questions that matter. Who cares whether Obama wears a flag pin or not?

I guess it's up to you FCNLers.

Recession what?

Lately, it's recession, recession, recession... and boy is it depressing, which is why I recommend checking out the $3 Trillion Shopping Spree.



Okay, so it's still pretty depressing, but at least they tried...

Power Plays on the Hill

Today Jim Nussle, Director of the Office of Management and Budget is likely to face tough questions from Senate Appropriations Chairman Robert Byrd for the Bush Administration's "emergency supplemental request" of $108 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Approximately $102.5 billion will go towards the Defense department, while the State Department will receive about $5.4 billion.

While Chairman Byrd is grilling Nussle, Senate Democrats will be considering whether its time to ask the longest serving Senator to step down from the chairmanship, given his old age and recent health problems, according to the Politico. Both Byrd's staff and Senate majority leader Reid have attempted to calm the brewing storm, denying reports that Senate Democrats would "dethrone a living legend." According to The Hill, Senator Patrick Leahy has privately expressed interest in replacing the ailing Chairman Byrd. Publicly the Vermont Senator has denied this statement, yet four democratic aides have confirmed that private discussions have been taking place. Hawaii Senator Daniel Inouye is next in line for the post and will be "managing" the war supplemental, the legislative term for shepherding the funding bill through the Senate.

This comes as the congressional democratic leadership are considering plans to split the Administration's funding requests for Iraq and Afghanistan, in order to gain support for Afghanistan funding from the Out of Iraq Caucus, who vows to oppose any more funding for Iraq. This would also clearly result in a Washington power struggle, and mark a difference in the two parties foreign policy agenda at a politically salient time, just before the November elections.

Lastly, Senator Lieberman has publicly come out in favor of Senator McCain, possibly jeopardizing his chairmanship on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee should the Democrats gain more Senate seats in the upcoming November elections.

For more information on the war supplemental.

An appalling lobby visit, a beautiful Union Station

Working on Capitol Hill is often filled with contradictions. In just the past week and a half I have experienced both profound frustration as well as awe at the neighborhood's superficial beauty.

First with the happy beauty. Since I started work here in July, the front esplanade of Union Station has been blockaded. I thought it would stay there forever, as part of some kind of post-9/11 protection. On Monday, however, they were gone- leaving the view to the Capitol Dome clear. Walking to work I felt like Jimmy Stewart in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.

Now to the frustrating. FCNL hosted a smashingly successful young adult lobby weekend from April 4-7 and I was lucky enough to accompany three groups of young people to make photo record of their visits with congressional staff. The first two visits went smoothly, with legislative assistants listening attentively to what the students had to say, and taking notes on information to bring back to their bosses. The third visit, however, was dismal. The group I went with was nervous, as is normal on your first lobby visit, but the legislative correspondant we met with regarded this nervousness as a show of ignorance, and proceeded to treat them with a condescension and disregard that I found insulting and appalling.

At one point this staffer asked me to explain the bill and the mission of FCNL. I was not familiar with the bill; as I had stated at the beginning of the meeting, I was there to take pictures. The more upsetting fact revealed by this move was that the staffer was more interested in what I, a self-proclaimed ignorant resident of Washington, had to say more than a group of students who lived and studied in his district. Was it because he thought I was a lobbyist? Because I was older? Why he did this I can't say, but it left a bad taste in my mouth. Not to mention that his response to what we shared with him demonstrated a basic lack of understanding of policy and history. Shame on you, nameless staffer, for treating constituents like this. Shame on you for not engaging and empowering young people, all of whom can vote. We all expect better.

So go the days of our internship. I am usually impressed with how easy it is to talk to legislators. This experience taught me to remain calm and always check in on what bill you are lobbying.... even if you're just taking pictures.

Ode to the Power of the Blog: or the Story on the Military Considering Recruiting and Hiring Bloggers to Hack Sites "Anti-thetical to US Interests"

Whoah...if nearly a trillion dollars spent on the war isn't enough to wage it and they need to infiltrate the blogosphere, it must be that US soldiers and Iraqi bloggers have had quite a bit of influence.


Wired.com just leaked the story that "A study, written for U.S. Special Operations Command, suggested 'clandestinely recruiting or hiring prominent bloggers."

The report "introduces the military audience to the "blogging phenomenon," and "lays out a number of ways in which the armed forces -- specifically, the military's public affairs, information operations, and psychological operations units -- might use the sites to their advantage. " The report also suggested that these bloggers should hack blogs that are "anti-thetical to US interests".

The report continues to suggest "clandestinely recruiting or hiring prominent bloggers or other persons of prominence... to pass the U.S. message. In this way, the U.S. can overleap the entrenched inequalities and make use of preexisting intellectual and social capital. Sometimes numbers can be effective; hiring a block of bloggers to verbally attack a specific person or promote a specific message may be worth considering.

What do you say gang? FCNL Peace in Politics by day and take on a moonlighting shift for the Pentagon by night?

Sound a bit, well, I don't know....1984-like to have the state develop a plan for psych-ops to use against their own people that they are trying to sell a war to? No reason for alarm- the report warned that these clandestine operations could lose some American hearts and minds:

"On the other hand, such operations can have a blowback effect, as witnessed by the public reaction following revelations that the U.S. military had paid journalists to publish stories in the Iraqi press under their own names. People do not like to be deceived, and the price of being exposed is lost credibility and trust."

HOLD IT!!! PEOPLE DO NOT LIKE BEING DECEIVED?!!

That and that the price of propagandizing the American people is being found out--- if only politicians were this honest!

Could they actually stoop that low?

As mentioned above, they already have.

Here's a reminder of what a "free press" means in Iraq:

Even as the State Department and the United States Agency for International Development pay contractors millions of dollars to help train journalists and promote a professional and independent Iraqi media, the Pentagon is paying millions more to the Lincoln Group for work that appears to violate fundamental principles of Western journalism.

If that isn't enough to get you motivated to blog, I don't know what is :)

Iraqis Continue Peaceful Protests of US Occupation

Followers of anti-U.S. cleric Muqtada al-Sadr march
Monday through the Iraqi city of Najaf on the fourth anniversary
of the fall of Baghdad to U.S. forces.
(Hadi Mizban/Associated Press)

We hear a bit about the US protests against the war, but when is the last time the mainstream media reported on the numerous protests in Iraq? Today is April 9th, the fifth anniversary of the "toppling of Baghdad", and of course not one mainstream US media source reported Iraqis peacefully protested the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

Last year tens of thousands of Iraqis protested against the occupation (pictured above). The article cites that "Col. Steven Boylan, a U.S. military spokesman and aide to the commander of all U.S. forces in Iraq, praised the peaceful nature of the demonstration, saying Iraqis 'could not have done this four years ago.'

"This is the right to assemble, the right to free speech — they didn't have that under the former regime," Boylan said. "This is progress, there's no two ways about it."

Isn't that the sweetest thing you ever did hear? Of course what Col. Boylan forgot to mention is that these protesters are expressing is a very popular platform: as of last month, 70% of Iraqis are calling the withdrawal of US forces. And yes, even the Shias who we came to bring even more liberation to, 55% of them said the departure of US forces made a civil war LESS likely [according to BBC/ABC poll from September 07-yes during the "surge"]....but honestly, what do they know? Obviously their opinion doesn't mean too much, but the important part is, they are more than welcome to have one :)

Moqtada al-Sadr had announced a million strong protest to mark today's anniversary, but postponed it off citing security concerns (hmm....not safe enough to protest this year...and what, Col. Boylan, might that say about progress?) . But the Iraqi Islamic Party hosted a protest in the city of Fallujah today. (This party is the largest Sunni political party in parliament with 25 seats out of 275.) It was reported in Voices of Iraq, which is a news service run that pools Iraqi media and translates it into English. (Substitute it for the Times or Post just once--you won't regret it)

TODAY'S PROTEST:
Anbar, Apr 9, (VOI) – The Iraqi Islamic Party (IIP) in Fallujah city of Anbar province organized on Wednesday a peaceful demonstration that condemned the 5th anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

"50 demonstrators participated in the demonstration," Mohammed Hussein al-Zobaee, a senior leader of the IIP and member of Anbar provincial council told Aswat al-Iraq – Voices of Iraq – (VOI).

"We consider April 9 a day of invasion, occupation, and robbery of the treasuries of Iraq and its people," he added.

The demonstration lasted for around one hour, at al-Jumhoriya street, center of Fallujah, and near the IIP's head office in the city.

Powerless in the face of Power

That's how listening to my favorite radio program, "This American Life", this week made me feel.

Listen to: The Audacity of Government

It should be called "The Audacity of the Executive Branch and how Congress doesn't do anything to stop them."

It makes me want to:

1) Vote
2) Yell at my members of Congress

Two things any good radio show should do. Bravo Ira.