Showing posts with label global threats. Show all posts
Showing posts with label global threats. Show all posts

Saturday, September 08, 2012

Biggest Threats To Peace - Israel And U.S.

The inimitable Noam Chomsky (pictured above) is not like most people. Most people, especially Americans view the world from an ethno-centric viewpoint. That is, that they start from the view that their own country is right in whatever it does, and use that point of view then to judge the rest of the world To say that this kind of viewpoint is often wrong would be an understatement. Chomsky asks us to climb out of our ethno-centric skins and try to view the world from a position of no bias.

In a recent article for The South African Civil Society Information Service, Chomsky asks us to do this and to take a fresh and unbiased look at the situation in the Middle East. When we do so, he believes we will see that Iran is not nearly the greatest threat to world peace. The United States and Israel are far greater threats. Whether you agree with Chomsky or not, this is a very thought-provoking read (and it's never a bad thing to stimulate the little gray cells). Here is a part of Chomsky's article:

It is not easy to escape from one’s skin, to see the world differently from the way it is presented to us day after day. But it is useful to try. Let’s take a few examples.

The war drums are beating ever more loudly over Iran. Imagine the situation to be reversed.

Iran is carrying out a murderous and destructive low-level war against Israel with great-power participation. Its leaders announce that negotiations are going nowhere. Israel refuses to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty and allow inspections, as Iran has done. Israel continues to defy the overwhelming international call for a nuclear-weapons-free zone in the region. Throughout, Iran enjoys the support of its superpower patron.

Iranian leaders are therefore announcing their intention to bomb Israel, and prominent Iranian military analysts report that the attack may happen before the U.S. elections.

Iran can use its powerful air force and new submarines sent by Germany, armed with nuclear missiles and stationed off the coast of Israel. Whatever the timetable, Iran is counting on its superpower backer to join if not lead the assault. U.S. defense secretary Leon Panetta says that while we do not favor such an attack, as a sovereign country Iran will act in its best interests.

All unimaginable, of course, though it is actually happening, with the cast of characters reversed. True, analogies are never exact, and this one is unfair – to Iran.

Like its patron, Israel resorts to violence at will. It persists in illegal settlement in occupied territory, some annexed, all in brazen defiance of international law and the U.N. Security Council. It has repeatedly carried out brutal attacks against Lebanon and the imprisoned people of Gaza, killing tens of thousands without credible pretext.

Thirty years ago Israel destroyed an Iraqi nuclear reactor, an act that has recently been praised, avoiding the strong evidence, even from U.S. intelligence, that the bombing did not end Saddam Hussein’s nuclear weapons program but rather initiated it. Bombing of Iran might have the same effect.

Iran too has carried out aggression – but during the past several hundred years, only under the U.S.-backed regime of the shah, when it conquered Arab islands in the Persian Gulf.

Iran engaged in nuclear development programs under the shah, with the strong support of official Washington. The Iranian government is brutal and repressive, as are Washington’s allies in the region. The most important ally, Saudi Arabia, is the most extreme Islamic fundamentalist regime, and spends enormous funds spreading its radical Wahhabist doctrines elsewhere. The gulf dictatorships, also favored U.S. allies, have harshly repressed any popular effort to join the Arab Spring.

The Nonaligned Movement – the governments of most of the world’s population – is now meeting in Teheran. The group has vigorously endorsed Iran’s right to enrich uranium, and some members – India, for example – adhere to the harsh U.S. sanctions program only partially and reluctantly.

The NAM delegates doubtless recognize the threat that dominates discussion in the West, lucidly articulated by Gen. Lee Butler, former head of the U.S. Strategic Command: “It is dangerous in the extreme that in the cauldron of animosities that we call the Middle East,” one nation should arm itself with nuclear weapons, which “inspires other nations to do so.”

Butler is not referring to Iran, but to Israel, which is regarded in the Arab countries and in Europe as posing the greatest threat to peace In the Arab world, the United States is ranked second as a threat, while Iran, though disliked, is far less feared. Indeed in many polls majorities hold that the region would be more secure if Iran had nuclear weapons to balance the threats they perceive.

If Iran is indeed moving toward nuclear-weapons capability – this is still unknown to U.S. intelligence – that may be because it is “inspired to do so” by the U.S.-Israeli threats, regularly issued in explicit violation of the U.N. Charter.

Why then is Iran the greatest threat to world peace, as seen in official Western discourse? The primary reason is acknowledged by U.S. military and intelligence and their Israeli counterparts: Iran might deter the resort to force by the United States and Israel.

Furthermore Iran must be punished for its “successful defiance,” which was Washington’s charge against Cuba half a century ago, and still the driving force for the U.S. assault against Cuba that continues despite international condemnation.

Monday, October 22, 2007

Richardson Details Global Threats


A couple of days ago, Bill Richardson gave a speech in Iowa in which he detailed the major threats to world peace that the next president will have to deal with. There are many threats to peace, and we have seen with our current president just how badly an inexperienced leader can screw things up.

In our next president, we need someone with experience in dealing with world leaders. No one has had more experience or more success in dealing with world leaders than Bill Richardson -- even those leaders considered to be "outlaws" by most of the civilized world.

Richardson has had success as a congressman, a cabinet member, a governor, and especially as a diplomat on the international stage. After suffering through the incompetent currently in the White House, America badly needs a competent president to restore our respect and world standing, and to solve global threats to world peace. America needs Bill Richardson.

Here is some of what Richardson had to say. You can go here if you'd like to read the entire speech.

"For decades, we believed that the only apocalyptic threat to human civilization was the possibility of nuclear war. Now we know better. We know that poverty and overpopulation affect us all. Refugee crises. Pandemic diseases. Climate change. Environmental degradation. Resource depletion. Ethnic and political instability. These are not just the problems of individual nations; they are the problems of an interdependent world. We are the most powerful nation in the history of the world. Yet we are not immune to such threats. It will take vigilance and bold action now to preserve our safety for the future."

"We need to take immediate, bold steps toward clean energy. The foundation for international action will be my comprehensive energy program, which the Sierra Club has called the most aggressive of any Presidential candidate. I have learned some lessons on the way to making New Mexico the Clean Energy State. The most important one is that Americans are ready to act. All that they need is a President who is ready to lead. Once you lead, you find allies in corners whom you never knew existed."

"In these times, facing these threats, we cannot afford to have untested leadership. My colleagues in this race have my respect, but it is a simple fact that the next international deal negotiated by any of them will be his or her first."

"I rescued three hostages from Sudan; there was no time then for polls or consultants. Now is not the time for political calculation. As we gather our strength for this effort, we must remember that preserving one's popularity is no recipe for inspiring a nation, let alone the world. I owe my success in bringing people together and solving problems to risk taking. Sometimes you have to lay things on the line to get results."