Monday, November 10, 2003
What’s Happening, Iraq: Trends
The alarming casualties…what to say… Sunday’s Washington Post (Robin Wright, Rajiv Chandrasekaran) also reported a notable development, that the Administration is discouraged by the indecisiveness of the hand-picked “Governing Council” of Iraq, fearing that a timetable for withdrawal of U.S. troops will be delayed by the absence of a legitimate government.
The United States is deeply frustrated with its hand-picked council members because they have spent more time on their own political or economic interests than in planning for Iraq's political future, especially selecting a committee to write a new constitution, the officials added. "We're unhappy with all of them. They're not acting as a legislative or governing body, and we need to get moving," said a well-placed U.S. official who spoke on the condition of anonymity. "They just don't make decisions when they need to.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17199-2003Nov8.html
More GOP hardball
Still more examples of their being tough on the Democrats. This time, Democratic pet projects are being thwarted; literally no government funding for projects in any district of a Democratic representative is being approved.
And, Senate Majority leader Bill Frist took the unusual step of suspending an inquiry into the possible misuse of pre-invasion intelligence; Frist claimed that the inquiry was being manipulated "to politically wound the president of the United States."
His action occurs as the dvd “Uncovered…” was being released (and pushed by moveon.org) It lays out the cooking / selective use of intelligence. A full report from the Guardian (Andrew Gumbel):
An unprecedented array of US intelligence professionals, diplomats and former Pentagon officials have gone on record to lambast the Bush administration for its distortion of the case for war against Iraq. In their view, the very foundations of intelligence-gathering have been damaged in ways that could take years, even decades, to repair.
A new documentary film beginning to circulate in the United States features one powerful condemnation after another, from the sort of people who usually stay discreetly in the shadows - a former director of the CIA, two former assistant secretaries of defence, a former ambassador to Saudi Arabia and even the man who served as President Bush's Secretary of the Army until just a few months ago
Between them, the two dozen interviewees reveal how the pre-war intelligence record on Iraq showed virtually the opposite of the picture the administration painted to Congress.
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=461953
Our Friends, the Saudis and the Pakistanis
Everyone is learning the lessons- that the Administration will not stand by its “friends” and that it will respect those with nuclear capability. So the Pakistanis, veterans of deals with the North Koreans, are now dealing with Saudi Arabia. From the Asia Times (Stephen Blank):
…apparently defying those international concerns, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are now reported to have arranged a deal by which Pakistan will provide Saudi Arabia with nuclear technology in return for cheap oil. The US-based Defense and Foreign Affairs Daily even goes so far as to say that Pakistan will station nuclear weapons on Saudi territory. These weapons will be fitted to a new generation of Chinese-supplied long-range missiles with a reach of 4,000 to 5,000 kilometers.
There are numerous motives for this deal, as reported by different sources. In the Saudi case there is evidently growing disengagement with Washington due to the "war on terrorism" and the war on Iraq. These events have created an atmosphere where Saudi elites evidently feel less inclined to rely on American protection in the face of regional threats, specifically the likelihood of an Iranian nuclear weapon. They also see no pressure from Washington being directed against Israel's nuclear arsenal, even though there is no sign or even consideration of an attack on Saudi Arabia. They also clearly resent the evidence of a Saudi connection to al-Qaeda and accusations against them of less than wholehearted cooperation with Washington and other Western capitals in efforts to break up al-Qaeda and its source of financing=
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK07Ak01.html
Medicare: The Assault
The House Republicans and the White House are working together to cap funding for Medicare. They seek to legislate automatic cutbacks in the program if the costs grow faster than “expected.” This would thwart Democratic vows to expand any prescription benefit that might pass, as such expansion then would force higher beneficiary premiums, lessened benefits or higher payroll taxes.
Today’s NY Times (Robert Pear) focuses on the Republicans refusing to vote for a Medicare drug bill unless it encourages competition between Medicare and private plans, while the Democrats refusing to vote for such competition, fearing that it would “undermine traditional Medicare and could raise costs for people who remain in that program.”
Paul Krugman promises to write on Medicare soon; perhaps that will further rev up media interest and fervor from the Democratic candidates.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/10/politics/10MEDI.html
-R
The alarming casualties…what to say… Sunday’s Washington Post (Robin Wright, Rajiv Chandrasekaran) also reported a notable development, that the Administration is discouraged by the indecisiveness of the hand-picked “Governing Council” of Iraq, fearing that a timetable for withdrawal of U.S. troops will be delayed by the absence of a legitimate government.
The United States is deeply frustrated with its hand-picked council members because they have spent more time on their own political or economic interests than in planning for Iraq's political future, especially selecting a committee to write a new constitution, the officials added. "We're unhappy with all of them. They're not acting as a legislative or governing body, and we need to get moving," said a well-placed U.S. official who spoke on the condition of anonymity. "They just don't make decisions when they need to.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17199-2003Nov8.html
More GOP hardball
Still more examples of their being tough on the Democrats. This time, Democratic pet projects are being thwarted; literally no government funding for projects in any district of a Democratic representative is being approved.
And, Senate Majority leader Bill Frist took the unusual step of suspending an inquiry into the possible misuse of pre-invasion intelligence; Frist claimed that the inquiry was being manipulated "to politically wound the president of the United States."
His action occurs as the dvd “Uncovered…” was being released (and pushed by moveon.org) It lays out the cooking / selective use of intelligence. A full report from the Guardian (Andrew Gumbel):
An unprecedented array of US intelligence professionals, diplomats and former Pentagon officials have gone on record to lambast the Bush administration for its distortion of the case for war against Iraq. In their view, the very foundations of intelligence-gathering have been damaged in ways that could take years, even decades, to repair.
A new documentary film beginning to circulate in the United States features one powerful condemnation after another, from the sort of people who usually stay discreetly in the shadows - a former director of the CIA, two former assistant secretaries of defence, a former ambassador to Saudi Arabia and even the man who served as President Bush's Secretary of the Army until just a few months ago
Between them, the two dozen interviewees reveal how the pre-war intelligence record on Iraq showed virtually the opposite of the picture the administration painted to Congress.
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=461953
Our Friends, the Saudis and the Pakistanis
Everyone is learning the lessons- that the Administration will not stand by its “friends” and that it will respect those with nuclear capability. So the Pakistanis, veterans of deals with the North Koreans, are now dealing with Saudi Arabia. From the Asia Times (Stephen Blank):
…apparently defying those international concerns, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are now reported to have arranged a deal by which Pakistan will provide Saudi Arabia with nuclear technology in return for cheap oil. The US-based Defense and Foreign Affairs Daily even goes so far as to say that Pakistan will station nuclear weapons on Saudi territory. These weapons will be fitted to a new generation of Chinese-supplied long-range missiles with a reach of 4,000 to 5,000 kilometers.
There are numerous motives for this deal, as reported by different sources. In the Saudi case there is evidently growing disengagement with Washington due to the "war on terrorism" and the war on Iraq. These events have created an atmosphere where Saudi elites evidently feel less inclined to rely on American protection in the face of regional threats, specifically the likelihood of an Iranian nuclear weapon. They also see no pressure from Washington being directed against Israel's nuclear arsenal, even though there is no sign or even consideration of an attack on Saudi Arabia. They also clearly resent the evidence of a Saudi connection to al-Qaeda and accusations against them of less than wholehearted cooperation with Washington and other Western capitals in efforts to break up al-Qaeda and its source of financing=
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EK07Ak01.html
Medicare: The Assault
The House Republicans and the White House are working together to cap funding for Medicare. They seek to legislate automatic cutbacks in the program if the costs grow faster than “expected.” This would thwart Democratic vows to expand any prescription benefit that might pass, as such expansion then would force higher beneficiary premiums, lessened benefits or higher payroll taxes.
Today’s NY Times (Robert Pear) focuses on the Republicans refusing to vote for a Medicare drug bill unless it encourages competition between Medicare and private plans, while the Democrats refusing to vote for such competition, fearing that it would “undermine traditional Medicare and could raise costs for people who remain in that program.”
Paul Krugman promises to write on Medicare soon; perhaps that will further rev up media interest and fervor from the Democratic candidates.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/10/politics/10MEDI.html
-R
