The Diplomatic Times Review

DeLay-Abramoff Money Trail Shows How Things Get Done in Washington

The Washington Post's Jeffrey Smith reported December 31, 2005 that, "The U.S. Family Network, a public-advocacy group that operated in the 1990s with close ties to Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Texas, was funded almost entirely by corporations linked to embattled lobbyist Jack Abramoff, according to tax records and former associates of the group."

"During its five-year existence," The Post said, " the U.S. Family Network raised $2.5 million but kept its donor list secret. The list, obtained by The Washington Post, shows that $1 million came in a single 1998 check from a now-defunct London law firm whose former partners will not identify the money's origins."

I think the DeLay-Abramoff affair is giving anybody whose interested a look at how things really get done in government and politics.

For more, please see "The DeLay-Abramoff Money Trail." See "A High-Powered Lobbyist's Swift Fall From Grace" for background on Abramoff.

A New U.S. Navy Secretary Scheduled to be Sworn In January 3

Donald Winter will be "sworn in as the Secretary of the Navy on January 3, 2006, according to the Associated Press. I' bet most Americans have never heard of him. But so what? Americans generally don't know who their leaders are, with the exception of the president and the more visible cabinet secretaries. See "New Navy secretary to be sworn in next week."

Is Donald Trump Politic Enough to be Governor of New York?

I see where the Associated Press (AP) has reported that Donald Trump is considering running for governor. The source for this speculation, according to the AP, is New York State Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno. I don't think Trump has the patience to be a politician. He's a deal maker so at least he has that in his favor. Here's the story.

New Posts Up at The Blogging Journalist

If you are interested in blogging, new posts are up over at The Blogging Journalist. I'm off to see Syriana and will post more here later today.

White House Wants Supreme Court to Overturn Decision on Padilla

The Bush White House just won't quit. "Hoping to overturn a federal appeals court ruling last week, the Bush administration Wednesday [December 28, 2005] asked the Supreme Court to allow the immediate transfer of accused terrorist Jose Padilla from a military prison to civilian custody," according to the December 29, 2005 edition of csmonitor.com.

The Monitor noted that, "The New York Times reports that in its brief to the high court, the Justice Department called the appeals court ruling that blocked the transfer an "unwarranted attack" on presidential discretion."

For more, see "Padilla's lawyers, Justice Dept. ask Supreme Court to hear appeal."

President Bush Faces a War Within the War

While so much of public debate has focused on whether the United States is winning the war against the predominantly Sunni insurgency, only a few commentators have noticed that another war in Iraq is in the early stages: the war between the United States and the an emerging Shiite-dominated Iraqi government.

Whether this conflict will soon lead to direct military clashes in 2006 is an open issue, but is not out of the question. Here a few signs of this war within a war:

(1) The Shiite-and-Kurd-dominated government organized after the January 2005 elections to write a constitution, not only conducted discussions with Iran about economic cooperation, it also discussed Iran's training of Iraqi military forces. While this received some media coverage, only a few have seen this as a omen about what is to come and have visualized the implications for American interests and for political stability in the Middle East. For obvious reasons, the Bush administration did not publicize this development.

(2) While the results of the December 15th Iraqi election are not final, it appears that the Shiite political parties who want some version of a theocratic state and closer relations with Iran will have a dominant role in the new government. It is unlikely that this new government will make enough compromises with Sunni interests over the constitution and over the composition of important ministries-- especially the police and military--to allow a stable government to emerge. This will develop in spite of what will be the Bush administration’s vigorous arm-twisting to force such compromises.

(3) The Bush administration publicized the existence of Iraqi torture of Sunnis carried out by Shiite-dominated security forces. This clearly was intended to force the current Shiite-dominated government to avoid alienating Sunnis even farther.

(4) The administration has just announced that the number of American military personnel assigned to Iraqi police commando units will be significantly increased to curb abuses that these units have inflicted on Sunnis. This action speaks for itself

The Bush administration is now caught on the horns of a dilemma. After the invasion, it expected to install a government dominated by someone who would be subservient to what it perceives as American interest. But the irony is that the democratic process the administration boasts about is creating a government will not kowtow to the administration's desires in the long run-although for the short term it needs the American military to fight its civil war against the Sunnis.

The odds are that any new Iraqi government will use American military power to keep Sunni influence at bay. Then once it has consolidated its power, it will push for an American withdrawal leaving a Shiite-dominated state allied with Iran and a disenfranchised but weakened Sunni community. While the Bush administration has not publicly acknowledged this dilemma, it is clearly pushing the Shiites to offer enough compromises to quell major elements of the Sunni resistance.

But how hard can the administration push before the Shiites push back? Whether push will come to shove with the Iraqi government using the Shiite-dominated military force President Bush is creating to resist American pressure is the sixty-four dollar question.

The irony here is that the immediate "victory" that President George W. Bush so mightily craves really means a strategic defeat and increased instability in the Middle East. And for this, so many people have died!

Is Farris Hassan Brave or a Fool?

As Jamie Malernee and Kevin Smith note in their December 28, 2005 South Florida Sun-Sentinel report on 16-year-old, American-born Farris Hassan's venture to Iraq alone, "The (U.S.) State Department bluntly warns Americans not to travel to Iraq." You can imagine why.

So is Hassan brave or a fool? See "Florida teen secretly heads to Baghdad."

Will Traditional Pensions Soon Disappear?

American "Companies are discarding traditional pensions -- or making government foot the bill" according to the Los Angeles Times in a report headlined "How Bedrock Promises Of Security Have Fractured Across America."

What about the promises that were made to American workers?

Justice Department Wants to Know Who Embarassed Mr. Bush

I see the Justice Department has opened an investigation into who leaked classified information to The New York Times about President Gorge W. Bush's secret domestic spying program, which Times reporters Eric Lichtblau and James Risen exposed. As the Associated Press noted December 30, 2005:

The Times revealed the existence of the program two weeks ago in a front-page story that acknowledged the news had been withheld from publication for a year, partly at the request of the administration and partly because the newspaper wanted more time to confirm various aspects of the program.Catherine Mathis, a spokeswoman for The Times, said the paper will not comment on the investigation.

As expected, Mr. Bush has strongly defended domestic spying, something the U.S. often criticized in the former Soviet Union. It also criticizes such spying in China, the Middle East and so-called Third World nations. Here's a December 17, 2005 White House transcript of a radio address in which Mr. Bush defends it.

See my "Taking Risks to Preserve Civil Liberties."

The Blogging Journalist

EXPLANATION: Lately, I haven't spent much time here at The Opinion Gazette or The Diplomatic Times Review. Why?

I've been over at The Blogging Journalist, which debuted December 23, 2005. It's primarily about blogging journalists, so-called "citizen journalists" (most journalists in the U.S. are citizens) and pundits . Now that it's up, I'll be more diligent here and at The Times Review.

Please take a look at The Blogging Journalist and feel free to leave a comment.