The Diplomatic Times Review

‘We Must Redefine What it Means to be Pro-Israel’

Former U.S. Federal Trade Commission Attorney Ralph E. Stone, who writes regularly on international affairs, asserts in a November 15, 2009, post in the Californian Chronicle, which was also published at  Fog City Journal.com, says, “Now is the time for a long overdue debate on our current Israeli foreign policy.” He adds:

The fallout from Israel´s 2006 war with Lebanon and its 2009 invasion of the Gaza strip has made many Americans view the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a new light. It was David (Israel) versus Goliath (the Arab ring states). For many, Israel is now seen as the neighborhood bully.

According to Mr. Stone, “It is unrealistic for the U.S. to suddenly become neutral in all things Middle East, but we must end our lockstep support of Israel with little or no public debate. Instead, we must redefine what it means to be pro-Israel.”

If you want to read more, please see “Redefining U.S. – Israel Foreign Policy.”

Technorati Tags: U.S. and Israel

Is U.S.’ AfPak Policy a Mistake?

Shahid Javed Burki, an writer at the Pakistani publication Dawn.Com, states emphatically in a November 17, 2009, post that, “Pakistan is not Afghanistan. See “AfPak policy a mistake.” He contends:

By coupling the two countries together and calling it ‘AfPak,’ the United States’ intention was to make policymaking simpler. It may have had the opposite effect.

Mr. Burki said, “The idea was that by lumping Afghanistan and Pakistan into one analytical framework, Washington and its allies would be able to focus on one geographic entity and would be able to use the same strategy to counter the threat posed to the West by the rise of Islamic extremism.”

Technorati Tags: U.S. AfPak Policy,Dawn.Com,Shahid Javed Burki

Recommended: ‘Fort Hood & the Perversion of Language…’

Jason Adams, a resident of Hudson, Wisconsin, USA, posted the best analysis I’ve read to date on the news coverage surrounding Major Nidal Malik Hassan’s alleged killing and wounding of U.S. soldiers and civilians at Forth Hood Texas, USA, on November 5, 2009. See Mr. Adam’s November 12, 2009, Dissident Voice post headlined Fort Hood & the Perversion of Language: “The Shooter Was a Soldier.”

Even if you don’t like what the Dissident Voice represents – it’s described as “a radical newsletter in the struggle for peace and social justice” -- read Mr. Adams’ post anyway. Don’t just read it, reflect on what he has to say.

Technorati Tags: Dissident Voice,Jason Adams,Nidal Malik Hasan,Fort Hood Killings

Is Turkey Disillusioned With Europe?

Daniel Steinvorth, writing from Istanbul, Turkey for the German magazine Der Spiegel, says in an article translated from German and posted November 13, 2009 at the English language Spiegel International Online: “As European opposition to EU membership for Turkey grows, Ankara is looking to forge closer ties to its neighbors.”

“Turkey wants to once again become a leading power in the Middle East -- but its relationship with Israel may suffer as a result,” he asserts.

I highly recommend “Disillusioned with Europe, Turkey Looks East.”

Technorati Tags: Turkey,Daniel Steinvorth,Spiegel Online International

Is Rahm Emanuel ‘Trying to Isolate Israel From America’?

Steve Clemon’s informative and influential blog The Washington Note has a November 6, 2009, post by Nahum Barnea, a correspondent for Israel’s Yedioth Ahronoth, that I highly recommend. It’s headlined “Does Netanyahu Believe Rahm Emanuel is Trying to Isolate Israel from America?”

If Mr. Barnea’s analysis of the relationship between the Obama Administration and Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is accurate, is he suggesting that President Barack Obama is trying to forge an even-handed Middle East policy while others in his administration wants him to continue the Israel-is- my-friend at all cost policy that has been the cornerstone of U.S. Middle East policy for 60-years? Just asking.

Technorati Tags: The Washington Note,Steve Clemons,Benjamin Netanyahu,Rahm Emanuel,President Barack Obama

Dawn.com Describes ‘Sri Lanka’s Post-War Scenario’

The Pakistani publication Dawn.com reported November 11, 2009, that, “Having won [34-year old] war [in Sri Lanka], the government of President Mahinda Rajapaksa is now struggling to win the peace.” Reporter Irfan Husain writes:

  After the fighting ended in May, over a quarter of a million Tamils found themselves in enclosed camps, living in appalling conditions. But gradually, the situation has improved, and according to the UN, nearly a hundred thousand internally displaced persons (IDPs) have been released. But whether they have much to return to is questionable.

Mr. Husain said, “Years of fighting have devastated their villages and farms, apart from wrecking the infrastructure in the north and the east.”

Mr. Irfan’s post, which I highly recommend, is headlined “Sri Lanka’s post-war scenario.”

Technorati Tags: Sri Lanka,Sri Lanka's Post-War Scenario,Dawn.Com,Irfan Husain,Mahinda Rajapaksa

Why Isn’t There Debate on Ending U.S. Role in the Afghan War?

“While [U.S] President Barack Obama reviews his strategy on Afghanistan, a perfect moment to send a strong unified message to end the war is slipping through our fingers,” wrote Sonali Kolhatkar, a Foreign Policy In Focus contributor and co-director of the Afghan Women's Mission and co-author of Bleeding Afghanistan: Washington, Warlords, and the Propaganda of Silence, in a November 2, 2009, post in Foreign Policy in Focus. She adds:

  Whether it's because we seem to have bought into the lies about the goals of this war or because we mistakenly feel that a Democratic president is going to come to the right conclusion on his own, one thing is clear: There's no debate within the Democratic Party or in the White House about whether to end the war. The only thing being debated is how to continue the war.

Ms. Kolhatkar says, “Similarly, there's little debate among progressives about how this is a bad war, and at the very least we need an exit strategy. Paralysis has set in on the particular manner of ending the war: whether to wait for some sort of "peace process," to pull out troops now versus later, to preserve troop levels until Afghanistan's women are safe, or some variation of these questions,” she asserts. “We're in a bizarre situation: As Obama waffles on how to continue the war in Afghanistan, progressives are waffling on how to end the war.”

If you want to read the entire post, please see “A Call for Clarity on the Afghanistan War.”

Technorati Tags: Sonali Kolhatkar,Foreign Policy in Focus,Afghanistan,Obama's Afghan Policy

Foreign Policy: ‘Afghanistan is Neither Vietnam nor Iraq’

William Tobey, a senior fellow at Harvard Kennedy School's Belfer Center, notes in a November 10, 2009 post at Foreign Policy’s informative AfPak blog that, “As President Obama contemplates a new strategy in Afghanistan, Washington is obsessed with whether the best analogy to the conflict lies in Vietnam or Iraq, with attendant and obvious implications for policy. Of course,” he adds, “Afghanistan has little in common with either Vietnam or Iraq in terms of history, geography, culture, or politics. There is, however, a more apt analogy, and it involves the very area in dispute.”

For analysis and a brief history of the area referred to, please see Mr. Tobey’s post headlined “Afghanistan is neither Vietnam nor Iraq.”

Technorati Tags: William Tobey,Foreign Policy AfPak Channel,Obama's Afghanistan Strategy

The Political Fallout From Britain’s Afghanistan Adventure

“Ever since Alexander the Great was wounded by a Pashtun archer’s arrow in 327BC Afghanistan has been known as the graveyard of empires,” writes the Times Online’s Rachel Sylvester in a November 10, 2009 post. “It is now becoming increasingly clear that it could be the cemetery of political careers [in Britain] as well — although that is perhaps an inappropriate metaphor given that more than 230 real bodies have so far been buried during the current campaign,”  she asserts. See “Graveyard of empires could claim more careers.”

Technorati Tags: Britain and Afghanistan

Will Americans Accept More Troops Being Sent to Afghanistan?

Frank C. Schell III, Dean’s International Council of the Harris School of Public Policy Studies at the University of Chicago, in the United States, contends in a November 10, 2009 article in the Far Eastern Economic Review that, “The idea of deploying additional American forces can be sold to the American people if certain criteria are met.”

To read about that criteria, please see “The U.S. Needs a New Af-Pak Strategy.”

Technorati Tags: New Af-Pak Strategy,Frank Schell,Afghanistan,Obama Administration