Just Foreign Policy News
June 2, 2011
Support the Work of Just Foreign Policy
Go Straight to the News Summary
I) Actions and Featured Articles
*Action: Urge Your Rep. to Support H Con Res 51
The latest report is that there may be a vote on the Kucinich Libya war powers resolution Friday – possibly alongside weaker alternatives designed to drain support. Urge your Rep. to support an end to U.S. military involvement in the Libya war. A House vote of no confidence in the Administration’s policy may compel the Administration to seriously pursue a diplomatic resolution.
https://www.justforeignpolicy.org/act/hconres51
*Action: Help Just Foreign Policy Get to Gaza:
Donate to support our participation:
https://www.justforeignpolicy.org/donate/audacityofhope
Urge Hillary to Act to Protect the Passengers on the Flotilla
https://www.justforeignpolicy.org/act/audacityofhope/hillarypetition
Help Support Our Advocacy for Peace and Diplomacy
The opponents of peace and diplomacy work every day. Help us be an effective counterweight.
https://www.justforeignpolicy.org/donate
II) Summary:
U.S./Top News
1) The support of liberals and conservatives – defying the leaders of both parties – for a bill to pull the U.S. military out of the Libya operation, which led GOP leaders to shelve the bill, signaled how abruptly the politics of U.S. warmaking have changed, the Washington Post reports. On Wednesday, House discontent with the Libya military operation – and with warmaking in general – seemed to boil over, the Post says. An early warning came last week, when the House narrowly voted down a proposal to demand a speedy transition of U.S. forces out of Afghanistan.
"There’s been disquiet for a long time," said Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), one of those who supported the Kucinich resolution on Libya. "Republicans have been too eager to support some military ventures abroad. And this, I think, is perhaps a little more consistent with traditional conservatism."
Rep. Dan Burton (R-Ind.), who co-sponsored Kucinich’s bill, said he would press for GOP leadership to bring it up for a vote. "I think, in the House, there’s probably enough votes to pass this," Burton said.
2) When an international flotilla sails for Gaza this month to challenge Israel’s naval blockade of the Palestinian territory, among the boats will be an American ship including the writer Alice Walker and an 86-year-old whose parents died in the Holocaust, the New York Times reports. Organizers said the new flotilla, scheduled to leave in late June, had at least 1,000 passengers on about 10 boats.
The Americans have named their boat "The Audacity of Hope." "We’re sending a message to our own government that we think it could play a much more positive role in not only ending the siege of Gaza, but also ending the whole occupation" of Palestinian land, organizer Leslie Cagan said.
To explain why she was joining the flotilla, Hedy Epstein, the 86-year-old, said, "The American Jewish community and Israel both say that they speak for all Jews. They don’t speak for me. They don’t speak for the Jews in this country who are going to be on the U.S. boat, and the many others standing behind us."
The American boat will carry letters from Americans to Palestinians, not aid, Cagan said. About a quarter of the passengers are Jewish. Among the crew is a former captain in the Israeli Air Force who refused to fly missions in Gaza.
3) Individuals who seek to break Israel’s maritime blockade of Gaza are "taking irresponsible and provocative actions that entail a risk to their safety," the State Department says.
4) President Obama looks set to announce an initial U.S. troop withdrawal from the costly Afghan war that could be larger than previously expected, Reuters reports. Some current and former officials say Obama could easily announce a pullout of at least 10,000 troops over the next year. At the start of this year, a minimal pullout of less than 5,000 troops had been anticipated. Anthony Cordesman, a former defense official and military expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said a drawdown of some 15,000 soldiers over the next year would balance political and military concerns without endangering the overall counter-insurgency campaign. [Arguably, Cordesman’s endorsement of the withdrawal of 15,000 troops establishes that as a floor – JFP.]
5) Calling the global war on drugs a costly failure, a group of high-profile world leaders is urging the Obama administration and other governments to end "the criminalization, marginalization and stigmatization of people who use drugs but do no harm to others," the Los Angeles Times reports. A report by the Global Commission on Drug Policy recommends that governments try new ways of legalizing and regulating drugs, especially marijuana, as a way to deny profits to drug cartels.
The new report said the world’s approach to limiting drugs has failed to cut the supply or use of drugs. More treatment options for addicts are needed, the report said. The assessment cited studies of nations, such as Portugal and Australia, that found decriminalizing the use and possession of at least some drugs has not led significantly to greater use.
The recommendation was swiftly dismissed by the Obama administration and the government of Mexico, which are allied in a violent 4 1/2 -year-old crackdown on cartels that has killed more than 38,000 people in Mexico.
Haiti
6) Cables made available to the Haitian newspaper Haïti Liberté by WikiLeaks show the U.S. embassy in Haiti collaborated unsuccessfully with US oil companies to try to undermine an oil deal between Haiti and Venezuela that was wildly popular among Haitians suffering from high oil prices, The Nation reports. The cables show the extreme lengths that the US embassy was willing to go to try to prevent Haiti from cooperating with Venezuela, The Nation says.
Pakistan
7) A report by the Center for Global Development says the US should hold back much of its $7.5 billion aid package to Pakistan until it reforms dysfunctional policies related to energy, taxes and other areas, AP reports. Barely 2 percent of Pakistanis pay income tax, the report notes. The report also calls for focusing more on trade by giving Pakistani exports easier entry to U.S. markets, noting that Pakistan’s textile exports compete with China, not US production. The report’s authors are mystified about the difficulty of getting basic information about U.S. AID projects in Pakistan, AP says.
Honduras
8) Honduras was readmitted to the OAS Wednesday, having been suspended after the 2009 coup, Reuters reports. Human rights groups are worried abuses by security forces during the coup and attacks on journalists were left unpunished and continue under the new government. Ecuador’s ambassador to the OAS said her country could not support the readmission because of the ongoing violations.
Bahrain
9) Human rights observers said after Bahrain officially ended 11 weeks of martial law Wednesday, security forces attacked peaceful protesters in more than 20 villages with rubber bullets, stun grenades, shotguns and tear gas, the New York Times reports. Though President Obama has called on Bahrain to respect the rights of its citizens, the US has largely looked away as Bahrain and its Persian Gulf allies have crushed Bahrain’s protest movement, the Times says.
Peru
10) Observers in Peru say the US Embassy is backing the presidential candidacy of Keiko Fujimori against Ollanta Humala, writes Mark Weisbrot in the Guardian. "The US embassy strongly opposes Humala’s candidacy," said an award-winning Peruvian journalist. The thought of another Fujimori government is so frightening on human rights and democracy grounds that a number of prominent conservative Peruvian politicians have decided to endorse Humala. But Washington wants Fujimori, because if Humala wins, there is little doubt that he will join the rest of South America on most issues of concern to Washington.
Contents:
U.S./Top News
1) As House GOP leaders fend off vote on Libya resolution, antiwar sentiment simmers
David A. Fahrenthold, Washington Post, June 1
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/as-house-gop-leaders-fend-off-vote-on-libya-resolution-antiwar-sentiment-simmers/2011/06/01/AGYO1lGH_story.html
On Wednesday, 74 days after U.S. forces joined the military operation in Libya, President Obama seemed to run out of goodwill on Capitol Hill.
A group of both liberals and conservatives – defying the leaders of both parties – threw their support behind a bill to pull the U.S. military out of the Libya operation. That prospect led GOP leaders to shelve the bill before it came to a vote.
That episode signaled how abruptly the politics of U.S. warmaking have changed, as the intervention in Libya follows a bloody, weary decade in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Now, a Democratic president has asked the country to support a new military action and missed a legal deadline that required him to get Congress’s authorization.
In response, an antiwar movement has appeared in an unlikely place: a House dominated by the Republican right.
"We are in control in the House, and we want something on the floor," said Rep. John Campbell (R-Calif.), one of a number of conservatives who called Wednesday for a showdown with Obama. "Put a resolution up, and let us express … to the president that ‘you no longer have the authority of this Congress to conduct military operations in that country.’ "
Since the beginning of the Libyan operation, congressional leaders have been quietly supportive of Obama – but mostly just quiet. In the Senate, a resolution in support of the president is still waiting for a vote.
In the House, GOP leaders had said little on the subject, even after Obama missed a deadline set in the 1973 War Powers Resolution. That law required him to obtain congressional permission within 60 days, a deadline that passed last month.
"His intention is not to undermine the commander in chief, at a time when we have troops in harm’s way," Kevin Smith, a spokesman for House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio), said Wednesday.
But also on Wednesday, discontent with that military operation – and with warmaking in general – seemed to boil over.
An early warning had come the week before, when the House narrowly voted down a proposal to demand a speedy transition of U.S. forces out of Afghanistan. In 2010, a similar bill garnered 162 votes in defeat, including nine Republican votes. This time, it still lost – but with 204 votes, including 26 Republican votes.
On Wednesday, the bill at issue was far more drastic. Introduced by Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich (D-Ohio), it would demand that Obama withdraw forces from the Libyan operation within 15 days. That would be a crippling loss for the NATO-led campaign, which relies heavily on U.S. air power.
The resolution looked, a week before, like a legislative long shot.
Then, on Wednesday, it wasn’t.
"There’s been disquiet for a long time," said Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), one of those who supported it. "Republicans have been too eager to support some military ventures abroad. And this, I think, is perhaps a little more consistent with traditional conservatism."
Conservatives expressed support for the bill in a closed meeting, but GOP leaders put off the vote. Instead, they said they would gather all 200-plus House Republicans to discuss Libya again Thursday afternoon.
Rep. Dan Burton (R-Ind.), who co-sponsored Kucinich’s bill, said he would press for GOP leadership to bring it up for a vote. "I think, in the House, there’s probably enough votes to pass this," Burton said. Also Wednesday, Rep. Thomas J. Rooney (R-Fla.) introduced a similar bill, which would require Obama to obtain Congress’ approval by June 19 or begin withdrawing troops.
House Democrats would likely be split on the issue. Several liberals have followed Kucinich, blasting Obama for missing the 60-day deadline. But Rep. Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.), the second-ranking Democrat, said earlier this week that he would not support Kucinich’s bill.
[…] If the House does seek a showdown with Obama over Libya, it would be bucking a Capitol Hill tradition that goes back generations. Most legislators, no matter what their party, have been reluctant to meddle in military campaigns that presidents have already begun.
On Wednesday, some legislators said they were worried whether Congress had the stomach to see that sort of confrontation through. "We’ve got to be honest with ourselves: The answer is no, I don’t think so. Why not? Because it’s easier to let somebody else carry that load [of guiding a war effort], and then applaud or blame," said Rep. John Garamendi (D-Calif.), who said Obama has not clearly articulated the U.S. strategy in Libya.
2) Americans Are Joining Flotilla to Protest Israeli Blockade
Laurie Goodstein, New York Times, June 1, 2011
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/02/world/middleeast/02flotilla.html
When an international flotilla sails for Gaza this month to challenge Israel’s naval blockade of the Palestinian territory, among the boats will be an American ship with 34 passengers, including the writer Alice Walker and an 86-year-old whose parents died in the Holocaust.
A year ago, nine people in a flotilla of six boats were killed when Israeli commandos boarded a Turkish boat in international waters off the coast of Gaza. The Israelis said their commandos were attacked and struck back in self-defense, but the Turks blamed the Israelis for using live ammunition. The raid soured relations between Israel and Turkey and intensified pressure on Israel to end the naval blockade.
Organizers said the new flotilla, scheduled to leave in late June from a port they would not identify, had at least 1,000 passengers on about 10 boats. One boat will carry Spaniards, another Canadians, another Swiss and another Irish.
The Americans have named their boat "The Audacity of Hope," lifting the title of a book by President Obama to make a point, said Leslie Cagan, a political organizer who is the coordinator of the American boat.
"We’re sending a message to our own government that we think it could play a much more positive role in not only ending the siege of Gaza, but also ending the whole occupation" of Palestinian land, she said. "The phrase does capture what we believe, which is that it is possible to make change in a positive way, and that’s a very hopeful stance."
[…] Gabriel Schivone, a student at the University of Arizona who is joining the flotilla, said, "It’s in the tradition of Dr. King’s direct-action principles, to create a situation so tension-packed that it forces the world to look and see what’s happening to the Palestinians."
To explain why she was joining the flotilla, Hedy Epstein, the 86-year-old, said, "The American Jewish community and Israel both say that they speak for all Jews. They don’t speak for me. They don’t speak for the Jews in this country who are going to be on the U.S. boat, and the many others standing behind us."
The American boat is owned by a Greek company and registered in Delaware, Ms. Cagan said. It will carry letters from Americans to Palestinians, not aid. About a quarter of the passengers are Jewish. Among the crew is a former captain in the Israeli Air Force who refused to fly missions in Gaza.
3) Daily Press Briefing – State Department
Mark C. Toner, Deputy Department Spokesman, June 1, 2011
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2011/06/164801.htm#ISRAEL
[…] QUESTION: — flotilla. Yeah. Are you talking to the Israeli government? Are they planning to intervene [against] these ships in international waters? Is it okay with U.S. Government? Or in Israeli waters?
MR. TONER: We have made clear through the past year that groups and individuals who seek to break Israel’s maritime blockade of Gaza are taking irresponsible and provocative actions that entail a risk to their safety. I think I’ve talked about this specifically. We’ve raised our concerns with the Turkish Government as well, and we’ve also met and said publicly as well as privately, meeting with some of these NGOs, that – about our concerns, about the risk for attempting to break this blockade. We want to just reiterate that there are established and efficient mechanisms for getting humanitarian assistance through to Gaza, and that’s been our message consistently. You’re asking me if we’ve raised it with the Israelis?
QUESTION: The Israelis, and if they’re going to intervene these ships in international waters (inaudible).
MR. TONER: You have to – I mean, I’d have to refer you to the Israeli Government as to what their actions may be if people attempt to break the blockade. Our message has been consistent, that there established mechanisms for getting humanitarian assistance into Gaza and that flotilla actions are indeed provocative, and we don’t want to see anybody harmed.
[…]
4) White House Prepares Initial Afghan Drawdown
Missy Ryan and Caren Bohan, Reuters, Thursday June 2, 2011
http://thestar.com.my/news/nastory.asp?file=/2011/6/2/worldupdates/2011-06-02T113801Z_01_NOOTR_RTRMDNC_0_-574460-1&sec=Worldupdates
Washington – President Barack Obama, with Osama bin Laden dead and a fiscal crisis on his hands at home, looks set to announce an initial U.S. troop withdrawal from the costly Afghan war that could be larger than previously expected.
Some current and former officials say Obama could easily announce a pullout of at least 10,000 troops over the next year as the administration seeks to capitalize on gains against the Taliban in the south and the Navy SEAL raid last month that killed the al Qaeda leader in Pakistan.
At the start of this year, with violence raging after nearly a decade of war, a minimal pullout of less than 5,000 troops had been anticipated.
[…] Anthony Cordesman, a former defence official and military expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said a drawdown of some 15,000 soldiers over the next year would balance political and military concerns without endangering the overall counter-insurgency campaign. "It shows you’re serious about reductions. It’s the first step in this transition process to 2014," he said.
White House discussions on the Afghan war, a potential drag for Obama as he eyes his 2012 re-election bid, are tilting subtly toward the so-called counter-terrorism model favoured by Vice President Joe Biden, which relies on targeted raids rather than a heavy footprint of regular combat troops.
The perceived success of special forces raids in Afghanistan over the past year, together with the strike on bin Laden, will strengthen those arguing for a faster drawdown, officials say.
The White House may also be more likely to favour a faster withdrawal as Obama grapples with pressure to cut spending and battles Republicans to raise the limit on U.S. borrowing.
Hostility is mounting in both parties toward the war, which now costs over $110 billion a year. Last week, the House of Representatives narrowly defeated an amendment that would have required Obama to intensify planning for a withdrawal.
[…]
5) High-profile panel urges non-criminal approach to world drug policy
The report by the Global Commission on Drug Policy, which includes former U.N. chief Kofi Annan and past presidents of Mexico, Brazil and Colombia, was swiftly dismissed by the U.S. and Mexico.
Ken Ellingwood and Brian Bennett, Los Angeles Times, 6:41 PM PDT, June 1, 2011
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-mexico-drug-policy-20110602,0,1661469,full.story
Mexico City and Washington – Calling the global war on drugs a costly failure, a group of high-profile world leaders is urging the Obama administration and other governments to end "the criminalization, marginalization and stigmatization of people who use drugs but do no harm to others."
A report by the Global Commission on Drug Policy, which includes former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan and past presidents of Mexico, Brazil and Colombia, recommends that governments try new ways of legalizing and regulating drugs, especially marijuana, as a way to deny profits to drug cartels.
The recommendation was swiftly dismissed by the Obama administration and the government of Mexico, which are allied in a violent 4 1/2 -year-old crackdown on cartels that has killed more than 38,000 people in Mexico.
"The U.S. needs to open a debate," former Colombian President Cesar Gaviria, a member of the panel, said by telephone from New York, where the report is scheduled to be released Thursday. "When you have 40 years of a policy that is not bringing results, you have to ask if it’s time to change it."
[…] In its 2012 budget, the administration has requested $1.7 billion for drug prevention programs, a 7.9% increase from the previous year.
Administration officials have promoted the use of drug courts where judges can sentence offenders to treatment and other terms as alternatives to jail time. The White House also is working to expand reentry programs that aim to reduce recidivism rates by assisting the nearly 750,000 drug offenders released from prison each year to transition more easily back into communities.
Vanda Felbab-Brown, a fellow at the Brookings Institution who has examined U.S. drug policy, said the Obama administration has pushed the issue in a "considerably better direction. Nonetheless, she added, "a lot of it stayed at the level of strategy and rhetoric."
[…] Gaviria, the former Colombian president, said he saw signs of a shift in opinion last year, when Californians voted on a ballot measure that would have legalized possession of small amounts of marijuana. Although the measure failed, "people are changing their minds," he said.
The new report said the world’s approach to limiting drugs, crafted 50 years ago when the United Nations adopted its "Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs," has failed to cut the supply or use of drugs. The report, citing figures from the world body, said global marijuana consumption rose more than 8% and cocaine use 27% between 1998 and 2008.
The group cited a U.N. estimate that 250 million people worldwide use illegal drugs, concluding, "We simply cannot treat them all as criminals."
More treatment options for addicts are needed, the report said. And it argued that arresting and incarcerating "tens of millions" of drug-producing farmers, couriers and street dealers have not answered economic needs that push many people into the trade.
The assessment cited studies of nations, such as Portugal and Australia, that found decriminalizing the use and possession of at least some drugs has not led significantly to greater use.
The group’s members include former U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, the writers Carlos Fuentes and Mario Vargas Llosa and Richard Branson, founder of Virgin Group.
In Mexico, thousands have died in drug-related violence since late 2006, when Calderon deployed the military in a stepped-up fight against organized crime. Most of the deaths stem from turf wars between rival trafficking gangs.
Last month, tens of thousands took to the streets in Mexico City to protest the violence and demand an end to the drug war.
[…]
Haiti
6) WikiLeaks Haiti: The PetroCaribe Files
Dan Coughlin and Kim Ives, The Nation, June 1, 2011
http://www.thenation.com/article/161056/wikileaks-haiti-petrocaribe-files
When René Préval took the oath of Haiti’s presidential office in a ceremony at Haiti’s National Palace on May 14, 2006, he was anxious to allay fears in Washington that he would not be a reliable partner. "He wants to bury once and for all the suspicion in Haiti that the United States is wary of him," said US Ambassador Janet Sanderson in a March 26, 2006, cable. "He is seeking to enhance his status domestically and internationally with a successful visit to the United States."
This was so important that Préval "declined invitations to visit France, Cuba, and Venezuela in order to visit Washington first," Sanderson noted. "Preval has close personal ties to Cuba, having received prostate cancer treatment there, but has stressed to the Embassy that he will manage relations with Cuba and Venezuela solely for the benefit of the Haitian people, and not based on any ideological affinity toward those governments."
Soon, however, it became clear that managing relations with those US adversaries "solely for the benefit to the Haitian people" would be enough to put Préval in Washington’s bad graces-especially when it came to the sensitive matter of oil.
Immediately after his inauguration ceremony, Préval summoned the press to a room in the National Palace, where he inked a deal with Venezuelan Vice President José Vicente Rangel to join Caracas’s Caribbean oil alliance, PetroCaribe. Under the terms of the deal, Haiti would buy oil from Venezuela, paying only 60 percent up front with the remainder payable over twenty-five years at 1 percent interest.
As the press conference rolled on, just a mile away from the National Palace, in the bay of Port-au-Prince, sat a tanker from Venezuela carrying 100,000 barrels of PetroCaribe diesel and unleaded fuel.
Préval’s dramatic inauguration day oil deal won high marks from many Haitians, who had demonstrated against high oil prices and the lack of electricity. But it ushered in a multiyear geopolitical battle among Caracas, Havana and Washington over how oil would be delivered to Haiti and who would benefit.
The revelations come in a trove of 1,918 cables made available to the Haitian weekly newspaper Haïti Liberté by the transparency group WikiLeaks. As part of a collaboration with Haïti Liberté, The Nation is publishing English-language articles based on those cables
[…] According to the leaked US Embassy cables, Washington and its allies, including Big Oil majors like ExxonMobil and Chevron, maneuvered aggressively behind the scenes to scuttle the PetroCaribe deal.
For the Haitian government the oil support from Venezuela was key in providing basic needs and services to 10 million Haitians, securing a guaranteed supply of oil at stable prices, and laying the basis for Haitian energy independence from the United States.
Further, Haiti "would save USD 100 million per year from the delayed payments," noted the Embassy in a July 7, 2006, cable. Préval earmarked these funds for hospitals, schools and emergency needs, such as disaster relief. But the US Embassy opposed the deal.
"Post [the Embassy] will continue to pressure Preval against joining PetroCaribe," Ambassador Sanderson wrote in one April 19, 2006, cable. "Ambassador will see Preval’s senior advisor Bob Manuel today. In previous meetings, he has acknowledged our concerns and is aware that a deal with Chavez would cause problems with us."
[…] The extraordinary story that the Haiti WikiLeaks cables tell of the US Embassy’s campaign against PetroCaribe-which provides such obvious benefits for Haiti-lays bare the real priorities of "Haiti’s most important and reliable bi-lateral partner," as Sanderson calls the United States.
As for Préval and his officials, the cables indicate that, faced with Washington’s might, they employed a preferred form of Haitian resistance, dating back to slavery, known as "marronage," where you pretend to go along with something but do the opposite. This dynamic of US pressure and subtle Haitian pushback has persisted under the Obama administration, which has moved to marginalize Préval’s INITE political party in favor of new president Michel Martelly and his group of pro-American Haitian business supporters.
Under President Martelly, the fate of PetroCaribe remains unclear. But those who appreciate what the program has done for Haiti see reason to worry. While Préval tried to walk the battle-line between Washington and the ALBA alliance, Martelly had a pre-inauguration meeting not with the foreign minister of Venezuela, but that of Colombia, whose US-oriented neoliberal development plan he has said he will emulate.
Pakistan
7) Report: US should delay some aid to Pakistan until key reforms go through, focus more on trade
Nahal Toosi, Associated Press, June 1
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/report-us-should-delay-some-aid-to-pakistan-until-key-reforms-go-through-focus-more-on-trade/2011/06/01/AGWV98FH_story.html
Islamabad – The U.S. should hold back much of its $7.5 billion aid package to Pakistan until it reforms dysfunctional policies related to energy, taxes and other areas, according to a new report that criticizes the American aid program’s focus in a country beset by corruption, poverty and militancy.
The report by the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Global Development is the culmination of months of research and interviews with aid and other experts in Pakistan and the United States. Titled "Beyond Bullets and Bombs: Fixing the U.S. Approach to Development in Pakistan," it also calls for focusing more on trade by giving Pakistani exports easier entry to U.S. markets.
[…] According to the report, the U.S. Agency for International Development spent $275 million in 2009 and $676 million in 2010, the first year covered by the $7.5 billion package, which was approved in 2009.
Although the report largely supports long-term financial assistance to Pakistan, it notes that in certain sectors, spending the money now will do nothing more than provide superficial fixes that keep Pakistani leaders from having to make politically difficult decisions.
For instance, barely 2 percent of Pakistanis pay income tax, and yet the ruling party cannot push through tax reforms.
[…] "To the extent that Pakistani leaders expect and assume disbursement of aid, it makes sense for them to push for that money rather than to work with their political rivals to move on key reforms," the report said.
"We believe that the pure act of delaying disbursement in certain sectors will benefit both the Pakistani reform process and the ultimate effectiveness of U.S. aid," it says.
The report acknowledges the difficulties of running an aid program in an insecure country where corruption is endemic, poverty is rampant, democratic institutions are weak and basic government services such as education and health care have long taken a back seat to military expenditures.
But it is critical of how the U.S. has approached the challenge.
The aid mission lacks clear goals – and some goals overlap with security and political aims that should be kept separate from the development mission, the report says.
The U.S. AID mission is understaffed, and many of its workers stay for just one year and don’t forge solid relationships with Pakistani counterparts, the reports says. It also says too many people are in charge, both in Islamabad and Washington, with no clear lines of authority.
Some of the report’s top recommendations are not about aid, but trade. The authors urge Congress and the White House to "extend duty-free, quota-free access to U.S. markets for all Pakistani exports from all of Pakistan for at least the next five years."
That recommendation echoes the pleas of many Pakistani businessmen and political leaders, who say the best way to keep the huge numbers of young people in the nation of 180 million from turning to militancy is to improve the economy and give them jobs.
Textiles and apparel make up the majority of Pakistani exports. Giving them more favorable treatment in the U.S. market is unlikely to pose much competition to American manufacturers, but rather to other countries that export to the U.S., such as China, the report says.
The report’s authors are mystified about the difficulty of getting basic information about U.S. AID projects in Pakistan. They note that it took them "several months of persistent requests" to get basic data on how much of the aid money has been spent.
Pakistanis are largely in the dark about what the money is being spent on, so they focus mostly how much money in total is spent, which the report’s authors say offers little insight into the true impact of projects funded.
The authors stress that it is better to spend slowly and effectively than to waste money on projects with little long-term impact. Still, "because of a debilitating lack of transparency in the aid program, no one is even sure what the United States is doing," they say.
[…]
Honduras
8) Honduras readmitted to OAS after coup
Deborah Charles, Reuters, Wed, Jun 1 2011
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/01/us-honduras-oas-idUSTRE75063P20110601
Washington – Honduras was readmitted to the Organization of American states on Wednesday, repairing ties with the hemispheric group two years after President Manuel Zelaya was toppled in a widely condemned coup.
The OAS voted 32 to one to readmit Honduras at a special meeting called to consider the case, with Ecuador the only country to oppose the move.
[…] Human rights groups are worried abuses by security forces during the coup and attacks on journalists were left unpunished and continue under the new government.
Ecuador’s ambassador to the OAS, Maria Isabel Salvador, said her country could not support the readmission because of the ongoing violations. "Democracy, the rule of law, due process of law, human rights and saying no to impunity — that’s why we cannot agree with the other members of the organization," she said.
[…]
Bahrain
9) Bahrain Ends Martial Law but Renews Crackdown on Protests
Katherine Zoepf, New York Times, June 1, 2011
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/02/world/middleeast/02bahrain.html
Hours after Bahrain officially ended 11 weeks of martial law on Wednesday, security forces attacked peaceful protesters in more than 20 villages with rubber bullets, stun grenades, shotguns and tear gas, according to human rights observers in Bahrain.
A day earlier, the king, Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa, called for a national dialogue aimed at reconciliation, while also making it clear he would not tolerate any public protests. As the government withdrew troops from the capital of Manama early Wednesday, it promptly dispatched large numbers of police officers, who began massing at dawn in the areas where activists had called for protests, said Mohammed al-Maskati, the leader of the Bahrain Youth Society for Human Rights.
"In some villages the protesters only gathered for a few minutes before the security forces attacked," said Mr. Maskati, who said the plan was for coordinated protests to begin at 5 p.m. in mostly Shiite villages around the tiny island kingdom.
Bahrain’s Shiite majority, inspired by the example of the Egyptian pro-democracy demonstrators who brought down their authoritarian president, Hosni Mubarak, started a protest movement in early February. They pressed for greater rights and freedoms from the Sunni monarchy, which they said had long discriminated against Shiites in housing, education and employment.
As the popular uprising gained momentum, bringing tens of thousands into the street, the monarchy began an aggressive crackdown, including attacks on medical personnel and the injured seeking treatment, arbitrary detentions, torture and the killing of more than 30 demonstrators, human rights researchers said. In mid-March, the king declared martial law and invited troops from the Gulf Cooperation Council, including 1,200 from Saudi Arabia and 800 from the United Arab Emirates, into the country to help stop the unrest.
[…] Though President Obama has also called on Bahrain to respect the rights of its citizens, the United States has largely looked away as Bahrain and its Persian Gulf allies have crushed the protest movement.
In a speech on Tuesday to local journalists, King Khalifa announced that a "comprehensive, serious dialogue" would begin next month and said that "no one shall be harmed due to his peaceful, civilized expression of opinion."
But Bahraini activists said that the kingdom’s prisons were still full – more than 800 people have been arrested since the protest movement began – and that the country’s military court was still active. Matar Ibrahim Matar, a former member of Parliament and leading member of Bahrain’s largest Shiite opposition group, Al Wifaq, was arrested on May 2 and, aside from one brief phone call to his family, has been held incommunicado ever since. Nabeel Rajab, the head of the Bahrain Center for Human Rights, was summoned by the military court late Tuesday, shortly after the king’s speech.
"It’s early days in the end of the ‘state of national safety,’ as they call it, but the government has a lot to do to make up for the damage it has done," Dan Williams, a researcher for Human Rights Watch, said in a phone interview. "It’s not enough to just call it off. Are all the people who were detained going to be released?" As a result, the national mood, activists say, is bitter and angry, rather than receptive to calls for reconciliation.
"The king has been talking about reforms, but all we’ve seen is another crackdown," said Maryam al-Khawaja of the Bahrain Center for Human Rights.
[…]
Peru
10) Peru’s Election Could Change Hemispheric Relations, and Washington is Worried
If its preferred candidate Keiko Fujimori loses to Ollanta Humala, the US will be isolated against South America’s left governments
Mark Weisbrot, Guardian, Thursday 2 June 2011 19.00 BST http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/jun/02/peru-venezuela
In just a few days, on Sunday 5 June, an election will take place that will have a significant influence on the western hemisphere. At the moment, it is too close to call. Most of official Washington has been relatively quiet, but there is no doubt that the Obama administration has a big stake in the outcome of this poll.
The election is in Peru, where left populist and former military officer Ollanta Humala is facing off against Keiko Fujimori, the daughter of Peru’s former authoritarian ruler Alberto Fujimori, who was president from 1990-2000. Alberto Fujimori is in jail, serving a 25-year sentence for multiple political murders, kidnapping and corruption. Keiko has made it clear that she represents him and his administration, and has been surrounded by his associates and former officials of his government.
Fujimori was found to have had "individual criminal responsibility" for the murders and kidnappings. But his government was responsible for many more widespread murders and human rights abuses, including the forced sterilisation of tens of thousands of women, mostly indigenous.
Between the two candidates, whom do you think Washington would prefer?
If you guessed Keiko Fujimori, you guessed right. I spoke Monday night with Gustavo Gorriti in Lima, an award-winning Peruvian investigative journalist who was one of the people that Alberto Fujimori was convicted of kidnapping. "The US embassy strongly opposes Humala’s candidacy," he said. Harvard professor of government Steven Levitsky, who has written extensively on Peru and is currently visiting professor at Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú (PUCP), came to the same conclusion: "It’s clear that the US embassy here sees Keiko as the least bad option," he told me from Lima on Tuesday.
Humala’s opponents argue that Peru’s democracy would be imperilled if he were elected, pointing to a military revolt that he led against Fujimori’s authoritarian government. (He was later pardoned by the Peruvian Congress.) But his record is hardly comparable to the actual, proven crimes of Alberto Fujimori.
Humala is also accused of being an ally of Venezuela’s President Hugo Chávez. He has distanced himself from Chávez, unlike in his 2006 campaign for the presidency. But all of this is just a rightwing media stunt. Chávez has been demonised throughout the hemispheric media, and so rightwing media monopolies have used him as a bogeyman in numerous elections for years, with varying degrees of success. Of course, Venezuela is also irrelevant to the Peruvian election because almost all governments in South America are "allies of Chávez". This is especially true of Brazil, Argentina, Bolivia, Ecuador and Uruguay, for example, all of whom have very close and collaborative relations with Venezuela.
As in many other elections in Latin America, rightwing domination of the media is key to successful scare tactics. "The majority of TV stations and newspapers have been actively working for Fujimori in this election," said Levitsky.
The thought of another Fujimori government is so frightening that a number of prominent conservative Peruvian politicians have decided to endorse Humala. Among these is the Nobel prize-winning novelist Mario Vargas Llosa, who hates the Latin American left as much as anyone. Humala has also been endorsed by Alejandro Toledo, the former Peruvian president and contender in the first round of this election.
So why would Washington want Fujimori? The answer is quite simple: it’s about Washington’s waning influence and power in its former "backyard" of Latin America. In South America, there are now left-of-centre governments in Argentina, Brazil, Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, Uruguay and Paraguay. These governments have a common position on most hemispheric issues (and sometimes, other international issues, such as the Middle East), and it often differs from that of Washington.
For example, when the Honduran military overthrew the country’s elected left-of-centre president, Manuel Zelaya, in 2009, and the Obama administration sought to legitimise the coup government through elections that other governments would not recognise, it was Washington’s few rightwing allies that first broke ranks with the rest of South America.
Prior to last August, the only governments in South America that Washington could count as allies were Chile, Peru and Colombia. But Colombia under President Manuel Santos is no longer a reliable ally, and currently has very good co-operative relations with Venezuela. If Humala wins, there is little doubt that he will join the rest of South America on most issues of concern to Washington. The same cannot be said of Keiko Fujimori.
And that is why Washington is worried about this election.
–
Just Foreign Policy is a membership organization devoted to reforming US foreign policy so it reflects the values and interests of the majority of Americans. The archive of the Just Foreign Policy News is here:
https://www.justforeignpolicy.org/blog/dailynews