Choices

Not sure how I got through last week's rant without some mention of the elections in Iraq, fledgling democracy under our protective and nurturing (right) wing. Though the official results may not be in for some time, the winner appears to be Prime Minister Maliki's Dawa party, at the expense of the more religious Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council (formerly the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, an exile group formed in Iran during the Iran/Iraq war, now enjoying close ties to both Washington and Tehran). Probably the most interesting thing about these provincial elections - something underreported in the U.S. press - is the degree to which this was a vote for an end to the U.S. occupation. The status of forces agreement that Maliki negotiated with Bush late last year pretty strongly rejects any enduring U.S. presence on Iraqi soil - no permanent bases, etc. If that agreement is acted on as drafted, we'll be out in a matter of months. Bush essentially signed what he termed a "cut and run" pact, and Maliki is seeing some of the benefit of that. He's also benefiting from the reduction in violence and his preference for maintaining Iraq's territorial integrity. But it can be seen as yet another referendum on Bush. Good grief.

This week, of course, was the election in Israel. Not sure what to say about a poll that puts the party founded by Ariel Sharon a narrow first, the one headed by Bibi Netanyahu second, and the one whose standard bearer is an overt racist (Avigdor Lieberman) third. Not that there was a major party peace option here - the attack on Gaza that killed 1,300 Palestinians was prosecuted by the leader of fourth-place Labor, Israel's traditional center-left party. One is tempted to cry, as V.S. Naipaul did in a very different context, a million mutinies now! How is it that a nation of smart people can give themselves such abysmal leadership? For chrissake, Lieberman is essentially the lynchpin of the next Israeli government, with emphasis on the term "lynch". He has advocated "execution" and transfer for Israeli Arabs, and ran on a promise to make them swear a loyalty oath. (Reminds me of that bizarre loyalty oath crusade in Catch-22, where you would have to sign one before entering the mess hall, getting your chow, sitting down at your table, etc., etc.) Where is this headed?

Of course, we have our own little problems here. I've heard our beloved secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, stating the new administration's policy that we will not speak with Hamas unless they 1) renounce violence, 2) recognize Israel's right to exist, and 3) abide by all past agreements signed between Israel and the Palestinian authority. Sounds great... except that we consistently fail to ask the same of Israel. They have never renounced violence - quite the opposite, to the point where it has eroded their national character in a very sorry fashion. They have never recognized the Palestinian's right to exist within any reasonable borders - like the 22% of historic Palestine that is not in Israel proper. Not satisfied with nearly 4/5 of a loaf, they have continued to build settlements and related infrastructure in the West Bank in violation of all agreements with the Palestinians, through good times and bad. When will they abide by those agreements?

Anyway... then there's Dennis Blair, our new director of national intelligence, and a former liaison to the murderous Indonesian government during some of its worst actions in East Timor. Read Allan Nairn's postings on Blair to learn how he provided cover for some pretty heinous crimes back during the Clinton administration. This is change? Note to Obama: change this menace the hell out.

luv u,

jp