Medea Benjamin's Blog, page 2

The Fourth Estate in Flames

A war-weary American public that a year ago resoundingly rejected US military intervention in Syria to overthrow the Assad regime now is rallying behind the use of force to destroy the so-called Islamic State (Isis). In just three months, from June to September, support for US airstrikes in Iraq soared from 45% percent to 71%, and to 65% for airstrikes in Syria.

How did such an astounding turnabout occur? Certainly it wasn’t due to the persuasive powers of President Obama, who seems to have been reluctantly dragged into a conflict that he once acknowledged has no military solution.

The credit for selling Obama’s war on Isis must go to the mainstream American media.

Day after day, night after night, the press relied on propaganda from both Isis and the US government to whip up fear and a thirst for revenge in the American public. Gruesome beheading videos distributed by Isis were played over and over. The media not only regurgitated official US messages but packaged them better than the government itself ever could.

And then, as if Isis wasn’t enough to whip up public fear itself, the Khorasan Group suddenly appeared as the US media compliantly latched onto the new script leaked by anonymous officials, just a few days before Syrian air strikes were set to begin. Khorasan, they told the public on the administration’s behalf, is a group of hardened terrorists more dangerous than Isis because it plans to attack commercial planes using flammable clothing or exploding toothpaste.

The imminent Khorasan attack justified the ensuing U.S. bombing. However, it was later reported that Khorasan – if it even exists – is just a handful of militants whose plans were not so imminent. Few media bothered to follow up on that aspect of the story.

Why has the media pushed the Obama administration’s war frame instead of playing the role of skeptic by questioning official assertions, insisting for corroboration on “anonymous leaks” and seeking alternative points of view? After years of government lies – from claims of WMDs in Iraq to zero civilian casualties in drone strikes – you’d think the members of the fourth estate would have learned a lesson.

But the mainstream US media plays the role of government lapdog more than watchdog.

They sensationalized the supposed threat from Isis even as intelligence agencies insisted that the group poses no immediate threat to the United States. A chorus of fearmongers, Republicans and Democrats alike, appeared on TV to insist that the American way of life is at stake. The hysterical Senator Lindsey Graham claimed that Isis is out to murder each and every one of us. Senator Bill Nelson advocated cutting off the “head of the snake” before Isis could fly its black flag over the White House. Former CIA and Pentagon chief Leon Panetta warned Americans to brace for a 30-year crusade. The media even trotted out “experts” on war – or at least war-mongering – like John McCain, Dick Cheney and even former presidential envoy to Iraq, Paul Bremer.

Obsessed with maintaining access to power, the mainstream media just keeps handing their megaphone to the powerful and self-interested. Rarely do we hear from people who opposed the disastrous 2003 invasion of Iraq or rightly predicted the chaos that would result from NATO intervention in Libya. The few anti-war voices who manage to slip into the dialogue are marginalized and later silenced.

Let’s face it: fear sells, violence sells, war sells. The vicious Isis beheadings, discussed ad infinitum, attracted large audiences. So did talk about exploding toothpaste. People whipped into a state of fear always want to know more.

Sadly, the public is not getting what it deserves: a well-rounded debate about the pros and cons of military action. Why has a decade of support for the Iraqi army and years of covert CIA support for the Syrian opposition been so fruitless? How much might this intervention cost? (So far, the bill has been more than $1bn.) How will Middle East monarchies that funded extremists suddenly become exemplars of democratic values? What is the endgame in Syria? Will Bashar Assad still be in power? What are the unintended consequences of expanding American military action in the Middle East? (The Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported that the US bombings already have attracted 6,000 more recruits to Isis.) And most important of all: what are the alternatives to stop the slaughter of innocent civilians? The voices of people proposing political solutions other than slaughter are the voices the public deserves to hear.

Wars usually start with overwhelming public approval once the White House and the national security apparatus get the media to beat the war drums. It’s only after people tire of war that the media really begin to seek answers to questions that should have been asked before the bombs were launched.

But instead, once again, the US government and the US media establishment is embracing a military policy of airstrikes to strengthen local capacity despite a regional landscape – from Yemen to Libya – littered with the wreckage of this approach. Smoldering in the detritus of war is also the fourth estate.

Medea Benjamin is the co-founder of the peace group CODEPINK and the human rights organization Global Exchange. She is the author of Drone Warfare: Killing by REmote Control.

A Reflection on the End the Occupation Conference 2014

By Kristin Delfs and Sophia Armen, Two Young CODEPINK activists

“Without community, there is no liberation” -Audre Lorde

CODEPINK has long stood in solidarity with Palestinian and Israeli nonviolent activists and human rights advocates working to hold Israel accountable for its violations of international law, educate Americans about the realities of the Israeli Occupation, and change U.S. foreign policy and support for the oppressive Israeli military. Today, our communities of conscience are growing and working together as we see connections between the realities of oppression and violence.

This past weekend we, on behalf of CODEPINK Los Angeles, had the pleasure of attending and participating in the US Campaign to End The Occupation’s 13th Annual National Organizers’ Conference in San Diego. The conference largely focused on BDS efforts both local and national. Discussion of “solidarity” and “joint struggle” also reverberated throughout the weekend in regards to the Israeli occupation of Palestine and the oppression felt here in our own country.

The murder of Mike Brown in Ferguson in August, and the subsequent outpouring of support and solidarity for the people of Ferguson, has highlighted a similar kind of oppression inflicted here at home – by a brutal and highly-militarized police force that targets Americans of color, and hides behind the same guise of “defense”.  Los Angeles police officers, like others nationwide, have traveled to Israel numerous times to receive military training from the Israeli government. They have received training in the ways of occupation, the use of battle-proven weapons, and counter-intelligence from the Israeli government, who is currently the 10th largest exporter of weapons in the world, despite being one of the smallest nations.

A few days ago the ADL published an online article claiming that , “while Gaza and Fer­gu­son no longer dom­i­nate the head­lines, these unre­lated events con­tinue to be con­nected by a num­ber of groups and indi­vid­u­als in an attempt to bring atten­tion to their activism.” This outrageous claim is an insult to all people feeling oppression who fight for a voice, regardless of nationality or origin. It is a pathetic attempt to belittle their experience – an attempt for which the ADL should be ashamed of themselves. But the attention our solidarity efforts are gaining even by pro-Occupation lobbies, show the meaningful connections affected communities are making and reinforce our dedication to joint-struggle

The conference’s theme “The Mainstreaming of BDS & Continuing Struggle for Palestinian Rights” represents a turning point in Palestinian solidarity activism in the United States. Thanks to the dedicated work of Palestinian activists and people of conscience internationally, solidarity activism for Gaza and the West Bank has been moving into the mainstream. This new trend is also a direct result of the recent horrific round of attacks on Gaza, known as Operation Protective Edge, which social media and independent voices helped push in front of the eyes of citizens of the West – especially Americans – whose complicity in the occupation amounts to over $3 billion of military aid to the Israeli government every year for this continuing colonial project.

Now more than ever is the time to connect these struggles and stand in solidarity against the oppression and apartheid that exists across the globe. We ask you to please consider standing in solidarity with the people of Ferguson, by participating in #FergusonOctober‘s Week of Resistance in Ferguson, MO October 10-13. If you are unable, consider trying to pass a local resolution to demilitarize the police in your community. You can contact nathan@codepink.org for more information and get involved with our BDS campaigns by contacting sophia.codepinkla@gmail.com.

“What Do We Want? Justice! When Do We Want It? Now! Read and share our Youth Manifesto, and help support the youth of America in standing up against war and militarization. Only together can we forge a new path of justice, dignity and equality for all. We of CODEPINK ask you to stand up in solidarity with the people of Ferguson and Palestine, in the name of resistance and in the name of peace.

Kristin Delfs and Sophia Armen are two recent graduates and young organizers with CODEPINK Los Angeles who are dedicated to fighting systems of oppression in our communities and abroad.

Don’t Bomb Syria & Iraq 101: Useful Information to Read and Share!

NEWS & ANALYSIS

Why Americans’ support for bombing ISIS may not last By Peyton M. Craighill http:/www.washingtonpost.com/news/storyline/wp/2014/09/22/why-americans-support-for-bombing-isis-may-not-last/

Wrong Turn on Syria: No Convincing Plan By THE EDITORIAL BOARD http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/24/opinion/on-syria-no-convincing-plan.html?ref=todayspaper&_r=1

UN Security Council approves foreign fighters resolution pushed by Obama By Justin Sink http://thehill.com/policy/international/218803-un-security-council-approves-resolution-to-stop-foreign-terrorist

As US Bombs ISIS in Syria, Even Some Pro-War Pundits Express Skepticism By William Greider http://www.thenation.com/blog/181713/us-bombs-isis-syria-even-some-pro-war-pundits-express-skepticism

COSTS OF WAR

First U.S. Stealth Jet Attack on Syria Cost $79 Million – Daily Beast http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/09/24/first-u-s-stealth-jet-attack-on-syria-cost-79-million.html

White House won’t estimate cost of ISIS war By Justin SInk http://thehill.com/policy/defense/218520-white-house-wont-estimate-cost-of-isis-war

The Campaign AgainstISIL Could Cost $1.5B a Month By Janine Davidson and Emerson Brooking http://www.defenseone.com/threats/2014/09/the-campaign-against-isil-could-cost-15b-month/94976/

DEBATE IN CONGRESS

The audacity of air strikes and secret deals: just making Isis grow stronger? By Raúl M Grijalva and Michael Shank http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/23/air-strikes-weapons-deals-isis-insurgency

Barbara Lee Was Right in 2001. She’s Still Right Now By John Nichols  http://www.thenation.com/blog/181733/barbara-lee-still-speaks-arguing-congress-must-declare-wars

CONGRESS WAVERS ON WAR By Tom Hayden http://tomhayden.com/home/congress-wavers-on-war.html

Understanding Authorizations for the Use of Military Force By Ken Gude http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/security/report/2014/09/24/97748/understanding-authorizations-for-the-use-of-military-force/

FROM THE REGION

In Farewell Speech, Karzai Calls American Mission in Afghanistan a Betrayal By Rod Nordland http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/24/world/asia/hamid-karzai-afghanistan.html

 

Gains for Women are Going Backward Due to Failure of National and International Leadership: Nordic Women’s Conference

By Ret. Col. Ann Wright

Over 10,000 women from the Nordic countries of Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland and Iceland gathered May 12-15, 2014, in Malmo, Sweden for the  ”Nordisk Forum: New Actions on Women’s Rights.” As a regional conference, it was a strategy to augment the work done in the World Conferences on Women  that had been regularly taking place every five years from 1975 until 1995.

Due to the worldwide negative effects of conservatism on the status of women, particularly reproductive health and sex education, the Executive Director of United Nations Office for Women, Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka told the conference that in the foreseeable future, there would be no world conference of women similar to the 1995 Beijing women’s conference. She suggested that a world conference on women could jeopardize the positive steps that have been taken over the last 30 years by United Nations resolutions on the rights of women.  She cited a “failure of national and international leadership in which progress and gains for women are being reduced or are going backward.”

Instead, Mlambo-Ngcuka encouraged regionals conferences such as the one for the Nordic countries.  Mlambo-Ngcuka is the former South African Deputy President and Minister of Minerals and Energy and has been the chief of the UN Women Office for two years.

The first World Conference on Women was held in Mexico in 1975.  Four years after that conference, in 1979, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) was written. It has been ratified by 188 UN member states.  CEDAW requires states to include gender equality in national legislation and to promote it in political and public life.  Although the CEDAW Committee and the UN Commission on the Status of Women monitor the progress and recommend concrete measures, discrimination and violence against women are still global phenomena and women and children constitute the majority of the one billion people living in extreme poverty.

Following the 1975 conference in Mexico, similar worldwide conferences on women were held in Copenhagen (1980), Nairobi (1985) and Beijing (1995).

Since the Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing in 1995, no other worldwide conference on women’s rights has been convened.  Many fear that the renegotiation of the Beijing Platform might roll back its ambitious goals due to current reactionary tendencies and economic crises in the world. Despite advances in some countries, in many others, women’s rights are still marginalized, ridiculed and threatened. Hundreds of thousands of women and girls are systematically abused, raped, subjected to genital mutilation and killed, the brutal evidence that the principal of human rights is not observed in many countries.

Even in Scandinavia, conservative governments have been elected and far-right nationalists parties are rising in power.

Women from war crisis areas told the conference of the plight of women in their war-torn areas and their exclusion from the peace process.

The study “Equal Power-Lasting Peace,” conducted by the Swedish organization Women to Women (Kvinna till Kvinna) Foundation shows that international commitments to involve women in the peace process have not been implemented.  The study examines obstacles for women’s participation in peace processes, based on field studies made in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia-Herzegovina, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Iraq and Liberia. Only 2.5% of the signatories of peace agreements in the past two decades were women.  Afghanistan and Syria are current examples of how women are being excluded from these processes.

Dr. Sima Simar, Minister of Women’s Affairs in the 2001-2002 interim administration of Afghanistan and now the director of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission, said that while more girls and boys are going to school in Afghanistan now under the US/NATO occupation of Afghanistan than under the Taliban regime, rights for women under the Karzai administration have not been widely implemented.  When an Iraqi woman at the conference told Dr. Simar that little progress has been made for the LBGT community in Iraq, Dr. Simar said very sympathetically that the same is true in Afghanistan and that to discuss the rights for the LBGT community is very difficult, in fact dangerous, due to the very conservative culture of Afghanistan.   She added that any gains on the status and rights of women that have been made are in continuous jeopardy due to the same conservative culture.

I first met Dr. Simar in 2001 in Kabul, Afghanistan.  As a member of the small team that reopened the US Embassy there in December, 2001, I visited Dr. Simar in her home for a discussion on the plight of women after seven years of Taliban rule.  During Secretary of State Colin Powell’s first visit to Afghanistan in January, 2002, I saw Dr. Simar in action for women’s rights.  Secretary Powell was to meet with interim President Hamid Karzai and four out of fifteen cabinet ministers.  When we got to the Presidential Palace, we were informed that the cabinet ministers who had been left out of the meeting were very upset and to keep peace with this cabinet, President Karsai had now invited all of the ministers to attend the meeting – but only four were to have the opportunity to speak – and Dr. Simar was not one of them.

However, shortly after the meeting began, much to the chagrin of President Karsai and some of the other cabinet members, Dr. Simar jumped into the conversation to remind Powell of the very difficult period for women and children under the Taliban.  Her intervention was short and powerful and Secretary Powell later said he greatly appreciated her breaking protocol to underscore the plight of women and children.  However, one could tell from the facial and body language that her remarks concerning women were not well received by her fellow government officials.

Venetia Sebudandi, Rwandan ambassador to the Nordic countries, said the 1994 genocide and breakdown of infrastructure in Rwanda was so extensive that it caused a remarkable opportunity to restructure the lives and roles of the women survivors.  She said that 70 % of the adult survivors of the genocide were women and that in order to pull the society back together, women demanded and received an equal role in society.   As result in Rwanda, today 64 percent of the Rwandan Parliament, 50% of the judges and 48% of all government employees are women. She said that education of children is now a national priority of the country and 100% the children of Rwanda go to school.  She said that Rwanda now provides universal healthcare.

In 2015, the United Nations will sponsor a worldwide “Beijing 20″ campaign to address continuing gender wage gaps and unequal opportunities, low representation of women in leadership in public office and the private sector, child marriage, rampant violence and other violations against women and girls.  Mlambo-Ngcuka commented on the campaign, “During the past two decades much progress has been made in women’s legal rights, educational achievements, and participation in public life, but  much still remains to be done.”

Nordiskt Forum 2014 is a forum of 200 Nordic women’s organizations to develop strategies for the Nordic region for an equal society where all contribute to social and economic development and work for a sustainable future with men, in public and private sectors, in decision-making positions, with a variety of experiences from professional, social and cultural groups and civil society.

The twelve themes of the Nordiskt 2014 conference were:

Peace and Security;
Economic and Social Development;
Women’s and Girls’ Bodies-reproductive rights, health and sexuality;
Women in the Workplace-equal pay, education and career;
Violence against Women and Girls;
Environment, Climate and Sustainable Development;
Care Work and Welfare Society;
Political Participation and Development;
Gender Mainstreaming and Gender Equality in Organizations;
Feminism in the Future in the Nordic Region and the Organization of Women’s Movements;
Asylum and Migration;
New Technologies and Media

One of the twelve tracks of the conference was on peace and security. I was honored to be among a handful of American academics and activists who were invited to speak at the conference, including the eminent American scholar on militarization of societies, Dr. Cynthia Enloe, who spoke on feminism, militarism and hate speech

I was asked to speak by the oldest feminist organization in Sweden.  The Left Federation of Swedish Women is celebrating its 100th anniversary this year.  My topic was “Women and the Military: A Feminist Perspective.”Although I am not grounded in feminist philosophy, I explained my 29-year career in the U.S. Army and Army Reserves and my 16-year experience with the US Department of State, my resignation eleven years ago in opposition to the Bush administration’s war on Iraq and now my decade long challenge to many policies of the United States, in particularly, its war policies.

I also discussed the US role in militarization of the world, with the biggest export of the United States now is weapons.  Scandinavian women are greatly concerned about the increasing militarism in their region with Denmark, Norway and Iceland in NATO, and Sweden, which is not a member of NATO, providing a NATO bombing range in the north of Sweden and sending Swedish military forces to the NATO command for military operations in Afghanistan.

As conservative agendas of governments around the world decrease the opportunities for women, it is vitally important that women work in solidarity with those still struggling for basic human rights as well as with those facing a roll-back of gains made.  The Nordic Women’s Conference was an important gathering of women to remind us of the need for communication and solidarity.

John Kerry Attempts to Bully CODEPINK Protesters into Silence

By Ann Wright

There aren’t many who come to Congress to protest—not nearly enough—and the disparaging comments of chairs of committees and witnesses toward those who challenge administrations are certainly aimed at discouraging pesky, uncomfortable protests.

It wasn’t that anyone liked Saddam Hussein and his treatment of many in Iraq, but we knew we were being lied into a war with the false claims of weapons of mass destruction—and we protested vigorously against it.

We certainly don’t like what Assad has done to many in Syria, nor what ISIS is doing to the people in the territory they currently control, but we didn’t trust the Obama administration on last year’s issue of chemical attacks in Syria, nor do we trust him on arming “moderate” rebel groups in Syria. So we protest.

On September 16, we attended the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing with Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Martin Dempsey and held up our signs saying, “There is no military solution,” “More killing = more extremism” and other similar messages.  After the hearing began, I stood up and said, “No More War, No More War.” Committee chair Senator Carl Levin responded by banging his gavel and saying, “If you don’t sit down you will be removed.”  Then he added a snide comment,  “You’re acting very war-like yourself,” even though I was totally peaceful and calm.

During that hearing, five of us were thrown out of the room after we each gave the committee and witnesses a quick piece of our minds about the folly of another attempt to use the U.S. military to resolve yet another political issue.

The next day on September 17, Secretary of State John Kerry began his testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations committee, a committee he chaired as a U.S. Senator, by challenging CODEPINK: Women for Peace over their opposition to arming the Syrian rebels.  As Kerry entered the hearing room, we shouted, “No more war.  No military solution.”  Kerry responded by saying that he respected our right to protest. “You know, as I came in here, obviously we had some folks who spoke out. And I would start by saying that I understand dissent. I’ve lived it,” he said, referring to his leadership of Vietnam Veterans Against the War nearly 40 years ago. “That’s how I first testified in front of this country in 1971.”

Kerry then said that CODEPINK was started by women who were opposed to war but who also thought that government’s job was to take care of people, give them health care, and education, and good jobs. “And if that’s what you believe in, and I believe it is,” he said, “then you ought to care about fighting ISIL. Because ISIL is killing and raping and mutilating women. And they believe women shouldn’t have an education. They sell off girls to be sex slaves to jihadists.”

Well, Secretary of State Kerry, we are concerned about women and all people.  We do not like what Assad has done to the people of Syria and we don’t like what ISIS has done.  And we did not like what Saddam Hussein, Muammar Qaddafi or the Taliban did to those who opposed their rule.  And we also do not like what the United States has done to the women, children and men of Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan and the chaos it has caused in the Middle East.

Kerry conveniently didn’t mention in his testimony that ISIS is the direct blowback the United States is facing after the 11-year war on Iraq. According to the Washington Post, after the US invasion and occupation of Iraq, Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, now the head of ISIS, was a minor Islamic preacher who became a militant because of the occupation.  He formed a small, armed group in eastern Iraq to oppose the American occupation and in 2005, he was captured by American forces and spent the next four years as a prisoner in the American prison camp called Bucca, in southern Iraq.  

According to the New York City Daily News, the U.S. military did not consider him particularly dangerous, and let him go when the camp closed in 2009. As he left, he reportedly told guards, “I’ll see you guys in New York.” They did not consider his parting words a threat — just an acknowledgment that many of his captors were reservists from a unit based on Long Island. The camp’s commanding officer said, “He was a bad dude but he wasn’t the worst of the worst.”

We believe there are other ways to deal with ISIS than having more weapons from the United States flood into the region. The armed rebel groups that number between 80,000 to 100,000 want more weapons, interestingly, to counter the U.S. weapons that the 10-30,000 ISIS fighters have captured from some of the 250,000 Iraqi military trained and equipped by the United States over the past ten years. The cycle of arming groups with U.S. weapons and having those weapons fall into the hands of fighters the United States opposes is well documented and a very good reason not to provide these weapons to even more fighters.

A better strategy is to pressure those governments that have been supporting ISIS behind the scenes and that are now the U.S. allies in Obama’s coalition of the willing.  Saudi Arabia is the big brother caliphate that ISIS wishes to become—an oil rich, conservative religious country where Sharia law, morals and vice police, prison for those who do not agree and beheadings are the norm.  Saudi Arabia has been the cash cow for U.S. military contractors and oil companies for decades and the U.S. government has turned a blind eye to the human rights abuses that the Saudi monarchy has wrecked on its people.  But rather than confronting Saudi Arabia directly about its support for extremist groups in the region, the Obama administration pushed for a formal training facility for “moderate” armed groups in Syria to be trained in the home of extremists. It does not make a bit of sense!!!!Now is the time for the United States to go to the mat with Saudi Arabia.

And now that the Turkish diplomats have been freed from ISIS, it’s time to put great pressure on Turkey. Turkey is anti-Assad and has allowed international fighters to transit into Syria and Iraq and has turned a blind eye toward militant recruitment in Turkey itself. Unemployment in Turkey is 9.3% in 2013, and in 2010, almost 17% of the population lived below the poverty level.  ISIS reportedly pays fighters $150 a day. Working with ISIS, young men are able to earn more that three times Turkey’s average per capita GDP-a tremendous recruitment tool.

The U.S. must put pressure on Turkey to stop the flow of illegal oil from ISIS into Turkey.  ISIS is selling $1 million in oil per day from oilfields it has captured in Syria and Iraq on the black market to groups in Turkey.

Rather than trying to bully CODEPINK to stop protesting Obama-Kerry policies, we suggest that Secretary Kerry focus his energies on getting Obama allies to stop aiding and supporting ISIS and its brutal regime of terror on civilian communities.

(Retired) Col. Ann Wright spent 29 years in the U.S. Army and Army Reserves. She was a diplomat in the State Department for 16 years, serving in the U.S. embassies of Afghanistan, Sierra Leone, Micronesia, Mongolia, Kyrgyzstan, Grenada and Nicaragua. She resigned in 2003 in protest of the then-impending invasion of Iraq. In 2009, she co-authored, Dissent, Voices of Conscience.

Violation of International Law: Where is Obama’s “Authorization to Use Force” in Iraq

[image error] There was much enthusiasm in 2008 that President Barack Obama would bring a saner and more lawful approach to issues of foreign policy and war and peace. Six years later — with Americans still being killed in Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay still in active operation, US drones killing people in several countries and even American citizens, and now new mischief in Iraq — it is clear that President Obama has done little more than expand the already large war-making powers of his predecessor and fully enabled the vision of a “unitary executive” with unfettered powers in war and peace.

Where is, for example, President Obama’s domestic authorization for the use of force in Iraq against the Islamic State? Obama has taken the position that the 2001 Authorization of Use of Force (“AUMF”) passed by Congress in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, as well as the 2002 AUMF against Iraq passed before that war provide him with the legal basis for further air strikes. None other than John Yoo, the famous ratifier of torture in the George W. Bush Administration, has rushed to Obama’s defense, claiming that Obama has all the legal authority he needs under the 2001 and 2002 AUMFs.

But the notion that these Authorizations support current military action against the Islamic State more than a decade after they were initially passed is highly flawed. The 2001 AUMF was specifically limited to terrorist groups that had planned or aided the 9/11 attacks. There is zero evidence (and no government official has yet argued) that the Islamic State is somehow tied to 9/11. The 2002 AUMF, which provided the domestic legal basis for the Iraq War, is also untenable as justification for this war as it was based on the purported “threat” posed by Saddam Hussein. Indeed, through his National Security Advisor Susan Rice, Obama himself called for the revocation of the 2002 AUMF in July, mere weeks before now claiming it as a renewed basis for the adventurism in Iraq.

The attacks are also bereft of any basis in international law. Under the United Nations Charter, a country may only use armed force against another country in self-defense, or when approved by the United Nations Security Council. There is no resolution that has authorized the US strikes in Iraq; and the notion that the United States must lob bombs into Iraq as a matter of self-defense is simply not credible.

While not made explicitly (at least not yet), the White House will likely rely on a tenuous theory in international law called the “responsibility to protect,” which argues that countries may involve themselves militarily in other countries in order to protect civilians or prevent other imminent humanitarian harms. This was the basis of the bombing campaign against the former Yugoslavia, which never had UN Security Council authorization. Obama’s current Ambassador to the United Nations, Samantha Power, is a well known advocate of this doctrine and she has recently argued that the US has all the legal authorization it needs for the air campaign.

But there is no basis in international law for such a theory, and more clear-minded observers have rightly concluded that the so-called “responsibility to protect” is a thinly-veiled excuse for Western meddling in countries thousands of miles away. As Antony Loewenstein notes:

We never hear any [responsibility to protect] backers pushing for a military intervention in Gaza to protect the Palestinians from Israeli missiles. Nobody is talking about protecting Egyptian civilians from the brutal, US-backed dictatorship in Egypt. Barely a word is raised to protect the repressed activists in Bahrain or Saudi Arabia. Whether it’s dressed up as solidarity, a responsibility to protect, or an intervention to prevent breaches of human rights, from Iraq to Libya these are grotesque experiments on helpless civilians, the conclusions of which are clear for us to see.

The Nuremberg Trials, which outlawed wars not conducted in conformity in international law, made no exceptions for “responsibility to protect,” and in fact labeled any war not conducted with a solid legal footing as the “crime of aggression,” considered the supreme international crime – largely because of the horrific consequences that take place when wars break out. Yet here, too, this White House has recently argued to the Northern District of California that the Nuremberg Trials are “irrelevant” to the determination of whether Presidents can be held accountable for their actions with respect to war and peace.

From a historical point of view, it is ironic that a young senator from Illinois who campaigned in large part agains the Iraq War and who showcased his credentials as a constitutional scholar would be the handmaiden of the permanent “state of exception” described by the National Socialist philosopher Carl Schmitt, who argued that sovereigns should have the right to suspend the legal and juridical constraints of their societies so that they may act outside of law. This is the opposite of the legal constitutionalism that forms the philosophical basis of the American legal order, which can be summarized with the words of Edward Coke: “The King himself should be under no man, but under God and the Law.”

Even six years later, the stings and scars of the Bush-era wars still haunt those who favor civilization over barbarity, and certainly continue to physically affect those who fought on either side, as well as the millions of civilians who always suffer when wars take place.

The failure of President Obama to seek a more rational foreign policy is a disquieting but important lesson:  those pressing for a lawful, constitutional government that resolves international conflicts instead of initiating them have far more work to do and cannot rely on the promises — falsely given — by politicians from any political party. The last Administration was wrong, but it was openly wrong and harbored no pretenses that it sought an imperial Presidency. In contrast, this Administration has cloaked itself in sanctimony even while consolidating the grave excesses of its predecessor. Both parties remain committed to imperialism and the wars that accompany them, or in the immortal words of Tacitus, writing two millennia ago of those who dismantled the ancient republic in Rome in order to create a dynastic and militant empire: “To ravage, to slaughter, to usurp under false titles, they call empire; and where they make a desert, they call it peace.”

D. Inder Comar is legal director at Comar Law. Comar Law is currently litigating a lawsuit against members of the Bush Administration for allegedly committing aggression against Iraq (Saleh v. Bush, N.D. Cal. Mar. 13, 2013, 13-cv-1124 JST).

“There Is No Military Solution” – But Obama Launches a New U.S. War in Syria

By Phyllis Bennis

“There Is No Military Solution” –

But Obama Launches a New U.S. War in Syria

In response to the initiation of U.S. bombing in Syria, Phyllis Bennis, Fellow of the Institute for Policy Studies and of the Transnational Institute, is author ofBefore & After: U.S. Foreign Policy and the War on Terror issued the following statement:

23 September 2014

President Obama’s decision to bomb Syria stands in stark violation of international law, the UN Charter, and the requirements of the U.S. Constitution.  It contradicts his own commitment, stated a year ago in the UN General Assembly, to reverse Washington’s “perpetual war footing.”

And it portends disaster for the people of Syria, the region, and much of the world.

The White House stated goal is to destroy the headquarters of the violent and extremist ISIS militia. But you can’t bomb extremism out of existence.  The U.S. bombs do not fall on “extremism,” they are falling on Raqqah, a 2,000 year-old Syrian city with a population of more than a quarter of a million people – men, women and children who had no say in the take-over of their city by ISIS.  The Pentagon is bombing targets like the post office and the governor’s compound, and the likelihood of large number of civilian casualties as well as devastation of the ancient city, is almost certain.

President Obama was right when he said there is no military solution to the ISIS crisis. Bombing Syria, without Congressional authorization, without United Nations approval, in direct opposition to the stated position of Syria’s government, will only make that crisis worse.  It will give ISIS and its allies a new basis for recruitment, it will strengthen the repressive Syrian government, it will undermine Syria’s struggling non-violent opposition movement, and it will further tighten the links between ISIS supporters in Syria and in Iraq.

The bombing should stop immediately, and be replaced with a U.S. policy based on

·       Supporting an intensive new UN-based diplomatic initiative involving all parties in the region

·       Opening direct talks with Iran and Russia based on shared opposition to ISIS – with Iran to jointly push for ending anti-Sunni sectarianism in the Iraqi government, and with Russia to work towards ending the multi-party civil war in Syria

·       Pressuring U.S. allies in the region to stop their governments and people from arming and facilitating the movement of ISIS fighters

·       Shifting the war funds to a massive increase in humanitarian assistance

Phyllis Bennis

Director, New Internationalism Project

Institute for Policy Studies

1112 16th Street NW #600

Washington DC 20036

tel: (202) 234-9382 ex 5206

fax: (202) 387-7915

Solidarity, Strength and Safety in the Streets.

The permits are in, the people are coming, and we’re soon to find ourselves in the midst of what is being promoted as the largest climate march in history. The climate march, however won’t be the only event happening in response to a call for folks to organize in protest of corporate and governmental powers which continue to trade our collective futures in exchange for power and profit.

A look at beyondthemarch.org brings one to a list of associated events ranging from the Climate Ribbon, a massive public art installation and ritual space, to Flood Wall Street, a call to flood, blockade, sit-in, and shut down the institutions that are profiting from the climate crisis. Where the march organizers worked for months negotiating with the NYPD and state authorities to minimize the potential risk to participants, Flood Wall Street is an action intended to directly confront the system that causes and profits from the crisis that is threatening humanity. Through Flood Wall Street, the power of the people will be demonstrated not only in their numbers but in their choice to not wait and hope that their voices will be heard by those who are in positions of power, but rather to join together to say that there is no time to waste. Harmfully wielded power must be confronted.

Whether we choose to confront the system directly, or comply with the complex system of permits and negotiations – we must remain aware that our simple being, as people who refuse to silently accept a position of powerlessness in the face of state and capitalist power, is a challenge to the system – a challenge that is often met with heavy repression. We can’t control the way state forces will respond to our unity, but we can take action, create systems of radical care and share wisdom, experience, and knowledge to help mitigate the potential risks of these confrontations when they occur.

One should not be ashamed to acknowledge the fear that can rise in these confrontations. We can not and will not be neutralized by our fear. We have a tool in our box that is stronger than their intimidation and violence: our solidarity. As Mutant Legal cites in their Dissident Survival Guide, ‘Solidarity kills fear’. Solidarity and the knowledge of how to protect ourselves and each other in confrontation with violent agents of the state is our not-so-secret weapon. In what follows, you will find information that will help you to understand how the police operate, and how to respond in ways that keep everyone safe. A big part of this process is community solidarity.

Detention

If you are approached by an officer, it may help you to give extremely basic answers to extremely basic questions (first name, your neighborhood, what you are doing). Keep your answers under five words.

If they continue to question you, ask “Am I free to go?”
If they say yes, then walk away.
If they say no, ask “Am I being detained?” If they say that you are not being detained, then walk away.
If they say you are being detained, you can ask why; they may or may not give you a valid reason.

If you are in a group that is surrounded by officers, you can mic-check “Are we being detained?” This seems to be an effective way to get them to release you if they are penning you in without cause.

Do Not Consent to a Search.

You can be detained without being “under arrest.” In that situation, police are legally permitted only to pat you down, ostensibly to check for weapons. However, they may also try to search you, your pockets, or your bags. Physical resistance can lead to retaliatory violence or incarceration.

Instead of resisting, say “I DO NOT CONSENT TO THIS SEARCH,” so that people around can testify that the search was performed without consent or a warrant. This will probably not prevent or stop a search. But it may mean that anything the search yields cannot be used against you at trial. If you say nothing, then anything found during the search can be evidence admissible at trial.

Say, “I do not consent to this search!” Even if you believe you have made your non-consent apparent, you should make a point of reciting this formula in a clear, loud voice.

Identification.

In New York State US Citizens are not required to carry ID unless operating a motor vehicle (in which case you must carry your driver’s license). If you are being detained, an officer can ask for your ID, and may detain you until your identity has been verified. It may be helpful to carry a picture ID that does not have a lot of information on it. If you are a non-citizen, you are required to have ID on you at all times.

Invoke your right to an attorney

Unlike on TV, the police will not read you your Miranda Rights upon arrest. They are only required to read you these rights before a formal interrogation. Keep in mind, however, that an officer who has just arrested you is not chit-chatting with you because they want to be buddies; police are trained to ask seemingly benign questions in order to gather information that can be used against you or your comrades.

You must say “I am going to remain silent, and I want to talk to my lawyer.”
You must say you are going to remain silent, and then you must actually remain silent.
Anything you say to the police, to someone in your cell, and even on the phone can and will be used against you.
If you say anything, you must re-invoke your right to remain silent. Once you request a lawyer, the officers are supposed to stop questioning you. This doesn’t mean they will.

Never, EVER waive your right to counsel. Attorneys protect you and the people around you, by making sure you aren’t questioned against your will. An attorney can help ensure the police don’t coerce you into saying or signing anything that incriminates you or your friends, or results in you waiving your rights. If your lawyer suggests you cooperate with the police in a way that makes you uncomfortable, you have an absolute right to request new counsel.

You can get answers to question about the legal system in New York City by calling Just Info at 1-855-878-4630, and you can reach radical legal help by calling the National Lawyers Guild at 212-679-6018. If you witness an arrest during protest you should try to get the arrestee’s full name and date of birth and contact the National Lawyers Guild so they can help with tracking the arrestee through the arrest process, and assist with arraignment and defense. You should also call this number as soon as you have access to a phone if you yourself are arrested.

Filming the Police

Filming police activity can help de-escalate potentially violent and abusive police interactions.

You have the right to observe and document police activity in the State of New York as long as you are standing a “reasonable distance” from the cops and are not obstructing them in any way.
If a police officer asks you to move back, you may continue to film. Respond calmly and clearly “I’m moving back” but loudly enough that those around you can hear your confirmation and consent to the officers order.

Most legal activist, advocates and COPWATCH trainers advise moving back no more than a few steps. Officers may repeat the order. If they do repeat the process again. Move back a few steps while repeating “I am moving back” calmly and clearly.

Post-Arrest

In the event that you are arrested, you will likely be taken to a police precinct for processing. In the event of mass arrests, they may set up an arrest-processing center. In Manhattan this is likely to take place at 1 Police Plaza but has taken place in other makeshift venues. At the precinct, a few things can happen.

You may simply be released.

More likely one of three things will take place.

You may be issued a summons. A summons is similar to a speeding ticket. You will be required to answer the ticket as directed.
The second likely scenario is a Desk Appearance Ticket (DAT). If you are given a DAT you will be required to return for court at the date and place written on the ticket,
The third and worse case scenario is that you will be ‘held over’ or ‘put through the system’. What this means is that you will be processed and then transferred to Central Booking.

In Manhattan, Central Booking and the arraignment part (court room) are located at 100 Centre Street. You will be held in Central Booking until you are docketed and called for arraignment. During your time in Central Booking (likely between 24 and 36 hours but can be significantly longer in cases of mass arrest.) a court employee will interview you about your place of residence, ties to the community, employment, family etc., It is okay to talk to this person, but don’t talk about the conditions of your arrest. This information will be shared with the judge and the prosecutor for use in determining whether or not to set bail or release you on your own recognizance (ROR). Do not talk to anyone but your lawyer about the conditions of your arrest.

Arraignment

Prior to your arraignment, you will meet with a lawyer. This may be an NLG lawyer in the case of mass arrest, but unless a private attorney has been contacted for you, it will more likely be a Legal Aid attorney. Get the attorney’s name and phone number.

You will be arraigned on the charges before you in front of a judge.
Your lawyer will enter your plea. When in doubt plead not guilty.
Conditions of release will be set. (Bail or ROR)
The next court date will be scheduled and provided to you on a court slip.
You may be offered an Adjournment in Contemplation of Dismissal (ACD). If you agree to an ACD, your case will be adjourned for 6 months. If you are not arrested during the 6-month period, the charge is dismissed and the case is sealed.

Activist Security Strategies

Work with people you know and trust. Make sure that everyone you work with is taken care of. If anyone feels marginalized or threatened, it will be much easier for law enforcement to convince them to cooperate.
Ensure that people feel supported socially and materially, so that they have less reason to cooperate with authorities. Law enforcement can play on people’s poverty, immigration status, mental health, and sexuality, or even threaten people’s families to pressure them.
Solidarity means taking anti-oppression work seriously. Marginalized or vulnerable people cannot stand in solidarity with groups that do not take seriously the obligation to stand in solidarity with them.
Work in your own community, or work in solidarity with existing community groups who have accepted your offer of assistance.
Don’t talk about actions that you are planning with people who don’t need to know about them, and don’t talk about details with anyone, even after an action is over.
Do not create an atmosphere of distrust, and do help kill rumors before they spread.

In the end, the best protection you have is knowing your rights and taking care of the people around you. Our strength is in our solidarity.

See you in the streets!

Includes excerpts from the Dissident Survival Guide used with permission.

Congressional Hearing Schedule about ISIS

Join CODEPINK in action this week to oppose more war on Iraq and in Syria!

Tuesday, September 16,

Senate Armed Services Hearing: US Policy Toward Iraq and Syria and the Threat Posed by ISIL, with witnesses Secretary of State Hagel and General Martin Dempsey

When: Tuesday, September 16, MEET outside hearing room at 8:00am (hearing begins at 9:30am)

Where: Hart Senate Office Building, Room 216

Wednesday,  Sep 17, 2014

House Homeland Security Committee Hearing: Worldwide Threats to the Homeland, with Witnesses Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson, FBI Director James Comey and Matthew Olsen, Director of National Counterterrorism Center

>When: Wednesday,  Sep 17, 2014, MEET outside hearing room at 8:30 (hearing starts at 10:00am)

>Where: 311 Cannon House Office Building

 

2:30 pm Senate Foreign Relations Committee Hearing: US Strategy to Defeat ISIL, with Witness John Kerry

>When: Wednesday, September 17, MEET outside hearing room at 1:00pm (hearing starts at 2:30pm)

>Where: Senate Dirksen office, Room 419

Thursday, September 18

House of Representatives Armed Services Committee, with Witness Secretary Hagel

>When: Thursday, September 18, 2014, MEET outside hearing room at 9:30 (hearing begins at 11:15 AM)

>Where: 2118 Rayburn House Building

 

House Foreign Affairs Committee, with Secretary Kerry

>When: Sep 18, 2014 11:30am to 2:30pm

>Where: 2172 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, DC 20515

“YOU CAN’T BOMB THE WORLD TO PEACE!”

August 14, 2014

By Toby Blome

Last month we brought our peace messages to the Golden Gate Bridge at the height of the Israeli assault on GAZA.  We were greeted and thanked by numerous foreigners on the bridge from countries all across the globe.  Early on in the walk a young Turkish woman with head scarf, approached me in tears and thanked us for our effort.  Later in the march, numerous women with head coverings from multiple muslim nations showed expressions of solidarity, appreciation and support, as did many others.  We converged in the middle of the bridge, as usual, for a silent vigil, and finished our group march with a rally on the SF side, commemorating the victims by reading dozens of the names and ages of the 2,000 + killed in GAZA.  As Fred and I returned to the Marin side, I held a sign that said:”LET IRAQ LIVE”  (alternating with the LET GAZA LIVE side)……a young 13 yr. old boy passed me,  walking alone, while clapping his hands in support.  I turned and asked him where he was from.  ”Kurdistan,” he said.  I asked him where in Kurdistan. “Iraq,” he replied.

The Golden Gate Bridge is one of the best places to “Propagate Peace.”  Hundreds of visitors from all around the world come to the bridge.  Help us break the silence and show them that “the people” say NO WAR!  During this somber week, as the US government continues to expand its bombing and drone campaign on the world, more lives continue to be threatened.  Syria, Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen.  Please join us tomorrow as we continue to break the silence.

U.S.A.: DON’T BOMB THE WORLD!

“You can bomb the world to pieces, but you can’t bomb the world to peace.” – Michael Franti