Month: April 2008

On June 13th 2006, CommonDreams.org ran an article entitled, “New American Century Project Ends With A Whimper”.^[1]

The thrust was that the neo-con policy group responsible for the Project for the New American Century, was dead in the water. The Iraq war had gone horribly wrong, Rumsfeld (one of its ‘members’) was out of favor, and the whole concept of American empire-building was teetering before adverse public opinion.

CommonDreams was probably accurate, so far as concerted action by the group was concerned, but a large number of individuals were involved with the PNAC, and when one delves beneath the surface, to those areas the US media fails to visit, a picture emerges suggestive of a more vaporous, but still highly active and subversive force for world dominance.

Let’s exam for a moment the positions today of certain high-ranking officials of the PNAC:

BILL KRISTOL – one of the co-founders of the PNAC, has been editor of the neo-con rag, “The Weekly Standard” since 1994. Funded by Rupert Murdoch, the paper is a mouthpiece of neo-conservative policy. Kristol is looking to the future. He’s found himself a nice position as foreign policy adviser to presidential nominee, John McCain.

ROBERT KAGAN – the other co-founder of the PNAC, has also secured a position as foreign policy advisor to presidential hopeful, John McCain.

BRUCE JACKSON – was (or is) a Project Director of the PNAC. Would you be surprised to learn his present position is as foreign policy adviser to presidential expectant, John McCain?

RANDY SCHEUNEMANN – also a ‘Project Director’ of the PNAC. Where is he now? Working as a foreign policy adviser to presidential presumptive, John McCain.

DANIEL MCKIVERGAN – a former Deputy Director of the PNAC. Guess who he’s working for now? You’ve got it in one: presidential prospect, John McCain.

It would appear that the PNAC is well placed to groom the next president of the United States in their own brand of foreign policy; assuming, of course, he is elected to the office. At least five of its top officials are ensuring the next Republican president is well versed in PNAC policy.

Meanwhile, other members are beavering away elsewhere. We’re all familiar with the parts played by Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Cheney, Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Richard Pearle, and Paul Wolfowitz in the present administration’s affairs over the last five years. Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz both suffered the effects of their own super-egos and are, for now, out the game, but many others are still active. In all there were twenty-five signatories to the original PNAC document, but a host of other far right-wing Republicans have signed their names to significant PNAC letters or reports:

KENNETH ADELMAN – called “a lifelong neo-con activist”, is still an active member of the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board.

JEFFERY BERGNER – is an Adjunct Professor of the National Security Studies Program. He is presently Assistant Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs. It’s handy to have a PNAC neo-con in the law office.

JOHN BOLTON – while not presently active in government, is involved with a whole range of right-wing “think-tanks”, including the AEI. He is now counsel to the law firm Kirkland and Ellis, in their Washington D.C. office. Another lawyer biding his time?

ZALMAY KHALILZAD – after serving as US Ambassador to Afghanistan, then Iraq (2005-2007), George W Bush installed Khalilzad as Ambassador to the United nations following the ousting of John Bolton; the replacement of a coarse tongued neo-con with a smooth-tongued neo-con. This was also the case when Paul Wolfowitz fell from grace at the World Bank. The PNAC held the position nicely after persuading Bush to replace Wolfowitz with:

ROBERT ZOELLICK – during George Bush’s 2000 presidential campaign, Zoellick was a member of that faithful little band, The Vulcans, who made up Bush’s foreign policy team, led by Condoleeza Rice.^[2] He was a signatory to the PNAC letter sent to then President Bill Clinton advocating removal of Saddam Hussein. When Wolfowitz was dethroned from the World Bank, Zoellick was appointed as his replacement.

This then is a small selection of the many PNAC activists politically involved, or waiting in the wings for the next Republican president. They all, I believe without exception, have one common interest: the furtherance of the State of Israel and the dominance of that nation in the Middle East. Many PNAC members are Jews; probably all are Jewish sympathizers. Of all the names mentioned above, one is not Jewish. They were certainly not picked for that reason and this article is in no way anti-semitic, but the PNAC is a largely Jewish organization with Israeli ambitions.

Finally, let’s consider one other PNAC member:

ELLIOT ABRAMS: in 2005 he was appointed Deputy National Security Adviser for Global Democracy Strategy. He is a Jew with special interest in the Middle East and a near obsession with Israel. In 2006 he accompanied Condoleeza Rice as her primary adviser, during the Israeli-Lebanese war. According to an article written just over a year ago in the Asia Times:^[3]

“……it appears that Rice’s own chief Middle East aide when she served as Bush’s national security adviser, Elliott Abrams, has become the principal foil in frustrating her efforts to resume a [Palestinian-Israeli] peace process…….Abrams’ personal influence over Bush could not possibly match Rice’s, but his bureaucratic skills and political connections – notably to the so-called “Israel lobby” of pro-Likud Jewish organizations and the Christian Right – give him considerable clout. According to various sources, Abrams has been working systematically to undermine any prospect for serious negotiations designed to give substance to Rice’s hopes – and increasingly impatient demands by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia – of offering the Palestinians a “political horizon” for a final settlement.

“The Bush administration has done nothing to press Israel to deliver on its commitments, beyond Washington’s empty rhetoric about a two-state ‘political horizon’,” Henry Siegman, the longtime director of the US/Middle East Project at the influential Council on Foreign Relations, wrote in the International Herald Tribune just last week.

“Every time there emerged the slightest hint that the United States may finally engage seriously in a political process, Elliott Abrams would meet secretly with Olmert’s envoys in Europe or elsewhere to reassure them that there exists no such danger,” Siegman complained.”

The PNAC may have retreated after their heady days prior to the Iraq invasion, but it seems unlikely they are “dead in the water”. In fact, the organization is very much alive and active, if somewhat less publicly than before.

Many have questioned a possible link between the PNAC and the 9/11 attacks. The suggestion of “another Pearl Harbor” as a catalyst for their plans led many to wonder whether 9/11 was mere coincidence. Perhaps, then, an apparent disbanding was not such a bad idea.

After all, as we’ve seen, it’s not so difficult to continue working from behind the scenes.

^{[1] ” “New American Century Project Ends With A Whimper”, Commondreams.org, June 13th, 2006}

^{[2] The Vulcans: Wikipedia.}

^{[3] “Rice faces formidable White House foe”, Asia Times, February 23rd, 2007.}

Filed under: PNAC: alive and kicking

Ask most people what is likely to be George Bush’s legacy after two terms as president of the United States, and they will almost certainly respond, “The Iraq war.”

After all, there may be much he failed to do as president, like dealing efficiently with the disaster of Hurricane Katrina, achieving a measure of peace between the Israelis and Palestinians, or preventing the economy from sliding into recession, but the one thing he did manage efficiently was to transform a peaceful, non-aggressive nation into a hotbed of violence, suffering, and general mayhem that will take years to revert to normality.

It is fitting that George W Bush should be remembered as the perpetrator of one of the most dastardly acts in recent world history.

Unlikely as it may seem at this moment, that act may be something far worse, and with even more far-reaching consequences, than Bush’s invasion of the Middle East.

In January 2007, at his State of the Union address, George Bush mandated a seven-fold increase in ethanol production that caused farmers and producers alike to rub their hands with glee.^[1] Ethanol would take away America’s reliance on foreign oil, it was said, and raise a finger to all those nasty Arab sheiks who keep withholding supply and putting up the price of crude.

Even as Bush was making his speech, scientists, environmentalists, and aid charities were also rubbing their hands, but in their case, it was in despair.

Ethanol is produced from vegetable matter, largely corn, though other cellular products are being tested. Vegetable matter requires to be grown and harvested, meaning valuable land normally available for growing food is taken over for ethanol production.

This is exactly what is happening today.

All over the world, farmers are switching to ethanol crop production. Food shortages, with an inevitable rise in prices, are the result.

The western world is being hit by a combination of rising fuel costs and basic commodity shortages. The shopping bill of an average American family has jumped dramatically, but while hardship in the US and Europe is inconvenient, the impact of food shortages in the less developed world, where most people live on less than two dollars a day, is already becoming catastrophic.

Food riots are breaking out in many areas of the planet. The latest are happening now in Haiti, where cereals and grains – the staple diet – have risen in price by 50% in the past twelve months.^[2] In Africa, food riots have swept the continent causing serious explosions of violence and frustration. In most of West Africa, the price of food has risen by 50 percent—in Sierra Leone, 300 percent. Parts of Yemen, where the price of wheat has doubled in little over a month, are also effected.^[3]

Food riots in the United States have not been ruled out by some commentators.^[4]

The raison d’etre of George W Bush’s two terms as president has been the diversion of more wealth, from the poorest on earth to the richest. This has been his single great achievement. In fairness, we must look beyond George Bush to those who control him; true power manifests in the vice president, Dick Cheney. This is no reason to allow Bush off the hook, however, as he has always proved a willing participant to the schemes of his masters, whether it be the violent securing of Middle East markets, or ensuring further obscene wealth for his corporate cronies by depriving the world of much needed foodstuffs.

To the unwary, any full-scale diversion of crops to ethanol production may seem a relatively minor matter; after all, surely a balance will be found eventually between fuel and food production?

The answer has to be a resounding, “NO!”

The whole world grows crops that are marketed according to the capitalist system of ‘best price secures’. With the huge, and likely permanent, increases in crude oil over the last five years, ethanol producers can afford to outbid the food industry for corn and other cellulose crops, and still ensure vast profits.

Unless the American government steps in and caps the volume of food crops allowed for ethanol production, the future looks bleak indeed. To suggest such action is unlikely, given the huge investment in this industry, is an understatement.

George W Bush’s legacy, in the years after he leaves office, may well not be his war, but the actions he instigated to starve millions throughout the world, and the numerous wars and violent conflicts that erupt as a direct result of those actions.

<sup>[1] “Ethanol Industry Gets a Boost From Bush”, WP, January 25th, 2007

[2] ” Food riots turn deadly in Haiti”, BBC, April 5th, 2008

[3] “Food riots rock Yemen”, Intelligence Daily, April 4th, 2008

[4] “US Food Riots Much Closer Than You Think”, Rense.com, October 23rd, 2007</sup>

Filed under: Bush’s legacy

One of the greatest failings of any politician is an inability to tell the truth. The usual reason politicians lie, apart from egotism, is to cover up a conflict of interest.

Conflicts of interest abound in political circles today because lobbyists and corporate sponsors bombard politicians with pressures, usually in the form of expensive perks, to run with their pet ideas and money-making schemes.

Hillary Clinton, one of the two Democrats running for their party’s presidential nomination, recently suffered just such a conflict of interest. Yesterday, her chief strategist Mark Penn, resigned. Penn admitted to meeting with Columbian officials to promote a free trade deal with that nation supported by George W Bush and the Republican party. Clinton has always maintained she is against the deal. If she’d said she were not, there is no way she would gain the support of unions, vital to any chance of her winning the nomination.

The question to arise from this debacle is whether there is any way Hillary Clinton could have been unaware of Penn’s conflicting interests?

The answer has to be a resounding, “No.”

Penn was her chief campaign strategist. There is no way his involvement could be kept from her. She not only must have known, but also approved of it.

Last Friday, Bruce Rainer, president of one of America’s biggest unions, “Unite!” said in a press release:^[1]

“……that Clinton’s chief strategist would be working hand in hand with the government of Columbia and the Bush Administration while candidate Clinton says she opposes the agreement is truly incredible, even by today’s crazy standards.”

Is it not time Clinton supporters began querying this long trail of inconsistencies that have stalked her campaign over the months; the egotistical lies she has spread to inflate her own abilities and importance?

Or are they so intent on securing a woman’s ascent to the Oval Office that they’ve become blind to her obvious inadequacies?

^{[1] “Statement of UNITE HERE General President Bruce Raynor”, April 4th, 2008.}

Filed under: Political prevarication