Senator Joseph Biden: Gaining informed consent on Iraq Crocker Snow: Will George Bush opt for a shootout, or settle for a face-saving solution? Ian Davis and Trevor Findlay: Who should the public believe about inspections in Iraq? Stephen Zunes:The U.S. veto against a U.N. Security Council condemnation of Israel's attack against U.N. staff members encourages future aggression... Dan Smith: On North Korea--war by any other means THE GLOBAL BEAT'S INTERACTIVE REPORTS Why We Are Hated,Nuclear Bunker busters AND Post-Moscow Disarmament

New York University

ANTI-AMERICANISM IS BACK IN STYLE
Boston University professors Margaret and Melvin DeFleur have updated their study of attitudes about America in different countries of the world. Click here to see the an interactive guide.

Click here for the full report as a pdf file

David Isenberg's critique of Homeland Security and recommendations for improvements
[click on image to go to the executive summary]

THE SEARCH FOR A NUCLEAR WEAPON FOR LIMITED CONFLICTS
Mark Bromley and David Grahame report on the Pentagon's search for a nuclear "bunker buster"

THE FUTURE OF NUCLEAR ARMS CONTROL

Rose Gottmoeller:
an interactive assessment of nuclear disarmament after the Moscow Summit,

THE PEACE MARCHES—8 MILLION PEOPLE -- FROM MELBOURNE TO ROME, NEW YORK TO BURBANK, VOTED WITH THEIR FEET IN A WORLDWIDE MARCH AGAINST THE WAR.
For many, it was the first time ever that they had joined in a protest demonstration. The bottom line: whether its objectives are right or wrong, the Bush administration now stands increasingly isolated in the world. As one British World War II veteran puts it: "I have nothing against America. It is just a case of a bunch of ‘bad politicians’ in Washington." How long the administration or the United States can remain dramatically out of sync in an otherwise globalized world remains to be seen.
The BBC: London's "biggest demonstration ever"
The Guardian: A million and they kept coming...
The Los Angeles Times: The biggest protests took place in countries whose governments nominally support the U.S. on Iraq.
The Washington Post: Millions marching show an extraordinary degree of coordination.

TONY BLAIR IS UNDER ENORMOUS PRESSURE
Blair will try to muster support at the Labor Party’s Spring conference this week, but he faces an uphill struggle, that only promises to intensify after his meeting with France’s Jacques Chirac this week.
(The Financial Times, February 15, 2003)

THE NEW YORK POST CAPTURES THE MOOD OF THE EXTREME RIGHT.
Never a newspaper for people with deep thoughts, the New York Post published a cover on Friday in which the tabloid’s photo editors had superimposed the heads of weasels over the faces of the foreign ministers of France and Germany. The accompanying headline read: "U.N. MEETS—weasels to hear new Iraq Defense." It was, said one New Yorker, the kind of mindless, thuggish caricature that one saw the extreme right publishing in Europe in the period leading up to the outbreak of World War II. The Post may have provided the most telling measure yet of the extent to which the Bush administration’s war fever is separating the United States from the rest of the world. The only significant ally in favor of war with Iraq now is Tony Blair, and the embattled British prime minister admits that his career is hanging on by a thread.

THE NEW YORK TIMES WAFFLES
Reporting the Post's weasel cover and recent incidents of rhetorical vitriol directed against allies, the Times seemed more amused than offended.

WHAT DID FRANCE ACTUALLY SAY?
French Foreign Minister Villepin’s speech to the Security Council earned a round of applause from the other delegates present. Colin Powell’s did not.
Here is an excerpt of what Villepin actually said:
"…Let us be clear. Not one of us feels the least indulgence towards Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi regime.
In unanimously adopting Resolution 1441, we collectively expressed our agreement with the two-stage approach proposed by France: disarmament through inspections
and, should this strategy fail, consideration by the Security Council of all the options, including the recourse to force. It was clearly in the event inspections failed and only in that event that a second resolution could be justified.
The question today is simple. Do we believe in good conscience that disarmament via inspections is now leading us to a dead end, or do we believe that the possibilities regarding inspections presented in 1441 have still not been fully explored?
In response to this question, France believes two things. First, the option of inspections has not been taken to the end. It can provide an effective response to the imperative of disarming Iraq.
Secondly, the use of force would be so fraught with risk for people, for the region and for international stability that it should only be envisioned as a last resort…"
Dominique Villepin, the UN Security Council, February 14, 2003
Read all the comments at the U.N. Security Council

THE ADMINISTRATION VOICES ITS DISDAIN FOR THE U.N.
The multiplying invective against the United Nations from the administration is beginning to resemble an annual confab of the John Birch Society.
By Stephen Zunes, Foreign Policy in Focus

CONFLICT OF INTEREST?
What happens when the candidate owns the company that manufactures the voting machinees that put him in power? Thom Hartmann in Common Dreams,Jan. 31, 2003

REMEMBER BLACK HAWK DOWN? SADDAM PINS HIS LAST HOPES ON DRAWN OUT URBAN WARFARE
By forcing the U.S. into urban fighting, Saddam hopes to make the U.S. responsible for the maximum number of Iraqi civilian casualties. Even if Saddam does not survive, the tactic is designed to make the U.S. a pariah to the rest of the world for the foreseeable future.
The New York Times, February 15, 2003

MADELEINE ALBRIGHT AND BRENT SCOWCROFT DISSECT THE CURRENT IRAQ SITUATION
What is the temper in the Security Council? Colin Powell delivered a virtuoso performance, but the applause went to France and Germany.

THE DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE’S ASSESSMENT OF THE TERRORIST THREAT FOR 2003
Despite Administration rhetoric, the threat from Al Qaeda remains. Vast stretches of lawless territory provide a breeding ground for new terrorist movements. Societies excluded from the global economy present another danger. The CIA’s George Tenet details a gloomy future.
George Tenet, DCI’s world-wide threat briefing, 11 February 2003
The FBI’s take on the War on Terrorism(Robert Mueller) "The terrorist enemy is far from defeated…"
Robert Mueller, FBI, February 11, 2003
Defense Intelligence:current and projected threats
The State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research: "Al-Qaeda continues to pose the most immediate and dangerous threat of attack against the US homeland and against Americans and American interests around the world…"

THE DOUBTS WITHIN THE CIA
Until the White House applied pressure, the CIA did not see Iraq as an immediate threat—unless, that is, the U.S. threatened war. Neil McKay details the history of the spin that changed the CIA ‘s assessment and turned George Tenet into a compliant hawk.
(Neil McKay in the Glasgow Herald, Feb. 16, 2002)

Ray McGovern observes the collapse of George Tenet’s integrity and his readiness to reverse earlier threat assessments in order to remain a team player.
(Ray McGovern in Common Dreams, Feb. 16, 2002)

AN INTELLIGENCE "FUSION" CENTER WILL CLEAR THE WAY FOR U.S. INTELLIGENCE AGENTS TO OPERATE IN THE UNITED STATES AND TO COMPARE INFORMATION ON U.S. CITIZENS
First in the order of priorities is a National Counter Terrorism Center, currently billed as the Terrorist Threat Integration Center. (James S. Gilmore, Senate Hearing on Government Affairs, September 14, 2003)

THE HUBRIS-NEMESIS COMPLEX
The combination of God-like pretensions and a natural inclination to violent revenge characterizes some of the world’s powerful leaders. The blend leads to unexpected behavior patterns. The RAND Corporation’s latest study explores the phenomenon.
By David Ronfeldt, RAND (downloadable on-line in pdf format)

SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN’S ARGUMENT AGAINST TRYING CONTAINMENT WITH IRAQ
An absence of reliable allies makes the prospects doubtful at best. If you try to put Iraq in a box, you may find it is a box without a lid or a bottom.
(Senator John McCain, Feb 12, 2003)

IS U.S. TRADE POLICY BREEDING TERRORISTS
The middle east economic survey points out that a lack of investment in the region is creating a breeding ground for new terrorists who will willingly fill the ranks of Al Qaeda’s next generation.
(MEES, Feb. 10, 2003)
MIDDLE EAST ECONOMIC SURVEY
The REPORT ON TRADE IMPACT ON THE WAR ON TERRORISM

WE STAND PASSIVE AND MUTE:
A lone voice on Capitol Hill, Senator Robert Byrd remarks on the silence of the U.S. Senate in a time of crisis:"...To contemplate war is to think about the most horrible of human experiences. On this February day, as this nation stands at the brink of battle, every American on some level must be contemplating the horrors of war.
Yet, this Chamber is, for the most part, silent -- ominously, dreadfully silent. There is no debate, no discussion, no attempt to lay out for the nation the pros and cons of this particular war. There is nothing.
We stand passively mute in the United States Senate, paralyzed by our own uncertainty, seemingly stunned by the sheer turmoil of events. Only on the editorial pages of our newspapers is there much substantive discussion of the prudence or imprudence of engaging in this particular war.
And this is no small conflagration we contemplate. This is no simple attempt to defang a villain. No. This coming battle, if it materializes, represents a turning point in U.S. foreign policy and possibly a turning point in the recent history of the world.
This nation is about to embark upon the first test of a revolutionary doctrine applied in an extraordinary way at an unfortunate time. The doctrine of preemption -- the idea that the United States or any other nation can legitimately attack a nation that is not imminently threatening but may be threatening in the future -- is a radical new twist on the traditional idea of self defense. It appears to be in contravention of international law and the U.N. Charter. And it is being tested at a time of world-wide terrorism, making many countries around the globe wonder if they will soon be on our -- or some other nation's -- hit list.
High-level administration figures recently refused to take nuclear weapons off of the table when discussing a possible attack against Iraq. What could be more destabilizing and unwise than this type of uncertainty, particularly in a world where globalism has tied the vital economic and security interests of many nations so closely together? There are huge cracks emerging in our time-honored alliances, and U.S. intentions are suddenly subject to damaging worldwide speculation. Anti-Americanism based on mistrust, misinformation, suspicion and alarming rhetoric from U.S. leaders is fracturing the once solid alliance against global terrorism which existed after 9/11.
Here at home, people are warned of imminent terrorist attacks with little guidance as to when or where such attacks might occur. Family members are being called to active military duty, with no idea of the duration of their stay or what horrors they may face. Communities are being left with less than adequate police and fire protection. Other essential services are also short-staffed. The mood of the nation is grim. The economy is stumbling. Fuel prices are rising and may soon spike higher. ..this administration has squandered a large projected surplus of some $5.6 trillion over the next decade and taken us to projected deficits as far as the eye can see…
In foreign policy, this administration has failed to find Osama bin Laden… This administration has turned the patient art of diplomacy into threats, labeling and name calling of the sort that reflects quite poorly on the intelligence and sensitivity of our leaders, and which will have consequences for years to come.
Calling heads of state pygmies, labeling whole countries as evil, denigrating powerful European allies as irrelevant -- these types of crude insensitivities can do our great nation no good. We may have massive military might, but we cannot fight a global war on terrorism alone. We need the cooperation and friendship of our time-honored allies as well as the newer-found friends whom we can attract with our wealth. Our awesome military machine will do us little good if we suffer another devastating attack on our homeland that would severely damage our economy. Our military manpower is already stretched thin and we will need the augmenting support of those nations who can supply troop strength, not just sign letters cheering us on.
--Senator Robert Byrd, TomPaine.com Feb. 14, 2003

Zoned for Debate
NYU's Webforum on current issues in journalism

Click here, or on the image of the Zoned for Debate web page

Need information, but having trouble with a broken link? Send an e-mail to wtd2@nyu.edu
or click here
We may be able to help

For quick access to the Global Beat, set your bookmark to:
http://globalbeat.org