Bishop Desmond Tutu and Ian Urbina: When It Comes to Iraq: might doesn't necessarily make right. William Dowell: Remember Vietnam? Will the war in Iraq stop the threat, or increase it? Paul Heise: Now that Saddam and his clique are doomed, what is keeping them from using their weapons of mass destruction?

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]

"SHOCK AND AWE" VS SURGICAL STRIKES
The Administration promised an aerial bombardment so devastating that Saddam Hussein's forces would surrender immediately. At the same time it wanted a minimum of civilian casualties. The result was a visual spectacle that emotionally repulsed much of the Arab world, but left the Baathist power structure dangerously cohesive. On NBC's Meet the Press, Rumsfeld tried to explain that the target of this "precision bombing" was the Iraqi regime. When Russert pointed out that Iraq's defense minister gave a briefing throughout the bombing, Rumsfeld admitted sheepishly that some targets had been missed.
"How Do You Run A Charm Offensive and Engage in Shock And Awe?"(The Times of London, March 24, 2003)
Rumsfeld on Meet The Press
Rumsfeld on CBS News Face the Nation: The Secretary of Defense was surprised by video footage of American prisoners of War that had just been shown on Al Jazeera TV. CBS anchorman Bob Schieffer showed Rumsfeld the footage and said: "Well, there you have it. Those, apparently, are American prisoners. As I said, we just received that. Can you tell us anything or what do you make of that? " Rumsfeld answered:" I have no idea. There are some journalists that are missing -- not journalists that were embedded with our forces, but some freelance people who were moving around on their own -- some have been killed and some are missing and whether they were journalists or coalition forces, I simply don't know. " (Face the Nation, March 23, 2003)click here for full transcript
The Washington Post's Howard Kurtz on Rumsfeld's damage control
General Tommy Franks briefing, Monday, March 24, 2003(CENTCOM, March24)
General Abizaid's briefing in Qatar on Sunday, March 23(CENTCOM)

HEAVY FIGHTING AND AMERICAN PRISONERS OF WAR
By Monday, U.S. troops were running into heavy fighting, and losing helicopters. Pilots said they were forced to abandon their targets by an intense curtain of fire that rose from streets, rooftops and backyards, hitting near all their aircraft. (The Washington Post, March 24, 2003)

WHAT THE REST OF THE WORLD SAW

U.S. Prisoners of War shown on Al Jazeera

Al Jazeera Television broadcast the first footage of captured American soldiers and sparked a firestorm of protest from U.S. military authorities. Although CBS confronted Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld with scenes from the report, CBS and the other U.S. TV networks quickly decided not to show the film. Both French TV channels eventually ran sanitized versions of the Al Jazeera broadcast. The captured G.I.s appeared frightened, but in reasonably good condition. "We did not feel that there was anything humiliating or degrading," explained a French reporter. (To see France-2's 8 p.m. newscast on 3/23 click here).
To see today's 8 PM News on France-2, Click here
MUSLIM WAKEUP on-line runs the excised Al Jazeera pictures of dead American G.I.'s as well as a photograph of a 2-year old child killed by U.S. bombs in Basra. Warning: these are difficult to look at.

THE ROOTS OF AL JAZEERA
While it has incurred Pentagon wrath for showing aspects of the war that we would rather not see, Al Jazeera's roots extend back to a joint effort between the BBC and Saudi Arabian television. That venture quickly collapsed after the Saudi government protested vetoed a hard hitting documentary about beheadings in the Kingdom. To the dismay of the Saudis, and ultimately of Washington most of the journalists drifted over to a new channel being set up in Qatar. To Washington's dismay, the Arab journalists began emulating the kind of hard hitting reporting that American journalists used to be known for. All that happened at a time when the U.S. press was becoming increasingly neutered by corporate ownership and Washington spin-doctors. Michael Moran, who previously worked for the BBC and is now a senior producer at MSNBC, details the history. (Mike Moran, MSNBC).

MEANWHILE AT GUANTANAMO
Britain's Guardian newspaper reports that a major diplomatic row is about to break concerning U.S. treatment of POWs at Guantanamo, and Human Rights Watch criticizes the Justice Department's efforts to deny due process of law to prisoners on the grounds that Guantanamo is sovereign Cuban territory--even though the base where prisoners are being subjected to "stressful"interrogations is under U.S. administration.
THE GUARDIAN'S REPORT
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH

DOES ANYONE STILL REMEMBER THE WAR AGAINST TERRORISM?
Osama Bin laden was inspired, in part, by Islamic fundamentalist thinking which holds that the West will never give the Arab world an even break. One of Bin Laden's recruiting pitches held that Desert Storm had defiled Islam by allowing infidels, a.k.a. the U.S. Army to more or less permanently base itself on the Holy sands of Saudi Arabia. The U.S. had effectively turned the Custodian of the Holy Places, Mecca and Medina, into a neocolonialist puppet. The argument was powerful enough to move young Saudis into giving up their lives in an attack against the World Trade Center. How will radical groups look on the destruction of one of Islam's great cities, the home of the first Caliphate? The New York Times Magazine provides a primer on the thinking of one of the most influential philosophers of the Muslim Brotherhood, the spiritual antecedent of Bin laden and the others likely to follow him.
(Paul Berman, New York Times Magazine, March 23, 2003)

THE BLOG FROM BAGHDAD:Dear Raed, Where and Who are You?
A running diary of what it is like to be in Baghdad at the moment has drawn so many readers that it threatens to melt down a number of Internet servers. Dear Raed has an almost whimsical, if edgy approach to the war:"...The most disturbing news today has come from Al-Jazeera, they said that nine B52 bombers have left the airfield in Britain and flying "presumably" towards Iraq, as if they would be doing a spin around the block. Anyway they have 6 hours to get here. Last night was very quiet in Baghdad. Today in the morning I went out to get bread and groceries. There were no Ba’ath party people stopping us from leaving the area where we live..."
(dear_raed.blogspot.com)

Kanan Makiya keeps a running diary in the New Republic on the frustrations of the Iraqi opposition. Makiya's conclusion: it's time for a newer generation to try its hand.

Nate Thayer: what it feels like in Baghdad
The City is definitely getting scarier.
(Nate Thayer, Slate, March 19, 22, 23, 2003)

AT THE HEIGHT OF THE ATTACK ON BAGHDAD, THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION QUIETLY SLIPS THROUGH ITS $7.5 BILLION TAX BREAK ON CORPORATE INTEREST PAYMENTS
Staying up well past midnight as the bombs were falling on b Baghdad, Friday, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives managed to put the necessary pieces together. The Pentagon had skillfully evaded answering questions about the cost of the Iraq war until after the tax break, which will primarily benefit corporations and the high end of the investment pecking order, had passed. A dissenting voice, Senator George V. Voinovich (R-Ohio) warned, "We're on the edge of a fiscal crisis in this country if we keep going the way we are, particularly with this war that's hanging over us today." (Helen dewar, Washington Post, March 22, 2003)

NOW IT IS TIME TO COST THE WAR
His $750 billion tax break safe in hand, Bush now confirms that he'll need an extra $75 billion to cover initial costs of the war in Iraq. (Dana Millbank and Mike Allen, Washington Post, March 22, 2003)

RICHARD PERLE AND DANIEL COHN-BENDIT SLUG IT OUT IN FOREIGN POLICY
Perle's line: Sure Syria helps bankroll the terrorists in Hamas, but after we take out Saddam, Syria will be much more willing to listen to the U.S. point of view on Israel. Daniel Cohn-Bendit's response: You've got to be kidding. (Foreign Policy, May-June 2003)
Perle's recent efforts to turn war into profit are detailed with links to relevant documents by Disinfopedia.org

WHAT TO EXPECT FROM THE KURDS
We were initially in this war to bring democracy to the Middle East, right? Well, that was until Turkey informed us that anything resembling a nation-state is definitely out for the Kurds. The only problem is that the Kurds have had their own functioning, largely democratic government for the last ten years--thanks in large part to U.S. air protection and the inability of Saddam's government to extend its influence into Kurdish areas. With Saddam soon to be ousted, and given. Turkey's strategic importance, not to mention the importance of oil fields in Kurdish territory, the administration will be tempted to end a regional democracy rather than promote it. No problem there, the Kurds are used to being betrayed by Washington going back to the breakup of the Ottoman Empire. The International Crisis Group sketches out Kurdistan's recent history and analyzes the policy considerations that make Iraq's northern territories hard to govern.
(ICG, March 21, 2003)

REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENS IN IRAQ, THE LAST FEW WEEKS HAVE BEEN A DIPLOMATIC TRAIN WRECK
Rachel Bronson,the Council on Foreign Relations' Director of Middle East Studies, notes in an email exchange with Bernard Gwertzman that France and Germany deserve part of the blame, but the major responsibility belongs to the administration. Says Bronson:The Bush administration came to power with a notion that "if we say it, they will follow." Many in this administration believed that President Clinton did not show resolve and commitment and therefore did not lead the international community. This administration decided to pursue an alternative course. They alienated many around the world, but even worse, they did not build a strategy for bringing along ambivalent partners.
The second problem is that this lack of strategy led them to make policy decisions that have been contrary to alliance building. The doctrine of preemption alienated many around the world who we would have liked to have been helpful to us.
The third problem is that they never got "on message." They kept changing what this was about--disarmament, regime change, terrorism, or democracy. You can weave a story together about how all of this fits, but they never did.
Fourth, they never put together a compelling vision about post-conflict Iraq. Many around the world believe we have no idea what we are getting ourselves into, and will leave a mess on Iraq's neighbors' doorsteps when we decide things are too hard, or other problems are more compelling. Only very, very recently did the administration begin talking about post-conflict Iraq, and unfortunately it has been too little too late..." (to read full text, click here)
The New York Times' Bill Keller suggests that it may be time for Powell to step down... Keller contends that Powell spent so much time trying to protect his right flank from neo-Reaganite hawks in Washington that he failed to do the kind of diplomacy that was needed to build a genuine coalition in support of the war. As a result, Muslim liberals who normally speak out in defense of American interests abroad have come under intense fire and may leave the U.S. facing a Pyrrhic victory in Iraq. All well and good as a provocative analysis, but would the administration really be better off without Powell?
(Bill Keller, The New York Times, Saturday, March 22, 2003)

U.S. COMMAND WARNS AGAINST FLOODING BAGHDAD
Destroying the dams on iraq's major rivers could flood the capital and everything around it, including U.S. troops laying siege.
(U.S. Defense Dept. Briefing, March 21, 2003)

U.S. CONVINCES JORDAN AND OTHER COUNTRIES TO EXPEL IRAQI DIPLOMATS
Italy. Australia and Jordan agree to a U.S. request to expel Iraq's diplomats, France, Germany, the Vatican, the Netherlands, Poland, Russia and Sweden refuse. Egypt says the suggestion is not under consideration, and Iran also refuses to sever relations at this point in time. (Islam on-line.net)

NOT SURPRISINGLY , THE ARMS MARKET IS BOOMING IN THE GULF
"...The United States has launched its long-anticipated invasion of Iraq at the same time that the biennial International Defense Exhibition (IDEX) 2003, the Middle East's largest military show, is taking place in Abu Dhabi, one of the seven emirates of the United Arab Emirates. Ironically, the five-day event was due to end on Thursday, the day that the US began its attack on Iraq.
Some 850 companies and around 45,000 visitors including heads of state, defense ministers, military delegates, diplomats and industry officials were present for the sixth holding of IDEX. While 37 countries have national pavilions, four countries - Malaysia, Romania, South Korea and Thailand - make their debut. This year's exhibition has seen an almost 35 percent increase in participation..."
(David Isenberg, in Asia Times, March 21, 2003)

TELEVISION COVERAGE THAT CAUGHT THE EXCITEMENT OF WAR, BUT LITTLE OF THE BLOOD AND HORROR
"...The explosions also had an eerie prettiness to them and the shelling often had the appearance of a spectacular light show -- especially when shot after dark and turned a glowing green by night scope photography. In this sense, though the pictures were dramatic and often live,they didn't bring the horror or ugliness of war into sharp focus, or any kind of focus at all..."
Tom Shales in the Washington Post, March 22, 2003

JOHN B. KIESLING'S LETTER OF RESIGNATION
Kiesling was a political officer at the U.S. Embassy in Athens. his letter of resignation has circulated through various web chat groups for the last month, and it is now published by the new York Review of Books. Here is an excerpt:
Dear Mr. Secretary:
I am writing you to submit my resignation from the Foreign Service of the United States and from my position as political counselor in US Embassy Athens… The policies we are now asked to advance are incompatible not only with American values but also with American interests. ... We have begun to dismantle the largest and most effective web of international relationships the world has ever known. Our current course will bring instability and danger, not security.
The sacrifice of global interests to domestic politics and to bureaucratic self-interest is nothing new, and it is certainly not a uniquely American problem. Still, we have not seen such systematic distortion of intelligence, such systematic manipulation of American opinion, since the war in Vietnam. The September 11 tragedy left us stronger than before, rallying around us a vast international coalition to cooperate for the first time in a systematic way against the threat of terrorism. But rather than take credit for those successes and build on them, this administration has chosen to make terrorism a domestic political tool, enlisting a scattered and largely defeated al-Qaeda as its bureaucratic ally. We spread disproportionate terror and confusion in the public mind, arbitrarily linking the unrelated problems of terrorism and Iraq. The result, and perhaps the motive, is to justify a vast misallocation of shrinking public wealth to the military and to weaken the safeguards that protect American citizens from the heavy hand of government. September 11 did not do as much damage to the fabric of American society as we seem determined to do to ourselves. Is the Russia of the late Romanovs really our model, a selfish, superstitious empire thrashing toward self-destruction in the name of a doomed status quo?
To read John Kiesling's complete letter, click here...

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

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,