"WHO THE HELL IS SHOOTING AT US?"



--Sgt. First Class Marc Biletski, among the American soldiers that raced onto

Haifa Street before dawn to dislodge Sunni insurgents and Shiite militias; cited

in Damien Cave and James Glanz, ?In a New Joint U.S.-Iraqi Patrol, Americans Go

First? (New York Times, January 25)

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/25/world/mi...agewanted=print



"BOTTOM LINE IS THAT WE'VE HAD ENORMOUS SUCCESSES AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE

ENORMOUS SUCCESSES."



--Vice President Dick Cheney, regarding Iraq; cited in Peter Baker, ?Defending

Iraq War, Defiant Cheney Cites 'Enormous Successes,'? (Washington Post, January

25)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2402066_pf.html



BUSH CONTINUES TO UNITE THE WORLD... AGAINST HIM JIM LOBE (ANTIWAR.COM,

JANUARY 23): Despite two years of a concentrated effort by Secretary of State

Condoleezza Rice and her public diplomacy major-domo Karen Hughes to boost

Washington's global image, more people around the world have an unfavorable

opinion of U.S. policies than at any time in recent memory, according to a new

BBC poll released Monday. SEE BELOW ITEMS 2, 28-35.

http://www.antiwar.com/lobe/?articleid=10375



USA TANKS IN WORLD POLL... THE BEGINNING OF THE BEGINNING - (DAVID SEATON'S

NEWS LINKS, JANUARY 24): The result of this world wide poll is not so much a

failure of US policy or even its "packaging" (public diplomacy) but rather the

triumph of the new technologies of communications and the social networks they

are forming.

http://seaton-newslinks.blogspot.com/2007/...ginning-of.html



HELEN OF TRUTH NANCY SNOW (HUFFINGTON POST, JANUARY 21): The Freedom House

report, Freedom in the World 2007 identified a "growing 'pushback' against

organizations, movements, and media that monitor human rights or advocate for

the expansion of democratic freedoms." The Middle East/North Africa region,

where U.S. public diplomacy efforts to "win hearts and minds" are especially

focused, saw miniscule change in democracy and freedom over the past year.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nancy-snow/h...th_b_39203.html



AMR KHALED AND WARS OF IDEAS MARC LYNCH (ABU AARDVARK, JANUARY 23): One of

the biggest dangers lurking within a lot of recent talk in the 'wars of ideas'

community about "using" moderate Islamists. Given such mutual public hostility

and mistrust, the temptation is great to avoid public dialogues and instead

focus on covert methods such as paying influentials to spread 'our message.' But

the U.S. shouldn't get sucked into payola schemes.' COMMENT BY BLOG READER

MARTIN: "How much of the American outreach to 'moderate Islam' is originating

out of the office of Karen Hughes?"

http://abuaardvark.typepad.com/abuaardvark...haled_and_.html



CHINA CONFIRMS MISSILE TEST - MURE DICKIE, MICHIYO NAKAMOTO, AND KATHRIN

HILLE (FINANCIAL TIMES, JANUARY 23): China's lack of effective public diplomacy

on the test of an anti-satellite weapon is not difficult to understand. Beijing

analysts have long argued that it is understandable for a still relatively weak

military power such as China to be reluctant to give too much information about

its defense.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/e657a164-aaa7-11db...00779e2340.html

SEE ALSO

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2401646_pf.html



IS OSAMA BIN LADEN THE MARTIN LUTHER OF ISLAM? - REZA ASLAN (SLATE, JANUARY

24): Charlotte Beers, the hapless Madison Avenue exec who was the first

undersecretary of state for public diplomacy in the Bush administration, put

together a series of video spots showing how great life was for Muslims in the

United States. In many countries, the response was: "We're thrilled these people

like living in Dearborn. Now please get the Israelis out of the West Bank and

Gaza." Muslims abroad tend to be less interested in how their co-religionists

live in the United States -- what matters is American foreign policy.

http://www.slate.com/id/2158114/entry/2158213/?nav=tap3



WAR ON TERROR'S OTHER FRONT: CLEANING UP US POP CULTURE: THE DISTORTED VIEW

OF AMERICA THAT HOLLYWOOD PROJECTS BREEDS HATEFUL FEELINGS ABROAD - DINESH

D'SOUZA (CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, JANUARY 25): By proclaiming our allegiance

to the traditional values of Judeo-Christian society, we can reduce the currents

of anti-Americanism among the Muslims, and thus undercut the appeal of radical

Islam to traditional Muslims around the world.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0125/p09s01-coop.html



VIEWS ON U.S. DROP SHARPLY IN WORLDWIDE [BBC] OPINION POLL - KEVIN SULLIVAN

(WASHINGTON POST, JANUARY 23): Globally, the most common view in 23 of the 25

countries polled is that the United States is causing more Middle East conflict

than it is preventing.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2201300_pf.html



THE WORLD AGREES: STOP HIM - ROBERT SCHEER (TRUTHDIG/COMMON DREAMS, JANUARY

24): The almost universal support the United States enjoyed after the 9/11

terrorist attacks has been completely squandered, as a majority of the world?s

people now believe that our role in the entire world is negative.

http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print....s07/0124-28.htm



LOW EBB OF AMERICAN SOFT POWER - JOSEPH NYE (HUFFINGTON POST, JANUARY 24):

'M]y strongest take-away of the day [at the Davos meeting in Switzerland] was a

seasoned Asian diplomat telling me that in all his travels, he has never seen

American soft power at such a low ebb. In his words, only the Israelis, Indians,

and Vietnamese have a positive view of the U.S. Then he added, and Iran, if you

look only at the people, not the government."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joseph-nye/d...e-_b_39536.html



THE VIEW OF BUSH AND AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY FROM DAVOS 07 - JIM WALLIS

(HUFFINGTON POST, JANUARY 24): 'Despite the broad hostility to U. S. policies

around the world, I am often amazed at how much good will there is toward

Americans.'

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-wallis/t...er_b_39493.html



EUROPOST: AS AMERICA'S DISCONTENT WITH BUSH GROWS, EUROPEANS SIGH WITH

RELIEF - MARTIN VARSAVSKY (HUFFINGTON POST, JANUARY 23): As Americans reject

Bush´s policies in Iraq, Europeans? sympathies for America increased.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/martin-varsa...er_b_39380.html



RESPONSE TO BUSH'S SPEECH FROM BRITAIN TO BEIJING: LEADERS AND ANALYSTS SAW

LITTLE NEW IN FOREIGN POLICY, BUT WELCOMED HIS SHIFT ON ENERGY (CHRISTIAN

SCIENCE MONITOR, JANUARY 25)

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0125/p10s01-usfp.html



IRAQI POLITICIANS SEE LITTLE NEW IN STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS - SAMEER N.

YACOUB, ASSOCIATED PRESS (WASHINGTON POST, JANUARY 24)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2400168_pf.html



IRAQ'S REFUGEES: THEY ARE FLEEING THEIR HOMES AT THE RATE OF 50,000 A MONTH,

AND THEY NEED HELP EDITORIAL (WASHINGTON POST, JANUARY 22): The best way to

help Iraqi refugees, of course, is to secure their country so that they can

return home safely. Since that won't be possible anytime soon, the United States

is bound by both practical and moral considerations to address a crisis that it

helped to create.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2100934_pf.html



U.S. SOLDIER SPEAKS OUT FROM BAGHDAD - AARON GLANTZ (ELECTRONIC IRAQ,

JANUARY 23): More than 1,000 active duty U.S. soldiers have signed a petition to

Congress -- known as an Appeal for Redress -- calling for the withdrawal of all

U.S. troops from Iraq.

http://electroniciraq.net/news/printer2849.shtml



OUR MERCENARIES IN IRAQ: THE PRESIDENT RELIES ON THOUSANDS OF PRIVATE

SOLDIERS WITH LITTLE OVERSIGHT, A DISTURBING EXAMPLE OF THE MILITARY-INDUSTRIAL

COMPLEX - JEREMY SCAHILL (LOS ANGELES TIMES, JANUARY 25)

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commen...omment-opinions



SECTS MANIAC - PETER BEINART NEW REPUBLIC, JANUARY 22): "Do we and Prime

Minister Maliki share the same vision for Iraq?" wondered National Security

Advisor Stephen Hadley in a November memo. Virtually everything Maliki has done

in recent weeks screams no. How much more evidence do we need, and how many more

Americans must die, before we take that no for an answer?

http://www.tnr.com/docprint.mhtml?i=20070129&s=trb012907



ANALYSTS SEE A CHANCE FOR MALIKI SUCCESS - WALTER PINCUS (WASHINGTON POST,

JANUARY 24): The draft of a new National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq says it

will be "very difficult" but "not impossible" for the government of Prime

Minister Nouri al-Maliki to succeed in providing better governance in that

war-ravaged country, a top intelligence official told a Senate committee

yesterday.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2301275_pf.html



THE STATE OF THE UNION - EDITORIAL (NEW YORK TIMES, JANUARY 24): Mr. Bush?s

comments on Iraq in his State of the Union speech added nothing to his failed

policies.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/24/opinion/...agewanted=print



SPEAKING ON DEMAND: THE STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS, A CONSTITUTIONAL

REQUIREMENT, SEEMED MORE FORCED THAN EVER THIS YEAR ? EDITORIAL (LOS ANGELES

TIMES, JANUARY 24): Much of the president's speech concerned Iraq, although he

said little that was particularly original or helpful.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-...-opinion-center



A STATE OF DISTRACTION EDITORIAL (SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE, JANUARY 24): A

nearly four-year war that has consumed more than $400 billion and claimed the

lives of more than 3,000 Americans has seriously eroded the standing of the

president who initiated it -- and it showed in both the substance and the

reception of Bush?s state of the union speech.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...;type=printable



STATE OF TROUBLES: A WEAKENED PRESIDENT BUSH ADDRESSES THE NATION ?

EDITORIAL (WASHINGTON POST, JANUARY 24): Mr. Bush's goal in his state of the

union speech was not so much to argue anew for the troop increase but to drive

home the point that the "consequences of failure would be grievous and far

reaching." On this, Mr. Bush is assuredly correct.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2301727_pf.html



TATE OF DISUNION EDITORIAL (BOSTON GLOBE, JANUARY 24): Bush is still

going it alone in Iraq, losing even many in his own party.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial...isunion?mode=PF



THE RIGHT STRATEGY ISN'T ENOUGH - STEPHEN SESTANOVICH (WASHINGTON POST,

JANUARY 24): If Bush focuses entirely on what's needed to improve things in Iraq

in the short term without making his policy more sustainable in America in the

long term, we'll have to call it a failure.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2301565_pf.html



CONGRESS PLAYS BAD COP ON IRAQ: A VOTE AGAINST BUSH'S STRATEGY COULD

ACTUALLY GIVE HIM MORE LEVERAGE WITH BAGHDAD OFFICIALS ? EDITORIAL (LOS ANGELES

TIMES, JANUARY 22): If he is smart, Bush will use Congress?s impatience

regarding Iraq to his advantage in pursuing both aspects of his "new way

forward" -- a surge in U.S. troops and a message to the Iraqis that the surge is

their last, best and temporary hope of U.S. assistance in keeping their country

together.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editor...ment-editorials



CONGRESS'S CHALLENGE ON IRAQ EDITORIAL (NEW YORK TIMES, JANUARY 22): Both

houses will need to find ways to use their power -- including the power of the

purse -- to do what Mr. Bush refuses to do: set and enforce deadlines for the

Iraqi government to disarm militias, share oil revenues and reintegrate the

Sunni middle class into Iraqi life.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/22/opinion/...agewanted=print



THE DEMOCRATS FUMBLE AND STUMBLE - WILLIAM M. ARKIN (WASHINGTONPOST.COM,

JANUARY 24): Removing American soldiers from the streets would indeed be a

different approach. But it is also stupid, that is, unless it is accompanied by

withdrawal and reconciliation with the reality that we will let Iraq go.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/earlywarnin...l?nav=rss_blogr



NEW FACE ON A TOUGH WAR - DAVID IGNATIUS (WASHINGTON POST, JANUARY 24): For

a nation bitterly divided over Iraq, the one point of agreement seems to be that

Lt. Gen. David Petraeus is the right commander for U.S. forces in Baghdad.

Petraeus offers something new: He is the last frail hope for a bipartisan

consensus on Iraq.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2301570_pf.html



SURGIN' GENERAL: DAVID PETRAEUS REALLY IS AS GREAT AS ADVERTISED. BUT GIVEN

THE MISSION HE'S TASKED WITH IN IRAQ, THAT WON'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE - SPENCER

ACKERMAN (AMERICAN PROSPECT, JANUARY 24): The surge plan entrusted to Lieutenant

General David Petraeus, chosen to command American forces in Iraq, assumes that

Iraq's sectarian and political deadlocks are attributable to the absence of

security. But this gets it exactly backward: the chaos is the result of

political deadlock.

http://www.prospect.org/web/printfriendly-view.ww?id=12398



SIGH FOR AMERICA - JAMES CARROLL (BOSTON GLOBE, JANUARY 22/COMMON DREAMS):

The "surge" in Iraq that matters is the movement from disaster to catastrophe. A

question: How can otherwise rational policy makers and military leaders continue

to cooperate in this madness?

http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print....s07/0122-29.htm



BUSH'S IRAQ "SURGE": THE FRAUD EXPOSED - ROBERT FREEMAN (COMMON DREAMS,

JANUARY 23)

http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0123-26.htm



CAN THE GENERAL SAVE THE DAY? - H.D.S. GREENWAY (BOSTON GLOBE, JANUARY 23):

In all the debate about the surge, the negative effect of foreign troops on the

Iraqi population has been underestimated.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial...the_day?mode=PF



THERE IS NO SOLUTION: A FOOL'S ERRAND IN BAGHDAD - MIKE WHITNEY

(COUNTERPUNCH, JANUARY 22): The real purpose of the surge is to pacify Baghdad

in order to rebuild confidence among the supporters of the war.

http://www.counterpunch.org/whitney01222007.html



ANDREA HEEDED AMERICA'S CALL, AND PAID WITH HER LIFE: IN IRAQ, ALL

FOREIGNERS ARE TARGETS - PATRICK COCKBURN (COUNTERPUNCH, JANUARY 23): The extent

of insurgent dominance in Baghdad is such that it will be extremely difficult

for Mr. Bush's "surge" in troops to work.

http://www.counterpunch.org/patrick01232007.html



BREAKING THE CLINCH - DAVID BROOKS (NEW YORK TIMES, JANUARY 25): The

weakness of the Bush surge plan is that it relies on the Maliki government.

There is one option that does approach Iraqi reality from the bottom up. It

calls for a ?soft partition? of Iraq in order to bring political institutions

into accord with the social facts.

http://select.nytimes.com/2007/01/25/opini...agewanted=print

PAID SUBSCRIPTION



A BAD IDEA THAT DESERVES A TRY: THE SURGE ISN'T GOING TO WORK. LET'S TRY IT

ANYWAY - JONATHAN RAUCH (REASON, JANUARY 22): Once the surge takes place,

Americans are likely to know in a matter of months whether the Maliki government

is serious about pacifying Shiite militants, coming to terms with Sunnis, and

cleaning up the ministries and security forces. If not, Washington can begin

withdrawing forces and shift into damage-control mode -- not without guilt, but

at least with certainty.

http://reason.com/news/printer/118092.html



COORDINATION COULD BREED CONTROL IN IRAQ - AUSTIN LONG (WASHINGTONPOST.COM'S,

JANUARY 24): Better coordination alone won't solve America's problems in Iraq

and guarantee victory. But without it, achieving victory will be a lot harder

regardless of the number of troops the U.S. maintains, because successes

achieved by one arm of the U.S. effort is too often undone by another.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2301218_pf.html



WHY THE 'BIG PUSH' SOUNDS HORRIBLY FAMILIAR - ADAM HOCHSCHILD (ASIA TIMES,

JANUARY 24): Like the Big Push of the Somme in WWI, the Big Push in Iraq is a

reapplication of tactics that have already proved a calamitous failure. As the

outspoken retired US Army Lieutenant-General William Odom, former director of

the National Security Agency, puts it, it's like finding yourself in a hole and

then digging deeper.

http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IA24Ak01.html



SPEAKING OUT NOW AGAINST THE IRAQ DISASTER IS TOO LITTLE, TOO LATE - CYNTHIA

TUCKER (BALTIMORE SUN, JANUARY 22): There is no chance for "victory" or

"success" in Iraq at this late date, and little chance for even averting

disaster. What is done cannot be undone. There is no "way forward."

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/o...-oped-headlines



REBELLION OVER IRAQ: SON AGAINST FATHER IVAN ELAND (ANTIWAR.COM, JANUARY

22): Full-blown civil war will likely occur in Iraq, with or without U.S.

forces being in the middle of it. Thus, the correct policy prescription is

immediate withdrawal.

http://www.antiwar.com/eland/?articleid=10376



FIGHT TODAY OR OCCUPY FOREVER: IF WE LEAVE IRAQ NOW, WE COULD GET A MIDEAST

VERSION OF NORTH KOREA: A DANGEROUS REGIME DOWN THE ROAD WITH U.S. FORCES

STATIONED NEAR ITS BORDERS FOR DECADES TO COME - JONAH GOLDBERG (LOS ANGELES

TIMES, JANUARY 25)

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commen...omment-opinions



TALKING OURSELVES INTO DEFEAT: PROFLIGATE SELF-DOUBT CAN EXACT A PRICE -

DANIEL HENNINGER (OPINION JOURNAL FROM THE WALL STREET JOURNAL EDITORIAL PAGE,

JANUARY 25): We are not only on the way to talking ourselves into defeat in Iraq

but into a diminished international status that may be harder to recover than

the doom mob imagines.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/d...r/?id=110009573



RETREAT ISN'T AN OPTION - LIZ CHENEY (WASHINGTON POST, JANUARY 23): If we

quit in Iraq now, we must get ready for a harder, longer, more deadly struggle

later. (The writer is former principal deputy assistant secretary of state for

Near Eastern affairs.)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2201103_pf.html



TRUTH TO POWER - FRANK J. GAFFNEY JR. (WASHINGTON TIMES, JANUARY 23): In

truth, our defeat in Iraq will make it impossible to keep Afghanistan free, let

alone protect ourselves from what will subsequently emerge out of the

terrorists' new Iraqi base.

http://www.washtimes.com/functions/print.p...22-093342-3577r



AN OPPORTUNITY FOR DIPLOMACY IN MIDDLE EAST - TRUDY RUBIN (BALTIMORE SUN,

JANUARY 23): America has leverage for the kind of diplomacy that is essential if

we want to quit Iraq without disaster. The goal of such diplomacy: to convince

Iraq's neighbors that Iraq's collapse would so endanger them that they have to

work to stabilize the country.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/o...-oped-headlines



MARTIN LUTHER AL-KING? - THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN (NEW YORK TIMES, JANUARY 24): If

Iraq is ultimately unraveled by Muslim suicide-nihilism, it certainly will be a

blot on our history 'We opened this Pandora's box. But it will be a plague on

the future of the whole Arab world."

http://select.nytimes.com/2007/01/24/opini...agewanted=print

PAID SUBSCRIPTION



VIDEO OUR OWN WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION (TRUTHDIG, JANUARY 23): This

disturbing documentary by former '60 Minutes' producer Barry Lando chronicles

the horror that 13 years of U.S.-backed sanctions wrought on Iraq, including the

deaths of hundreds of thousands -- many of them children.

http://www.truthdig.com/avbooth/item/20070...ss_destruction/



OUR DELUSIONAL HEDGEHOG - HAROLD MEYERSON (WASHINGTON POST, JANUARY 24): We

are stuck backing an Iran-friendly Shiite sectarian regime in Iraq, even as we

plan to spend hundreds of millions in aid to the Lebanese army to fend off the

Shiite sectarian forces of Hezbollah, and even as Secretary of State Condoleezza

Rice scuttles from one Sunni state to the next in an attempt to build a firewall

around Iran. This is foreign policy as nonsense.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2301563_pf.html



LOOKING FOR A GULF OF TONKIN-LIKE INCIDENT - RODRIGUE TREMBLAY (NEW AMERICAN

EMPIRE, JANUARY 22): President George W. Bush is busily looking for a Gulf of

Tonkin-like incident in order to further escalate the war in Iraq and to start a

fresh one with Iran.

http://www.thenewamericanempire.com/tremblay=1054



WEST'S IRAN PLAN SHOWS GAINS. WILL US STICK TO IT? EVIDENCE MOUNTS THAT

INTERNATIONAL PRESSURE IS HAVING AN EFFECT, BUT IRAN'S PRESIDENT REMAINS DEFIANT

- HOWARD LAFRANCHI(CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, JANUARY 23)

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0123/p02s01-usfp.html



STOP THE IRAN WAR BEFORE IT STARTS - SCOTT RITTER (NATION, JANUARY 24): If

the case for war with Iran is revealed to be as illusory as was the case for war

with Iraq, then Congress must take action to stop this conflict from occurring.

http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=...05&s=ritter



HE X FACTOR IN 2008 -- IRAN PATRICK J. BUCHANAN (ANTIWAR.COM, JANUARY

23): Is there anything that might alter the course of events and affect the war

picture by 2008? Indeed: a preemptive strike on Iran.

http://www.antiwar.com/pat/?articleid=10378



WISDOM IN EXILE - ANNE APPLEBAUM (WASHINGTON POST, JANUARY 23): There is

another Iran: an Iran that admires neither Ahmadinejad nor the Islamic

"establishment" that now opposes him, an Iran that believes in open engagement

with the West and an open discussion of history.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2201090_pf.html



IRAN'S PLANS: STICKS & CARROTS - AMIR TAHERI (NEW YORK POST, JANUARY 23):

Confrontation or accommodation? Three decades after the mullahs seized power,

the question remains at the heart of the Islamic Republic's strife-ridden

political life.

http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print....amir_taheri.htm



IRAN PREPARES PUBLIC FOR POSSIBLE CLASH - ALI AKBAR DAREINI, ASSOCIATED

PRESS (WASHINGTON POST, JANUARY 22): Iran conducted missile tests Monday as its

leadership stepped up warnings of a possible military confrontation with the

United States.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2200983_pf.html



SURVEYING THE SUNNI-SHIA QUESTION - MARC LYNCH (ABU AARDVARK, JANUARY 22):

The popular idea out there, true or not, is that the U.S. and its Arab allies

hope to prepare the ground for a confrontation with Iran by turning Arab public

opinion against the Shia.

http://abuaardvark.typepad.com/abuaardvark..._egyptian_.html



US, IRANIAN PUBLICS NOT SO DIFFERENT JIM LOBE (ANTIWAR.CON, JANUARY 24):

The people of Iran and the United States share many of the same hopes and fears

about global problems but remain deeply distrustful of each other's government,

according to a major survey of public opinion in both countries released

Wednesday.

http://www.antiwar.com/lobe/?articleid=10389



DEBUNKING IRAN'S NUCLEAR MYTH MAKERS - KAVEH L AFRASIABI (ASIA TIMES,

JANUARY 25): Increasingly, the voices of dissent in Iran on the nation's nuclear

policy are getting louder and louder, reflecting a growing disenchantment with

the confrontational policies of President Mahmud Ahmadinejad, which according to

many Iranian pundits have put vital national-security interests at risk.

http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IA25Ak03.html



TAKING THE OFFENSIVE ON IRAN - DAVID L. GRANGE AND ILAN BERMAN (CHICAGO

TRIBUNE, JANUARY 24): The consequences of inaction far outweigh the risks of

resolutely confronting Iran now.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion...ncommentary-hed



THE PRICE OF HYPOCRISY - MARK LEVINE (ASIA TIMES, JANUARY 25): Rice's craven

coddling of one of the world's oldest and most authoritarian regimes -- Egypt --

is morally unconscionable and it confirms al-Qaeda's argument that the U.S.

continues to care not a wit about the human and political rights of ordinary

Muslims.

http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IA25Ak06.html



OSTER POLITICS - ANDREW LEE BUTTERS (TIME, JANUARY 17): Lebanon seems

pretty evenly split between pro-Western and pro-Eastern camps.

http://time-blog.com/middle_east/2007/01/p...r_politics.html



THE STATE OF THE (DIS)UNION - PEPE ESCOBAR (ASIA TIMES, JANUARY 25): US

President George W. Bush's State of the Union address -- apart from the amalgam

of al-Qaeda and Iran in the same sentence -- was a non-event in terms of a new

strategy for the Middle East.

http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IA25Ak01.html



DUBIOUS 'SUCCESSES' IN IRAN EDITORIAL (WASHINGTON TIMES, JANUARY 25): We

remain skeptical of the notion put forward by the Bush administration and the

Israeli government that we are on the verge of some kind of New Mideast Order in

which "moderates" like the Wahhabi rulers of Saudi Arabia join hands with Israel

to combat Iran and the Shi'ite radicals.

http://www.washtimes.com/functions/print.p...24-094726-1371r



RICE'S RHETORIC, IN FULL RETREAT - JACKSON DIEHL (WASHINGTON POST, JANUARY

22): In Egypt Rice neglected to mention something: "democracy and reform."

During the course of her visit to Egypt, and her latest tour through the Middle

East, the words never publicly crossed her lips.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2100526_pf.html



SOMALIA'S LESSON -- DON'T ALWAYS TRUST THE LOCALS: SEND IN FOREIGN

PEACEKEEPERS TO THE HORN OF AFRICA, WHICH HAS SLIPPED INTO CHAOS EACH TIME

FORCES HAVE LEFT - MAX BOOT (LOS ANGELES TIMES, JANUARY 23): Although most of

the foreign policy debate in the U.S. has been riveted on Iraq, some within the

Pentagon have been touting recent events in Somalia as an alternative model of

how to fight Islamo-fascists.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commen...omment-opinions



MOMENT OF OPPORTUNITY IN SOMALIA EDITORIAL (NEW YORK TIMES, JANUARY 25):

Washington needs to move quickly, along with Arab and African leaders, to try to

broker a political compromise between responsible leaders of the Islamic Courts

Union, which was evicted from power last month by the Ethiopians, and the

internationally endorsed transitional government installed in its place.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/25/opinion/...agewanted=print



BLACKHAWK UP: AMERICA RETURNS TO SOMALIA - DAVEED GARTENSTEIN-ROSS (WEEKLY

STANDARD, JANUARY 29): It is now widely recognized that the United States should

not have disengaged from Somalia in 1994. The Bush administration should not

make the same mistake.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Publ...13/200wnmzz.asp



REMOTE CONTROL - MARCEL GRANIER (WALL STREET JOURNAL, JANUARY 24): The

president of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Hugo Chávez, has verbally

announced his decision to shut down Radio Caracas Television (RCTV) -- our TV

station, the oldest in Venezuela as well as the one with the largest audience.

So continues a long series of attacks against journalists, employees, management

and shareholders of many independent media companies.

http://online.wsj.com/article_print/SB1169...8902885814.html

PAID SUBSCRIPTION



ANOTHER VIETNAM: PART II - THOMAS SOWELL (WASHINGTON TIMES, JANUARY 23):

The most fundamental difference between President Bush and his critics has not

been in who has made mistakes, because both have. The biggest difference has

been that the president has taken a long-run view of the worldwide war on

terror, while his critics are seeking a quick fix.

http://www.washtimes.com/functions/print.p...22-093344-7820r



PRESIDENT'S PORTRAYAL OF 'THE ENEMY' OFTEN FLAWED - GLENN KESSLER

(WASHINGTON POST JANUARY 24): In his State of the Union address last night,

President Bush presented an arguably misleading and often flawed description of

"the enemy" that the United States faces overseas, lumping together disparate

groups with opposing ideologies to suggest that they have a single-minded focus

in attacking the United States.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2400006_pf.html



BUSH'S SOTU: ANNOTATED - STEPHEN ZUNES (FOREIGN POLICY IN FOCUS, JANUARY

24/COMMON DREAMS): By only speaking out in support of freedom in countries with

autocratic governments the administration does not like but remaining silent in

regard to autocratic governments the Bush administration supports, it

politicizes the human rights struggle, replaces principle with political

expediency, and compromises the struggle for freedom worldwide.

http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0124-32.htm



STATE OF THE APOCALYPSE - GLEN FORD (TOMPAINE.COM, JANUARY 23): Although

the Bushite ranks are now demoralized and their public support at low ebb, they

have never abandoned their crusade for a new world order based on raw,

unilateral U.S. military force, a planetary ?market? to be constantly

restructured according to the whims of unfettered, hyperactive capital.

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2007/01/2..._apocalypse.php



AMERICA NO LONGER OWNS GLOBALIZATION - NATHAN GARDELS (INTERNATIONAL HERALD

TRIBUNE, JANUARY 24)

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/01/24/opinion/edgardels.php

First Arab joins Israeli cabinet BBC News
The Israel government has voted to appoint an Arab Muslim to the cabinet - for the first time in the history of the Jewish state.Raleb Majadele from the Labour Party will be minister without portfolio. Mr Majadele, aged 53, said his appointment would give Israeli Arabs a sense of belonging. Labour Party leader Amir Peretz said it was an historic step towards equality for Israeli Arabs, who make up about 20% of Israel's population. All Israeli cabinet ministers - except for the ultra-nationalist Minister of Strategic Affairs, Avigdor Lieberman - voted in favour of Mr Majadele's appointment. "The first step has been taken and this has given Israeli Arabs a feeling of belonging," Mr Majadele told Israel's Army Radio. Israeli Arabs have long complained of discrimination, but the Israeli government points out that they have more rights than Arabs elsewhere in the Middle East, the BBC's Jon Leyne in Jerusalem says. In 2001, Salah Tarif, a member of Israel's Druze minority, was made minister without portfolio but he resigned shortly afterwards after being indicted on corruption charges. He was convicted in 2003.

Blair sees hope of climate deal BBC News
UK Prime Minister Tony Blair has told the World Economic Forum a major breakthrough on long-term climate change goals could be close.He told the forum in Davos, Switzerland it was possible because of a "quantum shift" in the attitude of the US. He said the German G8 presidency offered an opportunity for a new international agreement for when the Kyoto Protocol expired in 2012. "I believe we are potentially on the verge of a breakthrough," he said. Mr Blair praised Chancellor Angela Merkel's focus on climate change during her EU presidency and India and China's engagement with the G8. He also pledged to work with other world leaders towards a more "radical" and "comprehensive" successor to the Kyoto protocol. "The German G8 Presidency gives us the opportunity to agree at least the principles of a new, binding international agreement to come into effect when the Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012," Mr Blair said. "But one which is more radical than Kyoto and more comprehensive, one which this time includes all the major countries of the world."

'Mood shift'
However, he said any agreement would not be able to deliver without binding commitments from the US, China and India.He told the World Economic Forum: "If Britain shut down our emissions entirely, i.e. we closed down the country - not the legacy I want - the growth in China's emissions would make up the difference in just two years. "Without the biggest economies being part of the framework to reduce carbon dependence, we have no earthly chance of success," he said. But Mr Blair added: "The mood in the US is in the process of a quantum shift. "The president's State of the Union address built on his 'addicted to oil' speech last year and set the first US targets for a reduction in petrol consumption." In a wide-ranging speech on world issues, Mr Blair also said he believed nuclear power had to be part of the future. "But I look ahead in my country and I see a situation where we're going to move, incidentally, from self-sufficiency in gas to importing 90% of it, and I say for reasons both of energy efficiency and reducing carbon emissions, how are we going to do that without nuclear energy being part of the mix? "And I think we've got to get over this false view that it offers nothing by way of the future. I think there is a whole new generation of technology growing up around it," he said.

Standing ovation
According to the BBC's Tim Weber, the conference hall was completely full for Mr Blair's speech. Both his speech and following question and answer session received much applause and a standing ovation, our reporter in Davos said. Some observers are seeing Mr Blair's speech as an attempt to be viewed as an elder statesman once he steps down as prime minister. Trade ministers from around 30 countries have previously agreed during the conference that full-scale global trade talks should resume quickly. Politicians have said it would be "catastrophic" if the talks failed.

Foreign Policy Commentary Update January 29, 2007


US OFFICIAL PRAISES PHILIPPINES FOR SUCCESS IN WAR ON TERROR DOUGLAS

BAKSHIAN (VOICE OF AMERICA, JANUARY 27)

http://voanews.com/english/2007-01-26-voa13.cfm



CAN THE U.S. REBUILD ITS IMAGE? - LYRIC WALLWORK WINIK (PARADE, JANUARY 30):

After the usual niceties -- such as saying that we are reaching out to other

nations based on common values, friendship and respect -- Karen Hughes is

upfront in declaring that it will take at least a generation before hard-core

attitudes about the United States even begin to change. Hughes places some of

the responsibility for America's image on us. She talks about how -- before 9/11

-- people abroad perceived the U.S. as being uninterested in the rest of the

world.

http://www.parade.com/articles/editions/20...lligence_Report



PLAYING BY ISLAMOFASCIST RULES - ALEX ALEXIEV (WASHINGTON TIMES, JANUARY 27):

Top government representatives regularly engage in meaningless "Muslim outreach"

programs with the most radical of Islamist organizations, thereby legitimating

them again and again in the eyes of mainstream Muslims as the powers that be in

their community. Karen Hughes, the public diplomacy guru of the land, told a

convention of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA): "You are the

frontline in public diplomacy because you are more credible than I am."

http://washingtontimes.com/functions/print...26-090037-8629r



OPTIMISM IN THE FACE OF A "COSMIC WAR" - REZA ASLAN (SLATE, JANUARY 24):

Diplomacy will never work if it is run by partisan gunslingers like Karen Hughes

or by Madison Ave. executives like Charlotte Beers, not least because their

primary goal seems to be making American foreign policy more palatable to the

Muslim world. That's a waste of time. We need to focus instead on communicating

American values and ideals to the Arab and Muslim world. Who better to express

to the world's Muslims what it means to be American than American Muslims?

http://www.slate.com/id/2158114?nav=tap3



REGIONAL CRISES IN THE CONTEXT OF SAUDI-US RELATIONS: A CONVERSATION WITH

FLYNT LEVERETT - (SAUDI ARABIA UNITED STATES RELATIONS, DC, JANUARY 24): Dr.

Flynt Leverett, Senior Fellow and Director of the Geopolitics of Energy

Initiative in the New America Foundation?s American Strategy Program: "[T]hat is

also very problematic for the Saudi regime, that US policy is not just

empowering Iran, but it is also enabling Iran to conduct, if you will, public

diplomacy against the United States, which further complicates the strategic

challenge facing Saudi leaders right now."

http://www.saudi-us-relations.org/articles...-interview.html



11. PRINCE TURKI AL-FAISAL: WE ARE NOT YOUR FRIENDS ? CATHOLICGAUZE (GEOGRAPHIC

TRAVELS WITH CATHOLICGAUZE! A BLOG ON GEOGRAPHY, GEOGRAPHIC THOUGHT, AND COOL

GEOGRAPHY LINKS!, JANUARY 27): "The main point of the [outgoing Saudi Ambassador

to the U.S. al-Faisal's] speech was public diplomacy. Al-Faisal said the era of

the diplomat was over. He went on to state that we all conducted diplomacy and

that the exchange program was a perfect opportunity for Saudis to learn about

America. ... I asked if there was a program which would enable Americans to

visit Saudi Arabia. I was hoping there the 'exchange' would be somewhere near

equal. The prince replied that the Kingdom is 'working on it' and took pride in

the fact there are 'slightly less than forty Americans' studying in the

kingdom."

http://catholicgauze.blogspot.com/2007/01/...e-not-your.html



THE GOOD OLD DAYS OF SELLING DEMOCRACY: MARSHALL PLAN FILMS OFFER HISTORY

LESSON IN PUBLIC RELATIONS - PHILIP KENNICOTT (WASHINGTON POST, JANUARY 27):

Washington is awash in people muttering about the urgent need for better public

diplomacy, but the current administration's attempts to reinvent it have met,

mostly, with distress and sometimes mockery -- especially the first travels of

Karen Hughes, who encountered chilly audiences in her first forays to the Middle

East. The films of the post-WWII Marshall Plan reveal the fruits of a propaganda

machine that was working on an entirely different level of sophistication than

anything happening today.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2601742_pf.html



GEORGE W. BUSH, A PRESIDENT IN THREE ACTS - GEORGIE ANNE GEYER (YAHOO! NEWS,

JANUARY 25): "Compassionate conservatism? When did you last hear that term? Some

of my sources whispered that the whole agenda came from Laura Bush and Karen

Hughes, not from him [Bush]. At any rate, and particularly once 9/11 came,

George W. Bush left all those favorite ideas behind."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ucgg/20070126/cm_u...dentinthreeacts



LAWMAKERS EXCHANGE VIEWS ON CHINA-U.S. RELATIONS XINHUA (PEOPLE'S DAILY,

BEIJING, JANUARY 28): A group of Chinese and U.S. lawmakers had in-depth

exchanges of views on China-U.S. relations, parliamentary exchanges and other

issues of mutual concern, and reached wide-ranging consensus, at a meeting in

Hawaii over the past two days.

http://english.people.com.cn/200701/28/eng...128_345495.html



SLAUGHTER IN BAGHDAD'S BIRD MARKET: BOMBERS TARGET SHIA CIVILIANS - PATRICK

COCKBURN (COUNTERPUNCH, JANUARY 27/28): One by one the landmarks of Baghdad are

disappearing, engulfed by the torrent of violence.

http://www.counterpunch.org/patrick01272007.html



IT HAS UNRAVELED SO QUICKLY - SABRINA TAVERNISE (NEW YORK TIMES, JANUARY

28): Baghdad fell in 2003 and we are still trying to pick it back up. But Iraq

is a different country now. Deeply damaged from years of abuse under Saddam

Hussein, the Shiites who run the government have themselves turned into abusers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/28/weekinre...agewanted=print



TOMGRAM: WHERE DO THE AMERICAN DEAD COME FROM? TOM ENGELHARDT

(TOMDISPATCH, JAUNUARY 25): The American dead of the Iraq and Afghan Wars come

disproportionately from rural America.

http://www.tomdispatch.com/index.mhtml?pid=160190



ATROCITY IN KARBALA - EDITORIAL (NEW YORK POST, JANUARY 28): Those who have

led the outcry over what they hysterically decry as U.S. "war crimes" in Iraq

have a particular obligation to speak out against genuine atrocities of the kind

committed by terrorist insurgents.

http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print....editorials_.htm



GRUNTS, CONTRACTORS AND LABORERS: THE THREE US ARMIES IN IRAQ - ZIA MIAN

(COUNTERPUNCH, JANUARY 26): It is hard to see how adding a few tens of thousands

of soldiers will make much difference to an American force of at least a quarter

of million already in Iraq. It is likely only to make things worse, and many

people see that.

http://www.counterpunch.org/mian01262007.html



IN LIMBO ON IRAQ - DIANA WEST (WASHINGTON TIMES, JANUARY 26): It's very

possible that renewed American fighting in Baghdad, if successful -- which, as

Americans, we must hope it to be -- will not only stabilize the chaotic capital

of Iraq, but will also entrench its Shi'ite-led, pro-Hezbollah, anti-Western

government.

http://www.washtimes.com/functions/print.p...25-091731-6290r



THE IRAQ WAR: CONGRESS IS DRAWING LINE IN SAND - MARK SILVA (CHICAGO

TRIBUNE, JANUARY 28): After years of asserting presidential wartime powers,

President Bush now faces a certain confrontation with a new,

Democratic-controlled Congress that will methodically make a case for reining in

the president's authority over the Iraq war.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion...perspective-hed





CONGRESS RESPONDS TO BUSH'S IRAQ PLEA HELEN THOMAS (SEATTLE

POST-INTELLIGENCER, JNUARY 26/COMMON DREAMS): Bush is on the ropes as support

for the unpopular war further erodes, both among American voters and in

Congress.

http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0126-23.htm



THE WAR AND THE SENATE OPINION (BALTIMORE SUN, JANUARY 26): The nation

can't simply bide its time for the next two years before doing anything about

this disastrous war. Congress must act.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/b...inion-headlines





THE FIGHT WE'RE IN: WHAT'S THE BEST WAY FOR DEMOCRATS TO FORCE BUSH TO END

THE WAR TERENCE SAMUEL (AMERICAN PROSPECT, JANUARY 26): For Congress, the only

pertinent consideration should be how we get out.

http://www.prospect.org/web/printfriendly-view.ww?id=12405



THE BIPARTISAN WAR ON BUSH: REPUBLICAN SENATORS JOINED THEIR COUNTERPARTS IN

TAKING AIM AT BUSH'S IRAQ PLAN -- EVEN IF THEY WERE ONLY SHOOTING BLANKS - MARK

BENJAMIN (SALON, JANUARY 25)

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/01/...tion/print.html



DEMORALIZED: THE REAL STATE OF THE UNION - MONA CHAREN (NATIONAL REVIEW,

JANUARY 26): The defeatism on the part of the Democrats and some Republicans is

one of the reasons our task in Iraq is so difficult.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YzEzZ...2Q5ZjA0N2U5Yzg=



THE BODY DEMOCRATIC: FIGHT TODAY OR OCCUPY FOREVER - JONAH GOLDBERG

(NATIONAL REVIEW, JANUARY 26): There seems to be only one hope for persuading

the Democrats to support staying in Iraq. Let's just beat the rush and call Iraq

a humanitarian crisis now.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ODIxN...TY1OTZiZDJmMjY=



CONGRESS'S IRAQ QUAGMIRE: THE SENATE WOULD SEND GEN. PETRAEUS OFF WITH A PAT

ON THE BACK AND A VOTE OF NO CONFIDENCE IN HIS MISSION EDITORIAL (WASHINGTON

POST, JANUARY 25): Even if the objective of pacifying Baghdad with American

troops were a good one, it's not clear that enough troops are being sent for

long enough to succeed.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2401778_pf.html



THE INCOHERENT SENATE EDITORIAL (WASHINGTON TIMES, JANUARY 28): Passage of

a resolution denouncing the war in Iraq (which appears to have overwhelming

support) is utterly nonsensical if senators are serious about defeating the

enemy.

http://www.washtimes.com/functions/print.p...27-092607-6610r



PARTING WAYS IN IRAQ - DAVID BROOKS (NEW YORK TIMES, JANUARY 28): Logic,

circumstances and politics are leading inexorably toward soft partition.

http://select.nytimes.com/2007/01/28/opini...agewanted=print

PAID SUBSCRIPTION



THE COSTS TO THOSE WHO SOLDIER ON - ANTHONY LAKE (BOSTON GLOBE, JANUARY

26): The nation must meet its responsibility to begin a phased redeployment of

our troops from Iraq -- strengthening our armed forces for future missions while

pursuing more vigorously a war in Afghanistan that is not yet lost, but hangs in

the balance.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial...dier_on?mode=PF



MURPHY'S LAW & WEASEL-HOLES: IF WE DON'T GET OUT OF THE WEASEL-HOLE OF IRAQ,

WE WON'T HAVE MUCH OF A FUTURE - CAROLINE ARNOLD (COMMON DREAMS, JANUARY 26)

http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0126-26.htm



GRAND DELUSION: POLITICIANS IN BOTH PARTIES ACT AS IF THEY CAN MAKE THE WAR

GO AWAY SOON. IT WON'T - ROBERT KAGAN (WASHINGTON POST, JANUARY 28): The United

States cannot escape the Iraq crisis, or the Middle East crisis of which it is a

part, and will not be able to escape it for years. And if Iraq does collapse, it

will not be the end of our problems but the beginning of a new and much bigger

set of problems.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...7012601541.html



NOT THIS TIME - FRED BARNES (WEEKLY STANDARD, FEBRUARY 5): The painful

lesson of Vietnam applies in Iraq: Don't give up when victory is at hand.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Publ...13/206ifjmh.asp



TEHRAN'S INFLUENCE GROWS AS IRAQIS SEE ADVANTAGES - JOSHUA PARTLOW

(WASHINGTON POST, JANUARY 26): Iran has driven a wedge between Iraq and the

United States.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2502087_pf.html



IRAN'S NUCLEAR BOMB: ACQUIESCE OR ATTACK? GRAHAM ALLISON (HUFFINGTON POST,

JANUARY 27): However the war in Iraq ends, it is clear who the biggest winner

will be: Iran. If Iran is to be prevented from building nuclear bombs without

war, the US must now explore negotiating options that are unpalatable but

nonetheless better than the options a President will face at the end of the road

he is now on.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/graham-allis...qu_b_39800.html



WHAT IF IRAN SUSPENDS? A WESTERN DILEMMA - TRITA PARSI (ANTIWAR.COM, JANUARY

27): As the Feb. 21 deadline for Iran to halt its uranium enrichment program

fast approaches, both Iran and the West are scrambling to prepare themselves for

all possible moves by the other side.

http://www.antiwar.com/ips/parsi.php?articleid=10408



ANTI-SHIA OR ANTI-IRAN? BALANCE OF POWER POLITICS, NOT A NEW SECTARIANISM -

GREG GAUSE (ABU AARDVARK, JANUARY 25): The new effort at an anti-Iranian front

is a return to old American tactics. The fact that the democracy rhetoric has

been shelved and the minimal pressure on America's allies for political reform

set aside (evident most clearly in relations with Egypt) is the best indication

of the return to classic balance of power logic in American regional policy.

http://abuaardvark.typepad.com/abuaardvark..._balance_o.html



CRACKS IN IRAN: U.S. PRESSURE MAY BE HAVING AN IMPACT ON THE MULLAHS. IF SO,

THE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE EXPLOITED ? EDITORIAL (WASHINGTON POST, JANUARY 28):

The most promising way of refining the current policy would be to return to a

strategy that worked when the Bush administration tried it in 2001, which is

engaging Iran in a regional forum.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...7012701096.html



TO ATTACK IRAN EDITORIAL (BALTIMORE SUN, JANUARY 28): A unilateral

American military attack on Iran would cause incalculable harm to the United

States. It would leave the U.S. isolated among the world's nations, it would

expose American troops to far greater violence, and it would lay the groundwork

for a severe constitutional crisis between the executive branch and an aroused

Congress.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/b...inion-headlines



BUSH IS ABOUT TO ATTACK IRAN: WHY CAN'T AMERICANS SEE IT? - PAUL CRAIG

ROBERTS (ANTIWAR.COM, JANUARY 27): Everything is in place for an attack on Iran.

Why hasn't Congress told Bush and Cheney that they will both be instantly

impeached if they initiate a wider war?

http://www.antiwar.com/roberts/?articleid=10411



WHOSE IRAN? - LAURA SECOR (NEW YORK TIMES, JANUARY 28): For a Western

traveler in Iran these days, it is hard to avoid a feeling of cognitive

dissonance. From a distance, the Islamic republic appears to be at its zenith.

But from the street level, Iran?s grand revolutionary experiment is beset with

fragility.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/28/magazine...agewanted=print



ISRAEL'S WORST NIGHTMARE: CONTRA IRAN - YOSSI KLEIN HALEVI & MICHAEL B. OREN

(NEW REPUBLIC, JANUARY 26): The French philosopher André Glucksmann has noted

that, by threatening to destroy Israel and by attaining the means to do so, Iran

violates the twin taboos on which the post-World War II order was built: never

again Auschwitz; never again Hiroshima. The international community now has an

opportunity to uphold that order. If it fails, then Israel will have no choice

but to uphold its role as refuge of the Jewish people.

http://www.tnr.com/docprint.mhtml?i=200702...alevioren020507



THE HIDDEN COST OF FREE CONGRESSIONAL TRIPS TO ISRAEL: BRANDED AS

'EDUCATIONAL,' THESE TRIPS OFFER ISRAELI PROPAGANDISTS AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPOSE

MEMBERS OF CONGRESS TO ONLY THEIR SIDE OF THE STORY - JIM ABOUREZK (CHRISTIAN

SCIENCE MONITOR, JANUARY 26): What drives much of congressional support for

Israel is fear -- fear that the pro-Israel lobby will either withhold campaign

contributions or give money to one's opponent. (Jim Abourezk is a former

Democratic senator from South Dakota.)

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0126/p09s01-coop.html



LEBANON: SHADOW OF CIVIL WAR LOOMS AGAIN - SAMI MOUBAYED (ASIA TIMES,

JANUARY 27): The more the White House supports pro-Western Prime Minister Fouad

al-Siniora, the more it is easy for Hezbollah to discredit him.

http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IA27Ak02.html



WORLD IGNORES SIGNS OF CIVIL WAR IN LEBANON ROBERT FISK (INDEPENDENT,

JANUARY 27/COMMON DREAMS)

http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print....s07/0127-22.htm



SAVING LEBANON - EDITORIAL (NEW YORK TIMES, JANUARY 28): The Bush

administration needs to drop its stubborn resistance to diplomacy with Syria --

and try to coax Damascus away from both Iran and Hezbollah. Washington must make

clear that Lebanon?s sovereignty is not negotiable.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/28/opinion/...agewanted=print



FLAMES LICKING AT LEBANON - EDITORIAL (BOSTON GLOBE, JANUARY 27): Iran,

Israel, and the United States have all had a hand in weakening the foundation of

the Lebanese state; they should all be enlisted to remove Syria's heavy hand

from Lebanon and to settle Lebanese political differences peacefully, within the

rules of the democratic game.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial...lebanon?mode=PF



RICE'S STRATEGIC RESET - DAVID IGNATIUS (WASHINGTON POST, JANUARY 26):

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice this week sketched a new framework for

America's strategy in the Middle East based on what she calls the "realignment"

of states that want to contain Iran and its radical Muslim proxies.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2501555_pf.html



FROM BAD TO WORSE - MORTIMER B. ZUCKERMAN (U.S. WORLD & NEWS REPORT,

JANUARY 21): With her recently completed journey to the Middle East, Condoleezza

Rice wasted both time and energy -- and badly dented America's diplomatic

credibility.

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/artic...0121/29edit.htm



WHAT ARE THE SUNNIS THINKING? SHARP RED LINES IN THE MIDDLE EAST - MICHAEL

YOUNG (REASON, JANUARY 25): Only democracy could prepare Arab states to

withstand Iran without recourse to sectarianism. But the Bush administration

seems to have abandoned that inventive undertaking for the region.

http://reason.com/news/printer/118301.html



REVIVING THE SEARCH FOR MIDDLE EAST PEACE - JOHN SHATTUCK (BOSTON GLOBE,

JANUARY 27): Middle East peacemaking will be a hard sell this year. But the

popular demand for peace remains high.