Mideast update

1. Palestinian leader Abbas, the long-favored negotiator of I$rael is threatening not to run for re-election and may announce the move November 6.(1) According to “Haaretz,” the move is already official.

2. Immediately after I said that Europe could get credit for good deeds, the Yen traded higher against the Euro.(2) Thus we may surmise that Japan sought to involve Europe in Mideast peace-making.

3. Obama campaigners’ intransigence has added several complications to the peace process in the last 48 hours. One that I will mention is that Uncle-$am-owned General Motors tried to do Obama a favor by canceling its Opel deal with Russia and Canada, after which Canada rushed to pass a bill making telecommunications wiretapping legal.(3) Putin said it was an out-of-the-blue attack. However, it remains to be seen what GM can really manage to do about selling at least the European based operations.

4. At the moment, UN officials are saying a global climate deal looks unlikely in the next year. It was just a few days ago that UN Secretary General wrote “Yes We Can” in the “New York Times.”

On October 28, I wrote that Obama turned down the wrong road. Since that time, contradictions have only increased.

5. The EU’s action today further vindicates me when I said that I was not given the chance to go to Europe or other places for Internet access. It will now be necessary to take legal action to shut down Internet access; whereas, previously it was possible to gossip someone off the Internet, a procedure we know in advance will be disproportionately detrimental to oppressed nations.

Real leaks about files of mine that are supposed to be classified in addition to pure fabrications have played a real role in damaging the MIM’s struggle to keep its website online. The leaks were to benefit the careers of others, and of course, also had opportunist use of “national security” lingo. Leak-receivers in the media also saw their websites benefit by a lack of MIM competition. MIM’s website was getting over 100,000 readers a month, and included the most serious readers of politics in the world.

The EU move has the potential to uncomplicate the pile up of contradictions, which even Senator Lieberman said was getting to be too much.

Notes:
1. http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=237640 ;
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1126169.html
2. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601101&sid=aROCnRV12z7c
3. http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=110524&sectionid=3510213
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=110454&sectionid=351020701
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/smarter-sleuthing-can-save-our-online-privacy/article1348687/
4. http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/nov/05/ed-miliband-climate-change-copenhagen
5. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/06/technology/internet/06net.html

Mideast update

I have seen optimistic rumors and insinuations about the Mideast. Admittedly, such are par for the course since Oslo.

Various Palestinian leaders are calling on Hamas to sign a reconciliation agreement with Fatah. Furthermore, House Rep. Wexler is resigning his seat over what he sees as a critical time period for the Middle East.

We agree with Iran completely on Palestinian strategy questions. We support them if they go for one state or if they take time out for something leading to two.

Note:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/capitol-briefing/2009/10/rep_wexler_resigning_for_think.html

Mideast news divergence August 14 2009

Stories on the Mideast widely diverge today. The I$raeli papers report that there is an armed group with hundreds of men for a pan-Islamic emirate in Gaza following Al Qaeda while Hamas is for two states. Meanwhile, the I$raeli press also reports that Hamas is waiting for an Obama peace plan.

When we go to check another website the same day, http://www.presstv.ir, it says that there is no Al Qaeda group in Gaza and that Hamas says an Amerikan peace plan would only bring “death and destruction.”

As I wrote these two paragraphs, “Haaretz” added in that Al Qaeda and Hamas had a shoot-out with five dead.

There is a strategy possible here, that Hamas may be allowed to moderate and to be seen as accepting a peace plan while some radicals go to Al Qaeda. Another possibility is that I$rael and the Amerikkkans just seek to stir up divisions. Yet another possibility is that both sets of stories are true as a way of preparing public opinion through have-it-both-ways.

Amerikkkan pseudo-leftists are deeply steeped in sectarianism and secular humynism, not Mao’s teachings on the principal contradiction. For this reason, they look to support organizations in the other countries that claim to adopt the same exact principles, even if those organizations support U.$. war efforts against the Third World.

Today, Iran news in Amerika says there is a call on the “Assembly of Experts” to check Khameini’s qualifications to be the religious leader of Shia Islam. Meanwhile, on presstv.ir, we read that a member of the Assembly of Experts condemned the United $tates for supporting unrest.

Liberals support pluralism no matter what. Liberal sectarians support their organization’s cheerleaders no matter what. In Iran’s case, Mirhossein Mousavi(1) supported freedom for Marxists to speak in Iran, but it’s not simple for MIM to say that while U.$. public opinion is more hostile to Iran than any other Mideast country that we support pluralism and therefore Mousavi. Even if a country is not united with Maoist leadership, it is sometimes better that it stay united.

That’s also a consideration with Palestinians. The I$raelis are always looking for pluralism in their neighbors, because they need division to survive in the sea of Arab countries.

This pluralism extends to MIM. I$rael is probably discussing MIM’s ideas more than any other country, proportionately-speaking. Carlo Strenger discusses today “Why Israel’s left has disappeared” in “Haaretz.” He notices that the Chomsky/Said era of hopes in a united class struggle of Israelis and Arabs has passed. That has many implications for why certain strategies do not work and instead, if anything, the outrage of Palestinians is greater than that of Americans facing the British in 1776: the class gap is greater. The gap comes guised in religious polarization, but it is really class polarization. New York City works as a super-profit-redistribution-center of various ethnicities, but I$rael/Palestine does not, because there is no super-profit-redistribution to Palestinians. The soggy social-democratic and Martin Luther King integration strategies work where there is common class interest. I$raelis are now way too bourgeois for the original idea of many socialist Zionists to work anymore.

Note:
http://www.reuters.com/article/GCA-Iran/idUSTRE57B3W220090812

I$raeli Foreign Minister has more comments

In 1948, I$rael formed. Since then, Mao liberated China, built socialism and died. The colonies liberated themselves from Britain and France. The Vietnamese won the Vietnam War. China went back to capitalism. Apartheid crumbled. And now we are abandoning Reagan and Thatcher ideology on the market. All of that went on, but Palestine is still occupied.

After 60 years of war, Avigdor Lieberman is complaining about a “stopwatch”(1) placed on him, but for us, we do not care about Lieberman the individual, but his whole country. We actually agree with Lieberman. The Arab peace initiative ultimatum is important. If not met, then Congress should impose sanctions on I$rael to equalize it with Gaza. Then Lieberman can have all the time he wants. If I$rael denies the peace initiative and Congress fails to show good sense, then all hell should break out internationally. We know that in this particular struggle we will have widespread bourgeois support, because peoples everywhere know that they moved on from colonialism while the Palestinians are still stuck.

Where things stand right now, Lieberman says peace talks are at a “dead end.” So he does not want the 1967 lines and he wants to come up with new ideas.

It is up to I$rael, Obama and Congress. They can reject the Arab peace initiative; they can fail to impose sanctions equalizing matters in the meantime and they can fail to make a counter-offer of re-partition that the Arab League would take seriously. They can take as much time as they want, but the rest of the world is also free to reduce U.$. influence by all means at its disposal, and there’s no saying that it would not be better to do that first and talk afterwards. That’s why the Arab League ultimatum is important. If things are not going to be resolved one way, then Congress should get a whack and if Congress won’t do anything then the united $tates should be taken down quite a few pegs.

Notes:
1. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1077129.html

Olmert overture to Abbas?

I$rael’s outgoing prime minister Olmert continues to make assertions that Palestinian leader Abbas whimped out on a peace agreement. There could be two motivations other than the truth.

One is that Olmert wishes to position his Kadima Party now that Barak of the Labor Party has joined the Netanyahu government and brought Labor’s peace credentials under fire. There is talk of a split in the Labor Party and Kadima and Meretz would be positioned to pick up the pieces.

Two is that Olmert tries to say something about history, which is yet obscure.

Xinhua found it worthwhile to report on what we had only seen in “Ha’aretz” so far, namely that Olmert offerred 93% of the West Bank and some international solution for Jerusalem.(1) Perhaps in reply the Palestinians said they needed action on an agreement concerning all core issues, which would include refugees/right of return.(2)

I$rael could always publish the terms of the agreement Olmert says Abbas turned down. It could be a way to win over international public opinion.

Abbas is no longer Palestinian president, problem number one, because his term expired in January. So for Olmert to go public now is perhaps disingenuous. On the other hand, if Hamas got hold of the agreement, perhaps Hamas could in theory agree and various people sign before Netanyahu comes in. So it could be more than just rhetorical.

As for the argument that U.$. Congress or I$rael is to blame, not Obama, the Democrats in Congress rely on Obama. Their fates are intertwined.

Palestinian negotiator Erekat says Olmert was to blame. Olmert tried to create the impression he made an offer, but Erekat says it was in the midst of the invasion of Gaza and included no official documents or maps.(3) MIM would certainly agree that would be an example of peace for propaganda purposes only.

Erekat says one more failed round of negotiations will end hopes for a two-state solution.(4) Pressure is on Netanyahu.

Notes:
1. http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-03/27/content_11079458.htm
2. http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-03/25/content_11072443.htm
3. http://www.imemc.org/article/59649
4. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/27/AR2009032702112_2.html?hpid=opinionsbox1&sid=ST2009032702663

Obama getting I$raeli support and returning favor

Although John Bolton takes the original Bush Jr. administration line that any diplomacy is bad for I$rael and since Obama has an envoy to I$rael/Palestinians things are bad for I$rael,(1) in general Obama has shown that the political forces that brought him to power are very shaky.

Gordon Brown is down pretty low in the polls, but he was able to recognize Hezbollah in Lebanon. Meanwhile, Obama officials go out of their way to be to Brown’s right on the peace issue.(2) That tells us much about political reality, when the left-most politician of the united $tates is still to the right of Gordon Brown, himself considered within the right-wing of the Labour Party in terms of past elections/challenges.

Underlying the problem is that a mixture of neo-conservative, liberal Christian and anti-Christian forces brought Obama to power. Their true goal is career networking and counterrevolution. Hence, they have taken the popular side of the fence on questions such as stem cell research and abortion and act like they have instituted major change making all their abandonment of real political struggle and their state-sponsored attacks on revolutionaries justified. Even leaving aside their career network for individuals, their big issues — stem cells and abortion — are themselves just career issues writ large. One is to increase jobs for scientists, the other to allow timing in a female’s career. Exemplifying the Obama train of thought is Frank Rich at the New York Times, who sees a big decline in Christian activist influence.(3)

We should notice the subtle usefulness of Obama, the “Satanists” and the “RCP” to anti-Muslim warfare. Obama sidelines the Christian fundamentalist activists at the same time carrying out war in Iraq and Afghanistan, including with a troop increase in Afghanistan. His approach is in line with closing Guantanamo Bay but not really. In other words, Obama seeks to paper over the visible symbols that mobilize the Third World for war against U.$. invasion.

At the same time, the decline of Christian fundamentalist influence and Obama’s wins in New York and Florida do not mean anything for the Palestinian track of peace negotations. With Obama in power, the bombings of Gaza continue. In fact, Olmert simply snows newly attentive people as if I$rael were making new and unprecedented offers of peace.

U.$. lackey and moderate, former president Abbas says that Olmert never in the negotiations offered up East Jerusalem or a map of territorial division for the West Bank.(4) That pretty much says it all.

If I$rael were serious about anything, the Knesset could divide up Jerusalem, and we can be sure the Shalit deal would go through if that’s what it took for Palestinians to get Jerusalem. Palestinian unity government would be eased as well, because it would appear that there is some reason to have it — and not just feints at peace.

Instead, for its part, I$rael more and more openly sides with the Obama administration to the point of repeating everything he says. When Obama called for a women’s commission, I$rael dredged up old rape charges against former president Katsav from the 1990s, which his brother said was done for “external considerations.”(5) Livni also made a statement followed by outrage in the papers drummed up.

For the U.$.’s part, there is already an accomplishment in being worse than Bush. By taking a denial-of-reality line on Hamas at this time, the Obama administration is delaying aid to the bombed out Gaza Strip, destroyed just as Obama came into office. At least under Bush, Abbas was the president of Palestine till January 9th. Now there is no Palestinian government other than the Hamas parliamentary one and yet the United $tates still wants to dictate terms of how aid gets into the Gaza Strip. The Obama administration is delaying aid to the Gaza Strip, because of rhetoric about “terrorism,” this at a time of dire need of Palestinians. The Obama administration won’t release the aid unless Palestinians form a government of U.$. choice — a so-called technocratic government.(6)

Meanwhile, again outflanking Obama, EU delegates are pushing recognition of Hamas. A British Labour Party member is calling for recognition of Hamas and its 2006 election victory.(7) Meanwhile, it was a British MP that actually delivered trucks of aid across the border to the Gaza Strip from Egypt this week.(8) The United $tates dictates terms for how aid should arrive, while British MPs go ahead and deliver it. So once again, our supposedly left-wing president is lagging behind the Labor Party. If you were one of those who used to piss on the Labour Party from the left and now you are cheering Obama, you might want to consider that it’s just Amerikan nationalism on your own part, a desire to be liked by the majority.

Olmert claims he came within a “whisker” of peace, but that Abbas lacked the “courage.” Yet morons in the left-wing of parasitism in the united $tates cannot figure it out. Lackey moderates in Palestine say I$rael is about to institute an “anti-peace” government and never made a serious offer.(9) The British right-wing of the Labour Party single-handedly brought more change to the Mideast. Yet, Obama aides are saying it’s not a good time to pressure I$rael. I guess we should wait till closer to U.$. elections or after Obama has lost any political mojo he has. (That’s sarcasm.)

The class struggle cannot go forward in exact timing tandem with the diplomatic struggle, because the economic struggle has a timing of its own. The diplomatic reasons being given as excuses are weak. There is never going to be better timing than right now.

Notes:

1. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1070961.html

2. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/13/world/middleeast/13diplo.html?ref=world

3. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/15/opinion/15rich.html

4. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1071175.html

5. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArtStEng.jhtml?itemNo=1069719&contrassID=1&subContrassID=1&title=’Katsav’s%20brother:%20Rape%20charges%20are%20blood%20libel’&dyn_server=172.20.5.5

6. http://www.reuters.com/article/middleeastCrisis/idUSLF93014

7. http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/03/14/world/worldwatch/entry4865921.shtml

8. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7939480.stm

9. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1071175.html

A more original source for news than the last two above would be the Palestinian Authority outlet here:

http://www.maannews.net/en/index.php?opr=ShowDetails&ID=36461

Political horse-trading

by Henry Park

My road to a conventional political career is blocked. I have gone public the last two months to ask for a truce but failed to obtain it.

Sometimes politicians try to make it look like they support each other when they do not. The incentive to create a deceiving appearance is the apolitical nature of the voting public. For example, Obama created a certain appearance by supporting Bill Richardson for Commerce Secretary. Then we found out that it was one of Obama’s donors that embroiled Richardson in a grand jury investigation. So we should be suspicious about that, require further investigation as to whether that was a back-stabbing operation.

Alternately, Obama pretends to disown Reverend Wright and Blagojevich, but Wright is now openly singing Obama’s praises again.

With Obama and a certain supporter of his, I was not able to get beyond the level of appearances. It would be unethical, not to mention against my own interests, to condone the sort of scandals that have been created for political purposes.

As we learn today from Gail Collins and David Brooks at the “New York Times,” change is not in the air. So I tried for career, only to have the usual Democrats blocking it.

I had the added incentive/disincentive of reaching a deal, because Obama needed a potted plant in office to paper over certain problems. Although I cannot be extorted into office and service to the Obama agenda, just because of Obama’s political operations against me, he and the Democrats have succeeded in disrupting our media. No one should be fooled into thinking that Obama agrees with MIM already and has no need for extortion. 

Yesterday, CNN reported that Obama bowled down the middle in his Gaza statement and questioned whether that would change anything there. Meanwhile I$rael’s prime minister Olmert said that if you liked Bush, you will love Obama.(1) Hamas has said there is no change and Obama will fail.(2)

I noticed a certain male district attorney level allegorical criticism of me in precise coordination with the opening of the Gaza offensive by I$rael. Good going, hope you are proud of the results, because they are yours–morons.

Contrary to those saying “only a communist revolution” can liberate Palestine, obviously the great majority of colonies went free with communist help but without communist revolution. In other words, Obama’s line so far is unnecessarily oppressive even within capitalism.

I see myself playing no formal or informal role in government going forward and will return to writing to “create public opinion and the independent institutions of the oppressed.” Obama, Clinton and the rest of the elite may very well pick a fight with me/MIM. They have already disorganized the MIM media, and now it is time for a fight to put it back in order.

Notes:

1.  Haaretz service, “Olmert: U.S.-Israeli relations will grow even stronger under Obama,”

“‘The United States, including both parties, has been a true and strong friend of the State of Israel over the years, especially during former President Bush’s term of office,’ Olmert said.

“‘I am convinced that the United States’ deep and abiding ties with Israel will strengthen further,’ he added.”

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1057137.html

2. Associated Press, “Hamas: Obama does not represent change,” 23Jan09,

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1057946.html

Conventional career pursuits

by Henry Park

Many times but especially in diplomacy we face a trade-off between change and career. One school of thought says go for change immediately in one’s negotations. Another school of thought says to place people in bureaucracies and let them make their way to change in international relations.

After 25 years of anonymity and having no office, I preferred not to become a chip in an agreement and instead see various parties agree to change.

Practically speaking it is difficult to work out all the details of taking someone like me and clearing the way to a conventional career. I have asked Democrats spying on me to come clean so I could start a conventional career if change did not work out. I have not received any word on that, and so that combined with a failure to reach international agreements is the reason I am not in a government post. There is no point to taking a post only to become the most blackmailed office-holder.

In these posts, I oversimplify for the benefit of brevity and accountability.

Mideast update

by Henry Park

Hours after our last article, President Obama chose his Mideast envoys–Dennis Ross, George Mitchell and Richard Holbrooke. That direction and more importantly the massacre in Gaza has given new impetus to “Isratine”  as referred to by Libyan leader Qadaffi.(1)

I had been willing to serve as a chip in an international agreement. To understand this, the reader might envision what happens when there is an international agreement reached with the united $tates, but one side does not want Rice’s people or Clinton’s people monitoring it. So the point is that in international politics, people become chips in agreements.

What we are seeing now is that the Bush administration did not nail down any agreement in which I would have received a job.

There are also situations where we communists come under pressure to sell out principles and take jobs that deflect change. We are still watchful for the damage done to our media as part of the pressure tactics of the major parties.

Notes:

1. http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=83338&sectionid=351020506

Some details on Amerikan law and the Mideast

Since the 1990s, MIM has done its best to expose the Oslo process in the Mideast as a figleaf of peace on imperialist war. In the past two years, MIM has done its best to maneuver against that sort of approach to the Mideast. There were some weaknesses in the transition period, but no one no matter how senior knows how to avoid that.

What may be confusing some international comrades are the reasons why the playbook against MIM is as it is.

1) By claiming to consider MIM for offices, it justifies release of information on MIM to the public through its choice of proxies, with a thin legal cover; even though, such releases started long before the campaign season.

2) The only trouble with the above is that the facts could demonstrate the federal government in violation of laws against racism. Hence, stringent standards and supposedly lengthy processes of job application had to be adopted. In reality they will not be applied evenly.

3) Although the Oslo process was under Clinton, there is nothing saying MIM relations with McCain, Bush and Obama are smooth.

Generally, when U.$. imperialism’s State Department gets itself into diplomatic trouble from way, way overplaying its hand and blowing credibility, it saves some scandals to get out of difficulty. Once out of trouble, U.$. imperialism’s playbook generally says to discard the evidence all around.

The danger is that international readers will misinterpret the Aesopian language and legal situation here. MIM has not met in persyn with a single politician. Elaborate appearances are being created with no real world or legal basis; although, obviously certain real events also occurred relevant to our diplomatic struggle. It is a great matter of courage to be seen with a real communist in a professional situation. That fact can in turn be used as an excuse for why various silly pressures are brought to bear on MIM by people who know no other way of dealing with others than through coercion.

We counsel the oppressed and exploited internationally to remain confident. Imperialism has unleashed problems on itself that are real and beyond its own understanding.

We have offered suggestions to improve the peace process that have been steadily rejected. The enemy keeps returning the subject to money and career, because that is all the enemy can understand and adjudicate legally. Their laws concern careers, not change. Unfortunately to speak about change is to risk generating legal excuses for the status quo. Nonetheless, we have entertained the idea of a political career in exchange for change to prove to our international readers that we leave no stone unturned for peace. Those who have followed the Aesopian language can see nothing has come of this openness of ours. We hope to reduce the number of people duped into thinking that the Amerikan system could actually hire a known revolutionary communist for a public purpose. It has never been done; although it is true, the United $tates is in an unprecedented situation, so we have kept door open to change, so the world can gauge what is happening for itself.

When it appears that there is much trouble for not much result here and no change, the reason is that the imperialists are covering their legal asses. That makes them that much harder to understand.