'Remember Iraq'

By Munir Umrani

Posted Sunday, December 20, 2009, at 11:12:42 PM CST

"Remember Iraq?' asks Fareed Zakaria, NewsWeek's international editor, in a post headlined "Don’t Forget America’s Other War." "For months our attention has been focused on Afghanistan and you can be sure that the surge will be covered exhaustively as it unfolds in 2010," he adds, warning: "But the coming year could be even more pivotal in Iraq. The country will hold elections in March to determine its political future."

And how much will that political future cost U.S. taxpayers? Hopefully not one red cent, but that's wishful thinking.

How is Obama's Foreign Policy Supposed to Work?

By Munir Umrani

Posted Sunday, December 20, 2009, at 9:12:42 PM CST

Recommended: David Shorr's December 20, 2009. post at Talking Points Memo (TPM) titled "How Obama Foreign Policy (Is Supposed To) Work." Writes Shorr: "The crux of debates over foreign policy approach and strategy is the question of how US aims can be achieved. What's the most effective way to induce others toward desired outcomes?"

Has Turkey Become More Proactive in its Foreign Policy?

By Munir Umrani

Posted Tuesday, October 06, 2009, at 9:10:16 PM CDT

Amanda Akçakoca, a policy analyst and program executive at the European Policy Centre, opines in the October 5, 2009, online edition of Today's Zaman:

Over the past decade, there has been a fundamental shift in the way Turkey’s political elites shape the country’s foreign policy. Ankara has become more proactive, assertive and independent; less focused on traditional hard power and more on a ‘diplomacy-first’ approach. This new reality is based on Ankara’s innovative ‘strategic depth’ and ‘zero problems with neighbours’ policy.

Ms. Akçakoca said, "This approach aims to “end disputes and increase stability in its neighbourhood, replacing disagreement with cooperation; seek innovative mechanisms and channels to resolve regional conflicts; encourage positive change in the region; and build cross-cultural bridges of dialogue and understanding”. At the same time, Turkey is expanding its conomic and political influence in its surrounding neighbourhood."

 If you're interested in reading more of Ms. Akçakoca's perspective, please see "Turkish foreign policy – between East and West?"It's worth reading.

The Grand Old Party and U.S. Foreign Policy

By Munir Umrani

Posted Sunday, October 04, 2009, at 10:10:26 PM CDT

Is a Highly Centralized Government the Best System for Afghanistan?

By Munir Umrani

Posted Sunday, October 04, 2009, at 9:10:30 PM CDT

Aunohita Mojumdar, an Indian freelance journalist based in Kabul, Afghanistan, reported October 2, 2009, at EurAsia.Net that, "As the international community, specifically the NATO allies, wrestles with the need to develop yet another military strategy in Afghanistan, some domestic political leaders in the strife-ravaged country are starting to question whether a highly centralized government is the best system for the present, challenging times."

"The recently conducted presidential election, a vote marred by widespread fraud, has helped catalyze the nascent constitutional debate inside Afghanistan." she wrote. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. Domestic critics of President Hamid Karzai believe the reports of massive vote-tampering on behalf of the incumbent shows that the strong-presidential system is detrimental for Afghanistan. They are calling for an urgent redistribution of power -- from the central government to the regions -- in order to prevent Afghanistan’s democratization process from careening off the rails."

Mr. Obama, Israel and Weapons of Mass Destruction

By Munir Umrani

Posted Saturday, October 03, 2009, at 2:10:47 PM CDT

"In contradiction with his calls for nuclear-free world, US President Barack Obama has given Israel guarantees to maintain its nuclear ambiguity policy to skip international inspection of its nuclear facilities," comments islamOnline.net in response to The Washington Times' October 7, 2009, report headlined "EXCLUSIVE: Obama agrees to keep Israel's nukes secret."    See "Obama Keeps Israel’s Nukes Secret." Also see "Chutzpah, Thy Name is Israel."

Meanwhile, "Egypt has ruled out any additional nuke commitments unless Israel signs NPT (Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty), even as it asked for making the West Asia a nuclear free zone," the Press Trust of India reported October 2, 2009. See "No Nuke Commitments Until Israel Joins NPT: Egypt."

During a  September 28, 2009, address to world leaders attending the UN General Assembly's annual gathering of world leaders,  Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Al-Moualem called on Israel to commit to a Middle East free of Weapons of Mass Destruction.   

Did anyone expect Mr. Obama to force Israel to come clean about its nuclear weapons? I certainly didn't. Only Muslim nations and non-Christian nations are pressured to give up their nuclear weapons and nuclear weapons research under threat of sanctions and even attack. 

Does U.S. Military and Diplomatic Effort in Afghanistan Make Sense?

By Munir Umrani

Posted Saturday, October 03, 2009, at 7:10:06 AM CDT

 "A major U.S. effort in Afghanistan makes no sense in its own right: a faraway country with very limited resources and a history of hostility to invaders. But Afghanistan was intimately involved with the World Trade Center attack — a major psychological blow to the American people, and that has given Afghanistan a major psychological tie in U.S. minds," opines Ed Corcoran, a senior fellow "on national security issues" at GlobalSecurity.org and a contributor to Foreign Policy In Focus, in an October 1, 2009 critique in that publication of President Barack Obama's Aghanistan policy. See "Why Afghanistan."

"The present focus on Afghanistan, as articulated by President Barack Obama, "has a clear mission and defined goals — to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al-Qaeda and its extremist allies," Mr. Corcoran noted, adding:

This very narrow focus on a ragtag band of misfits squirreled away in an obscure part of the world, however, has drawn much criticism. One very lucid critique by Senator Russell Feingold (D-WI), a congressional leader in advocating a withdrawal timetable, stresses that we "cannot support an open-ended commitment to an escalating war in Afghanistan when the al-Qaeda operatives we sought have largely been captured or killed or crossed the border to Pakistan." Other critics raise questions about the president's rationale (Dave Schuler), whether Afghanistan constitutes a vital national security interest (Andrew Bacevich), and why a multi-year commitment of American forces is needed to deny al-Qaeda sanctuary in Afghanistan (Bernard Finel).

The former "strategic analyst at the U.S. Army War College, where he chaired studies for the Office of the Deputy Chief of Operations, according to Foreign Policy in Focus, noted that:

These critiques center around the question of how Afghanistan fits into overall U.S. strategic objectives. Unfortunately, overall US strategic objectives are broad and dated.

Mr. Corcoran thinks, "An updated set of strategic objectives, which takes into account both the impact of globalization and the importance of nation-building, leads to a different conclusion about U.S. involvement in Afghanistan. We should remain engaged, not as a military force but a force for economic development."

I highly recommend Mr. Corcoran's critique.

Deeping Crisis in Afghanistan Concerns China

By Munir Umrani

Posted Thursday, October 01, 2009, at 10:10:44 PM CDT

M K Bhadrakumar, a retired career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service, writing in the October 2, 2009, edition of Asia Times Online, thinks "The article "Afghan peace needs a map," which appeared in the English-language China Daily newspaper on Monday[September 28, 2009 ] should receive careful attention." See "China maps an end to the Afghan war." 

"China Daily is government-owned and the article is a very rare piece of focused opinion that proposes concrete steps to be taken on the way forward in unlocking the Afghan stalemate," he contends. According to the China Daily article:

Afghanistan's political and social turmoil has been aggravated by different intentions of the participating nations that constitute the coalition forces.

In the short term, the fragile Afghan regime is finding it difficult to tame its restive domestic situation. Still, a prescription could help bring the country out of the mess if key players adopt a peaceful and reconciliatory approach in their push for the end of the war.

The United States should first put an end to the war. The anti-terror war, which the former US administration of George W Bush launched in 2001, has turned out to be the source of ceaseless turbulence and violence in the past years.

Mr. Bhadrakumar notes that, "The article is credited to the deputy general of the China Council for National Security Policy Studies, Li Qinggong. A conspicuous increase in the Chinese reportage on Afghanistan is noticeable lately," he adds. "Conceivably, in the period since unrest appeared in Xinjiang, there is heightened concern in China over the deepening  crisis in Afghanistan, which impacts China's national security."

As Preeti Bhattacharji, a Research Associate at the Council on Foreign Relations, wrote in July 2009: "Xinjiang shares a border with Mongolia, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, and the Tibet Autonomous Region. Because of the Uighurs' cultural ties to its neighbors, China has been concerned that Central Asian states may back a separatist movement in Xinjiang." See "Uighurs and China's Xinjiang Region."

Is Afghanistan Poisoning Obama's Presidency?

By Munir Umrani

Posted Sunday, September 13, 2009, at 10:09:09 PM CDT

J Street: A New Pro-Israel Lobby

By Munir Umrani

Posted Sunday, August 16, 2009, at 11:08:09 PM CDT

Congressional Quarterly's Jonathan Broder has an August 15, 2009. post on "J Street, a new pro-Israel lobby with an approach to the Middle East conflict that emphasizes peace negotiations and accommodation." See "New Pro-Israel Lobby, New Point of View."

Can J Street serve as a counterweight to the American Israel Public Affairs Committe (AIPAC, which many U.S. senators and representatives are afraid to oppose on issues the organization deems important to Israel? According to Broder, it has started to do so already.