Issues End Wars and Occupations PDA Statement on US Government Policy on Iran

TomHaydenIt is imperative in this current crisis for PDA to issue a statement on U.S. policy toward Iran. We welcome your comments on the statement. We need to close the comment period by Monday, February, 20. You may make your comments through the Forum or at the end of this article. Tom Hayden will lead a discussion on Iran this Tuesday evening, February 14 on our monthly End Wars and Occupations conference call. Register for End Wars and Occupations call.

Summary
I. Current backdrop and opportunities
II. Proposed PDA Talking Points
III. PDA Position: Diplomacy, not War

PDA position paper on IRAN -- Summary
PDA wishes to point out the grave consequences of war with Iran. We call on our government to approach this crisis with all the seriousness that this situation merits. PDA calls upon Congress to take its rightful foreign policy role here, Belligerent talk – especially in an election year – is cheap and dangerous.

PDA calls upon the American people to look into this dangerous situation. We do not need another war with all its unknown costs and consequences.

PDA believes that our government has not given diplomacy a chance. The U.S. needs to take leadership by stepping back and taking diplomacy seriously. There is no military solution, but much economic catastrophe can ensue, even leading to a world economic collapse.

The Administration needs to recognize how jittery Iran’s leaders must be about the USA, based on our past interference with Iran’s governance, as far back as 1953. The U.S. will need to send assurances and signals of a change in American posture.

 PDA Israel/Palestine Statement
"PDA supports a two-state solution to the Middle East crisis: Israel and Palestine living side-by-side as free, sovereign, and independent states, fully recognized by each other and the world. Until this is achieved, Israelis and Palestinians, like all people everywhere, are equally entitled to the full protection of international human rights law, and this should guide U.S. policy and U.S. responses to actions by either side.

PDA stands tall with the majority of Americans who want our government to take a more even-handed approach to the Israeli-Palestinian crisis. We believe that this will ultimately be in the best interests of Palestinians, Israelis and Americans alike."

 

PDA points out that further threats to Iran, encircled as she is by western bases, can lead to her withdrawing cooperation with the IAEA inspections program. Our government needs to reach out to Russia and China to help achieve a non-military solution with Iran. Sanctions on Iran could be reduced as cooperation begins to take hold.

There is so much to be gained by proper diplomacy. The USA wants to keep the flow of oil from the Persian Gulf. And Iran could play a key role in reducing the influence of the Taliban and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan.

In our accompanying position paper, we analyze the nature of the threat of war with Iran and we suggest a number of diplomatic possibilities.

I. Current backdrop and opportunities
In the face of rapidly escalating threats against Iran by the Administration, Republican presidential hopefuls, and neo- conservative think tanks, some of the liberal ‘hawks’ who supported the Iraq war are expressing serious reservations about the sharp rise in tensions between Iran and both the U.S. and Israel, and the misinformation being circulated by U.S. officials to justify military action. An article in the Jan-Feb issue of Foreign Affairs is emblematic of the rush to war and the misinformation and has galvanized opposition to current U.S. foreign policy from unlikely sources.

The article, "Time to Attack Iran: Why a Strike is the Least Bad Option'', written Matthew Kroenig, an academic who just completed a one-year stint as a strategic analyst in the office of the Secretary of Defense advocates a “limited and carefully calibrated” U.S. aerial attack on Iran's air defenses and nuclear sites. Koenig’s total disregard for the economic and humanitarian consequences is a chilling reminder of what we are up against as advocates for peace. [1]

PDA can exploit responses by those who supported the Iraqi wars to argue that U.S. policy can still be reversed.

  • Leslie Gelb, the president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations a repentant Iraq-war hawk warned, “We're letting a bunch of ignorant, sloppy-thinking politicians and politicized foreign-policy experts draw 'red line' ultimatums. As before, we're letting them quick-march us off to war." [2].
  • Kenneth Pollack, a former top CIA analyst at the Brookings Institution whose 2002 book, "The Threatening Storm: The Case for Invading Iraq", was cited frequently in support of U.S. military action, argued not only against any further escalation, but also suggested that the sanctions on which the Obama administration has increasingly relied will lead to a humanitarian catastrophe and is potentially damaging to the struggling U.S. economy.[3]
  • Anne- Marie Slaughter, former director of the State Department’s policy planning office under Hillary Clinton argued that the West and Iran were playing a "dangerous game" of "chicken," and the more the West threatens Iran, the more easily Iranian leaders can portray America as the Great Satan to parts of the Iranian population that have recently been inclined to see the U.S. as their friend."[4]
  • New York Times columnist Bill Keller assured his readers that Kroenig's former colleagues at the Pentagon "were pretty appalled by his article, which combines the alarmist worst case of the Iranian nuclear threat with the rosiest best case of America's ability to make things better."[5]
  • Colin Kahl, who left the Pentagon in 2011 after two years as the head of Middle East policy, argued that Kroenig's "picture of a clean, calibrated conflict is a mirage. Any war with Iran would be a messy and extraordinarily violent affair, with significant casualties and consequences" and could transform "the Arab Spring's populist anti-regime narrative into a decidedly anti-American one."[6]


II. Proposed PDA Talking Points

1) Much of the fear and panic over Iran is the result of a widely-repeated mistranslation of a statement by President Ahmadinajad in a speech in 2005. Reputable scholars, including Juan Cole at the University of Michigan, translate his statement as, "the regime occupying Jerusalem will vanish from the pages of time." A mistranslation that "Israel must be wiped off the map" has been widely broadcast and repeated to mistakenly imply that Iran is threatening a nuclear attack on Israel.

2) The UN Charter prohibits any country from attacking another. The only internationally accepted legal justifications for the use of military force are: a) self-defense; and b) collective security action ordered by the Security Council. Surely the disastrous results of the illegal US invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq have demonstrated the wisdom of treating these rules of international law with the respect they deserve.

3) The US government claims it would prefer to settle its differences with Iran through diplomacy. And yet, the Obama administration did not give diplomacy with Iran a fair chance. [7] Instead, it reverted quickly to brinksmanship and threats. There are good reasons for Iran to mistrust the US, which overthrew its elected government in 1953, supported the brutal Shah and has pursued a regime change policy against it ever since Iran’s popular revolution in 1979. The indispensable first goal of diplomacy is to establish trust. Given the history between the two countries, making demands and threats is counter-productive. We need real diplomacy now!

4) There is no military solution to this crisis. Military strikes could only destroy parts of Iran's nuclear program, and could very well persuade it to end IAEA inspections and revive its nuclear weapons program. They would also strengthen the power of the military and the Revolutionary Guards, on whom the country would be dependent for its defense. The massive air strikes that would be required to have any impact on Iran would cause great loss of life, injury and devastation, and destroy any hope of reconciliation between Iran and the US for many years to come. Following an Israeli attack (which would be unlikely to occur without U.S. support), Iran would most likely retaliate against Israel with long-range missiles. The attack would ignite uproar of nationalism in Islamic countries and severely damage regional economies and political stability.

5) A war with Iran would be an economic catastrophe for the U.S. and could ignite (another) world wide economic collapse. Oil prices would spike—perhaps even double — not only because as Iran would cut off supplies to Europe (or even worldwide), but because allies and proxies of Iran might disrupt oil production in other countries This type of action would have sweeping consequences not only for the U.S., but for China, India, Russia, Japan, the E.U. and other industrial nations. Just as it did in 2008, a global recession would eventually cause oil prices to collapse and no national economy would be safe from its effects. And the U.S. military budget would climb yet again. Over 6,300 Americans have died in wars in Iraq and Afghanistan during the last 10 years, and over 45,000 have been wounded in action. The United States has spent over $1.3 trillion dollars funding these wars. We do not need another war with unknown costs and consequences.

6) As long as IAEA inspections continue, there is no way that Iran could divert any of its uranium to a secret program that could enrich it to weapons grade.

III. PDA Position: Diplomacy, not War
There is no guarantee that diplomacy will succeed, but war surely will fail.

A diplomatic strategy must begin with the United States deciding what it can put on the table to assure that both sides can reach a durable deal. We have done this with a reasonable degree of success in the past, with the U.S.S.R. in the 1930s and again in the 1970s and 1980s, and with the Chinese government in the 1970s. Both have nuclear stockpiles. Neither has ever felt compelled to use them.

In developing a diplomatic strategy toward Iran, President Obama might respond to the three questions Nixon asked his advisors when it came to diplomacy with China: What do they want, what do we want, and what do we both want?

Iran wants recognition of its revolution; an accepted role in its region; a nuclear program; the departure of the United States from the Middle East; and the lifting of sanctions. The United States wants Iran not to have nuclear weapons; security for Israel; a democratic evolution of Arab countries; the end of terrorism; and world access to the region’s oil and gas. Both Iran and the United States want stability in the region — particularly in Iraq and Afghanistan; the end of terrorism from Al Qaeda and the Taliban; the reincorporation of Iran into the international community; and no war.

If we were to accept these assumptions, the U.S. would agree to full recognition and respect for the Islamic Republic, and Iran would agree to regional cooperation with the United States in Afghanistan and Iraq. Both sides would agree to address the full range of bilateral disputes. The IAEA and the United Nations Security Council could accept an Iranian civil nuclear program in return for Iran’s continued agreement to grant inspectors full access to that program to assure that Iran did not build a nuclear weapon. As international agencies had full access to Iran’s nuclear program, there could be a progressive reduction of the Security Council’s sanctions that are now in effect. Iran and the United States could agree to support efforts toward achieving a nuclear-free zone in the Middle East.

Both sides would agree to cooperate in reducing the influence of the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan; in combating drug trafficking; and in keeping open the routes through which energy flows to the world from the Persian Gulf. Both sides would agree that while wide differences between the two nations remained, those differences must be resolved peacefully.

In addition, American policy-makers should reinvigorate their support for multilateral institutions such as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). When given the opportunity to fulfill its mandate, it has been effective. However, nonproliferation experts have noted international funding commitments have not kept pace with the new inspections demands placed upon the agency. This option, if seriously pursued by the United States, would require greater political and financial engagement with multilateral institutions, including the IAEA.

The U.S. should increase its engagement with other pivotal nations such as Russia and China. Both nations have significant economic and political influence that can be brought to bear in seeking a nonmilitary solution with Iran. Moscow and Beijing’s behaviors and statements have demonstrated that they are willing to consider and agree to U.S.-led positions when American policymakers persistently engage in diplomacy with them.

Should Iran obtain nuclear weapons, the U.S. should employ a strategy of deterrence, containment and engagement – similar to how the U.S. dealt with the Soviet Union and China during the Cold War. Even prominent Israeli security experts – the current and former heads of Israel’s foreign intelligence service and a former military chief of staff – have stated that a nuclear Iran is not an existential threat to Israel. Before these scenarios could become a real possibility, the U.S. would have to provide unmistakable evidence to Iran’s government that it is no longer bent on overthrowing its rulers . The U.S. needs to come up with a way to undo the legacy of the U.S. overthrow of Mossadegh in 1953, and its support of both the Shah, and Saddam Hussein’s war against Iran in the 1980s.

Simply “keeping the door open to diplomacy” will not be sufficient. So Iranian leaders must be approached directly, but discreetly, by someone they trusts who will convey assurances from President Obama that covert operations and public pressure have been demonstrably reduced. That person could be a leader from a country in the region. Khamenei will have to be convinced by actions, not just messages. Just as Nixon halted covert action in Tibet before approaching China, a similar signal will be needed with Iran.


Written by The End War and Occupation Steering Committee of Progressive Democrats of America: Sandy Davies, Marc Levin, Virginia Hauflaire, Sally Weiss Feb. 7, 2012

[1] Kroenig, Matthew. Time to Attack Iran: Why a Strike is the Least Bad Option. Foreign Affairs. Jan-Feb. 2012, p76-86.

[2] http://www.drudge.com/news/152496/gelb-question-march-war-iran

[3] http://www.tnr.com/article/world/99741/war-iran-america

[4] http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/09/saving-face-and-peace-in-the-gulf/

[5] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/23/opinion/keller-bomb-bomb-bomb-bomb-bomb-iran.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

[6] http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/137031/colin-h-kahl/not-time-to-attack-iran

[7] Trita Parsi. A Role of the Dice: Obama’s Roll of the Dice. Yale University Press,. 2012.

End Wars and Occupations - EWO Articles

IOT-End Wars and Occupations Articles

Prev Next Page:

We need to end the disastrous failure of the ‘war on terror’

We need to end the disastrous failure of the ‘war on terror’

Twelve years into America's "war on terror," it is time to admit that it has failed catastrophically, unleashing violence, war and instability in an "arc of terror" stretching from West Africa to the Himalayas and beyond.  If we examine the pretext for all this chaos, that it could possibly be a legitimate or effective response to terrorism, it quickly becomes clear that it has been the exact opposite, fueling a global explosion of terrorism and a historic breakdown of law and order. The State Department reports seem, at first glance, to...

Nicholas J.S. Davies | AlterNet 10 Feb 2014 Hits:224 EWO Articles

Read more

America’s Secret War in 134 Countries

America’s Secret War in 134 Countries

They operate in the green glow of night vision in Southwest Asia and stalk through the jungles of South America. They snatch men from their homes in the Maghreb and shoot it out with heavily armed militants in the Horn of Africa. They feel the salty spray while skimming over the tops of waves from the turquoise Caribbean to the deep blue Pacific. They conduct missions in the oppressive heat of Middle Eastern deserts and the deep freeze of Scandinavia. All over the planet, the Obama administration is waging a...

Nick Turse | Tom's Dispatch 04 Feb 2014 Hits:316 EWO Articles

Read more

Negotiators Put Final Touches on Iran Accord

Iran and a group of six world powers completed a deal on Sunday that will temporarily freeze much of Tehran’s nuclear program starting next Monday, Jan. 20, in exchange for limited relief from Western economic sanctions. The main elements of the deal, which is to last for six months, were announced in November. But its implementation was delayed as negotiators worked out technical details. The agreement faced opposition from Iranian hard-liners and Israeli leaders, as well as heavy criticism from some American lawmakers, who have threatened to approve further sanctions despite President...

Michael R Gordon and Eric Schmitt | The New York Times 13 Jan 2014 Hits:236 EWO Articles

Read more

House to Vote on National Defense Authorization Act

Call Your Representative at 1-855-686-6927 Say Vote "NO" on the Defense Authorization Act The House will be voting on a final version of the 2014 National Defense Authorization Bill. This measure includes $80.7 billion to continue the war in Afghanistan, on top of a $552.1 billion base budget for the Pentagon. Coming at a time, when we are experiencing cuts in food stamps, public housing, Head Start and a host of federal programs that our people urgently need – this bill is outrageous! Please call your Representative today on the Capitol Switchboard...

Tim Carpenter 10 Dec 2013 Hits:542 EWO Articles

Read more

Obama Says He Can Envision Nuclear Deal With Iran

Obama Says He Can Envision Nuclear Deal With Iran

President Obama said Saturday that he could envision a final diplomatic agreement with Iran that would let the country’s government enrich nuclear material for power production with enough restrictions to assure Israel and the rest of the world that it could not produce a nuclear weapon. But Mr. Obama said there was no guarantee that such a deal would emerge as Iran and Western nations negotiate during the next six months. “I wouldn’t say that it’s more than 50-50,” Mr. Obama said during a conversation at a conference run by the Saban...

Michael D Shear | The New York Times 08 Dec 2013 Hits:457 EWO Articles

Read more

Army general’s report defends decision to build $36 million headquarters in Afghanistan

 Army general’s report defends decision to build $36 million headquarters in Afghanistan

This past summer, the Army began investigating why the military spent nearly $36 million to construct a well-appointed 64,000-square-foot headquarters in southwestern Afghanistan that commanders in the area did not want and has never been used. The two-star Army general in Kabul who conducted the inquiry has determined that the decision to commission the building was appropriate — and recommended that U.S. troops move in, after more work is done on the facility. (Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) - The exterior of the Regional Command-Southwest (RC-SW) Command and Control...

Rajiv Chandrasekaran | Washington Post 04 Dec 2013 Hits:500 EWO Articles

Read more

Conservatives should stop defending Pentagon waste and fraud

Conservatives should stop defending Pentagon waste and fraud

How can some policymakers claim to be fiscal conservatives when they won’t allow small spending cuts to the defense budget to go through? We've seen that the “sky is falling” predictions about sequestration haven't materialize. Yet lawmakers in both houses of Congress are still seeking to at least partially undo the spending reductions in the Budget Control Act of 2011, despite evidence the Pentagon is wasting taxpayer dollars on overly expensive -- and arguably unnecessary -- projects. A recent amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act by Republican Sens. James Inhofe, R-Okla.,...

VERONIQUE DE RUGY | Washington Examiner 26 Nov 2013 Hits:352 EWO Articles

Read more

Should the U.S. spend billions more on the Navy? No

Should the U.S. spend billions more on the Navy? No

Spending billions on the U.S. Navy is an obscene waste The Budget Control Act of 2011 required automatic spending cuts unless Congress could agree on a long-term deficit reduction plan. When the law was passed, the conventional wisdom was that the automatic cuts in Pentagon spending would be unthinkable, and this would force the long-term budget deal. The conventional wisdom proved to be wrong, and the cuts to Pentagon spending began in March 2013. It was a dumb idea to reduce the deficit with unemployment elevated, but given that government spending was going...

Mark Weisbrot | The Denver Post 18 Nov 2013 Hits:419 EWO Articles

Read more

Pentagon to Spend $10 Billion ‘Modernizing’ Tactical Nukes

Pentagon to Spend $10 Billion ‘Modernizing’ Tactical Nukes

Plan Unaffordable, Unnecessary, Critics Note In a time of budget cuts, and with their leadership constantly insisting there isn’t enough funding to go around, the Pentagon is planning to “modernize” the B61 tactical nuclear weapons in a plan they estimate to cost at least $10 billion. “The B61 is the only weapon in the stockpile that fulfills both tactical and strategic missions,” insisted Gen. Robert Kehler, who insisted the plan was vital in testimony to Congress last week. The US made the first B61s in the 1970?s, and has created nearly a dozen...

Jason Ditz | AntiWar.com 07 Nov 2013 Hits:401 EWO Articles

Read more

Retired Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton advocates reduced military spending

Retired Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton advocates reduced military spending

Retired Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton comes from a military family. His three children are all soldiers, his wife is an Army captain, and his two brothers in-law are helicopter pilots. His father was M.I.A. for moer than 40 years in Vietnam. His opinions, he said on Wednesday in the Old Capitol, are colored by these facts, and that is why he believes the military should be utilized as little as possible. Eaton addressed University of Iowa students, professors, and members of the Iowa United Nations Association Wednesday in the Senate Chamber....

Jake McCulley | The Daily Iowan 07 Nov 2013 Hits:541 EWO Articles

Read more

Eyes on 2016, potential White House contenders flock with doves on Syria

Eyes on 2016, potential White House contenders flock with doves on Syria

Likely Republican presidential hopefuls who once expressed hawkish views on U.S. policy in Syria are pivoting with an eye on how the issue will play in the 2016 GOP primary. [WATCH VIDEO] With the conservative wing of the party now largely unified in opposition to military action, Sens. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Ted Cruz (R-Texas) are singing a different tune from just months ago, when both seemed to advocate a more muscular U.S. response to Syrian President Bashar Assad. Both Cruz and Rubio dispute that their views have changed.  Cruz said he...

Alexandra Jaffe | The Hill 06 Nov 2013 Hits:442 EWO Articles

Read more

At Long Last, Congress Hears From a Drone Strike Victim

 At Long Last, Congress Hears From a Drone Strike Victim

A Pakistani family devastated by drones gave a landmark briefing on Tuesday. On Tuesday morning, almost 10 years after the U.S. government began using drones to target suspected militants in Pakistan—one of the tools of the War on Terror that the Obama administration has embraced and expanded since taking office in 2009—Congress heard from some of the policy’s innocent victims for the first time. (Photo: 'How can I in good faith reassure the children that the drone will not come back and kill them, too?' asked Pakistani schoolteacher Rafiq ur Rehman, whose mother...

Cole Stangler | In These Times 30 Oct 2013 Hits:552 EWO Articles

Read more

Defense Contractors Profit Despite Sequestration And Shutdown

Defense Contractors Profit Despite Sequestration And Shutdown

Defense contractors have managed to not only stay afloat but also thrive in a climate of government closure and massive cuts to the Pentagon’s budget, continuing to rake in billions upon billions of dollars in profits. Under the terms of sequestration, the Department of Defense is slashing budgets left and right, with about $41 billion cut in 2013 alone. That hasn’t prevented the major defense contractors — including Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman — to continue to post huge profits according to Bloomberg. Northrop Grumman in particular has had a surprisingly...

Hayes Brown | Think Progress 26 Oct 2013 Hits:456 EWO Articles

Read more

Giant Pentagon Budget Is Unauditable Year After Year

Giant Pentagon Budget Is Unauditable Year After Year

The federal government is currently in a state of shutdown thanks to a small faction of extremist Republicans who vehemently bellow that the Affordable Care Act (ACA) will have a catastrophic economic effect on our country. These members of Congress are so irrational about the ACA that they have caused the furlough of nearly 800,000 federal workers -- some of whom handle vitally important tasks such as safety inspections, monitoring our food supply and detecting epidemic outbreaks. Congress, however, has failed to address the worst excesses in the federal budget...

Ralph Nader | Huffington Post 07 Oct 2013 Hits:601 EWO Articles

Read more

Hope of Healing for Sundus Shaker Saleh, an Iraqi Mother by Alice Walker

Hope of Healing for Sundus Shaker Saleh, an Iraqi Mother by Alice Walker

When the US invaded Iraq in 2003 Sundus Shaker Saleh, an Iraqi single mother of three, lost her home and her property, and was forced to flee to Jordan.  A decade later, Saleh is the lead plaintiff in a class action lawsuit against six key members of the Bush administration. They’re arguing that, since the war was not conducted in self-defense, and did not have the appropriate authorization by the United Nations, it constituted a “crime of aggression” under international law. On August 20th the United States Department of Justice requested that George W. Bush,...

Alice Walker | Code Pink 04 Oct 2013 Hits:497 EWO Articles

Read more

Army Chief Ray Odierno Warns Military Suicides 'Not Going To End' After War Is Over

Army Chief Ray Odierno Warns Military Suicides 'Not Going To End' After War Is Over

A tragic milestone was reached last year, when 185 active-duty Army soldiers died by suicide, surpassing the 176 soldiers killed in battle in Afghanistan that year. The Army's annual death toll from suicide has more than tripled since 2001, when 52 active-duty soldiers took their own lives. Just as disturbing: The increase in military suicides came while the military was mounting an aggressive series of suicide prevention campaigns and offering resources to help soldiers and their families. That demonstrates a difficult truth: Reducing military suicides will not be easy or quick, as...

David Wood | Huffington Post 03 Oct 2013 Hits:468 EWO Articles

Read more

The Dead Rhetoric of War

The Dead Rhetoric of War

The intoxication of war, fueled by the euphoric nationalism that swept through the country like a plague following the attacks of 9/11, is a spent force in the United States. The high-blown rhetoric of patriotism and national destiny, of the sacred duty to reshape the world through violence, to liberate the enslaved and implant democracy in the Middle East, has finally been exposed as empty and meaningless. The war machine has tried all the old tricks. It trotted out the requisite footage of atrocities. It issued the histrionic warnings that...

Chris Hedges | Truth Dig 03 Oct 2013 Hits:435 EWO Articles

Read more

Syria Accepts Russian Proposal To Surrender Chemical Weapons, Foreign Minister Says

Syria Accepts Russian Proposal To Surrender Chemical Weapons, Foreign Minister Says

The Associated Press reports Syria's Foreign Minister has said his country has accepted a Russian proposal to relinquish control of its chemical arms stores. On Monday, Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem stated that his country welcomed the Russian proposal, which called for Syria to place its chemical weapons under international control and for the weapons to be destroyed. No time frame or further details were given about the proposal. It remained unclear whether Syria was making genuine strides toward a diplomatic resolution to the conflict that began in March 2011, or if the...

Huffington Post 10 Sep 2013 Hits:695 EWO Articles

Read more

Obama Warned on Syrian Intel

 Obama Warned on Syrian Intel

Exclusive: Despite the Obama administration’s supposedly “high confidence” regarding Syrian government guilt over the Aug. 21 chemical attack near Damascus, a dozen former U.S. military and intelligence officials are telling President Obama that they are picking up information that undercuts the Official Story. MEMORANDUM FOR: The President FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) SUBJECT: Is Syria a Trap? Precedence: IMMEDIATE We regret to inform you that some of our former co-workers are telling us, categorically, that contrary to the claims of your administration, the most reliable intelligence shows that Bashar al-Assad was NOT responsible for the chemical incident that killed...

ConsortiumNews.com 09 Sep 2013 Hits:949 EWO Articles

Read more

9 Ways America Has Fueled the Bloody Civil War in Syria

9 Ways America Has Fueled the Bloody Civil War in Syria

President Obama's threats against Syria are framed by the carefully crafted image of a responsible superpower reluctantly drawn into a horrific conflict caused by others.  But the reality is very different.  For more than two years, U.S. policy has quietly fueled the escalation of the conflict in Syria and undermined every effort to bring the Syrian people the ceasefire and peaceful political transition they need and want.  Whoever is directly responsible for hundreds of deaths in the latest alleged chemical weapons incident, the critical covert and diplomatic role the United States has played...

Nicolas J. S. Davies | AlterNet 09 Sep 2013 Hits:673 EWO Articles

Read more

On Syria Vote, Trust, but Verify

On Syria Vote, Trust, but Verify

On Thursday I asked the House Intelligence Committee staff whether there was any other documentation available, classified or unclassified. Their answer was “no.” The Syria chemical weapons summaries are based on several hundred underlying elements of intelligence information. The unclassified summary cites intercepted telephone calls, “social media” postings and the like, but not one of these is actually quoted or attached — not even clips from YouTube. (As to whether the classified summary is the same, I couldn’t possibly comment, but again, draw your own conclusion.) Over the last week the administration...

Alan Grayson | The New York Times 09 Sep 2013 Hits:464 EWO Articles

Read more

Top 10 Unproven Claims for War Against Syria

Top 10 Unproven Claims for War Against Syria

In the lead-up to the Iraq War, I researched, wrote and circulated a document to members of Congress which explored unanswered questions and refuted President Bush's claim for a cause for war. The document detailed how there was no proof Iraq was connected to 9/11 or tied to al Qaeda's role in 9/11, that Iraq neither had WMDs nor was it a threat to the U.S., lacking intention and capability to attack. Unfortunately, not enough members of Congress performed due diligence before they approved the war. Here are some key questions...

Dennis Kucinich | AlterNet 08 Sep 2013 Hits:533 EWO Articles

Read more

The Question Before Us: Can Anti-War Forces Stop Obama from Attacking Syria?

The Question Before Us: Can Anti-War Forces Stop Obama from Attacking Syria?

As Obama remains steadfast in his push for military action, can those calling for restraint and diplomacy win out? As President Obama departed Russia on Friday with a mixed showing of international support at the G20 and with Congress scrambling to find consensus on its ultimate decision on whether or not to authorize a U.S. military attack on Syria, rapidly moving events over the past two weeks have culminated in a situation in which those advocating for military action have now firmly squared off against those arguing that only diplomatic solutions...

Jon Queally | Common Dreams 07 Sep 2013 Hits:566 EWO Articles

Read more

On the Fence about Syria? Read This!

On the Fence about Syria? Read This!

A quick reader on why military intervention in Syria is a big mistake–and what we should be advocating instead. Some progressives remain conflicted about how the United States should respond to Syria’s increasingly violent civil war. This internal division has only deepened as the Obama administration considers launching a military strike on Bashar al-Assad for an alleged chemical attack by regime forces on civilians last month. Many progressives are rightly skeptical about involving the United States in yet another war in the Middle East, but others are increasingly convinced that only a...

Peter Certo | Foreign Policy in Focus 06 Sep 2013 Hits:1468 EWO Articles

Read more

Syrians form human shields to protect key facilities as fears of strike grow

Syrians form human shields to protect key facilities as fears of strike grow

A civilian campaign to protect Syrian installations with human shields is being held in Damascus in anticipation of looming US attacks. The campaign “Over our dead bodies,” which was started last week on Facebook by Ogarite Dandache, a Lebanese reporter who has been covering the Syrian crisis, encourages people to form human shields around Syrian facilities that are potential US strike targets. Dandache told the Global Times Wednesday that the idea of the campaign was drawn from a similar one conducted during the Iraq War. She insisted that it be a “personal...

Yang Jingjie | Global Times 06 Sep 2013 Hits:639 EWO Articles

Read more

Syria: Law and Legitimacy

Syria: Law and Legitimacy

We can hear the drum beats of war again. Syria certainly appears to have committed heinous acts. The rebels may also have done so as well. Chemical weapons have not been the only horrific means of injuring innocent people. Tens of thousands have died and millions of lives have been disrupted. The use of chemical weapons against innocent civilians crosses a red line and violates international values, law, and stability. It cannot go unanswered. Responses to wrongdoing must not exacerbate problems. The UN inspectors are not tasked with discerning the origin...

Jonathan Grannoff | Huffington Post 04 Sep 2013 Hits:568 EWO Articles

Read more

Congress, Think Carefully Before Intervening in Syria

 Congress, Think Carefully Before Intervening in Syria

US President Barack Obama talks to bipartisan Congressional leaders in the Cabinet Room at the White House in Washington while discussing a military response to Syria, September 3, 2013. (Reuters/Larry Downing) President Obama’s decision to ask Congress to authorize any action towards Syria is both courageous and correct. He ignored the inevitable scorn he would get from the armchair patriots who believe the U.S. president can dispatch the military anywhere, at any time, for any reason. He reportedly overruled the advice of most of his national security team that wanted to...

Katrina vanden Heuvel | The Washington Post 03 Sep 2013 Hits:623 EWO Articles

Read more

PDA 10th Anniversary - Join us in Northampton on May 10th

Speakers-Combo

Join Jim Hightower, Tom Hayden, Ben Day, Mimi Kennedy,
Thom Hartmann, Cole Stangler, Medea Benjamin, Andrea Miller
Rep. Jim McGovern, Tim Carpenter, Mark Dudzic and
John Nichols

 Buttons-PurchaseTickets

End Wars and Occupations Leadership

 

          
    Virginia Hauflaire

Contact us at:
end-war@pdamerica.org

Blog Talk Radio Shows

PDA Radio - Chris Hellman, Understanding the Federal Budget
article thumbnailListen Live on Friday, April 12th at 1pm ET Our guest is Chris Hellman, Senior...

PDA Issues

PDA is organized around several core issues. These issues include:

Each team hosts a monthly conference call. Calls feature legislators, staffers and other policy experts. On these calls we determine PDA legislation to support as well as actions and future events.

113th Congress EWO - Legislation


Subscribe to End Wars and Occupations
View this group

End War and Occupations IOT Calls

  • 04-08-2014 End War and Occupations

    Judith Le Blanc, the Field Director for Peace Action, discusses preparations around the U.S. for the Global Day of Action on Military Spending, and how we can all organize or get involved in GDAMS actions in our local communities. Additional...

  • 02-11-2014 End War and Occupations

    Hear from two of our peace movement partners, Rusti Eisenberg of United For Peace and Justice (UFPJ) and Stephen Miles of the Win Without War coalition, as we discuss how we can build an even stronger and more effective peace movement, plus,...

  • 01-14-2014 End War and Occupations

    This call is a discussion of the work we will be doing moving into 2014. Stopping sanctions against Iran, including S 1881, were part of the discussion; a campaign to get HR 198: Repeal of the Authorization for Use of Military Force is underway;...

  • 12-10-2012 End War and Occupations

    Hear the discussion with guest speaker Jirair Ratevosian, Legislative Director for long-time PDA Advisory Board member Representative Barbara Lee of California. PDA's End War & Occupation IOT has endorsed five bills sponsored by Barbara Lee...

  • 11-12-2013 End War and Occupations

    Interesting call with Joseph Gerson of the American Friends Service Committee who talks about the imperative of nuclear disarmament and his work to overcome our country's suicidal addiction to weapons of mass destruction. Additionally, we heard...

  • 10-08-2013 End War and Occupations

    Our guest speaker, Steve Cobble, will provide a political assessment of how we can capitalize on the real but limited victory on Syria; keep Congress on our side; move the US to support a ceasefire and political transition; and convert opposition...

PR Rank