Blog @ MoreWhat.com

In an apparent throwback to the Cold War, Moscow and Washington are discussing a deal to swap 10 of the suspected deep-cover Russian agents arrested last month in the U.S. for prisoners held in Russia, according to people familiar with the talks.

That’s how a story about recently arrested Russian spies opens at the WSJ. How about there’s no ‘throwback’ at all? The Cold War never ended. Remember Hillary Clinton’s gaffe translating the English word ‘reset’ to Russian and being politely punked by a Russian official? That essentially sums up the current administration’s grip on foreign relations. In other words they don’t have a clue.

Hearings in the US for the Russians arrested for spying have been delayed. The Russians don’t want to comment and those all too familiar unnamed sources close to the story suggest a spy swap is in the works. But not unlike the 70’s the US may swap garden variety prisoners in Russia for those arrested for spying in the US. Does that sound smart to you?

“We’re rolling back the clock,” said Yuri Ryzhov, a former Russian ambassador and prominent academic who heads a commission that has defended scholars accused of treason. “It’s the 1970s now.”

Prisoners that may have been accused by the Russians of treason in Russia would be swapped for likely Russian spies?

As if the entire liberal agenda in Washington, DC wasn’t bad enough now the Obama administration is adding more foreign affairs blunders to their list of achievements.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

crossposted at Maggie’s Notebook

As much as China and Russia have demonstrated their opposition toward ’sanctions’ against Iran’s nuclear pursuits more impotent reaction appears forthcoming from the security council at the United Nations. As noted below, a ‘fourth round’ of UN sanctions indicates previous provisions have accomplished nothing.

If Iran sends uranium to Turkey and Brazil for further enrichment with the stated medical purposes expressed a minimum of several questions come to mind. What is to stop others from intercepting and/or advancing enrichment to weapons grade? What value can sanctions have if they have not worked to date and Iran’s nuclear pursuit advances unchecked?

Spokespersons from Iran and Turkey have offered political rhetoric on the topic. Western nations have expressed a real concern that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons. Also in the report below readers are reminded of frequent expressions from Iranian leaders that they intend to eliminate the state of Israel.

And the past and current situation with Iran has done nothing to resolve these issues. But it has allowed Iran to continue unimpeded. It is long past the time for an effective response to Iranian nukes. And all that sending uranium around the planet achieves is higher risk that the material will be used by rogue states or terrorists supported by them.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

from VOA News….

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says the United States and other major world powers have agreed on a draft resolution that could impose a fourth round of United Nations sanctions on Iran.

Clinton made the announcement in testimony to a Senate committee Tuesday, a day after Iran announced a plan to send some of its enriched uranium to Turkey in exchange for nuclear fuel.

The Security Council is set to hold consultations on the sanctions draft Tuesday.

Clinton said the plan followed talks among the five permanent Security Council members - the United States, Britain, China, France and Russia, as well as Germany.

She noted the agreement had been reached in cooperation with China and Russia - two nations that have previously resisted imposing more sanctions on Tehran.

On Monday, Iran signed an agreement with Turkey and Brazil to send 1,200 kilograms of low-enriched uranium to Turkey in exchange for higher-enriched nuclear reactor fuel to be used in a medical research reactor in Tehran.

Both Turkey and Brazil are non-permanent members of the Security Council.

Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast accused Western nations Tuesday of “seeking excuses” to avoid resolving the nuclear dispute with his country.

Turkey’s Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said talk of sanctions could “spoil the atmosphere” and lead to an “escalation” of statements that might “provoke” Iranian public opinion.

The United States and its Western allies accuse Iran of working to make a nuclear weapon. Iran says its atomic program is for peaceful purposes.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met with top Cabinet members Tuesday to consider a response to the Iranian plan.

Israel views a nuclear-armed Iran as a threat to its existence because of repeated calls by Iranian leaders for the demise of the Jewish state.

There are simply too many troubling stories in recent weeks. And this post simply selects a few that demonstrate the contrast of issues needing attention. From the never ending failure to enforce immigration law in the US to years of ignoring an issue of equal importance to national security, Iranian nukes, President Obama adds his ‘Katrina’ to the list of issues railed on by liberals during the Bush years but now silent with the Messiah in the White House. And let’s not forget about financial reform, too big to fail, bailouts and the announcement of a merger between United and Continental airlines.

An estimated 10 to 12 million people are thought to have entered the United States illegally, and most come from Latin America. Hispanics are the largest minority group in the American southwest, and immigration reform has become a potent political issue in the Hispanic community, where calls for crackdowns on illegal immigration have been viewed as anti-Hispanic.

There was a time when the number of illegals was estimated near 30 million. Over time it has been greatly reduced. The excerpt above points to the problem. ‘People thought’ to be here illegally. More important is stating ‘most come from Latin America.’ That the largest minority group in the southwest is ‘hispanic’ and the ‘hispanic community’ protests enforcement of immigration laws speaks to the larger problem. Being here illegally, making the most noise about amnesty, expressing no intention of becoming American while invoking the race card explains the fallacy. Illegal immigration is an entirely self-serving proposition. It denounces the very principles it claims to represent.

President Barack Obama says an expanding oil slick in the Gulf of Mexico is a massive and unprecedented environmental disaster that will require a relentless, coordinated effort to overcome.

That ‘relentless, coordinated effort’ is taking a long time to begin. Compare this to reaction over the response to Katrina during the Bush administration. NOAA has had an oil spill response program for 15 or 20 years. So why the long delays here? Now it is suggested the oil slick will travel around Florida and up the east coast of the US. Another example of how ineffective big government is.

And then there is the small matter of a merger in the airline industry.

The merger between United and Continental Airlines will be worth some $3 billion.

The combined company will have nearly 700 planes, 80,000 employees, and fly to 370 destinations in 59 countries.

Airline industry expert Joseph Schwieterman of DePaul University in Chicago says the announcement is a positive sign for an industry that has struggled since the 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington.

The airline industry struggled long before 2001. In many ways the troubles of the airlines is quite similar to that of automobile manufacturers. So two airlines merge as the answer to solve their problems. It does nothing to confront the underlying problems of the industry. But it does present a possible example of what the current push for financial reform in Congress, too big to fail and more bailouts in the future will bring. More problems for the American taxpayer, consumers in general and evidence politicians have no idea what they’re doing or are lying to you about their intentions.

This post concludes with a brief mention of Iranian nukes. This issue is the most troubling in this list. Continued failure to properly address and resolve it may result in a mushroom cloud. The only positive outcome thus far illuminates ineffective leadership around the planet, not just the United States. And that is little consolation.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad kicked off the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference with a lengthy diatribe against the United States and other Western powers who seek to sanction his country for its controversial nuclear program.

Mr. Ahmadinejad spoke for more than half an hour, giving what has become something of his trademark - a speech criticizing the United States, Israel and invoking God - and sending the U.S., British and French delegations walking out of the hall in protest.

There is nothing new about this issue. The UN is as impotent as ever. The Obama administration has done nothing. China, Russia and Iran have used this issue to their collective advantage and no one else presents an answer. As another terrorist demonstrates how vulnerable to attack everyone is weak minds obsess on how to be fair to those who do not understand the concept. When will we treat terror threats like terror threats? Stop coddling those who support and produce terrorism and other acts of war.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

This post is dedicated to those who serve.

The Doolittle Tokyo Raiders Association Reunion was held Friday through Saturday, April 16-18, at the U.S. Air Force Museum abeam Wright Patterson AFB, Dayton, Ohio. There are eight surviving crew members of the 80 who flew on the mission and four attended the reunion, including 88-year-old MSgt. David Thatcher (engineer/gunner - aircraft #7); 90-year-old Lt. Col. Robert Hite (co-pilot of aircraft #16 - the last one off the USS Hornet); 92-year-old Maj. Thomas Griffin (navigator and mission planner - aircraft #9); and 94-year-old Lt. Col. Richard Cole (co-pilot of aircraft #1 - Jimmy Doolittle’s plane).

All four men had numerous public autograph sessions, with hundreds of people in a line snaking through the museum, waiting for every two-hour session. We attended a 45-minute media conference to ask questions and hear their stories on Friday afternoon.

Sixteen B-25B Mitchell bombers were launched from the aircraft carrier USS Hornet deep within enemy waters. The plan called for them to hit military targets in Japan, and land in China. All of the aircraft involved in the bombing were lost and 11 crewmen were either killed or captured. One of these B-25s landed in Soviet territory where its crew remained interned for more than a year. The entire crews of 13 of the 16 aircraft, and all but one of a 14th, returned to the United States or to Allied control. The raid caused little material damage to Japan, but succeeded in its goal of helping American morale. It also caused Japan to withdraw a carrier group from the Indian Ocean to defend their homeland and contributed to Japan’s decision to attack Midway. Up to 250,000 Chinese were killed by Japanese retaliatory measures.

related:

The Official Website of The Doolittle Tokyo Raiders

from the site:
This web site is dedicated to my father, Richard O. Joyce and the other 79 Brave Men whom were in the Doolittle Tokyo Raid.

President Obama persuaded 46 countries Tuesday to sign on to a plan to put the world’s nuclear material beyond the reach of terrorists within four years, but the commitments are voluntary, and experts said reaching the goal will be difficult.

Let’s be realistic. Even if everyone attending the bomb summit (preceded much earlier by the beer summit and nearly as silly) was sincere four years is a ridiculous timeline. It demonstrates the ‘experts’ view that ‘reaching the goal will be difficult.’ Attendees are either unwilling or unable to account for all their nuke material and secure it. That means it is not going to happen. Hence, the understatement the agreements are voluntary. Likewise for the commentary here describing the affair as silly.

“This is an ambitious goal, and we are under no illusions it will be easy. But the urgency of the threat and the catastrophic consequences of even a single act of nuclear terrorism demand an effort that is at once bold and pragmatic,” Obama said at a news conference.

Betrayed by his own words President Obama once again displays his ignorance or suggests you are buffoon for believing him. The UK Foreign Secretary is no newcomer to bonehead quotes either and he proves it with the following ‘rubbish.’

David Miliband, the British foreign secretary, said Obama’s summit should be seen in a broader context that includes the recent signing of a U.S.-Russia arms-reduction treaty. “What they’ve done is break a culture of cynicism” about nuclear issues, Miliband said.

The Brit wit is wrong again too. In case he missed it President Obama offered Russia a meaningless ‘pact’ that was nothing more than a gesture to pander for support of sanctions on Iran’s nuke program that will accomplish no more than they have to date.

If you read the rest of the WaPo report a long list of senseless commentary from various sources including bomb summit attendees confirms the little get together was worthless. The only worthwhile commentary comes from Senator John Kyl. This blog is no fan of the Senator. But for this particular Senator it is true even a blind squirrel finds a nut every once in a while.

“The summit’s purported accomplishment is a nonbinding communique that largely restates current policy and makes no meaningful progress in dealing with nuclear terrorism threats or the ticking clock represented by Iran’s nuclear weapons program,” said Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), a prominent critic of Obama’s nuclear policies.

But then, this epiphany from a member of the GOP is not breaking news. Anyone with half a brain can draw the obvious conclusion. Could it be those who are feeling buyer’s remorse in voting for Barack Obama in the 2008 US Presidential election have realized how serious their error was? Probably not and they would likely not admit it publicly anyhow. They bear more responsibility for any damage done by the community organizer than the rest of us. Especially if they continue to deny the danger.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Those seeking to justify their pursuit of nuclear weapons are fond of waxing nostalgic about those who belong to the ‘club’. And of course, mentioning that the US is the only country to have used a nuke in wartime is a favorite of ‘rogue states’. To no one’s surprise they casually omit the fact they might all be speaking German or Japanese or even Russian had the US not entered WWII. Just like the US gets to bear the burden of cleaning up other messes around the world. Something the UN likes to complain about publicly but toast privately while wringing their hands at the thought they should actually live up to their charter.

Enter Barack Hussein Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton. On the topic of Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons here’s a nice summary excerpt….

‘Our aim is not incremental sanctions, but sanctions that will bite.” Thus did Secretary of State Hillary Clinton seek to reassure the crowd at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee two weeks ago about the Obama Administration’s resolve on Iran. Three days later, this newspaper reported on its front page that “the U.S. has backed away from pursuing a number of tough measures against Iran” in order to win Russian and Chinese support for one more U.N. sanctions resolution.

This fits the pattern we have seen across the 14 months of the Obama Presidency. Mrs. Clinton called a nuclear-armed Iran “unacceptable” no fewer than four times in a single paragraph in her AIPAC speech. But why should the Iranians believe her? President Obama set a number of deadlines last year for a negotiated settlement of Iran’s nuclear file, all of which Tehran ignored, and then Mr. Obama ignored them too.

After bowing to other heads of state in his world apology tour while trashing the country he was elected to lead President Obama continues pursuit of his reckless agenda. It could make you wonder who he’s working for? Talking about ‘tough’ sanctions or other means to stop Irans’ nuclear pursuit while caving to Russia and China at the UN will solve nothing.

“Do we have unanimity in the international community? Not yet,” said President Obama. “That is something we have to work on. We think that we are in a much stronger position to get robust sanctions now than we were a year ago, prior to us initiating our strategy.”

The United States has been working to obtain crucial support from China and Russia for a Security Council resolution. Beijing and Moscow have veto power in the council.

But efforts at the United Nations come amid increased concern in the U.S. Congress that Iran might be speeding up efforts to develop a nuclear weapons capability.

Dems in Congress like a deer in the headlights worried about November re-election chances and GOP members dreaming of retaking the majority combined with an inept White House give Iran all it needs to complete their objective. Help from Russia, China and the UN don’t hurt their chances either. While President Obama talks of a nuclear free world. How naive.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

BEIJING (Reuters) - China urged other powers on Tuesday to show more flexibility in dealing with Iran’s disputed nuclear programme, playing down prospects of sanctions after six countries met to discuss the standoff.

While Western powers have looked to further sanctions against Iran over its rejection of a U.N. plan to rein in Tehran’s nuclear ambitions, Russia and now especially China have resisted such steps and called for more negotiations.

How about this for a conspiracy theory? China and Russia have ties with Iran. They could care less if the US or its allies view Iranian nukes as a problem. China is hell bent on being a dominate force on the planet and has achieved much in that regard. Russia has lamented the fall of the Soviet Union since it happened and Putin is determined to regain that status as a world power.

Imagine Russia wants to relive the Missiles of October scenario from 1962 and allow Iran to be their proxy and provoke a nuclear standoff or worse, launch a strike against Israel? Israel may well be able to react in advance and preempt a first strike. Add to that any reaction that would come from China and others with nuke capability and Armageddon is poised to occur as the end of the Mayan calendar approaches in 2012. Coincidentally, the year President Obama is up for re-election and the VPOTUS warning of a test shows up late.

Even without the conspiracy theory, the so-called international community continues its impotent policy toward the current nuclear threat.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

If you are content with the Obama Administration’s handling of matters regarding nuclear weapons and Iran the following information should cause you to reconsider that position.

[But] the more telling detail, as a recent White House “guidance paper” acknowledges, is that the U.S. has been “carefully observing and analyzing this facility for several years.” That timeline is significant, because it was less than two years ago, in December 2007, that a National Intelligence Estimate on Iran’s nuclear programs asserted with “high confidence” that Tehran had “halted its nuclear weapons program” in the fall of 2003.

That NIE gave liberals and Iran a reason to cheer. Some internal critics in the Bush Administration may have sabotaged national security for political gain.

Fast forward to the present, and it turns out the NIE was misleading even on its own terms: Iran did have a covert facility, perhaps for enrichment, and the intelligence community knew or at least strongly suspected it. We are also learning that the NIE’s judgment puts the U.S. intelligence community at odds with its counterparts in Britain, Germany and Israel, which have evidence to show that Iran resumed its weaponization work after 2003.

Three US allies indicate Iran resumed the pursuit of nuclear weapons after 2003 yet the US report cited above held the opposite view. Red flags abound in this story if for no other reason then both positions cannot be correct. If the ‘allies’ assertion is correct then once again US intel is suspect. And if the Obama Administration is acting like the Qom facility is news to them more red flags are raised. Including support for the criticism that current US foreign policy is a strategy of appeasement. In which history and Neville Chamberlain serve as guidance in avoiding a 21st century failure.

Here are some recent reports demonstrating the complacency on the topic of Iranian nuclear weapons.

UN Nuclear Inspectors to Tour Iran’s Second Enrichment Plant Near Qom
Iran’s English-language Press TV reports that International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors are beginning a three-day visit to Iran, Saturday, to examine the country’s Fordoo nuclear enrichment facility.

The timeline suggests a month long delay between Iran’s preemptive disclosure about the facility in Qom and an impotent UN inspection.

Iran to Respond to UN Uranium Proposal Next Week
Iran has delayed its response to a United Nations-backed uranium enrichment plan aimed at easing international concerns that Iran’s nuclear program is being used to develop weapons.

Above is one more example in an extremely long list of delaying tactics the rest of the world allows Iran to use.

US Says Patience With Iran on Nuclear Issue Not Unlimited
At a news briefing, State Department Spokesman Ian Kelly said the United States would obviously have liked to see an Iranian reply but is willing to give Tehran a few more days. “We’re looking for concrete steps. And we take it as a positive sign that they’ve agreed in principle to take a couple of significant steps - the opening of the Qom facility, and then working out a procedure for having their low-enriched uranium re-processed in another country. At the same time, our patience is not limitless. I think we can stretch things out a few days, and that’s really what we’re talking about. But we’re not going to wait forever,” he said.

Equalling the extremely long list of Iranian delay tactics are statements from the US suggesting ‘we are really serious this time’. There is an uncanny similarity between US rhetoric on Iranian nukes and the useless parental response to a child allowed to dictate the rules.

The US, UN, IAEA and the remainder of the ‘international community’ have not just recently adopted an Iranian appeasement strategy like the parent who spoiled the child with lack of discipline. A list of resources below aid in demonstrating this point.

IAEA, Multilateral Talks, Iran Nukes, What’s Changed?

IAEA, International Community Complicit in Iran’s Nuke Strategy

Iran, the UN, IAEA, Elbaradei and Do-Nothings

IAEA Paper Tiger vs Iranian Nukes

Democrats Raise White Flag in Advance on Iran Nukes

Bush Warns Iran If Controversial Nuclear Work Continues…

US Criticizes Iran’s ‘Partial Answers’ on Nuclear Program

UN: Iran Still Defying Demands to Stop Enriching Uranium

US Spars With IAEA Chief ElBaradei Over Iran

Iran Says 3,000 Centrifuges Are Operational

US Official Criticizes Iran, IAEA Deal on Nuclear Program

IRAN, IAEA Make Progress in Nuclear Talks

IAEA Says Iran to Allow Inspections of Heavy Water Reactor

The bulk of the items above are from 2007 with some from 2009. The titles alone suggest the recurring theme of Iran’s delays and the wait and see appeasement of everyone else. If there’s a betting line in Vegas on this story one would have to guess the odds on favorite is Iran. With time being about the only thing the Iranians need to complete their pursuit of nuclear weapons they have one each round of this game.

One way or another this game will end sometime. An appeasement strategy ushered in WWII. Can we afford to make the same mistake on the possibility of WWIII?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Could someone explain how this solves anything?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

related:
Pressure Mounts on Iran Uranium Enrichment Program (Right Truth) 

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has drafted an agreement to supply enriched uranium to Iran following three days of negotiations at its headquarters in Vienna. If all parties agree to it, the deal could mark a breakthrough after a years-long international standoff over Iran’s nuclear program.

The draft agreement was announced to reporters by the International Atomic Energy Agency’s chief Mohamed ElBaradei, who has given all parties involved until Friday to approve it.

“I have circulated a draft agreement that reflects, in my judgment, a balanced approach on how to move forward,” he said. “The deadline for the parties to give, I hope, affirmative action is Friday, two days from now. And if we do get affirmative action, then I hope that we will have an agreement that we can send to the (IAEA) board of governors.”

ElBaradei said France was included in the draft agreement. Talks this week gathering Russia, the United States, France, Iran and the IAEA, stalled on Tuesday over Iran’s reluctance to have France participate in any deal on enriching its uranium. ElBaradei however described the discussions as constructive and forward-looking.

The IAEA chief did not elaborate on the draft deal, but news agencies report that it is essentially similar to an agreement reached in Geneva earlier this month. That deal would commit Iran to shipping about 75 percent of its lightly enriched stockpile of uranium to Russia for further enrichment.

The material would then be shipped to France to be converted into metal rods before being delivered back to Tehran. The rods would be used to power a research reactor in the Iranian capital making medical isotopes.

More broadly, if all parties agree to the deal, it would defuse international concerns about Iran’s nuclear program. Iran says the program is for peaceful purposes , but western nations fear Tehran is trying to build a nuclear bomb.

Here’s a story about Russia that mirrors some of the peculiar approaches to real or perceived problems and how people address them. The United States is not exempt from this sort of problem-solving. Beyond the curious choice of limiting container size for beer a familiar addition of taxes enters the picture. And some wonder in the US why President Obama and the liberal agenda are occasionally compared to socialism.

So is this a case of Russia copying liberal practices in the US or vice-versa?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev ordered new restrictions on the sale of beer and similar beverages last month in an effort to battle Russia’s rampant alcoholism. Questions are arising about why he is not targeting Russia’s drink of choice, vodka.

Russia is one of the world’s largest per-capita consumers of alcohol. The average Russian drinks 18 liters of alcohol a year. That is more than twice the maximum amount considered healthy by the World Health Organization.

The Lancet medical journal reported last month alcohol-related diseases caused around half of all deaths of Russians between the ages of 15 and 54.

In an effort to battle Russia’s rampant alcoholism, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev announced restrictions barring the sale of beer in cans or bottles larger than one-third of a liter. The new rules apply to ‘’light alcohol'’ beverages, but not to wine, vodka or other hard liquors.

The head of the Moscow-backed research group the New Eurasia Foundation, Andrei Kortunov, says it is no surprise Mr. Medvedev introduced the measure. “This is a tradition in Russia. That practically every new leader who comes to power in Moscow wants to do something about alcohol. Everyone understands that it is a national problem and something has to be done about that,” he said.

But some say his efforts fall short of addressing the real problem.

Anna Boguslavskaya is in her 20s, lives in Moscow, and loves the nightlife. She says she goes to clubs and bars on a regular basis and thinks the restrictions are ineffective. She says limiting the size of containers will not solve the problem, it will have the opposite effect. She says people will just buy more bottles of beer.

Kortunov also says limiting the size of beer cans probably is not going to make people drink less. He says he thinks the government’s anti-beer campaign is not targeting Russia’s drinking problem. “You know, beer is not the only drink which Russian population consumes in plenty. I think one of the reasons it happens paradoxically is because most of the beer production is now controlled by foreign companies,” he said.

Russia is the world’s fifth-largest beer market. Danish brewer Carlsberg has about 41 percent of the market share and analysts estimate the rest is shared by other imported and domestic brands.

The government has also submitted legislation that would increase the excise tax on beer by an average of 50 percent per year from 2010 to 2012. The proposal has already affected Carlsberg, which brews Russia’s No. 1 beer, Baltica. The company’s shares recently dropped to a four-week low.

Kortunov says the Kremlin needs to address the real root of the problem. “We should do something about education about enlightening people. We should develop this infrastructure that will allow people to go to sports and fitness centers. We should also advertise a healthy lifestyle,” he said.

In recent months, there have been sporadic government sponsored events at sports complexes throughout Moscow, encouraging people to exercise instead of drink.

Moscow resident Svetlana Andreeva, 25, says promoting sports is a good strategy, but it only targets young people. She says the program is not going to help solve alcoholism for guys 55 years old, whose lives are boring.

Kortunov says he doubts the government’s campaign will have a real effect on the problem. “If it is just the first step, we can give Medvedev the benefit of the doubt, though this step is probably rather a clumsy one. If it is all that they can offer, I think the results are not likely to be that great,” he said.

If history is any indication, Kortunov may be correct. In 1985, Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev ordered dramatic cuts in the production of wines and spirits and introduced strict controls on the public consumption of alcohol. The campaign triggered a massive surge in illegal production of low-quality home-brewed alcohol.

While the recent decision by the Nobel committee to award the 2009 peace prize to President Obama focused more attention on the US leader no more will be said about it in this post. US diplomatic strategy, success or failure, foreign policy and the role of the US State Dept and White House will be. All the talk about rebuilding America’s image, hope and change, a nuclear free world and ends to conflict needs a reality check. How are things going so far?

Not necessarily in order of importance what is on most peoples’ minds these days in terms of international relations or foreign affairs? From the US perspective the countries of note would include Russia, China, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, North Korea and Iran. Of course the perennial favorites not yet mentioned would be any country in the Middle East. Israel and its neighbors are still without solutions. Russia and China are still vying for top dog honors with the US on the world stage. Upstarts Iran and North Korea at the very least want a seat at the cool kids table. So nothing much has changed.

Here’s a brief recap of events in US diplomatic strategy with a ‘new’ President and Secretary of State.

Still no progress in Palestinian/Israeli peace talks

NECN/ABC) - President Barack Obama’s Mideast envoy, George Mitchell, left the region Sunday after failing again to get Israelis and Palestinians back to the bargaining table. The breakdown of peace talks is taking a toll on Obama’s prestige among Palestinians.

President Obama’s Middle East peace envoy on another trip to the region - more meetings - more handshakes with Israelis and Palestinians - but still no progress, no movement in the peace process.

Not a surprise to see a headline expressing failure in Middle East diplomacy no matter who is involved.

What about Iran?

Putin Says Iran Sanctions Talk Premature

By VOA News
14 October 2009

Russia’s Prime Minister Vladimir Putin says it is premature to discuss sanctions against Iran for its controversial nuclear program.

And the view from the US Secretary of State…..

“I believe if sanctions become necessary, we will have support from Russia,” Clinton told ABC television in an interview on Wednesday.

This is merely a continuation of the impotent international community’s response to Iran’s nuclear weapons program that was essentially confirmed again with yet another lie exposed with admission of the previously hidden enrichment facility already known to the Obama Administration. And no one will visit the plant until later this month. Like that will solve anything.

Which makes this next sham almost laughable if it wasn’t so pathetic.

Obama to Preside at UN Security Council

By Margaret Besheer
The United Nations

The United States has taken over the rotating presidency of the 15-member United Nations Security Council for the month of September. U.S. President Barack Obama and other top U.S. political figures will be at the world body this month to highlight issues of importance to the United States.

Another rhetorical masterpiece expressing the desire for a nuclear free world without the substance to support such a notion. The exclamation point is provided by the appeasement strategy reminiscent of a similar process that helped usher in WWII.

And what was the defining achievement by press accounts for the SoS Hillary Rodham Clinton?

Hillary Clinton Helps Turkey, Armenia Open Border - ABC News

Clinton uses diplomatic muscle in Turkey-Armenia row | Politics …

Turkey, Armenia Agree to Ties; Clinton’s Skill Tested (Update1 …

The Daily Star - Politics - Clinton hails Turkey, Armenia steps …

Clinton Helps Save Historic Turkey, Armenia Accord - International …

A more accurate appraisal of Clinton’s participation may be the following…..

Clinton to Attend Turkey-Armenia Normalization Deal Signing

By David Gollust
State Department

The State Department said Thursday Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will fly to Zurich to attend Saturday’s signing of accords to normalize relations between Turkey and Armenia.

A simple visit to the US State Dept website would bear this out. At least in terms of demonstrating that this State Dept is essentially no different from any other feeble attempt by heads of state to display their conviction to foreign relations or determination to improve conditions in the world. A visit to the website while producing this post featured the following items:

Positive Future for U.S.-Russian Relations

Finding Common Ground With Russia

Secretary Clinton Travels to Europe

U.S. Supports Peace in Northern Ireland

U.S. Supports Emergence of Afghan Government

U.S.-U.K. Advancing Shared Values

U.S.-Ireland Working Together

and travel puff pieces?

So much for the hope and change of a new administration in the US and statements expressed to suggest foreign policy would be successful.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

No one wants to air their dirty laundry in public. But that doesn’t stop it from happening. It seems that when most countries are the subject of criticism about their history those raising the issue are not from the target country. Currently some in the UK are defending their brand of healthcare against criticism from those debating a similar issue in the US. Iran and North Korea are getting criticized by just about every other country for their pursuit of nukes and their subsequent denials or lame justifications for it. And the US gets criticized for just about anything and everything. A likely downside to being on top of the pile. And Russia is not exempt from criticism either.

Sunday, August 23, marks the 70th anniversary of the so-called Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact - the non-aggression treaty signed in 1939 by Soviet Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov and German Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop. The pact included a secret protocol dividing Eastern and Central Europe into Nazi and Soviet spheres of influence. Days after it was signed, first German and then Soviet forces invaded Poland.

This kind of discussion will ruffle the Bear’s fur. Drawing comparisons between Stalin and Hitler will not go unnoticed in Russia. …’ in May, President Dmitri Medvedev issued a decree setting up a presidential commission to counter what he called attempts to “falsify history.” ‘ And then there is mention of something that seems akin to Russia’s Soviet legacy. ‘ Russian Emergency Situations Minister Sergei Shoigu introduced legislation in parliament that would make it a crime to deny the Soviet victory in World War II.’ The criticism is having the expected reaction in the Kremlin and elsewhere.

So what else are the critics saying? Dmitry Furman of the Russian Academy of Science’s Institute of Europe calls the presidential commission to counter what it deems historical falsification an “idiotic undertaking” and a “very bad idea.” He also says Stalin’s government killed as many, or even more people than Hitler’s.

But, given the suffering Russians endured after Hitler turned on Stalin and invaded the Soviet Union, Furman says it is natural that many resist equating Stalinism and Nazism.

Furman says it is “very difficult psychologically” for Russians to put what they see as their “victors” in the Great Patriotic War, as they call World War II, on the same level with the vanquished Nazis.

This might be a case of forgetting to note that Stalin was not representative of the Russian people. It may be difficult indeed for Russia to come to grips with the legacy of a madman.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

A few days ago German Chancellor Angela Merkel stated new sanctions against Iran would be considered if no agreement on negotiations was reached by September. Iran continues to claim their nuclear program is for energy purposes while many other countries suggest they are pursuing nuclear weapons. This is not a new story. After previous sanctions, UN resolutions and other lame attempts to persuade Iran to abandon the pursuit of nukes this ineffective strategy has been no more successful than similar tactics against North Korea on the same issue.

Are the world’s most powerful nations as ignorant and inept as their actions in this matter demonstrate? Or is it a simple matter of no one wanting to be the first to take effective action against Iran and North Korea? Will this situation escalate among ‘rogue’ nations of the world until one of them launches a strike against a perceived or stated foe? Or will Israel lose its patience with the so-called international community and its lack of suitable action and take matters into their own hands?

If the US, Russia, China and other nations continue to postpone what is necessary regarding Iran, North Korea and others pursuing nukes the question will not be who has them but when will they be used. If that is allowed to happen the scenario returns to that of the sixties. Before, during and after the Cuban Missile crisis in 1962 the idea of MAD, mutually assured destruction, was considered the concept which avoided WWIII and a nuclear winter or the planet ceasing to exist. It is reasonable to assume those seeking nukes these days are not dissuaded by this concept.

So why are the other nations of the world doing nothing about this?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

crossposted at:
Maggie’s Notebook
Conservative Thoughts

IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei has circulated his latest reports on nuclear safeguards in Iran and Syria to Member States. The report outlines developments since the Director General´s report of 5 June 2009.

Circulation of the reports is restricted; they cannot be released to the public unless the IAEA Board decides otherwise.

General Mohamed ElBaradei has circulated his latest report on nuclear safeguards in Iran to the Agency´s Board of Governors, the 35-member policymaking body. The Board next convenes in Vienna on 7 September.

So here’s a recent Arab response on Iran’s nuclear program.

Israeli nuclear weapons and Western hypocrisy
By Yusuf Fernandez (Source: thepeoplevoice.org)

Once again, Arab states have announced that this year they will submit a resolution at September’s general assembly of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in order to force Israel to sign the Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and open up its secretive military nuclear program to international inspections.

The article also suggests ‘Israel’s rejection to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) as the main obstacle to global nuclear disarmament.’ After stating that Israel has nukes with a 2000 km range and able to reach any Arab capital the article changes direction with ‘Israel is one of the few states in the world that have refused to sign the NPT and is reportedly the only state in the Middle East having nuclear weapons.’

Reportedly the only state in the Middle East having nukes, indeed. ‘Iran has repeatedly assured that its nuclear program is peaceful…’ Repeatedly ‘assured’ is the key here.

You may recall that Saddam Hussein commented after being apprehended from a hole in the ground that he did nothing to convince the world Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction for fear of looking weak to ‘his’ neighbors in the region. Had he not chosen that strategy he may have avoided another confrontation with the US military accompanied by the inevitable outcome. As if Desert Storm in 1991 was not proof enough he could not win a war against the US after invading Kuwait.

Like Iraq’s former ‘leader’ Saddam Hussein, Iran’s leadership behaves in a similar manner allowing statements calling for the destruction of Israel to stand refusing to recognize Israel’s right to exist and yet claim their nuclear ambitions are purely peaceful. They now promote the notion of ‘Western hypocrisy’ while they express the desire to destroy Israel and at the same time define their nuclear program as ‘peaceful’.

If you are curious to know who is Yusef Fernandez the following is from Frontpage magazine. ‘Yusuf Fernandez, the spokesman for the Spanish Federation of Islamic Religious Entities…‘

Some additional information may be found useful as well.

In 1967 the first law allowing the Muslims to organize themselves, after a parenthesis of centuries, was promulgated in Spain, leading to the establishment in 1968 of the first local Muslim Association in Spain in Melilla, and in 1971, the first national association, the Association of Muslims in Spain (AME), which has its headquarters in Madrid. Under the Spanish Constitution the Statutory Law of Religious Freedom is promulgated, now in force, and the Union of Islamic Communities in Spain was constituted (UCIDE), as well as the Spanish Federation of Islamic Religious Entities (FEERI), which together constitute the Islamic Commission of Spain (CIE), which is a member of the Muslim Council of Cooperation in Europe (MCCE)[1]in Brussels, which is a consultative body to the European Union.

So the IAEA reports to this point have solved nothing as indicated in numerous reports in the ‘media’.

Yossi Melman / The IAEA report on Iran lacks the bottom line

‘IAEA hiding incriminating evidence’

UN nuclear watchdog denies hiding Iran information

UN reports increase in Iranian uranium programme

IAEA to report Iran atom slowdown ahead of talks

Iran, Syria have not carried out sufficient cooperation in …

Iran is continuing nuclear activity, says United Nations watchdog

Iran Claims Report ‘Vindicated’ Nuclear Program

Iran dismisses nuclear assessment

Iran is stonewalling the UN nuclear watchdog agency about “possible military dimensions” to its suspect nuclear programme, officials have said.

The UN is urging the regime to clarify the mysterious role of a foreign explosives expert and shed light on other issues.

A senior Iranian envoy angrily denounced the assessment as “fabrication,” insisting his country has gone out of its way to be transparent and co-operative.

In its latest report, the International Atomic Energy Agency said it has pressed the Islamic Republic to clarify its uranium enrichment activities and reassure the world that it is not trying to build an atomic weapon.

Iran insists its nuclear programme is peaceful and geared solely toward generating electricity. The United States and key allies contend the country is covertly trying to build an atomic weapon.

These stories support comments suggesting the ‘international community’ response to the nuclear ambitions of Iran, North Korea and others is impotent. They do nothing about the problem outside of promoting resolutions at the equally impotent United Nations. This criticism includes the IAEA.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

crossposted at:
Maggie’s Notebook
Conservative Thoughts

Is it simply a growing trend in conspiracy theories or is there valid evidence that election fraud is omnipresent in those countries of the world which allow citizens to choose their leaders? Reports on the latest challenges in an election deemed noteworthy by the various media is highlighted below.

There is mounting concern about the aftermath of Afghanistan’s presidential election. No results or even an estimated voter turnout have been announced by the country’s election officials. Partial results from some provinces are expected Tuesday, however. But the election overseers say official results may have to be delayed while they investigate a rising number of serious charges of voting fraud.

According to another report both sides make a claim of election fraud.

Both the campaigns of incumbent President Hamid Karzai and his top challenger, former foreign minister Abdullah Abdullah, accuse the other of illegal campaign activities and tampering with the voting process.

Earlier this year an election in Iran accompanied by subsequent charges of election fraud caused a ’stir’ that has not been satisfactorily resolved. It has been reported that the event is responsible for disruptions of alliances in the ruling elite.

Iranian Nobel Peace Prize laureate Shirin Ebadi repeated her call for a fresh election in Iran, held under the supervision of the United Nations.

Speaking during a visit to South Korea, Ebadi said a new presidential election with U.N. oversight could help end the unrest that erupted after President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s disputed June 12 re-election.

Ebadi made similar comments during a protest speech in Amsterdam last month.

She also asked U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to visit Iran to receive a first-hand account of human rights abuses.

The secretary-general Monday sent what his office called a “customary letter” on his inauguration congratulating him, though the text would not be made public.

And then a contrast in claims of election fraud and media coverage on conspiracy theories.

Massive street protests by millions of peaceful demonstrators waving homemade signs and wearing bracelets displaying the color of their movement? At least 20 protesters gunned down by authorities and paramilitaries? Worldwide moral indignation stirred up by the international media?

Iran 2009? Yes!

Mexico 2006? Yes and no.

All aspects of the above scenario describe the Great Mexican Electoral Flimflam three years ago this July 2nd - save for the conundrum of worldwide moral indignation. Virtually ignored by the international media, the stealing of the Mexican presidential election by the right-wing oligarchy stirred little indignation anywhere outside of Mexico.

Imagine that. Something claimed as stolen in Mexico. With all the rants following elections in the US that disappointed the liberal masses comes a stunning development within the conservative ranks in America.

The primary question conservatives are afraid to ask is “What if the election is very close and Obama wins, then what?”

Will the McCain campaign protest? Is there a cadre of thousands of lawyers ready to jump on the ACORN voter registration fraud issue, or the Obama campaign pre-paid credit card donation debacle, or the many suspected votes cast for Obama by non-citizens?

Obama and his “thousands of attorneys” have answers to all these “trumped-up” complaints by the GOP. The DNC has convinced the Kool-aid crowd that Bush stole the last two elections, and they aren’t about the let that pass. So, hang on to you hats, and further down in this article you will find the Obama/DNC election fraud playbook.

WHAT???? Conservatives would consider leveling charges of election fraud???? Yes, it has come nearly full circle. Beyond the long standing American political rivalry between left and right there are other left and right battles making claim on election fraud.

Not to be outdone by anyone else Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez successfully cheated term limits for his electoral ambitions. As for the Russian Bear….

It has been 10 years since an ailing Boris Yeltsin promoted Putin from security chief to prime minister on Aug. 9, 1999. He was elected president the following year and in 2008 he handed the post — but not all the power — to a hand-picked successor, Dmitry Medvedev.

Putin became prime minister again, allowed almost all the men he surrounded himself with as president to remain in power, and is still understood to call the major shots.

For what once appeared as an aberration in American politics, if not world public affairs, political corruption in the form of ‘vote early, vote often’ has risen to a level that reduces the discussion to one simple inquiry. If all elections are suspect does anything else in public debate matter? Or is this a new strategy to distract?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com