Category: Foreign policy

War movies

The Holocaust was such a shocking atrocity—effecting far more Jews than the 6 million murdered in Nazi ovens—that it is almost impossible to communicate it meaningfully to new generations. Many outstanding movies have done their best to do so. The pictures of thousands of rotting bodies do not have the same impact as the personal stories of individuals and holocaust films have done an outstanding job of telling them. The Diary of Ann Frank introduced most of us to the Holocaust’s horrors in 1959. But “Europa Europa,” “Schindler’s List,”  “Life is Beautiful,” “The Pianist,” “Son of Saul,” among others each present poignant and original examinations of the ugliness and heart wrenching harm of antisemitism. Just this last week I was moved again by yet another approach to the story in the recent film “White Bird.”

It is important to confront such ugliness in the hopes of reducing the prospect of repeating them. Hitler convinced his countrymen (to the extent that they even knew what he was doing) that the best way to get rid of the “Jewish problem” was to get rid of the Jews. Sadly, Israel itself is propagating yet another genocide this time in Gaza, and West Bank and possible beyond, by convincing many Israelis that the only way to get rid of the “Palestinian problem” (and to have a “democratic Jewish state”) is to get rid of the Palestinians.

War presents a tougher challenge because many believe they might find glory in war. But the reality of war is ugly and tragic. Every country must defend itself against attack, but the United State has not fought a war on its own territory for over one hundred and sixty years. None the less we have been at war somewhere most of the time. Most movies about war have faithfully reflected its ugliness—not only for those killed by them but for their surviving loved ones and the wounded survivors who live on without limbs or with other impairments. But we continue to wage them most of the time.

Movies like “The Bridge on the River Kwai” (the film site of which I visited in Sri Lanka), “Lawrence of Arabia”, “Dunkirk”, and “1917”, depict the heroism in war that might seem attractive but also its ugliness. “All Quiet on the Western Front,” Paths of Glory,” “The Deer Hunter,” and “Grave of the Fireflies,” explore in greater depth the horror of war. Last night I watched the heart wrenching story of a WWII Irish solder’s return to Dunkirk many years later, which wonderfully depicts the absurdity of most wars.

So why do we fight so many of them and in far away places? Much of my work has been in war zones such as Bosnia, Afghanistan, Israel, Iraq, and Kosovo. While I have never been in the tranches, I have certainly heard gun fire. But more importantly, I have witnessed the aftermath of war and embarrassingly the bumbling incompetence of attempted American rule of conquered territories. “Warren’s travels to Afghanistan, Bosnia, Iraq, Israel, Kosovo and beyond”

But why do we so readily go to war? Perhaps because they are “over there” it is too easy to send our youth off wherever and “thank them for their service.” Unfortunately, there are also too many people who think we must flatten our enemies, ala Adolf Hitler, rather than diplomatically cultivate peaceful, get along relations with them. If American’s understood more clearly the ugliness of war, and the futility of taming neighbors via suppression or even eradication, we could have a more peaceful and prosperous world.  

FIRE: Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression

“Free Speech Makes Free People

“The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression’s mission is to defend and sustain the individual rights of all Americans to free speech and free thought — the most essential qualities of liberty…. FIRE defends and promotes the value of free speech for all Americans in our courtrooms, on our campuses, and in our culture.”   “F.I.R.E.”

The above words headline FIRE’s website and purpose. Free speech is so fundamental and essential to the vibrancy and health of American society that I have blogged in its defense on many occasions and will not repeat those argues here: “Freedom of speech-final thoughts for a while at least”   “Do we really need free speech”  It should not surprise you that I was on the Free Speech Council at the U of Cal Berkeley in 1964  “Joan Baez”

Attacks have come from both sides of the political spectrum, but the current risks are from the MAGA right and the Jewish lobby. 

In commenting on the Palestinian-Israeli wars, criticism of Israel’s vicious attacks on Gaza, West Bank, Lebanon and now Syria have too often led to University repression of speech if it is critical of Israel and even firing of staff. “The alternative to war”   “Palestine”  Pro Palestinian demonstrators have too often been suppressed.

The US government has increasingly flexed its muscle to silence criticism as well. A Free Press headline claimed: “A Mom Asked for Public School Board Records. They Charged Her $33 Million.”  Free Press: “Mom asks for public school records”

But serious concerns are being raised by President elect Donald Trump’s actions to punish or silence opponents. Kash Patel, Trump’s nominee to lead the FBI, stated last year that:

 “’We’re going to come after the people in the media who lied about American citizens, who helped Joe Biden rig presidential elections,’ Patel said. The same applies for supposed ‘conspirators’ inside the federal government, he said.”  AP “FBI Trump Patel”

In an equally, if not more, disturbing attack on the press “Trump filed the suit in March, days after Stephanopoulos said multiple times in an interview with Rep. Nancy Mace (R., S.C.) on ABC’s Sunday morning news show “This Week” that Trump had been found civilly liable for raping writer E. Jean Carroll. A federal jury determined he was liable for sexual abuse, but not rape.”  Rather than correct its minor misstatement, Disney, the owner of ABC News, settled out of court and agree to pay $15 million to Trump’s future presidential foundation and museum, and $1 million in legal fees to Trump’s lawyer. WSJ: “Disney Trump lawsuit with ABC News” The dampening impact on press reporting is huge.

The following is not from the Onion:

 “The MAGA cult leader took time out of his very busy presidential transition schedule to sue a pollster and newspaper in Des Moines, Iowa, for a poll he didn’t like prior to the election. Seriously. Trump’s vindictiveness has very little to due with polling in Iowa, of course. These actions are designed to scare the mainstream media into obsequence when his wrecking ball of second term actually gets under way”  USA Today: “Trump sues Des Moines Register over election poll”

While this may look like a joke, its dampening impact on free speech is serious and we must fight it.

The first Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

America’s tradition of free speech extends far beyond these legal protections from government. It embodies a tradition of open (and hopefully civil) public debate and expression of our view. We must defend it.

Econ 101: Our standard of living

In 1900, US income (GDP) was $4,096 per capita in 2023 dollars, while in 2023 it was $81,695. The US poverty rate fell from 56% to 11.1% over the same period. How was such a dramatic increase in our widely shared standard of living possible? The answer (without explaining how it came about) is increased labor productivity. Each worker has been able to produce more and more and hence earned a higher income.

Putting this differently, more and more people were automated out of their old jobs allowing them to find new ones and produce new things increasing overall output/incomes. Such dynamism does carry the temporary cost of finding new jobs and developing new skills. At any point over the last century that cost could have been prevented by freezing productivity improvements, but that would also have ended the growth in our incomes. Thank heavens such crazies did not win out. But it seems they never stop trying.

The International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA), the union that represents some 47,000 dockworkers, is threatening to strike if the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX), which oversees port operations, goes forward with plans to automate more of these port activities.

“’There has been a lot of discussion having to do with ‘automation’ on United States docks,’ Trump wrote in his post Thursday. ‘I’ve studied automation, and know just about everything there is to know about it. The amount of money saved is nowhere near the distress, hurt, and harm it causes for American Workers, in this case, our Longshoremen. Foreign companies have made a fortune in the U.S. by giving them access to our markets.’

“’For the great privilege of accessing our markets, these foreign companies should hire our incredible American Workers, instead of laying them off, and sending those profits back to foreign countries,” Trump wrote.” “WP: Trump – port-strike-automation”

Whether out of ignorance or deliberate obfuscation, Trump again misstates who gains and who pays. When foreign ships are unloaded in American ports it is the American consumers who benefit from any cost savings at the ports.  Trump also claims (though he surely knows better) that China would pay for his high tariffs on imports from China.

A tariff, of course, is a tax the US levies at our borders on goods we import from abroad. It’s paid in the first instance by the American importers. Like any other tax, it is added to the price of selling these imports to the American public. It’s very purpose is to reduce domestic demand for such imports in order to encourage (more expensive and less efficient) domestic production of such goods. Please, let’s not stop technical progress and the higher income it enables.

U.S. occupation of Iraq

The following blog is 100% true. I did meet with Erik Prince in his Tyson’s Corner office and the U.S. Army’s killing of an old Iraqi man in Baghdad and the related events are 100% true. Unfortunately, my confrontation of Prince with his security teams damaging behavior in Iraq only occurred in my dreams last night.

In the late 2000s (probably 07 or 08) I met with Erik Prince in his Blackwater headquarters at Tyson’s Corner Virginia to discuss a prospective project in Jordan. At the end of our meeting I confronting him with the bad reputation of his Blackwater team in Bagdad (sadly this was only in my dream but the events are 100% true).

Following the U.S. and British invasion of Iraq, Blackwater provided security in Bagdad to US Embassy staff and foreign contractors such as me. While reporting to the U.S. Treasury, I was paid by USAID and housed and protected as part of the BearingPoint team under the USAID contract. Because of Blackwater’s reputation for a high profile, roughshod approach to security (driving their armored cars wherever—including sidewalks and wrong way streets), BearingPoint had hired a British security firm.

Even when countries are “liberated” their citizens never like the invading army to hang around long. Iraq was no exception. And the U.S. has proved no better (to say the least) than other colonial powers at administering the lands they conquered. The following story from early 2004 of an illustrative incident in Bagdad was told to me by a US Embassy friend, Michael Cole, who was in the middle of it:

“On a residential street between the Green Zone and our destination in Kadhimiya – possibly Mansour, Karkh, or Hurriyah – I heard the young soldier in the gun turret above me yell extremely loudly at someone in the street. I often spent rides like this reading notes or emails I’d printed to prepare for meetings, glancing up frequently to become familiar with routes and landmarks in case I needed to return to the Green Zone alone. I saw the old man the soldier was yelling at as he walked directly into the road. The Humvee was going extremely fast, driving in formation with 2 or 3 others, swerving across the road in formation to prevent civilian vehicles from riding alongside us where they could block our route or gain a clear line of fire to assassinate me. The driver never could have stopped once the man walked into the road. Just as I saw him and realized why the soldier was yelling, I heard and felt each tire on the passenger side where I sat roll over him. I’ve never run over a deer, but I expect the sound is similar. The vehicle was too fast, loud, and heavy for me to hear a scream or bones break, but I heard a crowd behind us scream, and cars honk. I looked around for landmarks so I could file a report and return to the site someday to make amends. The man appeared to have left a small yellow house with a date palm beside a four-lane road.

“I remember the soldiers cussed loudly when we hit the man. Most had Southern accents and sunburned faces. They started the mornings clean except for their gloves, but ended every day covered in dust, with black outlines left by tinted blast goggles. We talked about the incident when we arrived in Kadhimiya and were safe in a walled parking lot. Most of the soldiers were as distressed as I was. We all knew the man was dead, and we believed it was too dangerous to stop and try to help.

“One of the soldiers, possibly a young lieutenant who was my liaison with the security details, explained that the local Forward Operating Base had a process to compensate families of civilians killed by Coalition Forces. He explained that Iraqi tradition permitted compensation in lieu of prosecution even among local persons, and that this was an accepted form of justice. My later study of Arab tribal culture led me to believe Baghdadis could follow the same practice. I submitted my own brief statement to a local colonel or lieutenant colonel, who knew the case and assured me the family was well-compensated for the man’s death. I remember doubting anyone could be satisfied by this, but I was pleased I was not the only person who had submitted a statement. The soldiers did so before me. I tried to estimate what the man’s life could be worth between a Shiite Baghdadi family and the US military, but the normal actuarial items never equaled what I imagined anyone could call justice. 

“I asked Iraqi colleagues what to do. They shared my grief. Some shared my anger. Others were dismissive – possibly because I described the man as poor. Most advised me not to go back because there was nothing I could do to help. One lady said I could help in a small way by visiting the family, and that was the advice I decided to accept. 

“My interpreter thought it was a terrible, dangerous idea to visit the old man’s family. He said they would kill me. However, he drove me to the site I described to him. He parked a block away, and I walked to the yellow house. One of the man’s relatives spoke English and translated for me. They knew why I was there, and they invited me to sit at a table in their front yard where they drank tea and watched the traffic pass. I told them I did not drive the humvee, but I was a passenger, and that I saw their grandfather, and that I was sorry. One man yelled at me in Arabic about his anger about the conditions in the city during the occupation, of which his relative’s death was just one event among many injustices. I listened, and I agreed. I asked for the man’s name, and they told me. Maybe I wrote it in a notebook that’s now in a box somewhere. I apologized again and held the hands of two men for a moment. The lady who translated told me the man was old, and his death was quick, and it was good of me to come. She said “the officer” had already visited, and her gesture suggested everything was resolved. I was glad they didn’t kill me, but I didn’t believe everything was resolved to anyone’s satisfaction. However, I thanked them for talking to me, and I walked back to my interpreter’s car. I walked up a block and he followed me until we were out of the family’s eyesight from their yard.

“That was that. It was another week in Baghdad, and I didn’t think much of it until I returned home that summer. Sometimes I remember that day when I see a thin, old Arab man, or a man in a grey dishdash, or a deer eyeing the road, or a sandbag beside the road, or plaid cotton with yellow in it, or olive-colored hands, or the shade of a palm over a blacktop, or smell hot tar or dust caked in sweat, which is to say, I think of it often and at unexpected moments. I’m no longer consumed by rage and sadness like I was in 2005, the year following my return home, which I barely remember. Now I remember it as an example of what happens in war, which should be avoided at almost all costs, and with an exhalation of sadness few who I’ve ever met might understand. We all have instances and threads of sadness woven through our memories and consciousnesses, and this is one of mine.”

You can read more of my own experiences there in “Iraq-An American Tragedy-My Travels to Baghdad”

America’s Trump style Foreign Policy

The world benefits from rules of interaction that provide peace and cooperation. Rather than building more weapons of war, we could build more temples of beauty. Championing rules most countries respect and aspire to and being the largest (or perhaps second largest) economy in the world, the United States has naturally led such an international order. Retaining that role would be jeopardized if the U.S. did not diplomatically fashion such rules that were embraced and respected by most other countries and if the U.S. did not itself abide by the rules it had championed.

America’s leadership role is being jeopardized by our hypocrisy, such as condemning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine while given a blank check and American weapons for Israel’s invasion of Gaza and Lebanon and ignoring its abuse of its occupied territories in the West Bank of Palestine. America’s embrace of the International Criminal Court’s (ICC’s) arrest warrant for Vladimir Putin for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and America’s condemnation of the ICC’s arrest warrant for Israel’s PM Benjamin Netanyahu’s and its former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant is the very definition of hypocrisy.  

President elect Donald Trump’s style of negotiating international agreements reflects more the behavior of a bully than a diplomat. Last Monday Trump threatened to levy a 25% percent tariff on all imports from Mexica and Canada, despite the large economic harm to the US as well as Mexica and Canada and despite the laws and agreements it would violate, if they did not stop the illegal drugs and aliens entering the US across their borders. WC: “tariffs”

“Trump’s threat spurred outrage across the northern and southern U.S. borders, prompting backlash and warnings of retaliatory tariffs from both Mexico and Canada.”  The Hill: “Takeaways from trumps new tariff threat”

“Donald Trump’s angry threat to impose 25 percent tariffs on all U.S. imports from Mexico… is widely being depicted as a bluff….

“But amid all this parsing of Trump’s intentions, a crucial fact about his new move is getting lost: At the center of it is a lie. This lie is hiding in plain sight: It’s the underlying suggestion that Mexico is not doing anything to stop migrants from coming and that Trump’s threat of tariffs is needed to change that….

“All this is laid bare by the sharp response to Trump’s threat that new Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum issued Tuesday. Her statement is getting attention for its barbed claim that American guns trafficked to Mexico are fueling crime and violence there among gangs supplying U.S. markets with drugs. ‘Tragically, it is in our country that lives are lost to the violence resulting from meeting the drug demand in yours,’ Sheinbaum noted acidly, suggesting that the two countries’ interrelated national challenges underscore the need for cross-border cooperation rather than Trumpian confrontation.”

She further noted that: “You may not be aware that Mexico has developed a comprehensive policy to assist migrants from different parts of the world who cross our territory en route to the southern border of the United States. As a result, and according to data from your country’s Customs and Border Protection (CBP), encounters at the Mexico-United States border have decreased by 75% between December 2023 and November 2024….

“What this polite (and euphemistic) language says is that Mexico is already acting extensively to thwart migrants who travel through that country—originating south of Mexico—so they don’t reach our own southern border. As Sheinbaum notes, this is partly why border apprehensions in the United States have dropped sharply of late.” New Republic: “Mexico’s Sheinbaum responds to Trump tariffs”

So, what did our bully in chief do next?  “President-elect Donald Trump has said he had a “wonderful” conversation with Mexico’s President Claudia Sheinbaum, in an apparent easing of the tensions raised this week over trade tariffs….  After Wednesday’s phone call, both leaders described the conversation in positive terms. Trump said on Truth Social, his social media platform, that it was a ‘very productive conversation’ and thanked Mexico for its promised efforts.”

Perpetuating his original lie, “Trump indicated that Sheinbaum would stop migration through Mexico, ‘effectively closing the southern border’.

“Sheinbaum said she had explained her country’s efforts to deal with migrants and that her position would ‘not be to close borders but to build bridges’”.  https://on.ft.com/49czcol

Trump may or may not be a good negotiator (6 of his businesses have filled for bankruptcy) but his approach is that of a bully. Given America’s dominant status in the world, bullying rather than leading and negotiating in the search for mutually beneficial compromises will hasten American decline from leadership.

War

My many visits to Sarajevo, Mostar, and Banja Luka in 1996-7 exposed me to the devastation of war, as did my multiple visits to Pristina in 1999-2000, and my 23 visits to Kabul between 2002-13.  My two months in Bagdad as part of the Coalition Provisional Authority in 2004 and five, two week follow up visits added live fire to my “post” war experiences that left me jumpy for many months after returning home.  None of these came close to the front-line experiences of reporter Robert Fisk, whose accounts are reproduced in his thick book “The Great War for Civilization: The Conquest of the Middle East,” though he reported from the same countries I had worked in.

Fisk’s reports on his interviews with actual people and his viewing of their butchered bodies and mass graves in the dessert confronts his readers with the real victims of war. To characterize his accounts as heart wrenching doesn’t come close to the true tragedies he reports. The deceptions and lies of all sides, add to the immense tragedies of our post WW wars, which have accomplished nothing but death and destruction.

The current Middle East wars (Israel’s slaughter of men, women and child in Gaza, West Bank, and Lebanon), following decades of Israel’s abusive rule over Palestinian territories, is beyond belief and too many Americans remain silent.  But no side has been “pure.” Our illegal and lie filled invasion of Iraq in 2003 followed years of American and British bombing of Iraq following the Gulf War in 1991 (Desert Storm). Our sanctions of Iraq over that period staved to death 1.5 million Iraqi’s, mainly children (despite the Food for Oil program), and the U.S. military’s use of depleted uranium munitions in that war dramatically increased Iraqi cancer cases and birth defects in the years that followed. Fisk reports on these and US and UK efforts to keep it all quiet.

Some of Iraq’s health problems were also aggravated by Iraq’s use of chemical warfare agents such as mustard gas and sarin during the Iran-Iraq war of 1980-88. The United States, being on Iraq’s side at that time, ignored its use of these chemicals, which remain in the soil today.  American leadership, which is desired by much of the world, is undermined by such double standards. Our government lies to its own citizens about its illegal behavior as well. Edward Snowden is paying a very high price for exposing some of it. We owe him a lot.

American interference in other countries’ affairs (other than by being the beacon on the hill) has rarely served our national interest. While we have blindly assumed that we would be welcomed as liberators in Panama (1989-90), Iraq (1991, and 2003), Somalia (1993, 2007, and 2010), Haiti (1994), Bosnia (1994), Afghanistan (1998, and 2001), Serbia (1999), Libya (1986, and 2011) and Syria (2014)–(need I mention Vietnam?), we failed to understand that peoples of most every country hate invaders no mater who they are. Moreover, our ignorance and arrogance made us very inept occupiers.

In Ukraine and Israel our interference stops short of sending our solders (almost). But Russia’s invasion of Ukraine could have easily and sensibly been avoided if the U.S. had encouraged the negotiations Russia sought in December 2021 “Ukraine’s and  dead and  war”.  Following Russia’s invasion, we tragically threw cold water on the agreement almost reached between Ukraine and Russia in the March 2022 negotiations in Turkey. ‘Peace negotiations in the Russian invasion of Ukraine”  So onward to the last Ukrainian. The final outcome is very likely to be identical to the March 2022, Istanbul Communiqué but with 120,000 dead and 600,000 wounded Russians and 70,000 dead soldiers and 10,000 dead civilians and 140,000 wounded Ukrainians and 500 billions of dollars’ worth of property destruction. In other words, Russia and Ukraine paid a huge price (with our help) for nothing.

Fisk gives human faces to the real people who pay the price for our aggressions. This horrible cost in lives and property has contributed nothing to our national security. America has much to offer the world and has contributed much to the quality of life around the world. But it has done so with its example, trade, and diplomacy, not its army. The principles and institutions on which American was founded and has flourished have served us well when we have remained faithful to them.

President elect Trump has nominated Tulsi Gabbard to become his Director of National Intelligence. When she left the Democratic party two years ago and endorsed Trump for President this August she praised Trump for “having the courage to meet with adversaries, dictators, allies and partners alike in the pursuit of peace, seeing war as a last resort” and condemned the Biden administration for the U.S. “facing multiple wars on multiple fronts in regions around the world and closer to the brink of nuclear war than we ever have been before.”

“In 2022, she also faulted the Biden administration for failing to address Russian concerns as it invaded Ukraine.

“’This war and suffering could have easily been avoided if Biden Admin/NATO had simply acknowledged Russia’s legitimate security concerns regarding Ukraine’s becoming a member of NATO, which would mean US/NATO forces right on Russia’s border,’

Following a 2017 trip to visit Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad, Gabbard defended meeting with an American enemy by saying:

“I think we should be ready to meet with anyone if there’s a chance it can help bring about an end to this war, which is causing the Syrian people so much suffering,”  “The Hill–Tulsi Gabbard-Trump Nomination — 11/14/24”

 I hope that she still thinks this way.

Save Israel

To save Israel, U.S. standing in the world, and the lives of thousands of innocent Palestinian men, women and children, Israel must end its wars against the Palestinian territories it occupies in the West Bank, Gaza, and it war in Lebanon immediately. U.S. support is already in violation of U.S. law and must top immediately.  “David Ignatius–Biden Should withhold weapon to Israel”  Israel’s publicly stated objective is to rid the land from the River to the Sea of as many Palestinians as possible in order to establish a democratic, Jewish state over the entire area.

While Israel’s Defense Minister Yoav Gallant stated that Israel had achieved its military objectives and should end the fighting, Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu disagreed and recently fired Gallant. Israel’s wars have seriously eroded its support in the world and the United States has become isolated by its continued support of what most of the world now calls Israel’s genocide of Palestinians.

According to recent reports, the Israel-Hamas war that began in October 2023 has resulted in a staggering number of casualties:

Over 43,000 Palestinians in Gaza have been killed

  • This includes at least 11,000 children and 6,000 women
  • An estimated 99,013 Palestinians have been injured

Israeli casualties:

  • Approximately 1,200-1,700 Israelis have been killed
  • This includes at least 36 children
  • Around 5,431 Israelis have been injured

These figures are estimates and the true toll may be higher. Some sources suggest the total death toll in Gaza could reach up to 186,000 when accounting for both direct and indirect deaths due to the conflict.

President elect Trump announced Tuesday that he’d nominated former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, a proponent of Israeli annexation of the West Bank, to be the US ambassador to Israel. “I am pleased to announce that the Highly Respected former Governor of Arkansas, Mike Huckabee, has been nominated to be The United States Ambassador to Israel…. Mike has been a great public servant, Governor, and Leader in Faith for many years. He loves Israel, and the people of Israel, and likewise, the people of Israel love him. Mike will work tirelessly to bring about Peace in the Middle East!” Trump said in a statement.

What must Huckabee or anyone else who loves Israel do to bring peace to Israel and the Middle East? He must convince the Israeli government to end its abusive treatment of the peoples whose land it has taken and rules. Since expelling approximately 700,000 Palestinians in the 1948 war at Israel’s founding, 134,000 Palestinians have been killed and more than 5 million driven from their homes into refugee status in the surrounding countries.

Israel has rejected a so called two state solution in which the West Bank and Gaza Strip would become an independent country. Thus, Israel must give up its apartheid status for the Palestinians in a one state Israel providing them with full citizenship and equal treatment to Israel’s Jewish citizens and must stop killing or driving them away. “One State Solution for Palestine-Israel”

But I support the immediate end of these wars and the establishment of equal treatment and justice for everyone not only because I care about Israel, but also because American support of Israel’s genocide is damaging my own country. It makes a mockery of the high principles upon which America was founded and has isolated us from the rest of the world’s condemnation of Israel’s misconduct.

Trust but Verify

Trust in our institutions and each other is a hugely important factor in a society’s wellbeing. The lack of it can cost billions of dollars and inconveniences in airports and other security measures and in the extreme can lead to physical attacks on our government such as the January 6 attack on the U.S. Congress.

Russia has produced and helped disseminate fake news about U.S. government responses to recent hurricanes (“Russia amplified hurricane disinformation to drive Americans apart”,  “Covert war on American minds”) and destruction of mail-in ballets for next week’s elections (“Pennsylvania ballots video by Russia”). Donald Trump continues to deny that he lost the 2000 elections despite knowing otherwise according to his staff. “Indictment claims Trump knew he lost”  

Responding to government incentives, pharmaceutical companies developed COVID vaccines in amazingly quick time during Trump’s administration, which then lost public trust as a result of Anthony Fauci’s lie about the lack of need for face masks (“Noble lies-covid-Fauci-CDC-masks”) and mixed messages from the American public health establishment. While the government’s understanding of the COVID virus and how best to protect ourselves from it evolved as more information was analyzed, their communications with the public did not give confidence that they were sharing what they knew and what they didn’t. Temporary lock downs might have been justified as the government geared up to respond, but each of us should have been given more freedom thereafter to make our own risk assessments based on the best available information. School closings have done permanent harm to a generation of children.

America has flourished because we are free and relatively unrestrained to live and innovate as we please within public institutions we trust. These facts—President Reagan’s “Beacon on the Hill”—have attracted the admiration of much of the world. But our record is not pure and the more we depart from these principles the more the world will come to distrust us. The current example is America’s complicity with Israel’s genocidal wars in Gaza, West Bank, and Lebanon.  “Warnings of Israel’s UNRWA ban will collapse aid efforts in Gaza”   The UN has condemned Israel’s attacks and blocking of food and medical aid to Gaza, and bombing schools and hospitals. “List of United Nations resolutions concerning Israel and the annexation of Jerusalem”. U.S. law forbids providing aid to countries guilty of such acts, but we continue providing it none the less.  “Two governments linked by lies and bloodshed”

But our complicity with Israeli atrocities is not the first or only example of such behavior. Our ally, then enemy, Iraq used chemical weapons (nerve gas and mustard gas) during the Iran-Iraq War, starting in 1983 and continuing until the war ended in 1988. We closed our eyes and said nothing.

Even the Reagan administration, whose détente with the Soviet Union helped end the cold war, violated its principles and public trust with the Iran-Contra Affair. “Iran Contra Affair”

Such violations of our principles damage public trust at home and abroad. Beyond being despicable in their own right, they undermine trust in our institutions at home and abroad and threaten the life we have always expected to enjoy. This is not something Russia is doing to us, we are doing it to ourselves.

Be sure to vote next week and happily or graciously accept the outcome.

Should the US Still Police the World?

This was a debate between Bret Stephens and Jamie Kirchick for the affirmative and Matt Taibbi (without his baseball cap) and Lee Fang for the negative. You can and should watch it here: https://open.substack.com/pub/bariweiss/p/a-free-press-live-debate-on-foreign?r=1n8osb&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

The affirmative side (Jamie and Bret) only seemed to understand policing in military terms. The idea that there might be good and bad policing never seemed to cross their minds. Bearing in mind that I was a member of the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq for its final two months and made 22 visits to Afghanistan from 2002-2013 (not to mention my years of work with the IMF in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Kosovo, Serbia, and South Sudan), my experience has been that when led by our military, which is quite good at fighting, our policing is generally inept (to understate it considerably). Warren Coats life and travels

Jamie and Bret’s blindness sadly reflects the single-minded understanding of neocons of what our leadership role in the world should look like (military involvement and wars).  This blindness is shockingly visible in the debate. America must and should be involve in the world we are part of. We should promote the values of peace and freedom that have America the envy of the world. That means actively working to be a good neighbor and to help fashion the rules and norms of cross border cooperation (for the cross-border movement of goods, people, digital messages and value, etc.). We potentially have a lot to offer in such a role in our own self-interest and for the betterment of the world.

But when we have led with our Army, our “leadership” has been rotten for the world and for us. We are bad colonial rulers as I have seen first hand. These points were made by Matt and Lee who mopped the floor with Bret and Jamie. By the vote of those listening, Matt and Lee won the debate but were still supported by a minority of those voting. God help us.

More recently, our unconscionable support of Israel’s vicious slaughter of its neighbors in Gaza and the West Bank and now its invasion of Lebanon, has destroyed any remaining respect we had as a world leader.  https://wcoats.blog/2024/10/05/score-card/

Propaganda

The arguments I present at the dinner table to convince you of my position/proposal, will succeed or fail depending on their merits and the skill with which I present and defend them. My freedom to make my case at home or your home or in the public square (Kiwanis Club, Facebook, X, etc.) and yours to challenge it and/or to make your own, is an essential feature of our free and flourishing society. It is a right guaranteed in the First Amendment to our Constitution. The give and take and challenges of such debate improve the prospect of adopting better policies and proposals and of their broad public support.

The Woke movement to prevent, shout down, or otherwise silence hate speech (at least in the eyes of some) violated our freedom of speech and the virtues of its protection. It was rightly opposed and seems in retreat, last year’s measures by Columbia and many other Universities to prevent pro-Palestinian demonstrations notwithstanding. Demonstrations that violate or threaten the rights and/or safety of others are not protected speech and should be banned.

The anti-free speech virus has spread to elements of the right wing as well. According to Jacob Mchangama in “Reflections on right-wing cancel culture”:

 “’The Left started it.’

“That was the common retort from right-wing X accounts like Libs of TikTok and their supporters, who attempted and often succeeded at getting people fired for making tasteless social media posts about the assassination attempt on Donald Trump back in July. 

“Most of their victims weren’t public figures but regular Americans like Home Depot employees, firefighters, chefs, and school counselors. This was fine and good, many argued, because it constituted sweet revenge for cancel culture excesses driven by the Left.” 

Constructive civil discourse is a valuable skill some have forgotten or never learned. Efforts to strengthen such skills by Braver Angles and other groups are encouraging.

On the other hand, measures by an increasing number of governments to ban speech they disapprove of seem to be growing. It is not all together surprising that the governments of Russia, China, Pakistan, Hungary, Brazil have banned unfriendly news sources and reporters. Measures in the U.S. to remove what our government considers false information for social media is shocking. Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Meta the owner of Facebook, recently expressed regret for the company’s past decisions regarding content moderation, particularly concerning COVID-19. In a letter to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, he revealed that senior officials from the Biden administration pressured Facebook to censor certain content, including humor and satire related to the pandemic. Zuckerberg stated, “I believe the government pressure was wrong, and I regret that we were not more outspoken about it”

More shocking still, Scott Ritter, a former UN weapons inspector and US Marine Corps intelligence officer, had his home searched by the FBI, potentially due to allegations related to his failure to register as a foreign agent. It is more likely that the real reason is our governments anger at his attacks on its efforts to suppress “disinformation” in the press. He recently participated in a discussion titled “Free Speech & The DOJ attack on Independent Journalism,” highlighting concerns about governmental interference in free speech and press freedoms. Ritter has been vocal on social media, urging authorities to respect the Constitution and stop restricting free speech and press activities. This interview of Ritter is well worth watching: Scott Ritter interview

If that doesn’t shock freedom loving Americans, surely this will. Pavel Durov, the CEO and founder of the messaging app Telegram, was recently arrested in France. He was detained as part of an ongoing judicial investigation into alleged criminal activities facilitated by Telegram, including the spread of child pornography, cyberscams, and organized crime. Durov has criticized the charges as “surprising” and “misguided,” arguing that it is unreasonable to hold a platform or its CEO accountable for user-generated content. He emphasized that Telegram complies with European Union regulations and has robust content moderation practices. The arrest has sparked discussions about the balance between free speech and the responsibility of social media platforms in moderating harmful content.

And then there are evil people who deliberately lie and deceive for the purpose of doing harm? Russia, for example, might judge it in its interest to weaken the United States by undermining America’s public trust in our institutions thus diminishing our effectiveness as a nation. “The Russian government’s covert efforts to sway the 2024 presidential election are more advanced than in recent years, and the most active foreign threat this political season, U.S. intelligence officials said Friday.” “Russia-election-covert-disinformation” But which way would Russia’s interests be best served. Ritter argues that Russia’s interest in the outcome of the American Presidential election is for a President whose policies will be predictable. That hardly describes Donald Trump.

A more challenging question is what to do about those unknowingly spreading false information believing it’s true (e.g. Antivaxxers).  In which of these boxes should we put someone like Tucker Carlson—deliberately deceiving –unknowingly deceiving—or sometimes right? These are not easy questions. I urge you to read Damon Linker’s exploration of Tucker Carlson’s diabolical motives: “The anti-liberal right builds a usable past”

So, what should we do? Defending our freedom to speak should be a top priority. “Do we really need free speech?”  Where should we look for the facts and to expose fake information? Social media and fake news”. What role should government play?

At the end of the day, it is what each of us believes that matters. It is in our own interest to evaluate the reliability of various sources of information. The government can help by being such a source, but it must earn our trust for the objectivity of its research and disclosure. It must never censor the information provided by others.  Government can require and promote the transparency of the information provided by others (e.g, who has paid for it).  This role for government will minimize the incentive for private parties to exert pressure on the government to support one version of the truth and suppress others. We must decide for ourselves, but our institutions can and should contribute to our filtering fact from fiction and help expose liars.  Freedom isn’t free.