Capitol
Hill Update, December 2006
 |
WAND
Public Policy Director Marie
Rietmann urges you to enjoy
the holiday season with
your community of choice...
Happy
Holidays from all of us
at WAND!
|
|
| |
|
Bolton
resigns as UN ambassador
December
4, W accepted John Bolton's resignation
as ambassador to the UN. It was
good news on many levels: he's
gone, first of all. But also,
this may signal that W and the
administration understand the
message from the November election:
Change course. (Of course, the
reaction to the Iraq Study Group
Report seems to disprove that
theory.)
From
the Washington Post:
"Bolton
recast the role of ambassador
to the United Nations, a post
traditionally filled by prominent
Americans who helped explain
the organization to Washington.
Instead, Bolton relished the
role of the body's chief critic,
playing down its achievements
and regaling congressional committees
with its failings."
From
the New York Times:
Mr.
Chafee, who lost his Senate
seat in last month’s elections,
perhaps best captured the political
reality that has engulfed Mr.
Bolton since he took office
in a recess appointment last
year.
“The
American people have spoken
out against the president’s
agenda on a number of fronts,
and presumably one of those
is on foreign policy,”
Mr. Chafee said last month.
From
the Bolton's mouth:
"There
is no such thing as the United
Nations. United States makes
the U.N. work when it wants
it to work. If the U.N. Secretariat
building in New York lost 10
stories, it would not make a
bit of difference."
U.N.
Ambassador Bolton Won't Stay
Bush Wary of Battle With
Democrats
By
Peter Baker and Glenn Kessler |
Washington Post | Full
article, click
here. December 5, 2006
President
Bush surrendered to congressional
foes yesterday in his fight to
install John R. Bolton as permanent
ambassador to the United Nations,
a harbinger of how the political
world has changed since Democrats
captured both houses of Congress.
Bush
circumvented Senate opposition
last year, sending Bolton to the
United Nations on a recess appointment,
and administration lawyers in
recent weeks had developed options
to keep him there after that appointment
expires this month. But officials
said Bolton and the White House
decided against provoking an early
confrontation with Democrats as
they take over Congress next month. |
|
Even though Congress is hightailing it out of town for the Holiday
recess, you might want to send
a message about some of these
things. We thank an activist
in Oregon for alerting us to
the story about federal libraries;
you can always make your own
email action about these things...
Click
here to
use the WAND Take Action Center.
|
|
Message
to West Point
by Bill Moyers | November 15,
2006 by TomPaine.com
This is an excerpt of an
excerpt. This is an important
speech by a smart man at a critical
moment in our history. We invite
you to read more. Here is just
a bit that relates to WAND's
specific mission.
The
Bargain
The
Armed Services are no longer
stepchildren in budgetary terms.
Appropriations for defense and
defense-related activities (like
veterans’ care, pensions,
and debt service) remind us
that the costs of war continue
long after the fighting ends.
Objections to ever-swelling
defensive expenditures are,
except in rare cases, a greased
slide to political suicide.
It should be troublesome
to you as professional soldiers
that elevation to the pantheon
of untouchable icons —right
there alongside motherhood,
apple pie and the flag—permits
a great deal of political lip
service to replace genuine efforts
to improve the lives and working
conditions—in combat and
out—of those who serve.
Let
me cut closer to the bone. The
chickenhawks in Washington,
who at this very moment are
busily defending you against
supposed “insults”
or betrayals by the opponents
of the war in Iraq, are likewise
those who have cut budgets for
medical and psychiatric care;
who have been so skimpy and
late with pay and with provision
of necessities that military
families in the United States
have had to apply for food stamps;
who sent the men and women whom
you may soon be commanding into
Iraq understrength, underequipped,
and unprepared for dealing with
a kind of war fought in streets
and homes full of civilians
against enemies undistinguishable
from non-combatants; who have
time and again broken promises
to the civilian National Guardsmen
bearing much of the burden by
canceling their redeployment
orders and extending their tours.
You
may or may not agree on the
justice and necessity of the
war itself, but I hope that
you will agree that flattery
and adulation are no substitute
for genuine support. Much
of the money that could be directed
to that support has gone into
high-tech weapons systems that
were supposed to produce a new,
mobile, compact “professional”
army that could easily defeat
the armies of any other two
nations combined, but is useless
in a war against nationalist
or religious guerrilla uprisings
that, like it or not, have some
support, coerced or otherwise,
among the local population.
We learned this lesson in Vietnam,
only to see it forgotten or
ignored by the time this administration
invaded Iraq, creating the conditions
for a savage sectarian and civil
war with our soldiers trapped
in the middle, unable to discern
civilian from combatant, where
it is impossible to kill your
enemy faster than rage makes
new ones.
And
who has been the real beneficiary
of creating this high-tech army
called to fight a war conceived
and commissioned and cheered
on by politicians and pundits
not one of whom ever entered
a combat zone? One of your boys
answered that: Dwight Eisenhower,
class of 1915, who told us that
the real winners of the anything
at any price philosophy would
be “the military-industrial
complex.”...
Please read
more, it's worth it...
|
|
Federal
library budgets facing ax
By Tim Reiterman| Los Angeles
Times | Full article, click
here.
December 10, 2006
...When
he learned that federal officials
were planning to close the library,
Mather was stunned.
"It is
completely absurd," he
said. "The library is a
national treasure. It is probably
the single strongest library
for space science and engineering
in the universe."
Mather is one
of thousands of people who critics
say could lose access to research
materials as the government
closes and downsizes libraries
that house collections vital
to scientific investigation
and the enforcement of environmental
laws.
Across the country,
a half dozen federal libraries
are closed or closing. Others
have reduced staffing, hours
of operation, public access
or subscriptions...
Officials say
the cutbacks have been driven
by tight budgets, declining
patronage and rising demand
for online services. And they
say leaner operations will improve
efficiency while maintaining
essential functions. "We
are trying to improve access
and . . . . do more with a little
less money," said Linda
Travers, acting assistant administrator
for the EPA's Office of Environmental
Information.
Although
hundreds of federal libraries
remain open, critics say the
downsizing, especially at the
EPA, demonstrates the Bush administration's
indifference to transparent
government and to scientific
solutions to many of the country's
most pressing problems.
|
| Congress's
Inaction Threatens Funding
Avoiding Spending Bills,
Hill Causes Crunch
By
Jonathan Weisman and Lori Montgomery
Washington Post | December 17,
2006 | Full article, click
here.
The
Republican-controlled Congress's
decision to adjourn a week ago
before completing many of the
spending bills that finance
the federal government will
reverberate in ways large and
small, such as understaffed
U.S. attorney's offices, delayed
renovations at the University
of Bridgeport in Connecticut
and a scuttled global nuclear
energy exchange.
Republican
leaders left behind just enough
spending authority to keep the
government operating through
mid-February, less than halfway
through the 2007 fiscal year
that began Oct. 1. Democrats
have signaled that when they
take control of Congress in
January they will extend that
funding authority for the remainder
of the year based largely on
the previous year's spending
levels, which will result in
many cuts in programs...
The
collapse of the budget process
was a long time coming, with
roots stretching back to the
Republican revolution of 1994.
But this year, the system
finally buckled under the weight
of the president's austere spending
recommendations, a difficult
election year and the Republican
leadership's efforts to placate
both its most ardent conservatives
and its endangered moderates.
Congress
was able to pass only two of
its 11 annual spending bills,
those that fund defense and
homeland security. Republicans
punted spending measures for
virtually every one of the government's
domestic programs to the Democrats
who assume control Jan. 4. Then
last week, Democrats announced
they would punt, too. A joint
House-Senate resolution -- rather
than carefully tailored spending
bills -- will keep the government
open through the end of the
fiscal year, Sept. 30, largely
at last year's levels.
The
consequences will be substantial...
|
 |
Notes
from the WAND News Bulletin
editor
When
it comes down to it,
finding and taking a
seat at a table of real
power takes a lot
of effort, time, and
skill.
|
|
As
the dust from the 2006
election settles, we're
delighted to see some
great women seeing their
years of effort pay
off at last.
WAND/WiLL
WOMEN TAKING THEIR SEATS
AT THE COMMITTEE TABLES
OF POWER
Congresswomen
elected November 7 who
will serve on key committees
WAND works with (partial
list as of Dec. 14):
- Senate
Armed Services Committee:
Claire McCaskill (D-MO)
- House
Armed Services Committee:
Nancy Boyda (D-KS),
Gabby Giffords (D-AZ),
and Kirsten Gillibrand
(D-NY)
- House
Rules Committee: Kathy
Castor (D-FL) and
Betty Sutton (D-OH)
are expected to join
our friend Louise
McIntosh Slaughter
(D-NY) who will chair
this Committee.
- In
addition, the following
WAND/WiLL Women were
named to the House
Appropriations Committee:
Barbara Lee (D-CA)
and Debbie Wasserman
Schultz (D-FL).
|
|
The
final count: New women Members
elected to 110th Congress
House
Michelle Bachmann (MN-6)
Nancy Boyda (KS-2)
Kathy Castor (FL-11)
Yvette Clarke (NY-11)
Mary Fallin (OK-5)
Gabrielle Giffords (AZ-8)
Kirsten Gillebrand (NY-20)
Mazie
Hirono (HI-2)
|
Carol
Shea-Porter (NH-1)
Betty Sutton (OH-13)
Senate
Amy Klobuchar (MN)
Claire McCaskill (MO)
(All
are Democrats, except Michelle
Bachmann and Mary Fallin) |
Pelosi's
House Diplomacy
By David S. Broder | Washington
Post | December 17,
2006 | Full article, click
here.
...Pelosi
has been thinking for
a long time about how
she would manage the House,
if she ever got the chance.
Two years ago, she and
others in the Democratic
leadership sent Hastert
a letter outlining changes
in House rules and procedures
that would end some of
the flagrant abuses of
the legislative process
that have taken place.
The letter said that Democrats
would live by the same
new rules if and when
they were the majority.
That was
repeated a year ago, and
Pelosi says it stands
today.
It means,
among other things, an
end to congressional rides
on corporate planes, a
block on the revolving
door between congressional
staff jobs and lobbying
shops, and a process that
will make it harder to
slip in special-interest
earmarks.
It also
means a radical overhaul
of House rules -- a strict
time limit on roll calls
to prevent prolonged arm-twisting
of reluctant members,
and a requirement that
conference committees
work in the open and include
minority party members.
After
a decade of bitter partisanship
that has all but crippled
efforts to deal with major
national problems, Pelosi
is determined to try to
return the House to what
it was in an earlier era
-- "where you debated
ideas and listened to
each other's arguments."
|
|
Activist
fights for better world
[Illai Kenney lives in
Atlanta and is a member
of STAND!]
Richard Allen Greene travels
to Atlanta, Georgia to
meet a 17-year-old relishing
the challenge of holding
corporations to account.
Full article, click
here.
...In
2002, she was the youngest
delegate at the United
Nations World Summit on
Sustainable Development
in Johannesburg.
Illai
was struck by the resilience
of people hit by Katrina.
Seeing extremes of wealth
and poverty there "made
connections click"
for her about global responsibility.
"On
one side of the street
it looked like suburban
America, and on the other
side, a shantytown would
have been a step up -
if you had running water,
you were rich."
She says young people
can be just as effective
fighting for such causes
as adults.
"People
wonder how I can have
any influence given that
I can't vote. But I can
go to elected officials
with 300 signatures of
people who can vote or
will be able to the next
time they're running for
office."
And
kids have buying power,
too, she observes. "We
could get a lot of companies
to look at us if we say
we won't buy their products.
That's how things were
done in the civil rights
movement."
'Whose
problem is it?'
She
is briefly taken aback
by the question of why
a teenager in the suburbs
of Atlanta should spend
her time fighting for
people living in India,
Mississippi or South Africa.
Then
she replies with a question
of her own. "If
it's not my problem, whose
problem is it? I
know kids who have never
been out of the Atlanta
area. I've been all over
the world. I would feel
like I am taking for granted
what I have been given
if I don't try to have
an impact."
|
|
Post-Election
Polls: Men Were Angry At
Bush, Women Wanted Change
By Ellen Goodman | November
24, 2006 | Full article,
click
here.
Women
are more united than divided.
They tend to see connections
between people not unlike
those -- pumpkin or pecan
pie eaters, octogenarians
or toddlers -- who assemble
around their own family
tables. No matter how much
we read about the infamous
mommy wars, women also concur
on the need for help in
balancing work and family.
So
for many, the biggest concern
still is healthcare. As
Rep. Debbie Wasserman
Schultz [a WAND/WiLL
woman!] of Florida, one
of the new breed of young
moms in Congress, says,
"I don't want the next
generation of moms hand-wringing
over how to deal with the
sniffles and waiting until
it turns into pneumonia.''
It's
past time to make healthcare
available to all kids.
As for education,
especially early education
and child care? The desire
to truly "leave no
child behind'' tops terrorism
on the female list. And
for women who share a family-table
view of the world, economic
security includes the increasingly
elusive retirement security.
Democrats
won't have much time to
prove that the "sea
change" on Capitol
Hill changes enough. Nor
does Speaker-elect Pelosi.
The good news from one of
the post-election surveys
is that voters are three
times more likely to see
female politicians as trustworthy.
The bad news is that only
21 percent of all voters
see even female politicians
as trustworthy. |
|
Notes
from the WAND News Bulletin
editor
Just
when you thought it was
safe to go back in the political
water...
|
|
So
much good news. And then.
So much bad news on the
nuclear front! The India
deal, the Reliable Replacement
Warheads, North Korea, Iran...
I'm
trying not to be terrified
into paralysis by all this.
But how have we lost our
respect for the fact that
these things could wipe.
out. civilization?
|
|
 |
WAND
urges: No new bomb plant | 12/06
Complex
2030, developed by the National
Nuclear Security Administration,
includes the construction of new
facilities to manufacture plutonium
warheads, to conduct nuclear weapons
research and development, and
to consolidate nuclear materials...
Our nation needs to kick the bomb
habit and switch to protecting
the environment from our nation’s
deadly nuclear waste inventory
and stockpiles of weapons-grade
nuclear materials. |
Bush
OKs nuke deal with India despite
inspection history
December 18, 2006 | Full article,
click
here.
WASHINGTON
(AP) -- President Bush on Monday
signed a civilian nuclear deal
with India, allowing fuel and
know-how to be shipped to the
world's largest democracy even
though it has not submitted to
full international inspections.
"The
bill will help keep America safe
by paving the way for India to
join the global effort to stop
the spread of nuclear weapons,"
Bush said.
The
bill carves out an exemption in
U.S. law to allow civilian nuclear
trade with India in exchange for
Indian safeguards and inspections
at its 14 civilian nuclear plants.
Eight military plants, however,
would remain off-limits.
"This
is an important achievement for
the whole world. After 30 years
outside the system, India will
now operate its civilian nuclear
energy program under internationally
accepted guidelines and the world
is going to be safer as a result,"
Bush said in a bill-signing ceremony
at the White House.
Critics
have said the measure undermines
efforts to curb the spread of
nuclear weapons and technology
and could spark a nuclear arms
race in Asia by boosting India's
atomic arsenal. India still refuses
to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty.
The
measure passed Congress with bipartisan
support, but critics complain
the deal undermines efforts to
prevent states like Iran and North
Korea from acquiring nuclear weapons.
Rep.
Ed Markey, D-Massachusetts, a
senior Democrat on the House Energy
and Commerce Committee, said the
pact, in effect, shreds the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty.
"This
is a sad day in the history of
efforts to halt the spread of
nuclear weapons and materials
around the world," he said.
"The bill that President
Bush has signed today may well
become the death warrant to the
international nuclear nonproliferation
regime."
|
| Annan
fears world paralysis on nuclear
arms threat
By
Irwin Arieff | Full article, click
here.
UNITED
NATIONS, Nov 28 (Reuters) - "Mutually
assured paralysis" has replaced
"mutually assured destruction"
as the greatest nuclear threat
as world leaders fail to act decisively
to promote disarmament and stem
proliferation, U.N. Secretary-General
Kofi Annan warned on Tuesday.
While
governments are coming together
to address many global threats,
"the one area where there
is a total lack of any common
strategy is the one that may well
present the greatest danger of
all -- the area of nuclear weapons,"
Annan said in a lecture at Princeton
University.
"We
are asleep at the controls of
a fast-moving aircraft. Unless
we wake up and take control, the
outcome is all too predictable,"
he said.
|
|
Green
groups challenge proposal seeking
two new reactors
GREG BLUESTEIN | Full article,
click
here. | Associated Press
ATLANTA - Environmental advocacy
groups filed a request Monday
to block a proposed expansion
of nuclear reactors in eastern
Georgia, saying the plan could
have a devastating impact on rural
communities near the plant.
The
groups asked the federal Nuclear
Regulatory Commission to reject
the proposed expansion of nuclear
reactors at Plant Vogtle, which
would nearly double the plant's
output of 2,340 megawatts.
"Investing
in new nuclear reactors here in
Georgia is a big mistake,"
said Sara Barczak of the Southern
Alliance for Clean Energy. "This
will only make our communities
more vulnerable."
Other
groups filing the request were
Atlanta Women's Action for New
Directions, the Blue Ridge Environmental
Defense League, the Center for
a Sustainable Coast and Savannah
Riverkeeper.
|
|
U.S.
to defend space with military
force
By Bill Gertz | THE WASHINGTON
TIMES | Full article, click
here.
December 14, 2006
The
United States will use military
force in space to protect satellites
and other space systems from attack
by hostile states or terrorists,
the Bush administration's senior
arms-control official said yesterday.
Robert Joseph, undersecretary
of state for arms control and
international security, said in
a speech outlining a new White
House space policy that free access
to space is a "vital"
U.S. interest and that the Bush
administration opposes new agreements
that would limit U.S. space defenses.
|
 |
A
Missile Defense System Is
Taking Shape in Alaska
By
WILLIAM YARDLEY | December
10, 2006
New York Times |
Full article, click
here. |
Four
years after President Bush ordered
a limited missile defense system
to be built and nearly a quarter
century after Ronald Reagan first
proposed the Strategic Defense
Initiative, this sub-Arctic outpost,
once a cold war training site
and still a cold-weather training
site, is where progress on the
long-embattled missile system
is perhaps most evident, military
officials say.
...Even
as questions persist about capability,
the missile defense program is
pushing forward at a cost of at
least $9 billion a year.
About a third of that goes to
the kind of operation that is
based at Fort Greely, called Ground-Based
Midcourse Defense, which is intended
to shoot down enemy missiles while
they travel through space. Vandenberg
Air Force Base in California also
houses two interceptors, but military
experts say Fort Greely is better
situated to interrupt the likely
flight path of a missile from
Asia or the Middle East. |
No
more new nukes, please
By Travis Sharp |Topeka Capital-
Journal | Full article, click
here.
The Nuclear Weapons Council (NWC),
a group of senior officials from
the Pentagon and the Department
of Energy's National Nuclear Security
Administration, has announced
that it is moving forward with
the Reliable Replacement Warhead
(RRW) program, a proposal that
aims to build the next generation
of U.S. nuclear weapons.
The
council didn't even seem to notice
that one of its major justifications
for the RRW program-a fear that
the plutonium "pits"
that trigger nuclear weapons were
becoming unstable-was completely
rejected two days earlier by JASON,
a prestigious scientific advisory
group. On November 29,
JASON released a report stating
that the pits remain dependable
for at least 100 years. The previous
estimate of pit life expectancy
was only 45 years, and the oldest
pit in the current U.S. nuclear
stockpile is 30 years old.
If
we have 70 years until plutonium
warheads become undependable,
why are we in such a hurry to
build new ones? After all, the
current stockpile is based on
50 years of research with more
than 1,000 underground nuclear
tests and is regularly deemed
"safe and reliable"
by nuclear experts.
|
23
National Religious Organizations
Oppose Plan to Build New Nuclear
Weapons Plant
Full document, click
here.
Twenty-three
national religious organizations
will file a formal public comment
Thursday opposing Bush administration
plans to spend over $150 billion
in taxpayer funds to update the
U.S. nuclear weapons complex and
build a new nuclear bomb plant
that is unneeded and unwise, the
Friends Committee on National
Legislation (Quakers) announced
today. “While we come from
separate religious traditions,
we speak with one voice to say
that we oppose the construction
of a new nuclear weapons complex,”
declares a coalition of national
Catholic, Jewish, Orthodox Christian,
and Protestant groups.
“The
U.S. cannot call on other nations
to stop the production of new
nuclear weapons while American
scientists are spending billions
to develop a new generation of
deadly nuclear bombs,”
declare the religious groups in
a written comment submitted to
the Energy Department at a public
hearing in Washington, DC.
|
Panel
Seeks Consensus On U.S. Nuclear
Arsenal
By
Walter Pincus | Washington Post
| December 16, 2006 | Full article,
click
here.
A
prestigious Defense Department
advisory panel has determined
there is no national agreement
on what the nation needs in the
way of nuclear weapons in the
post-Cold War period.
In
a recently released declassified
version of a report on U.S. nuclear
capabilities completed earlier
this year, the Defense Science
Board reported that its task force
on the subject concluded "there
is a need for a national consensus
on the nature and role of nuclear
weapons, as well as a new approach
to sustaining a reliable, safe,
secure and credible nuclear stockpile."...
The
report has become public as one
Democrat, who will be taking over
a congressional subcommittee that
oversees nuclear weapons programs,
has indicated she plans to take
a hard look at the program.
Rep.
Ellen Tauscher (D-Calif.), who
will chair the House Armed Services
subcommittee on strategic forces
that authorizes the weapons program,
said in an interview this week
that she plans to study the program
and the underlying numbers and
rationale established five years
ago by the Bush administration's
Nuclear Posture Review.
Tauscher,
whose district contains two of
the nation's nuclear laboratories,
opposed earlier administration
plans for a new generation of
warheads with new capabilities,
and helped defeat research on
the nuclear "bunker buster."
|
|
Notes
from the WAND News Bulletin
editor
While
we're waiting for the administration
to wake up and smell the
coffee already! A bit of
humor...
|
|
From The
New Yorker:
Dear Optimist:
A few years
ago, I inadvertently declared
war on the wrong country.
Also, I perhaps responded
a little slowly to a terrible
natural disaster. Also,
those of my friends who
are not under indictment
seem to be deserting me.
Also, the organization of
which I am in charge is
all of a sudden facing a
huge crushing debt. And
I still have almost two
years left in my job. Advice?
In
Somewhat Over My Head, Washington,
D.C.
Dear In
Somewhat:
Stay the
course! Admit to nothing!
Disparage your enemies!
Perhaps declare another
war? Do you have any openings
in your Cabinet? Sounds
like you could use a little
Optimism! What would you
pay? Have your people call
my people!
|
|
 |
Iraq
Study Group Report
Does it matter? Does
it tell the real story?
Will it make a difference?
To download the full report,
go
to this page. |
Here are a few
bits and bytes from the media
and some friends:
Sayre
Sheldon, president emerita of
WAND, weighs in here.
Susan Shaer, executive director
of WAND, has a few choice words
here.
A
Turning Point for a Panel: 4 Harrowing
Days in Iraq
New York Times | Full article,
click
here.
By PHILIP SHENON | December 8, 2006
For some members
of the Iraq Study Group, the turning
point came during four days in
Baghdad in September. They
found the trip so harrowing, they
said, that they wondered if they
could afford to wait to speak
out about the disaster in Iraq.
Like
other visitors, they arrived on
a C-130 transport plane that performed
a plunging corkscrew maneuver
to avoid insurgent fire while
landing at Baghdad’s airport.
Then they were bundled into flak
jackets and helmets and rushed
onto attack helicopters for the
five-minute flight to the Green
Zone, the military-controlled
neighborhood that is sealed off
from the city...
In
Iraq, Reaction to Report Runs From
Relief to Anger
By EDWARD WONG and ABDUL RAZZAQ
AL-SAIEDI | December 7, 2006
Bush
Aides Seek Alternatives to Iraq
Study Group’s Proposals, Calling
Them Impractical
New York Times | Full article,
click
here.
By JIM RUTENBERG and DAVID E. SANGER
| December 10, 2006
Administration
officials say their preliminary
review of the bipartisan Iraq
Study Group’s recommendations
has concluded that many of its
key proposals are impractical
or unrealistic, and a small group
inside the National Security Council
is now racing to come up with
alternatives to the panel’s
ideas.
The
pie-in-the-sky report
Author: Max Boot, Senior Fellow
for National Security Studies
December 13, 2006 | Los Angeles
Times | Full article, click
here.
Blue-ribbon
panels are easy to mock, but some
actually do perform a valuable
service. The base-closing commissions,
for example, were able to close
down military installations that
weren't needed but that Congress
couldn't pull the plug on. The
9/11 Commission produced a definitive
and enthralling account of the
worst terrorist attack on American
soil.
And
then there is the Iraq Study Group.
The money spent on its deliberations
should have been redirected to
some worthier purpose, such as
figuring out once and for all
how many angels can dance on the
head of a pin. Its much-vaunted
report was an anticlimactic combination
of banalities and stay-the-course
recommendations leavened with
generous dollops of wishful thinking.
The group's report begins with
the obvious: ''The situation in
Iraq is grave and deteriorating.''
Everyone knows that (even, probably,
in his heart of hearts, President
Bush), but no one is sure what
to do about it, and the group
doesn't help any.
Its
flagship recommendation has been
described as calling for the departure
of U.S. combat troops within a
year, but it says nothing of the
sort. Here is the key sentence:
''By the first quarter of 2008,
subject to unexpected developments
in the security situation on the
ground, all combat brigades not
necessary for force protection
could be out of Iraq.'' Note the
caveats. Essentially, this is
the policy Bush is already following:
''As Iraqis stand up, we will
stand down."
|
|
Women
Lose Ground in the New Iraq
Once They Were Encouraged to Study
and Work; Now Life Is 'Just Like
Being in Jail'
By
Nancy Trejos | Washington
Post | December 16, 2006
| Full article, click
here.
...As
Islamic fundamentalism seeps into
society and sectarian warfare
escalates, more and more women
live in fear of being kidnapped
or raped. They receive death threats
because of their religious sects
and careers. They are harassed
for not abiding by the strict
dress code of long skirts and
head scarves or for driving cars.
For
much of the 20th century, and
under various leaders, Iraq was
one of the most progressive Middle
Eastern countries in its treatment
of women, who were encouraged
to go to school and enter the
workforce. Saddam Hussein's Baath
Party espoused a secular Arab
nationalism that advocated women's
full participation in society.
But years of war changed that.
|
|
The
GOP's Iraq Two-Step
By
Harold Meyerson | Washington Post
| December 13, 2006 | Full article,
click
here.
Where
do the Republicans' likely 2008
presidential candidates come down
on Iraq?
...There's
also the little matter of waning
public support for the war.
In
the new Newsweek poll, 48 percent
of Americans say they want U.S.
forces home within a year; 67
percent want them back within
two years. A scant 23 percent
believe they should stay "as
long as it takes to achieve U.S.
goals."
The
political problem for GOP aspirants
is that the overwhelming majority
of that 23 percent is Republican.
In the same Newsweek poll, just
39 percent said that invading
Iraq had been the right course
of action, but fully 67 percent
of Republicans still endorsed
the invasion. And life being unfair,
they're likely to be the ones
who will vote in the '08 presidential
primaries.
So
what's a Republican presidential
hopeful to do? Concede the votes
of those Republicans who have
given up on the war to Chuck Hagel,
the Nebraska maverick who cannot
possibly win the nomination but
whose realism on the war could
make him the only electable Republican
if we're still in Iraq in late
'08? Or will Mitt Romney (who
was in China last week, far from
the Baker-Hamilton debates) or
some other GOP aspirant place
a long-shot bet on the revival
of Republican realism (hoping
the party will recognize both
the futility of the war and the
frustration of the American public)
and call for the return of our
troops?
|
| Leaving
Iraq, Honorably
By
Chuck Hagel (Republican Senator
from Nebraska)
November 26, 2006 | Full article,
click
here.
There
will be no victory or defeat for
the United States in Iraq. These
terms do not reflect the reality
of what is going to happen there.
The future of Iraq was always
going to be determined by the
Iraqis -- not the Americans.
Iraq
is not a prize to be won or lost.
It is part of the ongoing global
struggle against instability,
brutality, intolerance, extremism
and terrorism. There will be no
military victory or military solution
for Iraq. Former secretary of
state Henry Kissinger made this
point last weekend.
The time for more U.S. troops
in Iraq has passed. We do not
have more troops to send and,
even if we did, they would not
bring a resolution to Iraq. Militaries
are built to fight and win wars,
not bind together failing nations.
We are once again learning a very
hard lesson in foreign affairs:
America cannot impose a democracy
on any nation -- regardless of
our noble purpose.
We
have misunderstood, misread, misplanned
and mismanaged our honorable intentions
in Iraq with an arrogant self-delusion
reminiscent of Vietnam. Honorable
intentions are not policies and
plans. Iraq belongs to the 25
million Iraqis who live there.
They will decide their fate and
form of government...
America
finds itself in a dangerous and
isolated position in the world.
We are perceived as a nation at
war with Muslims. Unfortunately,
that perception is gaining credibility
in the Muslim world and for many
years will complicate America's
global credibility, purpose and
leadership. This debilitating
and dangerous perception must
be reversed as the world seeks
a new geopolitical, trade and
economic center that will accommodate
the interests of billions of people
over the next 25 years. The world
will continue to require realistic,
clear-headed American leadership
-- not an American divine mission.
The
United States must begin planning
for a phased troop withdrawal
from Iraq. The cost of combat
in Iraq in terms of American lives,
dollars and world standing has
been devastating. We've already
spent more than $300 billion there
to prosecute an almost four-year-old
war and are still spending $8
billion per month. The United
States has spent more than $500
billion on our wars in Iraq and
Afghanistan. And our effort in
Afghanistan continues to deteriorate,
partly because we took our focus
off the real terrorist threat,
which was there, and not in Iraq.
|
|
Dying
for 'Maybe'
By
Richard Cohen | December 13, 2006
| Full article, click
here.
The
truth is that no one knows what
will happen to Iraq if U.S. troops
pull out more or less precipitously
because, among other things, no
one knows what's going on in Iraq
now. (See the Baker-Hamilton
report for depressing details.)
My guess is that the civil war
will deepen and that Iraq, after
having history imposed on it by
Brits in pith helmets, will make
its own history. Maybe the Kurdish
region will go its own way, taking
its oil with it. Maybe the Shiites
in the south will embrace Iranian
hegemony -- or maybe they will
remember they're not Persians
who speak Farsi but Arabs who
speak Arabic, and resume the old
enmity. Maybe Osama bin Laden
will buy a condo in Baghdad. Maybe,
maybe, maybe.
Maybes
are not sufficient reason for
Americans to continue to die.
Baker, the realist, understood
that back when he was George H.W.
Bush's secretary of state. The
United States ended the Persian
Gulf War with Saddam Hussein still
in power, the Republican Guard
mostly intact and with enough
helicopter gunships to massacre
as many as 150,000 Shiite insurrectionists
in the south. The United States
encouraged the rebellion and then,
shamefully, looked the other way.
You could argue that we fight
a war today because we refused
to really fight one the first
time around.
|
|
WiLL
has been busy, busy, busy during
this Holiday season
Laura
Boyd (WiLL National Field Director)
and Nan Grogan Orrock (WiLL President)
were at NCSL's fall forum and
at CPA's Summit of the States
spreading the word about WiLL
and looking to recruit new women
into the ranks. However, it was
no easy task to reach all the
women state legislators at these
events -- the number of women
seated in state legislatures has
risen to 1731!
WiLL's
State Director network has swelled
to 86 women (either currently
seated or retired) across the
country. In December, we had our
second conference call meeting;
we discussed fall recruitment,
CSBA, and plans for the upcoming
year.
We
send best wishes for a peaceful
and joyful new year!
|
WAND
Executive Director Susan Shaer and the
DC fall intern, Annmarie Noonan, at the
Center for Policy Alternatives WiLL table
in December.
|
Campaign
Training Program at Institute for Public
Leadership and Public Affairs
at Northern Kentucky University
February 3-4, 2007 | March 24,
2007
Workshops to prepare emerging
leaders for entry into political
life.
Information: 859 572 7700 | Email:
instituteforpublicleadership@nku.edu
|
March
to End the War | Washington, DC
| January 27, 2007
Join
United for Peace and Justice in this
crucial push for peace!
|
|
The
peace and justice movement helped
make ending the war in Iraq the
primary issue in this last election.
The actions we take do
make a difference, and now there
is a new opportunity for us to
move our work forward.
On
Election Day people took individual
action by voting. On January 27
we will take collective action,
as we march in Washington, DC,
to make sure Congress understands
the urgency of this moment.
|
IDEAS,
VISIONS, RESOURCES FOR
A BETTER WORLD |
| Nuclear
Power Is Not the Answer: by
Helen Caldicott
From Booklist: Never one
to mince words, renowned physician
and activist Caldicott presents
exhaustive evidence to refute the
now-resurgent claim that nuclear
power is the solution to global
warming. Eschewing hyperbole and
speculation, Caldicott diligently
presents the facts about the grave
problems attendant on nuclear power.
|
 |
Working
Assets: first, if you're
not using one of their services,
please think about it. You're probably
gonna have a credit card anyway,
so you might as well do some good
with it.
Second, if you are a customer
already, please take a moment to
vote for WAND! on their customer
ballot. Thanks! |
 |
Be
part of a powerful community
of women and men leading our
country to a secure future!
*
To
join using a credit
card online,
click
here.
|
Don't
worry, we just moved it to a separate
page.
Click
here and you'll find out
more.
Don't
worry, we just moved it to a separate
page.
Click
here and you'll find
out all about what our chapters
and partners are planning for this
month.
The
WAND Bulletin Board is an announcement
service of WAND. The purpose of the
WAND Bulletin is to share news and ideas,
and to offer the support of a national
network of active WAND, WiLL and STAND
members and partner organizations.
WAND
/ STAND chapters and partner organizations
are encouraged to submit news for the
Bulletin Board. Please send text in
a form that is ready to be published
without further editing. Email submissions
to:
bulletin@wand.org.
Statements
posted on WAND’s Bulletin Board
do not necessarily reflect the position
of WAND.
To
join WAND, go to www.wand.org.
Your membership makes this work possible.
Thank
you for your support!
©
2006 WAND. |
