Articles in the Clinton, Hillary Category
CIA, Clinton, Hillary, Great Britain, Torture »
Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, personally intervened to suppress evidence of CIA collusion in the torture of a British resident, the high court heard today. (more…)
Clinton, Hillary, Honduras, Military Coup, Pilger, John »
Hiliary Clinton does not want to call it a coup because she does so, the Foreign Assistance Act would kick in and she would have to withdraw all the military support to the 600 US military personal who are based in Honduras. (more…)
Clinton, Hillary, Democracy, Egypt, Human Rights, United States »
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, we always raise democracy and human rights. It is a core pillar of American foreign policy. And I think that there is a great awareness on the part of the Egyptian Government that with young people like this and with enhanced communications, it is in Egypt’s interest to move more toward democracy and to exhibit more respect for human rights. And so we’re going to continue to engage in that dialogue. (more…)
Clinton, Hillary, Gaza, Israel, Military Occupation, United States »
“Congressman, the crossings are no longer completely closed. There are many items that are being transported through the crossings. There are, as you know, some items that the Israeli government does not permit to cross,” Clinton responded. “The best way for us to help the people of Gaza is for Hamas to cease its rocket firing on Israel, to abide by the quartet principles, and the same principles that were adopted by the Arab peace initiative, which I have reiterated several times here today.” (more…)
Does she have a list of these “many” items, because I suspect we have a different understanding of the word…
Christian Science Monitor, Clinton, Hillary, Egypt, Israel, Palestine, Peres, Shimon, Rice, Condoleezza, US Foreign Policy »
Earlier this month, newspapers here in Cairo carried front-page photographs of Clinton being kissed by Israeli President Shimon Peres during her visit to Jerusalem. Arabs saw in that a clear message. Ditto what she said – and did not say – about Gaza, Israeli settlements, Hamas, and human rights in Egypt. Many Arabs fear it’s Condoleezza Rice redux. (more…)
Clinton, Hillary, Gaza, Israel, Military Occupation, Obama, Barack, Palestine, United States »
Clinton: Israel has right to respond to Gaza rocket attacks (more…)
Bush, George W., Clinton, Hillary, Gaza, Hamas, Israel, Media, The Nation Magazine »
Human rights groups have criticized Israeli attacks on Gaza as disproportionate and indiscriminate, bordering on war crimes. Yet the Bush administration has encouraged Israel’s offensive, blaming Hamas for the violence. Unconditional American support in the face of Israeli brutality is one of the principal reasons so many people in the Arab world hate the United States, providing fertile ground for radical Islamist groups to grow. What measures would you take to put Israeli leaders on notice that the United States will not unconditionally support Israeli actions? (more…)
Clinton, Hillary, Gaza, Obama, Barack, Palestine, United States »
He has promised to tackle the Middle East on “day one” of coming to office, but indicated during an interview on Sunday that he would not break significantly with the Bush Administration’s overall stance toward the region. (more…)
Clinton, Hillary, Iraq, Obama, Barack, US Foreign Policy »
President-elect Barack Obama took only a few days after his election victory before tossing his most liberal supporters overboard. While loading up his administration with war-hawks of various stripes, including Vice President-elect Joe Biden and Secretary of State-designate Hillary Clinton, he left antiwar activists weeping in their blogs. (more…)
Clinton, Hillary, Gulf War II, Iraq, Military Occupation, New York Times, Obama, Barack, Pentagon, US Foreign Policy, United Nations »
The New York Times is reporting about an “apparent evolution” in president-elect Barack Obama’s thinking on Iraq, citing his recent statements about his plan to keep a “residual force” in the country and his pledge to “listen to the recommendations of my commanders” as Obama prepares to assume actual command of US forces. “At the Pentagon and the military headquarters in Iraq, the response to the statements this week from Mr. Obama and his national security team has been akin to the senior officer corps’ letting out its collective breath,” the Times reported. “[T]the words sounded to them like the new president would take a measured approach on the question of troop levels.”
The reality is there is no “evolution.”
Anyone who took the time to cut past Barack Obama’s campaign rhetoric of “change” and bringing an “end” to the Iraq war realized early on that the now-president-elect had a plan that boiled down to a down-sizing and rebranding of the occupation. While he emphasized his pledge to withdraw US “combat forces” from Iraq in 16 months (which may or may not happen), he has always said that he intends to keep “residual forces” in place for the foreseeable future.
(more…)
AIPAC, Afghanistan, Biden, Joe, Bush, George W., CIA, Clinton, Hillary, Cold War, Darfur, Emanuel, Rahm, Gates, Robert, Gulf War II, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jones, James, McCain, John, Militarism, Neoconservatism, Neoliberal Economics, Obama, Barack, Pakistan, Pentagon, Rice, Susan, Rove, Karl, Rumsfeld, Donald, Sudan, US Foreign Policy, al-Qaeda »
Barack Obama has assembled a team of rivals to implement his foreign policy. But while pundits and journalists speculate endlessly on the potential for drama with Hillary Clinton at the state department and Bill Clinton’s network of shady funders, the real rivalry that will play out goes virtually unmentioned. The main battles will not be between Obama’s staff, but rather against those who actually want a change in US foreign policy, not just a staff change in the war room.
When announcing his foreign policy team on Monday, Obama said: “I didn’t go around checking their voter registration.” That is a bit hard to believe, given the 63-question application to work in his White House. But Obama clearly did check their credentials, and the disturbing truth is that he liked what he saw.
The assembly of Hillary Clinton, Robert Gates, Susan Rice and Joe Biden is a kettle of hawks with a proven track record of support for the Iraq war, militaristic interventionism, neoliberal economic policies and a worldview consistent with the foreign policy arch that stretches from George HW Bush’s time in office to the present. (more…)
Advertising Industry, Afghanistan, Biden, Joe, Bin-Laden, Osama, Bolivia, Bush, George W., Chomsky, Noam, Clinton, Hillary, Democracy, Economic Inequality, Economic Regulation, Economics, Emanuel, Rahm, Ferguson, Tom, France, Gulf War II, Haiti, Imperialism, Iraq, Lippmann, Walter, McCain, John, Media, Morales, Evo, Obama, Barack, Pakistan, Racism, Rubin, Robert, US Foreign Policy, United States, Wall Street Journal, War on Terror »
Well, let’s begin with the elections. The word that the rolls off of everyone’s tongue is historic. Historic election. And I agree with it. It was an historic election. To have a black family in the white house is a momentous achievement. In fact, it’s historic in a broader sense. The two Democratic candidates were an African-American and a woman. Both remarkable achievements. We go back say 40 years, it would have been unthinkable. So something’s happened to the country in 40 years. And what’s happened to the country- which is we’re not supposed to mention- is that there was extensive and very constructive activism in the 1960s, which had an aftermath. So the feminist movement, mostly developed in the 70s-–the solidarity movements of the 80’s and on till today. And the activism did civilize the country. The country’s a lot more civilized than it was 40 years ago and the historic achievements illustrate it. That’s also a lesson for what’s next.
What’s next will depend on whether the same thing happens. Changes and progress very rarely are gifts from above. They come out of struggles from below. And the answer to what’s next depends on people like you. Nobody else can answer it. It’s not predictable. In some ways, the election—the election was surprising in some respects.
Going back to my bad prediction, If the financial crisis hadn’t taken place at the moment that it did, if it had been delayed a couple of months, I suspect that prediction would have been correct. But not speculating, one thing surprising about the election was that it wasn’t a landslide. By the usual criteria, you would expect the opposition party to win in a landslide under conditions like the ones that exist today. The incumbent president for eight years was so unpopular that his own party couldn’t mention his name and had to pretend to be opposing his policies. He presided over the worst record for ordinary people in post-war history, in terms of job growth, real wealth and so on. Just about everything the administration was touched just turned into a disaster. (more…)
9/11, AIPAC, Afghanistan, Albright, Madeleine, Biden, Joe, Bush, George W., CIA, Cheney, Dick, Chomsky, Noam, Christopher, Warren, Clinton, Bill, Clinton, Hillary, Darfur, East Timor, Emanuel, Rahm, Extraordinary Rendition, Fox News, G-20, Gates, Robert, Genocide, Goodman, Amy, Great Britain, Gulf War I, Gulf War II, Haiti, Holbrooke, Richard, Hussein, Saddam, Imperialism, Indonesia, International Monetary Fund (IMF), Iran, Iran-Contra Scandal, Iraq, Israel, Israel Lobby, Jerusalem, Kissinger, Henry, Kosovo, Kurdistan, MI5, Military Occupation, NAFTA, NATO, Neoconservatism, Neoliberal Economics, North Korea, Nuclear Weapons, Obama, Barack, Pakistan, Palestine, Pentagon, Powell, Colin, Private Security, Ross, Dennis, Rumsfeld, Donald, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Serbia, Sudan, Torture, US Congress, US Foreign Policy, United Nations, United States, Vietnam, War on Drugs, Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD), Wolfowitz, Paul, World Bank, Yugoslavia, al-Qaeda »
U.S. policy is not about one individual, and no matter how much faith people place in President-elect Barack Obama, the policies he enacts will be fruit of a tree with many roots. Among them: his personal politics and views, the disastrous realities his administration will inherit, and, of course, unpredictable future crises. But the best immediate indicator of what an Obama administration might look like can be found in the people he surrounds himself with and who he appoints to his Cabinet. And, frankly, when it comes to foreign policy, it is not looking good.
Obama has a momentous opportunity to do what he repeatedly promised over the course of his campaign: bring actual change. But the more we learn about who Obama is considering for top positions in his administration, the more his inner circle resembles a staff reunion of President Bill Clinton’s White House. Although Obama brought some progressives on board early in his campaign, his foreign policy team is now dominated by the hawkish, old-guard Democrats of the 1990s. This has been particularly true since Hillary Clinton conceded defeat in the Democratic primary, freeing many of her top advisors to join Obama’s team.
"What happened to all this talk about change?" a member of the Clinton foreign policy team recently asked the Washington Post. "This isn’t lightly flavored with Clintons. This is all Clintons, all the time."
(more…)
Afghanistan, Ali, Tariq, American Foreign Policy, Bush, George W., Clinton, Hillary, McCain, John, Military Occupation, Musharraf, Pervez, NATO, Nuclear Weapons, Obama, Barack, Pakistan, Palin, Sarah, Taliban, United States, Zardari, Asif Ali, al-Qaeda »
The decision to make public a presidential order of last July authorizing American strikes inside Pakistan without seeking the approval of the Pakistani government ends a long debate within, and on the periphery of, the Bush administration. Sen. Barack Obama, aware of this ongoing debate during his own long battle with Sen. Hillary Clinton, tried to outflank her by supporting a policy of U.S. strikes into Pakistan. Sen. John McCain and vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin have now echoed this view, and so it has become, by consensus, official U.S. policy.
Its effects on Pakistan could be catastrophic, creating a severe crisis within the army and in the country at large. The overwhelming majority of Pakistanis are opposed to the U.S. presence in the region, viewing it as the most serious threat to peace.
Why, then, has the U.S. decided to destabilize a crucial ally? Within Pakistan, some analysts argue that this is a carefully coordinated move to weaken the Pakistani state yet further by creating a crisis that extends way beyond the badlands on the frontier with Afghanistan. Its ultimate aim, they claim, would be the extraction of the Pakistani military’s nuclear fangs. If this were the case, it would imply that Washington was indeed determined to break up the Pakistani state, since the country would very simply not survive a disaster on that scale. (more…)



