WhirledView

Quick Takes

by CKR

Award to Cole
Hunter College has announced that Juan Cole will receive a James Aronson Award for Social Justice Journalism for his blog, Informed Comment. This is the first time that the Aronson Awards have included one for blogging. Cole says that Hunter is "functioning as a bellweather" for this step, but I would say that it's Informed Comment that is the bellweather, and Hunter is unusually perspicacious in recognizing that.

Cole fully deserves the award for covering the Iraq war in ways that the MSM hasn't. Congratulations, Dr. Cole!

Earthquakes in Iran
My fellow blogger PLS pointed out some time ago that Iran is spending its money on developing nuclear power rather than on protecting its people against earthquakes. At least sixty-six died today in earthquakes in Iran.

The Trouble with Boys
Colleges are becoming majority female. Where have the boys gone?

There was something about this article that gave me a thought: Historically, boys have had the easier time in school. They've been called on while girls are ignored and have gotten the benefit of the doubt when it came to grades. A gentleman's C has been acceptable to businesses as long as the young man showed other attributes.

Then something changed. Like those old Avis ads, girls were told that they had to work harder. And they did. But not much changed in the way boys were brought up. Not much changed for adult men, who mostly didn't have to contribute to the housework. They served as role models to their sons, who saw that Mom works hard and Dad flicks the remote.

Maybe it's time to complete the sexual revolution.

Stepping In for Jeffrey

by CKR

With Jeffrey in Geneva, I thought I'd respond to Max's questions.

Apparently there is a report in a German magazine, Cicero, that Saudi Arabia has been developing nuclear weapons with Pakistan's help. Pakistan denies that it's been helping Saudi Arabia in this endeavor. I can't find a site for Cicero on the Web, so I can't comment on the article, only on the reports.

Saudi Arabia has been interested in nuclear weapons for at least a couple of decades. It's not implausible that some of their scientists might have been working in Pakistan for this reason, or for other reasons, with an eye to picking up whatever information they could. Pakistan's denial is only what one can expect from this somewhat dicey ally of the United States in the Global War on Terror, or whatever they're calling it this week. How far along any Saudi program might be is a big question, but John Pike of Global Security is a reliable source.

Max's questions:

Saudi Arabia and reports that with Pakistan’s help it is developing nuclear missles. Does this make the region more secure or less.

Less.

Could this be a move that could neutralize Iran’s ambitions.

Probably not.

How do we get Iran to back off its nuclear program in light of the Saudi program.

Good question. We could also add Israel's nuclear program.

Shouldn’t BushCo. be trying to get India and Pakistan to give up nukes? Pakistan is to me at least very unstable.

The administration is newly taking a "realist" line. That means they have no idea how to get India and Pakistan to give up nukes.

Is the mid-east nuclear situation out of control or is it the current administration in over its head, or a combination of both.

All of the above.

Teaching Democracy Has Got a Lot Harder

By PLS

I just got an email from my friend Cynthia. She’s an instant Arabist — two years is nothing when it comes to internalizing a language like Arabic, to say nothing of sorting out its mutually incomprehensible dialects and the vastly different cultures which have evolved them — and she was thrilled when, at last, she was assigned to a US embassy dedicated to undermining a dictator and creating democracy. It’s called transformative diplomacy, she wrote, with rather touching, messianic enthusiasm. She intended to be a very enthusiastic part of it.

As we all know, the US is the touchstone of government by the people, and Cynthia had the academic background in American Studies that would make her a priceless asset to that grand democracy-building project. Unfortunately I can’t tell you the name of the country. Cynthia isn’t my friend’s name either. This is actually a very embarrassing story.

Cynthia was invited to give a talk on democracy to a group of students one day. A social studies teacher at a highly reputable college wanted her to discuss topics like the rule of law, separation of powers, habeas corpus, transparency, free and fair elections — the whole gamut of essentials, if there’s to be government of, by and for the people. Her superiors were delighted and gave permission.

This being an elite college, many of the students knew English and a few had actually studied in the US. Cynthia was relieved. She knew her freshly minted Arabic was little shakey. Besides the country was rife with anti-Americanism and she was glad to have some instant allies in the room. To live in the US, she knew, is to love it.

She started out by explaining that a distribution of essential governmental functions among the legislature, the executive and the judiciary prevents concentration of power and thus forestalls tyranny in the US. The President proposes policies, she said, but Congress controls the budget and makes law, which the President then administers. The judiciary ensures that everything’s in harmony with the Constitution.

Most of the students were having a hard time getting all that straight, so Cynthia was happy when one of the US-returned students raised his hand.

“Tell them about the veto,” he suggested.

“Oh yes,” said Cynthia. “If a President doesn’t like a new law, he can veto it. It won’t go into effect unless Congress overrides the veto with a two thirds majority. That’s in the Constitution, too.”

“What about signing statements?” asked the US-returned student. “Is it true that a President doesn’t have to veto a law he doesn’t like? All he has to do is write a little note saying he won’t enforce all or part of it because he doesn’t want to?”

“Yes,” said Cynthia, feeling a little uneasy. “It’s not in the Constitution, but it happens a lot these days.”

“Aha!” exclaimed the student. “That means your President is above the law, just like ours. Our President doesn’t listen to the legislature either.”

Tuesday More Than I Deserve Blogging

by CKR

I've been feeling guilty all winter for not watering my outdoor plants more. The lilacs I planted last year particularly would need water through this very, very dry and relatively warm winter. I got around to it two or three times, but it didn't feel like enough. Spring will tell, of course, and I appear to have been lucky.

Even some blossoms to come! But around here, one must be cautious in those expectations. Pinky-white apricot blossoms are beginning to float around their trees, but some have already sogged into brown--the result of early frosting, common in our capricious mountain weather.

Skip the rhetoric W; try the truth

By PHK

On March 24, WaPo columnist, E.J. Dionne wrote a column entitled “In charge, except they’re not.” The gist of the story was about how our wonderful W and the Republican Party are now running against themselves. You know: the charge-of-the-light-brigade kind of activity so masterfully executed by the Republicans against “big government” as if they hadn't been in charge of creating an even “bigger government” since they’ve held the White House beginning in 2000.

This kind of stuff has been going on successfully for decades: painting the Democrats as the anti-patriotic party of big government. In contrast, the party of the elephant is portrayed as the party of small government and for the little man enveloped in the stars and stripes.

The way, however, the Republican leadership is now acting – to position itself for the 2006 elections - you’d think they hadn’t been in charge of this country since at least W’s questionable election in November 2000.

Running against themselves

Lest we forget, the Republicans have complete control of both houses of Congress, the Supreme Court and the Executive. Lest we also forget, this single-party political noose dominated by a coalition of Bushite fundamentalist Christian and neoconservative ideologues has brought us a ballooning budget deficit. Why? Because W’s advisors forgot about the old axiom that took down LBJ – guns and butter don’t mix – and led us into a disastrous mess in Iraq now running $6 billion a month with no end in sight.

The administration also brought about a two-faced policy towards the Palestinians’ recent election of Hamas, an even more unstable Middle East than before November 2000 and major problems with a spinning out of control nuclear weapons control treaty regime worldwide. Thank you Mr. Bush, Mr. Bolton, Ms. Wilson (my Congresswoman), Mr. Woolsey, Mr. Perle and others who don’t believe in arms control to have sold the world the mistaken and dangerous idea that brought this about.

The administration also brought with these and other ill-begotten foreign policies this country’s worst international public opinion ratings since – well, it’s hard to say. Never have they been so bad or so bad for so long.

Friendly Persuasion

by CKR

And now begins the persuasion of the United States Congress and the Nuclear Suppliers Group to agree with George Bush that laws and regulations of long standing, that we all believed helped to inhibit nuclear proliferation, must be changed to accommodate his agreement with Manmohan Singh of India.

Henry Hyde (R, IL) and Richard Lugar (R, IN) have introduced President Bush’s bill into Congress, without endorsing it. Former Senator Sam Nunn (D-GA), who was instrumental in developing programs to contain Russia’s nuclear materials, has urged Congress to modify the bill.

Nunn, who was briefed on the deal by State Department officials last week, said he is concerned it would lead to the spread of weapons-grade nuclear material, unleash a regional arms race with China and Pakistan, and make it more difficult for the United States to win support for sanctions against nuclear renegades such as Iran and North Korea. Nunn is a board member of General Electric Co. -- which built nuclear power reactors in India before New Delhi conducted its first nuclear test in 1974 -- but he said he thinks the economic benefits are overstated.

Bill Frist has released a cautious statement that allows him to move in any direction.

The administration, if it’s running true to form, will claim that the bill is essential to the US’s economic and military security and drag out whatever boogeymen they still have in their closet to scare Congress into shape. Al-Jazeera, in an article laying out Indian and American reservations, reports that Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns, who negotiated the agreement, claims that it will help to bring India into signing the NPT, but, as many critics have noted, it is not possible for India to sign the NPT and retain nuclear weapons.

Drum-Thumping Heats Up

by CKR

Today's Los Angeles Times has an article that resembles one from earlier this week, I think in the Washington Post. Evidently that one didn't get enough attention, so the war-with-Iran machine needs to repeat it. It seems that unidentified "diplomats" believe that Iran is much closer to having nuclear weapons than anyone thought. (Could it be that the name of one of those diplomats is John Bolton?)

VIENNA — With efforts to halt its nuclear program at an impasse, Iran is moving faster than expected and is just days from making the first steps toward enriching uranium, said diplomats who have been briefed on the program.

Hmmm...yeah...let's parse that. I like to believe that the English language means something. How about a headline and lead like this:

Bush About to Declare Nuclear War

WASHINGTON - With Iran moving toward possession of the full nuclear fuel cycle, President George W. Bush is considering what to do about it. He is just minutes away from the possibility of opening that suitcase that always accompanies him and giving the properly coded command to send the missiles flying toward Iran's nuclear installations, said sources who know the command and control structure.

Equally true, equally accurate. But the LA Times didn't print the second. Nor did the WaPo.

So why did they print this?

With efforts to halt its nuclear program at an impasse

Not the first nor the last that an impasse will be reached in negotiations.

Iran is moving faster than expected and is just days from making the first steps

Pardon me, but I'd say that Iran already has made some "first steps" toward a nuclear program. They've acquired centrifuge designs, they've built a large building to house an enrichment operation, they've got auxiliary facilities. We don't know what's inside them for the most part because we don't have many intelligence assets beyond the satellite photos, but those look like first steps to me. When you add this in breathlessly

toward enriching uranium

it becomes a little more menacing. We (and the anonymous diplomats) still don't know what the Iranians want that enriched uranium for, but those pounding the drums think they know.

If engineers encounter no major technical problems, Iran could manufacture enough highly enriched uranium to build a bomb within three years, much more quickly than the common estimate of five to 10 years, the diplomats said.

My guess is that the anonymous diplomats have never been inside an enrichment facility, nor have they ever put together any precision equipment. So they are relying on the briefers, who are also...anonymous, but from the IAEA. I see no new technical information in this story, only assertions. The reporters, "staff writers," probably also lack that kind of experience, so they're relying (openly, they're honest about it) on the anonymous diplomats. How far away from the source before it becomes hearsay?

The Uniqueness of India

by CKR

"Implementation of the India-United States Joint Statement of July 18, 2005: India's Separation Plan" is now available, as I posted in WhirledView Choice last week. It’s been relegated to the wonkish, with not much analysis in the MSM, which concentrated on the broad outlines announced during President Bush’s trip to India.

Not that those broad outlines are unimportant: nuclear trade with a nation not party to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, and India retains the right to make as much fissionable material for weapons as it can in six reactors. Basically, India gets all the rights of an NPT nuclear weapon state, plus a bit more.

I can’t resist a close reading of the official documents, though, because of an ongoing conviction that sometimes important things can be found in the details and between the lines.

Between the lines, it appears that the Bush administration is weighing India’s potential competition for petroleum heavily. India’s energy needs are mentioned frequently in administration materials (State Department Fact Sheet, White House Fact Sheet). It may be that the administration is calculating that the development of nuclear energy, with whatever attendant mistakes, like their War on Terror, is better done there than here.

India, on the other hand, is quite open about its uniqueness.