Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

About Right Web

Print Friendly

Right Web is an independent online publishing project that assesses the work of prominent organizations and individuals—both in and out of government—who promote aggressive or militaristic U.S. foreign and defense policies, with a special focus on the “war on terror” and the Middle East. Right Web aims to foster informed public debate about these policies by producing articles and profiles about individuals and organizations that examine political discourses and institutional allegiances over time.

Efforts to push interventionist U.S. policies often cross party lines and can lead to seemingly unlikely alliances, thus Right Web examines individuals and organizations across the political spectrum, as well as influential “nonpartisan” and “apolitical” actors who collaborate closely with groups that push a hawkish agenda. Reporters, researchers, and analysts have come to rely on Right Web for its well-documented research and analysis.

Originally founded by the now-defunct International Relations Center (IRC) in 2003, Right Web represented a revival of an earlier IRC program called GroupWatch (1985-1991), which profiled more than 125 private, quasi-governmental, and religious organizations that were closely associated with the implementation of U.S. foreign policy in the 1980s, especially in Central America.

 

Mike Flynn is project director of Right Web. He holds a bachelor’s in philosophy from DePaul University and a PhD in international studies from the Graduate Institute that focused on global immigration detention policies.

 

Please Note: Right Web neither represents nor endorses any of the individuals or groups profiled on this website.

 

Inquiries or media requests can be sent to rightwebproject@gmail.com.

 

 

<< Back to the Right Web home page

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Brigette Gabriel, an anti-Islamic author and activist, is the founder of the right-wing group ACT! for America.


The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), one of the more effective U.S. lobbying outfits, aims to ensure that the United States backs Israel regardless of the policies Israel pursues.


Frank Gaffney, director of the hardline neoconservative Center for Security Policy, is a longtime advocate of aggressive U.S. foreign policies, bloated military budgets, and confrontation with the Islamic world.


Shmuley Boteach is a “celebrity rabbi” known for his controversial “pro-Israel” advocacy.


United against Nuclear Iran is a pressure group that attacks companies doing business in Iran and disseminates alarmist reports about the country’s nuclear program.


Huntsman, the millionaire scion of the Huntsman chemical empire, is a former Utah governor who served as President Obama’s first ambassador to China and was a candidate for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination.


Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) is one the Senate’s more ardent supporters of militaristic U.S. foreign policies.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Print Friendly

AIPAC has done more than just tolerate the U.S. tilt toward extreme and often xenophobic views. Newly released tax filings show that the country’s biggest pro-Israel group financially contributed to the Center for Security Policy, the think-tank that played a pivotal role in engineering the Trump administration’s efforts to impose a ban on Muslim immigration.


Print Friendly

It would have been hard for Trump to find someone with more extreme positions than David Friedman for U.S. ambassador to Israel.


Print Friendly

Just as the “bogeyman” of the Mexican rapist and drug dealer is used to justify the Wall and mass immigration detention, the specter of Muslim terrorists is being used to validate gutting the refugee program and limiting admission from North Africa, and Southwest and South Asia.


Print Friendly

Although the mainstream media narrative about Trump’s Russia ties has been fairly linear, in reality the situation appears to be anything but.


Print Friendly

Reagan’s military buildup had little justification, though the military was rebuilding after the Vietnam disaster. Today, there is almost no case at all for a defense budget increase as big as the $54 billion that the Trump administration wants.


Print Friendly

The very idea of any U.S. president putting his personal financial interests ahead of the U.S. national interest is sufficient reason for the public to be outraged. That such a conflict of interest may affect real U.S. foreign policy decisions is an outrage.


Print Friendly

The new US administration is continuing a state of war that has existed for 16 years.


RightWeb
share