Editor’s Note: We'd like to call your attention to the "new look" for the IRC's listservs. We're upgrading the way you interact with us, and how your personal information is stored in our systems. This represents the first in a series of changes we'll be making to our website and electronic products. More will be coming over the next few months and we hope it makes reading our emails as well as accessing our materials on the website a more enjoyable experience. As always, we appreciate your reactions, suggestions, and comments. As you might expect, making these changes as well as making our material available continues to be expensive, and we ask those who are able to make a contribution to support IRC’s work. Thanks to the recipients of Right Web News who have become IRC members or have paid the $25 suggested subscription price for this service. Right Web depends exclusively on the support of subscribers, IRC members, and individual donors. For those who haven’t become IRC members or subscribers, please consider doing so today--by clicking http://www.irc-online.org/donate.php for secure donations, including Pay Pal.

This Week on the Right

Nuclear Warrior Replaces John Bolton as Arms Control Chief
By Tom Barry

(Excerpted from Right Web analysis, first published by Inter Press Service and found in its entirety at: http://rightweb.irc-online.org/analysis/2005/0506joseph1.php.)

The top U.S. government official in charge of arms control advocates the offensive use of nuclear weapons and has deep roots in the militarist political camp.

Moving into the old job of John Bolton, the administration's hard-core unilateralist nominee to be the next U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Robert G. Joseph is the right-wing's advance man for counter-proliferation as the conceptual core of a new U.S. military policy.

Within the administration, he leads a band of counter-proliferationists who--working closely with such militarist policy institutes as the National Institute for Public Policy (NIPP) and the Center for Security Policy (CSP)--have placed preemptive attacks and weapons of mass destruction at the center of U.S. national security strategy.

Joseph replaced John Bolton at the State Department as the new undersecretary of state for arms control and international security affairs.

U.S. security strategy, according to the new arms control chief, should “not include signing up for arms control for the sake of arms control. At best that would be a needless diversion of effort when the real threat requires all of our attention. At worst, as we discovered in the draft BWC (Biological Weapons Convention) Protocol that we inherited, an arms control approach would actually harm our ability to deal with the WMD threat.”

Before the Sep. 11, 2001 attacks, proponents of national missile defense and a more “flexible” nuclear defense strategy focused almost exclusively on the WMD threat from “competitor” states such as Russia and especially China, and from ”rogue” states such as Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and North Korea.

Joseph and other hard-line strategists advocated large increases in military spending to counter these threats while paying little or no attention to the warnings that the most likely attack on the United States and its armed forces abroad would come from non-state terrorist networks.

Instead of advocating improved intelligence on such terrorist networks like al-Qaeda, which had an established record of attacking the United States, militarist policy institutes such as NIPP and CSP focused almost exclusively on proposals for high-tech, high-priced items such as space weapons, missile defense, and nuclear weapons development.

After 9/11 Joseph and other administration militarists quickly placed the threat from terrorism at the centre of their threat assessments without changing their recommendations for U.S. security strategy.

Joseph points to Iran and North Korea, as well as China, as the leading post-Cold War missile threats to the U.S. homeland. Typical of strategists who identify with the neoconservative political camp, Joseph continually raises the alarm about China, alleging that China is the “country that has been most prone to ballistic missile attacks on the United States.”

Arms control chief Joseph is a new breed of militarist who believes that in a world where weapons of mass destruction may be proliferating, it behooves the United States to bolster its own WMD arsenal and then use it against other proliferators.

Tom Barry is policy director of the International Relations Center (online at http://www.irc-online.org) and directs its Right Web program.

Featured Profiles

There are hawks, and then there are the crazed hawks--the ones who get so carried away with their war scenarios that nuclear warfare seems like a perfectly reasonable strategic response to perceived threats. Invariably, this type of hawk has never actually fought in any war. A tightly knit circle of these chickenhawks has nested in the Bush administration.

∙ Robert Joseph--the Counterproliferationist
Arms control chief Joseph is a new breed of militarist who believes that in a world where weapons of mass destruction may be proliferating it behooves the United States to bolster its own WMD arsenal and then use it against other proliferators.

Right Web Profile Robert Joseph

∙ Planning Nuclear War
The Deterrence Concepts Advisory Panel was established by the Bush administration to oversee production of the president's Nuclear Posture Review, which is a classified study outlining the country's plans and strategies vis-à-vis its nuclear arsenal. Tapped to chair the panel was Keith Payne, a hawkish nuclear policy analyst who heads the National Institute for Public Policy (NIPP).

Right Web Profile Deterrence Concepts Advisory Panel

∙ Bunker Busting Brain
Linton Brooks and the National Nuclear Security Administration are involved in efforts to develop so-called bunker-busting nuclear bombs, including the proposed Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator Weapon--and, according to one respected critic, “coming up with all the crazy ideas” about how the U.S. military can use nuclear weapons.

Right Web Profile Linton Brooks

∙ Nuclear Enthusiast as Top National Security Official
J.D. Crouch, a virulent nationalist, enthusiast of nuclear weapons, and Christian-right adherent, has recently become the right-hand man of National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley. Before serving as Ambassador to Romania, his previous job [in the Bush administration], he was an assistant secretary of defense for international security policy. In this role, Crouch served as a point person for Pentagon nuclear weapons programs.

Right Web Profile J.D. Crouch II

∙ Nuclear Think Tank
Since its creation in 1981, the National Institute on Public Policy (NIPP) has established itself as a key policy institute in the firmament of the right’s ever-expanding constellation of counter-establishment groups. Leaving aside the question of whether it is possible to provide “high-quality” or “cogent” analysis about NIPP’s favorite subjects--strategic use of nuclear weapons and the construction of hypothetical missile shields--this small policy institute in Fairfax, Virginia, has certainly had a significant impact on U.S. policy.

Right Web Profile National Institute for Public Policy

Letters From Our Readers
(Editor's Note: We encourage feedback and comments, which can be sent for publication through our feedback page, at: http://rightweb.irc-online.org/form_feedback.html. Thank you.)

Re: The Immigration Debate

I am a leftist. American leftists--real American leftists, that is--like taking money out of the pockets of rich people, business owners and investors, and putting it in the pockets of working American citizens. That is a fundamental tenet of leftism. If you are against that, then you ain’t no leftist.

Mass immigration increases the supply of labor, and therefore decreases wages. Period.

Thus, mass immigration takes money out of the pockets of working American citizens, especially blue-collar Americans, and puts it in the pockets of rich people, business owners, and investors--and non-American citizens. If you are FOR mass immigration, then you are AGAINST working American citizens. And you ain’t no leftist. End of story. And the race guilt thing ain’t working on me. You faux-liberal elite are nothing but another mask for neoliberal policies.

- Randy Smith

Re: The Immigration Debate

It is disingenuous for you to call Arizonans racists for wanting to control their borders. You are using Americans' sensitivity to racial issues in an old political correctness tactic to demonize and silence people that don't agree with you. Your sweeping condemnations betray your agenda. Perhaps you should turn that judgmental microscope upon your own motives and feelings on race. That is if you have the honesty and courage to do so.

- tcartner@concentric.net

Re: American Israeli Political Affairs Committee

There is no question that the pro-Israel lobby is perhaps the most powerful and interest group in Washington, and your organization is to be commended for pointing this out. The problem with discussing the power of the pro-Israel lobby is that it has anti-Semitic overtones: The political base of the pro-Israel lobby is firmly rooted in the American Jewish community, and any allusion to the power of organized American Jewry can easily to be misconstrued as a reference to the alleged "excessive influence" Jews exert over American policy in the Middle East.

Of course, the Jewish community is not politically monolithic, even on the issue of Middle East. There are any number of American Jews, not to mention Israelis, who are vehemently critical of the Israeli position in the peace process; and there are any number of Gentiles who support the Israeli position. But the pro-Israel lobby has been able to successfully represent itself as the voice of the Jewish community, making any allusion to the power of the interest group tantamount to feeding the anti-Semitic stereotype of Jews having "excessive influence" over American policy in the Middle East . This makes any discussion of the predominant role domestic politics plays in American policy in the Middle East a politically sensitive issue, which prevents a full comprehension of the political dynamics of Middle East policymaking in the United States.

- Nicholas Laham

Re: The Anti-Christian, Christian Party

Howard Dean has received a great deal of unfair criticism for calling the Republicans a “pretty much white Christian party.” Dean was actually far too mild in his comments and his description of the Republican Party in regards to their narrow demographic and ideological base.

The Republicans calling themselves Christian are promoting an essentially anti-Christian agenda. While these so-called “Christian Right” political leaders claim to speak for the Christians of America, they are actually speaking only for a small minority of Christians who are placing Bush Republicanism above the teachings of Jesus Christ.

I am a Southern, white, Christian male. I am a fairly conservative Democrat. I completely oppose the entire Republican agenda because my Christian faith and values are deeply offended by the greed and intolerance of Bush Republicanism.

Dean should not give the Republicans the benefit of exclusive use of the Christian label for an essentially anti-Christian political message. Real Christians love the poor and look down on anyone with a political agenda designed to benefit the wealthiest of the wealthy. The invasion of Iraq based on lying to the voters and deceiving our elected lawmakers is hardly the behavior of good Christians.

The politicization of the Christian church has benefited the Republican Party instead of the Christian church. It is an insult to many real Christians to call the attack on the Separation of Church and State a pro-Christian political agenda. Our Founding Fathers advocated this measure almost universally to protect both the government and our Churches. Politics and money are corrupting many churches--especially those led by so-called “Christian Right” preachers.

- Stephen Crockett, co-host of Democratic Talk Radio

If you would like to see our variety of free ezines and listservs, please go to: http://www.irc-online.org/lists/.
To be removed from this list, please email rightweb@irc-online.org with "unsubscribe Right Web."