Right Web

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

America’s Africa Misadventure; the Forgotten American Coalition; Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week; the

FEATURED ARTICLE

America’s Africa Misadventure
By Najum Mushtaq

In a region where a higher level of U.S. engagement is long overdue and should be welcomed by all quarters, the new U.S. Africa Command (Africom) has elicited widespread suspicion. Given its emphasis on the use of military power and its interventionist framework, Africom will in all likelihood be counterproductive for U.S. strategic interests in the region; most African countries see military motives behind Washington’s rhetoric of peace, cooperation, and humanitarianism. Read full story.

FEATURED PROFILES

Akbar Atri
Could this Iranian exile dissident, who champions regime change in Iran through his work with groups like the Committee on the Present Danger, be the "Iranian Ahmed Chalabi"?

David Horowitz
The right-wing commentator known for his diatribes against liberals has designated the last week in October "Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week."

Committee on the Present Danger
Reinvented after 9/11 to promote an expansive "war on terror," this Cold War-era anti-communist outfit has, along with a host of other neoconservative-led pressure groups, recently set its sights on pushing U.S. intervention in Iran.

Forgotten American Coalition
According to its chair, Gary Bauer, the members of this new pro-war letterhead coalition—which include Christian Right leaders, neoconservatives, social conservatives, and hardline nationalists— "believe defeat at the hands of an ideology that worships death would be immoral."

Gary Becker
In his writings, the Nobel laureate and Hoover Institution fellow switches between free-market economic principles and hawkish support for the "war on terror."

ALSO NEW ON RIGHT WEB

Hillary’s "Soft Power"
By Jim Lobe

Potentially the next president, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton espouses the benefits of "soft power" in U.S. foreign relations while leaving open the possibility of using hard power in Iran. Read full story.

Genocide Politics
By Khody Akhavi

While it has been quick to announce "genocide" in other parts of the world, the Bush administration sees a House resolution on the Armenian genocide as a threat to its prosecution of the "war on terror." Read full story.

LETTERS

IRC encourages feedback and comments. Send letters to rightweb@irc-online.org. IRC reserves the right to edit comments for clarity and brevity. Be sure to include your full name. Thank you.

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.”

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Bernard Lewis was a renowned historian of Islam and the Middle East who stirred controversy with his often chauvinistic attitude towards the Muslim world and his associations with high-profile neoconservatives and foreign policy hawks.


John Bolton, the controversial former U.S. ambassador to the UN and dyed-in the-wool foreign policy hawk, is President Trump’s National Security Adviser McMaster, reflecting a sharp move to the hawkish extreme by the administration.


Michael Joyce, who passed away in 2006, was once described by neoconservative guru Irving Kristol as the “godfather of modern philanthropy.”


Mike Pompeo, the Trump administration’s second secretary of state, is a long time foreign policy hawk and has led the public charge for an aggressive policy toward Iran.


Max Boot, neoconservative military historian at the Council on Foreign Relations, on Trump and Russia: “At every turn Trump is undercutting the ‘get tough on Russia’ message because he just can’t help himself, he just loves Putin too much.”


Michael Flynn is a former Trump administration National Security Advisor who was forced to step down only weeks on the job because of his controversial contacts with Russian officials before Trump took office.


Since taking office Donald Trump has revealed an erratic and extremely hawkish approach to U.S. foreign affairs, which has been marked by controversial actions like dropping out of the Iran nuclear agreement that have raised tensions across much of the world and threatened relations with key allies.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Soon after a Saudi-led coalition strike on a bus killed 40 children on August 9, a CENTCOM spokesperson stated to Vox, “We may never know if the munition [used] was one that the U.S. sold to them.”


The West has dominated the post-war narrative with its doctrine of liberal values, arguing that not only were they right in themselves but that economic success itself depended on their application. Two developments have challenged those claims. The first was the West’s own betrayal of its principles: on too many occasions the self interest of the powerful, and disdain for the victims of collateral damage, has showed through. The second dates from more recently: the growth of Chinese capitalism owes nothing to a democratic system of government, let alone liberal values.


Falsely demonizing all Muslims, their beliefs, and their institutions is exactly the wrong way to make Americans safer, because the more we scare ourselves with imaginary enemies, the harder it will be to find and protect ourselves from real ones.


Division in the ranks of the conservative movement is a critical sign that a war with Iran isn’t inevitable.


Donald Trump stole the headlines, but the declaration from the recent NATO summit suggests the odds of an unnecessary conflict are rising. Instead of inviting a dialogue, the document boasts that the Alliance has “suspended all practical civilian and military cooperation between NATO and Russia.” The fact is, NATO was a child of the Cold War, when the West believed that the Soviets were a threat. But Russia today is not the Soviet Union, and there’s no way Moscow would be stupid enough to attack a superior military force.


War with Iran may not be imminent, but neither was war with Iraq in late 2001.


Donald Trump was one of the many bets the Russians routinely place, recognizing that while most such bets will never pay off a few will, often in unpredictable ways. Trump’s actions since taking office provide the strongest evidence that this one bet is paying off handsomely for the Russians. Putin could hardly have made the script for Trump’s conduct at the recent NATO meeting any more to his liking—and any better designed to foment division and distrust within the Western alliance—than the way Trump actually behaved.


RightWeb
share