Right Web

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

Benador Public Relations

Please note: IPS Right Web neither represents nor endorses any of the individuals or groups profiled on this site.

Benador Public Relations (BPR) is the successor company to Benador Associates, a speakers bureau and PR firm founded by Eleana Benador that played a key role promoting major neoconservative figures during the first George W. Bush administration.

In contrast to Benador Associates, BPR endeavors to avoid controversial political issues. According to its website, “This boutique public relations firm is particularly targeting high end clients worldwide whose activities and interests need the expertise of a professional who understands the sensitivities, needs and expectations of their counterparts in other parts of the world. … Whether you need public relations support or, like in the case of banking institutions, privately enhance your customer relations or develop your activities in another country or continent, and whether you specialize in finance, real estate, industries, the arts, architecture, fashion, health, or others, the reality is that you need someone who truly understands where you are coming from, what your target is and who is committed enough to understand also your partners and serves as your ‘diplomatic representative’ to make you succeed in whatever your goal is.”[1]

Benador announced the launching of BPR in 2007, saying that its “areas of expertise—with absolute exclusion of politics—will include: international finance, with investment banking and infrastructure projects as the main chapters in that field; international real estate; science and culture.” According to a BPR statement, "Ms. Benador announced that in view of the uncertain political situation in America, she is to devote her undivided attention to her new public relations outfit.”[2]

The now-defunct Benador Associates included among its clientele several high profile foreign policy hawks, including Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy, Richard Perle, Michael Ledeen, Michael Rubin, and former CIA director James Woolsey, Max Boot, Rachel Ehrenfeld, Hillel Fradkin, Charles Krauthammer, Richard Pipes, Dennis Prager, Paul Vallely, and Meyrav Wurmser.

Share RightWeb

Please note: IPS Right Web neither represents nor endorses any of the individuals or groups profiled on this site.

Sources

[1]Benador Public Relations, “About,” http://www.benadorpr.com/aboutus.html.

[2]Benador Public Relations, "Announcing the Creation of Benador Public Relations,”November 29, 2007, http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/announcing-the-creation-of-benador-public-relations-59898872.html


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