Right Web

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

Restrictionism, Katrina, Bush Foreign Policy Team

Note from Editor: Right Web News depends solely on individuals’ contributions and subscribers. For fear of coming under administration scrutiny or attack by the powerful right web itself, liberal and centrist foundations decline to fund the IRC’s Right Web program, despite complaining that most of the funding priorities–from arms control to sustainable development–are being undermined by the right’s phalanx of institutes, constituency groups, think tanks, and government operatives. To produce an average profile costs about $250 in research, writing, and production time. That’s ten Right Web subscribers at $25 a year, or one donor who can afford $250. Lately, we have been besieged with requests to have profiles done on this or that right web figure or organization. We’d like to oblige, but profiles don’t grow on trees. 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. Thank you.

This Week on the Right

Restrictionism Resurgent

The Conservative Caucus, a pillar of right-wing politics in the United States, has joined the anti-immigrant bandwagon. For them and other right-wing stalwarts, the war on terrorism has morphed into the war on immigrants. Instead of United We Stand bumper stickers, Howard Phillips’ Conservative Caucus is distributing free Protect America bumper stickers to its anti-big government and social conservative constituents.

With the immigration issue, Phillips, who serves as chairman of the New Right organization founded by Richard Viguerie in 1974, is attempting to revive the backlash populism of the 1970s that turned against liberals and progressives—the “liberal establishment” in the 1970s and 1980s. Phillips is campaigning to collect 10 million signatures in support of the Conservative Caucus’ “Protect America—No Amnesty” drive—as part of an effort to “stop Congress and the President from granting amnesty to 10 million illegal aliens.”

Group Watch Profile: Conservative Caucus

Right Web Analysis: Politics and Ideologies of Anti-Immigrant Forces

Another core right-wing group not formerly known for its anti-immigrant focus that is joining the restrictionists bandwagon is the Mountain States Legal Foundation. In a recent mailing, the legal foundation, which generally focuses on private enterprise, public lands, and environmental issues, encourages its supporters and others to write a letter to Cong. Tom Tancredo, the leader of the House Immigration Reform Caucus, to support MSLF’s decision to defend Proposition 200 (Protect Arizona Now), the anti-immigrant referendum, taking to task the ACLU and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF) for attempting to have the proposition declared unconstitutional.

Both the Conservative Caucus and Mountain States Legal Foundation take aim at the Mexican government, saying in the case of the CC that the “Mexican government is helping its citizens to illegally invade America” which “in days gone by would have been considered an act of war by a foreign country.” MSLF encourages the United States to withdraw from the UN Commission on Human Rights in retaliation for a statement by a Mexican diplomat that the Mexican government might consider taking the United States before the commission for violating the rights of Mexican immigrants.

Right Web Profile: Immigration Reform Caucus

Featured Analysis

Foreign Policy Aftermath of Katrina

By Jim Lobe (Excerpted from new Right Web analysis at: https://rightweb.irc-online.org/rw/631)

The fact that an unprecedented number of Republican lawmakers have criticized the federal government’s response to the crisis is one indication that the president is headed quickly toward lame-duck status or worse.

“The Bush Era is over,” declared Post political columnist E.J. Dionne Jr., who argued that the “source of Bush’s political success was his claim that he could protect Americans,” but that that notion was drowned “in the surging waters of New Orleans .”

Others have pointed to the fact that some 7,000 National Guard troops from Louisiana and Mississippi , who could have been available for rescue and security operations at home, were instead deployed to Iraq , along with their equipment, when Katrina hit.

“They should be fighting the effects of flood waters at home—helping people in the communities they know best—not battling Iraqi people who want them to go away,” noted left-wing media analyst Norman Solomon.

Even before Katrina made landfall, however, some of Washington ’s foreign policy elite was worrying that the U.S. difficulties in Iraq were souring many citizens on global engagement—at least in the form pursued by the Bush administration—much as an increasingly unpopular Vietnam War turned the country inward, if not isolationist, beginning in the late 1960s.

Just hours before much of New Orleans was submerged in floodwater, Francis Fukuyama, famous for his 1992 “The End of History,” published a broadside attack in the New York Times on the administration’s decision to take the country to war in Iraq instead of building a more sustainable international coalition focused on destroying al-Qaida, and pressing for a stricter proliferation regime that would have attracted far more domestic and foreign support.

The article, entitled “Invasion of the Isolationists,” noted that Republican support for the Iraq war has been confined to only two sectors—“the neoconservatives (who lack a political base of their own but who provide considerable intellectual firepower) and from … ‘Jacksonian America’—American nationalists whose instincts lead them toward a pugnacious isolationism.”

That Katrina’s wrath was focused on the Deep South, the heartland of the “Jacksonians” (named for former President Andrew Jackson, the brutal Indian fighter who also, coincidentally, expelled the British from the United States at the Battle of New Orleans in 1814) was especially ironic—and potentially politically significant—given the weight Fukuyama gives that constituency in sustaining Bush’s aggressive unilateralism.

“I think there are a lot of southern Republicans who are asking why we’re still spending blood and treasure in Iraq and Afghanistan when we can’t seem to take care of our own at home,” said one Congressional aide this week. “Katrina brings home those kinds of policy choices in a very dramatic and concrete way.”

Indeed, the American Conservative Union (ACU), another Jacksonian bastion that has been very reluctant to criticize the five-billion-dollars-a-month costs of the Iraq War and the nearly 500-billion-dollar annual-defense budget, issued a statement Tuesday warning of a political revolt by its constituents.

“(C)onservatives throughout the United States are increasingly losing faith in the president and the Republican leadership in Congress to adequately prioritize and rein in overall federal spending,” said ACU president David Keene.

He noted that even before Katrina, “American taxpayers have witnessed the largest spending increase under any preceding president and Congress since the Great Depression.”

Anatol Lieven, a foreign policy analyst at the New America Foundation, also foresees foreign policy consequences to Katrina. “I wouldn’t call it withdrawal from the world, but there had already been a certain tailoring of ambition as a result of Iraq ,” he said. “But Katrina will push it further both because of the public mood and the financial constraints.”

Jim Lobe contributes to the Right Web project of the International Relations Center (www.irc-online.org) and is a regular writer for Inter Press Service, which first published this analysis.

See also

Bush Bad Neighbor Foreign Policy Team

A new Right Web chart, linked to hundreds of profiles of right-wing policy institutes, think tanks and foundations, illustrates the array of ways that the Bush Foreign Policy Team forms part of an informal coalition of militarists, social conservatives, and ideologues.

See the Right Web connections that bind such figures as Cheney, Abrams, Libby, Negroponte, Hadley, Cambone, Rice, Bolton, and Gershman together at:
https://rightweb.irc-online.org/charts/fpteam.php

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

Haim Saban is a media mogul and major donor to the Democratic Party known for his hardline stance on Israel and opposition to the Iran nuclear deal.


Nikki Haley, Donald Trump’s first U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, is known for her lock-step support for Israel and is widely considered to be a future presidential candidate.


Brian Hook is the director of policy planning and senior policy advisor to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and is the head of the Iran Action Group.


Josh Rogin is a journalist known for his support for neoconservative policies and views.


Laurence Silberman, a senior justice on the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, was a mentor to controversial Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh and has been a vocal supporter of right-wing foreign and domestic agendas, including the campaign to support the invasion of Iraq.


The People’s Mujahedin of Iran, or MEK, advocates regime change in Iran and has strong connections with a wide range of top political figures in the U.S.


Eli Lake is a columnist for Bloomberg View who has a lengthy record of advocating for aggressive U.S. foreign policies towards the Middle East.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Jobs should not be an excuse to arm a murderous regime that not only appears to be behind the assassination of a U.S. resident and respected commentator but is also responsible for thousands of civilian casualties in Yemen—the majority killed with U.S-supplied bombs, combat aircraft, and tactical assistance.


The contradictions in Donald Trump’s foreign policy create opportunities for both rivals and long-standing (if irritated) US allies to challenge American influence. But Trump’s immediate priority is political survival, and his actions in the international arena are of little concern to his domestic supporters.


While the notion that criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic is decades old, it has been bolstered in recent years, by the campaign to add to the definition of anti-Semitism any criticism that singles Israel out and doesn’t apply the same standard to other countries. The bottom line is that this entire effort is designed not to combat anti-Semitism but to silence criticism. 


Short-term thinking, expedience, and a lack of strategic caution has led Washington to train, fund, and support group after group that have turned their guns on American soldiers and civilians.


Trump is not the problem. Think of him instead as a summons to address the real problem, which in a nation ostensibly of, by, and for the people is the collective responsibility of the people themselves. For Americans to shirk that responsibility further will almost surely pave the way for more Trumps — or someone worse — to come.


The United Nations has once again turn into a battleground between the United States and Iran, which are experiencing one of the darkest moments in their bilateral relations.


In many ways, Donald Trump’s bellicosity, his militarism, his hectoring cant about American exceptionalism and national greatness, his bullying of allies—all of it makes him not an opponent of neoconservatism but its apotheosis. Trump is a logical culmination of the Bush era as consolidated by Obama.


RightWeb
share