 |
|
FP: Holbrooke had "brief and cordial" exchange with Iranian deputy foreign minister, Clinton says.
NYT: Spanish court weighs torture inquiry for six Bush era officials: Addington, Gonzales, Haynes, Yoo, Bybee and Feith. Seems closely aligned with how Philippe Sands' article speculated such a case could emerge.
AP, out of Baghdad: "Iraq says it will move members of an Iranian opposition group from a camp north of Baghdad to remote areas elsewhere and encourage them to leave the country peacefully. National Security Adviser Mouwaffak al-Rubaie says the strategy is to separate hundreds of members of the People's Mujahedeen Organization of Iran from their militant commanders.
Iraqi forces have taken over security of the group's camp from the Americans and al-Rubaie has warned the exiles their days in Iraq are numbered. Iraq's Shiite-led government has long sought to get rid of the group, branded terrorist by Iraq, Iran and the U.S. Al-Rubaie told reporters Friday the government is also talking to Western countries about taking in nearly a third of the 3,418 members."
In advance of Obama's trip to Europe Tuesday, the White House held a press conference call today with spokesman Robert Gibbs, NSC economic advisor Michael Forman and NSC director of strategic communications Denis McDonough. And while the White House press office may roll their collective eyes at the Washington press corps, on the call today, the second or third question was from a British journalist who asked Gibbs what present Obama had thought to give the Queen, given that there was apparently disappointment about UK prime minister Gordon Brown's receipt of a boxed DVD set from the Obamas on his visit to Washington last month. (Gibbs said that he wasn't going to give away "all the good news" on this call.)
Obama Afghanistan Pakistan announcement.
Here is the White House white paper on US policy to Afghanistan and Pakistan.
David Cloud: the middle ground in an inconclusive war. "...The main new U.S. goal is as constricted and clear-eyed as can be. It is to go after Osama bin Laden and the other remains of al-Qaida hiding along the Afghan-Pakistan border region. Everything else will be secondary. ..."
CSP's Heather Robinson
h/t RK.Elliott Abrams, former deputy national security advisor to President Bush, speaking Saturday morning in Fort Lauderdale at the winter meeting of the Republican Jewish Coalition, said he thinks the Obama administration may be able to successfully employ sanctions against Iran now that oil prices have dropped, especially if President Obama is able to secure cooperation from China and Russia.
However, Abrams predicted friction between Obama and Netanyahu on the issue of Israeli settlements. And he said that if sanctions fail to arrest Iran’s march toward nuclear capability, both Obama and Netanyahu will face a historic decision as to whether to allow “this regime whose stated intention is to destroy Israel” to acquire nuclear weapons.
Abrams, senior fellow for middle eastern studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, said President Obama has a better chance of effectively employing sanctions against Iran than President Bush did due to two factors: the drop in cost of oil and the possibility of increased cooperation from Russia and China.
CBS/Ha'aretz: IAF hits Sudan arms convoy suspected for Hamas. More here and here.
Foreign Policy: "Sources tell Foreign Policy that when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met with Netanyahu at the King David Hotel earlier this month, such was the concern that a certain former Mossad analyst who now serves as Netanyahu's security advisor may pose a counterintelligence problem that, after conferring with an aide, Clinton suggested to Netanyahu that they reduce the number of people in the room. ... Clinton's suggestion was made, sources say, in the hopes that Netanyahu would get the message and excuse Arad from the meeting. What happened instead, sources report, was that Netanyahu dismissed from the meeting Israeli ambassador to Washington Sallai Meridor, who has since announced his resignation. (An account of the meeting previously published on ForeignPolicy.com revealed that Clinton seemed remarkably constrained and tight-lipped during it.) ..."
A Loudoun County man slain while out for an early morning walk with his wife worked as a contractor at the Central Intelligence Agency for several years up until 2000, the CIA confirmed, and investigators said they want to meet with agency officials today to learn more about the nature of his work.
The sheriff said his officers have not yet determined a motive for Sunday’s attack, in which William Bennett, 57, was killed and his wife, Cynthia, 55, was critically injured. The assault may have been random, but deputies have not ruled out the possibility that they were targeted.
The University of Virginia Miller Center and PBS' McNeill/Lehrer is hosting an Iran debate tonight. Elliot Abrams and Joshua Muravchik will argue in a support of a resolution: "America cannot tolerate a nuclear Iran and must go to any lengths to prevent it.” Martin Indyk and Karim Sadjadpour argue the opposition to it.
Slate's Fred Kaplan: CT or COIN? Obama must choose this week between two radically different Afghanistan options.
Update: A Washington South Asia hand friend responds to Fred's piece: "The way to look at this is--there are three different wars going on in the region... a counter-insurgency in Afghanistan... a counter-terrorist campaign against al-Qaida in the tribal areas of Pakistan... and another counter-insurgency going on against the likes of Mullah Fazlullah and Baitullah Mahsud, mostly confined to the tribal areas and NWFP but increasingly seeping into the Punjab as well. Kaplan's kind of arguing that you have to pick one--but the real question is how to line up these three wars so that they're all mutually supportive, like lining up tumblers in a lock. This is a problem for both intel and policy, because different architectures have sprung up around each one of these wars and reconciling them is... a chore, to say the least. But that doesn't mean it can't be done!"
Phony populism. Check out veteran investigative reporter Jim Ridgeway's reporting on fiscal/retirement issues at his new site, unsilent generation.
FLC: Damascus will shortly inform Washington of reopening of U.S. school, cultural center.
Newsweek: "Over objections from the U.S. intelligence community, the White House is moving to declassify—and publicly release—three internal memos that will lay out, for the first time, details of the 'enhanced' interrogation techniques approved by the Bush administration for use against 'high value' Qaeda detainees. The memos, written by Justice Department lawyers in May 2005, provide the legal rationale for waterboarding, head slapping and other rough tactics used by the CIA. One senior Obama official, who like others interviewed for this story requested anonymity because of the issue's sensitivity, said the memos were "ugly" and could embarrass the CIA. Other officials predicted they would fuel demands for a "truth commission" on torture."
NYT: Karadzic claims Holbrooke promised him immunity. I was standing with a pack of reporters outside of the hotel in Pale, Srpska in the summer of 1996 when Holbrooke negotiatied Karadzic's agreement (.pdf) to withdraw from political/public life, but don't know if Holbrooke offered Karadzic any such thing in return (Holbrooke denies it); and even if he had, why or whether the ICTY would have to honor it. Presumably Holbrooke or anyone else doesn't have the power to offer a get out of jail free card under int'l law. Comments a former senior US officer who served in the Balkans: "It is my sincere belief that Karadzic should spend the rest of his useless life in a very small cell. I don't know what Holbrooke promised him but it would have no bearing on the ICTY's ability to prosecute. Holbrooke had no authority to promise immunity to anybody for anything."
Blake Hounshell on the Supreme Leader's "predictable" response to Obama's overture.
More from Daniel Brumberg, Farideh Farhi, and Juan Cole.
Farhi: "The bottom line is: 'Our nation dislikes it when you again proclaim 'talks with pressure'; we talk to Iran while we pressure them as well - threat and inducement. You cannot talk to our nation this way.'"
Ha'aretz: IDF killed civilians in Gaza under loose rules of engagement.
"At first the specified action was to go into a house. We were supposed to go in with an armored personnel carrier called an Achzarit [literally, Cruel] to burst through the lower door, to start shooting inside and then ... I call this murder ... in effect, we were supposed to go up floor by floor, and any person we identified - we were supposed to shoot. I initially asked myself: Where is the logic in this?
"From above they said it was permissible, because anyone who remained in the sector and inside Gaza City was in effect condemned, a terrorist, because they hadn't fled. I didn't really understand: On the one hand they don't really have anywhere to flee to, but on the other hand they're telling us they hadn't fled so it's their fault ... This also scared me a bit. I tried to exert some influence, insofar as is possible from within my subordinate position, to change this. In the end the specification involved going into a house, operating megaphones and telling [the tenants]: 'Come on, everyone get out, you have five minutes, leave the house, anyone who doesn't get out gets killed.'
Foreign Policy: Generals Odierno and Petraeus forcefully endorse Chris Hill's swift nomination for Iraq ambassador, through Secretary Gates' chief spokesman. See the update to my piece here:
More from Democracy Arsenal's Max Bermann, Petraeus v. McCain.Secretary Gates' chief spokesman Geoff Morrell told The Cable Thursday: “Generals Odierno and Petraeus have come out very publicly and very forcefully in support of Amb. Hill’s nomination. I know they support it. They know him from previous assignments, they like him, they believe he is well suited to the job and are anxiously awaiting his confirmation because they do need help, frankly. ... Everybody involved with Iraq wants to find a way to replicate that arrangement"--the effective interaction between Generals Odierno and Petraeus and former US ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker. "So that you have an even yoke that on the civilian/diplomatic side and on the military side which share the burden and are working together to get the job done. It’s what’s in the best interest of the Iraqi people and the American people.
“With regards to [Senate] members who have issue with him, I would say this," Morrell added. “We appreciate their steadfast support of the Iraq mission. But you can’t be bullish in support of that mission and not send an ambassador in a timely fashion.”
Via Tom Ricks, Ahmad Rashid on Pakistan divided against itself (.pdf, p. 7).
Milt Bearden writes in The National Interest on what now in Afghanistan:
the president has acknowledged that the two countries are one theater of conflict. This is progress.
But the first problem with U.S. planning begins with the idea that increasing America’s military footprint is enough. Campaign rhetoric about ramping up U.S. troop presence by another three brigades is being challenged, and properly so. Former commander of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan, General Dan McNeill, in a moment of candor last June, estimated that it would take four hundred thousand troops to pacify Afghanistan. He may have been right. And those numbers are not possible. Critics also point out that a fundamental redefinition of the mission is more important than troop numbers. If the troop increase means more of the same type of operations, there will be no advantage gained. More gunfighters means more gunfights, and there has never been evidence to suggest that outsiders can wear down an Afghan insurgency through rising body counts. Even sending in additional special-operations forces has its problems, since there is a growing recognition in military circles that far too many U.S. Special Forces elements have been “rangerized”—that they may be less focused on working with Afghans than on hunting them down. Unless we can get some old-fashioned special-forces teams into Afghanistan working on new approaches—helping rebuild the traditional system of rule and simply providing the security for the Afghans to start doing more for themselves—a troop increase will probably accomplish very little other than replacing the NATO troops that, in any case, will be pulling out over the next two years. It should not be forgotten that the USSR maintained one hundred twenty thousand troops in Afghanistan for nearly a decade, and still lost. Perhaps Defense Secretary Robert Gates had it right when in his January 27 testimony on Capitol Hill he said that “if we set ourselves the objective of creating some sort of central Asian Valhalla over there, we will lose. . . .”
Then there is the question of how to deal with the militias. Discussion of arming Afghanistan’s militias has led to little in the way of consensus. Many Afghans and some old Afghan hands say it won’t work because it has never worked before, that it will lead to more conflict and that militias armed by outsiders can never be controlled. Others say it is worth a try. Both may be right.
The militia solution always surfaces when a foreign enterprise in Afghanistan faces failure; and, yes, militias armed by outsiders have ended up fighting each other in the past. During the 1980s militias repeatedly turned on their Soviet armorers, or otherwise betrayed them. Indeed, Soviet-armed militias in eastern Afghanistan became quartermasters for the CIA, selling their weapons to the mujahideen for hard CIA cash, while saving the CIA huge transportation costs to boot. The Soviets paid the freight.
But the United States, inevitably, will arm some militias. The question will be how many and where and how? ...
Wash Times: Netanyahu national security advisor Uzi Arad still unsure about U.S. visa over alleged counterintelligence risk. But sources lower down in the piece think somehow a visa will come through.
NYT: Cuomo to subpoena AIG for bonuses. WP: Tidal wave of rage at AIG. More.
Is there a criminal investigation of AIG yet?
Update: A reader responds:
A colleague writes, "What did Tim Geithner know and when did he know it? Especially re payments to foreign banks. Big issue."IMHO you're asking the right question. Someone in the southern district of Manhattan [prosecutors' office] should be going after these guys on fraud and conspiracy, with all kinds of threats targeted at recovery of the bonuses, not to mention some time colocated with Bernie. Why should a Ponzi scheme perpetrated by an insurance company be treated any differently from one perpetrated by an individual?
Unwinding this will be a forensic exercise in any case. We own 80% of them, so why pretend that we (aka the federal government) needs to negotiate with the current "management"?
I'm willing to cut Timmy G some slack, more so than a lot of commentators I've read, but he needs to get help in switching gears from begin a go-along/get-along behind the scenes regulator to being a pol. I'd be very interesting in the advice Axelrod is giving on this one.
Wired: U.S. Military confirms Iranian drone shoot-down over Iraq. "Initially, coalition press officials would neither confirm nor deny the incident. But the presence of Iranian drones over Iraq -- and the confirmation of the shoot-down -- raise new questions about Tehran's unmanned aircraft capabilities and its intentions."
HRW on Saberi:
Iranian officials are unlawfully detaining the Iranian-American journalist Roxana Saberi by holding her without charge, Human Rights Watch said today. Saberi has been in detention without charge since January 30, 2009, in the political prisoners' section of Tehran's Evin prison. Human Rights Watch called on the Iranian authorities to immediately release the journalist they promised to free, or immediately bring her before a judge to review her detention in a public hearing, with the power to order her release.
Saberi, a 31-year-old journalist whose work was broadcast for networks including NPR, BBC, and FOX, was the Tehran bureau chief for Feature Story News (FSN) when she was detained in January. Her father, Reza Saberi, says that authorities alleged that she had purchased wine, against the law in Iran, a year ago. However, after six weeks of detention, she has not been charged with any crime.
"The constitution of Iran guarantees free speech, yet the government continues to detain journalists without charge for doing their jobs," said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. "In fact, Iran continues to be one of the biggest jailers of journalists worldwide."
IPF's Mideast Pulse: Kadima come back? Attila Somfalvi just reported that senior Kadima and Likud officials, including Benyamin Netanyahu and Tzipi Livni, have been secretly negotiating a government coalition in recent days. Is Kadima back in the government?
NYT: Israel stance was undoing of intelligence pick. More from the Post.
FP: "A U.S. official who asked for anonymity said that the White House had not pulled the plug. Freeman, the source said, decided that the criticism was never going to go away, and that therefore he couldn't do the job. [...] By the time Freeman spoke with Blair Tuesday, it had become clear to both men that Freeman's presence at the NIC would engender sharp attacks on anything the intelligence community said, and that the credibility of the intelligence product would suffer, not be enhanced. Under the circumstances, Freeman felt that the best thing for the NIC and the country was to withdraw."
Fred Kaplan: "But a debate on the merits is beside the point. Once Freeman became a lightning rod—once his impending job became about him and some of the things he's said since leaving government for the world of think tanks—President Obama had no choice but to abort the appointment. Otherwise, he would have faced not only a struggle over personnel but a never-ending series of struggles over policy."
AFP:: Italy's constitutional court says state secrets breached in CIA rendition case. Prosecutor Armanda Spataro tells CQ's Jeff Stein the Abu Omar trial will go on.
JTA: Former Aipac official suing organization over alleged defamation:
Steve Rosen, the former AIPAC foreign policy chief charged with receiving classified information, is suing his former employer for defamation, JTA has learned.
Rosen filed a civil action March 2 in the District of Columbia Superior Court seeking $21 million from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, its officers at the time of his dismissal in 2005 and an outside spokesman hired to deal specifically with the case. ...
The core of the case is the repeated claims by Patrick Dorton, the outside spokesman for AIPAC named in the suit, that Rosen and Weissman were fired because they "did not comport with standards that AIPAC expects of all its employees.” ...
WP: US, Israel at odds over Iran threat.
Also from the Post, another key official also running for president.
Rothkopf: Freeman forced out.
More from James Fallows, Andrew Sullivan, Ben Smith, Newsweek, Pincus, and me here.
More from James Besser.
Nico Pitney: "Christina Romer, at a speech at the Brookings Institution Monday afternoon, appeared to give support to critics of Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner who say that he is wrongly treating the economic collapse as a 'liquidity crisis' when it is instead a crisis of solvency in the banking system brought on by a collapse in asset prices."
Reuters: Iran lacks weapons-grade highly enriched uranium and has not yet made a decision on whether to produce any, U.S. intelligence officials told Congress Tuesday.
FP's David Rothkopf analyzes the mounting evidence that Barack Obama is obsessed with him.
CQ's Tim Starks: DNI Blair defends NIC pick Freeman in letter to lawmakers.
In another break with his predecessor’s expansive view of executive power, President Barack Obama is ordering federal agencies to disregard so-called signing statements where George W. Bush disagreed with bills he signed.
Bush used signing statements to express differences with about 1,200 items in legislation passed during his eight years in office. In many instances, he told federal agencies they should ignore the offending provisions.
However, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Monday that Obama had issued a memorandum essentially nullifying Bush’s signing statements by telling agencies not to rely on them without consulting with the Justice Department.
But as with other distinctions Obama has drawn with Bush, the new president is not making an entirely clean break. He is reserving his right to issue signing statements when he sees fit, though he is pledging to be more sparing in his use of the tactic. ...
Trita Parsi blogs at the Israel Policy Forum, on what he fears is the path back to square one. "...Failure to make progress on the Palestinian or Iran front may lead the Obama administration to focus on a Syrian deal instead. The argument reads that Israel is ready to make concessions to Syria in return for a break in the Syrian-Iranian axis, which will leave Iran weaker and more isolated. Consequently, the argument reads, this will give Israel greater leeway to accept compromises on the Palestinian front and Iran's weaker position will provide Washington with greater leverage that can result in a negotiation outcome that is more acceptable to Israel. It all sounds great in theory. The problem is, however, that there is nothing neither new nor comprehensive about this approach. It's the same piecemeal, sequential approach that has failed so many times before and left Israel with neither peace nor security. ..."
Ha'aretz: Avigdor Lieberman likely to get indicted on corruption charges, police sources say. More.
FP's David Rothkopf:
... The more I've thought about [Gordon Brown's] trip, the more I've realized that the reason he got the bum's rush from Obama was not that he is more boring than the snooker reruns that used to be so popular on British TV.
Nope, it's that Obama & Co. did not want to be too exposed to questions about what they would be doing at the April 2 G20 summit in London or what they thought of Brown's and other European leaders' bold calls for action to restructure and recapitalize the IMF and the World Bank or to create meaningful new regulatory mechanisms to restore transparency and order and reduce risk in too-complex, house-of-cards global financial markets.
Yet, Larry and Tim and the rest of the gang know that what we have experienced thus far is not only the first truly global economic crisis in history but that its origins...in the meltdown in mortgage-backed-securities markets...that is a symptom of potentially much bigger problems made possible by the structure and flaws inherent in the global derivatives markets which remain-perversely and potentially tragically-the unstable 800 pound gorilla in today's global economy. There is no real solution that will not involve creating global regulatory mechanisms with teeth, mechanisms that may be seen as challenging U.S. institutions (and those of other countries) and thus will be said to be undercutting our sovereignty (when in reality the choice is institutions with zero influence over global events or ones that work, between financial risks to U.S. sovereignty and an international system that actually preserves and extends it in the only way possible). There is no way to contain the contagion of this crisis among the world's poorest nations without stepping up and making a major multi-hundreds of billions of dollars commitment to recapitalizing the IMF and the World Bank...and the only way to do that is to pare away some voting rights from the Euros and pass them on to the Chinese, the Indians, the Brazilians, some Gulf countries and others who are the rising class of donors (or donor-borrowers) of tomorrow. ...
Two years since former FBI official Bob Levinson disappeared after a meeting in Kish Island. From State Department press statement today: "Today marks the two year anniversary of the disappearance of American citizen Robert Levinson, a retired FBI agent who went missing in Iran during a business trip to Kish Island in 2007. On this day, we reiterate our commitment to determining Mr. Levinson’s welfare and whereabouts, and reuniting him with his family. Mr. Levinson is the father of seven children and grandfather of two – his second grandchild was born in his absence. The Levinson family misses him desperately. In December 2007, Mrs. Levinson traveled to Iran - accompanied by her son and sister - where she met with Iranian officials who expressed a willingness to share information about their investigation into her husband’s disappearance with the family. However, to date, no information has been forthcoming. ..."
About those earmarks. A friend notes from Sen. Lindsey Graham's appearance on "Meet the Press" this morning: "'We do need earmark reform,' and then, 60 seconds later when asked about his own 37 earmark requests, and specifically a $950,000 outlay for Myrtle Beach, and whether he can justify his own earmarks, Graham replied: 'I think I should have the ability as a United State senator to direct money back to my state as long as it’s transparent and it makes sense, yes.' There’s a fancy term for directing money back to one’s state, Senator Graham: It’s called 'earmarking.'”
Reuters: Iran says ready to cooperate with U.S. on Afghanistan. "Clinton proposed the conference, which brings in Afghanistan's other neighbours including Pakistan and other players, would take place on March 31."
Ha'aretz: "Avigdor Lieberman, who Thursday emerged as the most likely candidate to replace Tzipi Livni as Israel's foreign minister, intends to demand that Likud Chairman Benjamin Netanyahu grants him 'full autonomy' in the new post, Haaretz has learned." Also interested in the job, Silvan Shalom.
NYT: Palestinian authority pm quits.
Salam Fayyad, the prime minister of the Western-backed Palestinian Authority, on Saturday submitted his government’s resignation, saying he hoped that it would help efforts to form a Palestinian unity government with the Islamic group Hamas.
A statement from his office said the resignation would take effect no later than the end of March.
Over the years, Mr. Fayyad, a political independent and an American-educated economist, who also serves as finance minister, has gained the trust of Washington and the international community. The announcement was bound to raise anxiety, coming just days after international donors pledged about $4.4 billion in economic assistance for the West Bank-based Palestinian Authority and for rebuilding Gaza.
The United States pledged $900 million to the Palestinian Authority, a third of it intended for rebuilding in Gaza after Israel’s recent 22-day military offensive there.
Still, it was not immediately clear whether the resignation would be accepted by the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, who leads Fatah, the mainstream party that is Hamas’s rival.
The Palestinian groups are expected to begin a dialogue in Cairo this week on the details of a unity government. Mr. Abbas told reporters in the West Bank city of Ramallah on Saturday that he had asked Mr. Fayyad to “continue with his work until we see the results” of the talks.
The move was widely seen as a conciliatory gesture to Hamas.
Salam Fayyad, the prime minister of the Western-backed Palestinian Authority, on Saturday submitted his government’s resignation, saying he hoped that it would help efforts to form a Palestinian unity government with the Islamic group Hamas.
A statement from his office said the resignation would take effect no later than the end of March.
Over the years, Mr. Fayyad, a political independent and an American-educated economist, who also serves as finance minister, has gained the trust of Washington and the international community. The announcement was bound to raise anxiety, coming just days after international donors pledged about $4.4 billion in economic assistance for the West Bank-based Palestinian Authority and for rebuilding Gaza.
The United States pledged $900 million to the Palestinian Authority, a third of it intended for rebuilding in Gaza after Israel’s recent 22-day military offensive there.
Still, it was not immediately clear whether the resignation would be accepted by the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, who leads Fatah, the mainstream party that is Hamas’s rival.
The Palestinian groups are expected to begin a dialogue in Cairo this week on the details of a unity government. Mr. Abbas told reporters in the West Bank city of Ramallah on Saturday that he had asked Mr. Fayyad to “continue with his work until we see the results” of the talks.
The move was widely seen as a conciliatory gesture to Hamas. ...
Short takes:
China hunkers down.
Searching for saints in Gomorrah.
AIG bailout beneficiaries include European banks.
Perhaps the simplest -- and certainly the quickest -- way to launch a dialogue with Iran, and the one least likely to play unhelpfully into the upcoming Iranian election, would be to simply stop not talking to Tehran. For nearly 30 years, American diplomats have been limited as to when and where they could speak to their Iranian counterparts. The president could authorize Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to lift this ban. It's that simple: Whether the diplomat is Obama's ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice; special envoy Richard Holbrooke, on a visit to Kabul or Islamabad; former assistant secretary of state Christopher Hill when he gets to Baghdad to replace Ambassador Ryan Crocker; or other U.S. diplomats, all would henceforth be free to engage Iranians as they do representatives of other countries with which the United States has troubled relations.
In this scenario, each American would operate within the limits of his or her existing instructions and responsibilities, as would the Iranians with whom he or she spoke. This is not a formula for negotiating a "grand bargain" addressing all the grievances of both sides or meeting all of each side's needs. Contacts of this limited nature would be unlikely to produce near-term breakthroughs. Eventually, if real progress is to be made, each side would need to establish a privileged, confidential channel through which all issues of interest to both governments could be put on the table. It would be a lot easier to set up and maintain that kind of channel if the principle of direct contacts were established and the practice routine.
Ha'aretz: "U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was critical on Tuesday of the "economic peace" plan of Prime Minister-designate Benjamin Netanyahu and said that an economic initiative without a political solution had no chance to succeed."
Amid reports that U.S. President Barack Obama last month offered in a letter to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev to reconsider plans for U.S. missile defense installations in Poland and the Czech Republic in exchange for Russia withholding assistance to Iran’s long range missile program, sources tell The Cable that the U.S. missile defense program is currently under review.
Among those involved in the U.S. missile defense policy review is Barry Pavel, the NSC senior director on defense who was brought over in the fall from the Defense Department, a source said. Obama administration officials sought to downplay the review.
"What is being reviewed relates to questions of the effectiveness of the system, the cost, which will impact its deployability going forward," said an NSC official. "It's not a big policy review. There are elements that need to be examined, for good governance."
Whereas the Obama administration has publicly discussed that reviews of U.S. policy regarding Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iran are underway, review of U.S. missile defense policy may be more sensitive given that the issue is subject to international negotations at various levels, as Obama's letter to Moscow suggests. ...
From Blake Hounshell and me at Foreign Policy: Mubarak's son slips into Washington.
Politico: US to send two envoys to Syria: Jeff Feltman and Daniel Shapiro.
Re: this interesting piece, a friend notes this from Ignatius last week:
Administration officials don't want to talk about "carrots and sticks," a favorite Bush formulation that the Iranians disliked. But Obama has the same task of balancing positive and negative elements: The administration wants talks, but if Iran continues to reject Security Council demands for controls on its nuclear program, Obama will seek much tougher sanctions.
Obama is working hard to woo Russia as an ally in the diplomatic dance with Iran. When Burns visited Moscow two weeks ago, he brought the message that if Russian pressure can persuade Iran to give up nuclear weapons, that could remove the rationale for U.S. missile defense installations in Eastern Europe. The Russians were "intrigued" but noncommittal, according to one official.
Roger Cohen in the NYT:
I return to this subject because behind the Jewish issue in Iran lies a critical one — the U.S. propensity to fixate on and demonize a country through a one-dimensional lens, with a sometimes disastrous chain of results.
It’s worth recalling that hateful, ultranationalist rhetoric is no Iranian preserve. Avigdor Lieberman, Israel’s race-baiting anti-Arab firebrand, may find a place in a government led by Benjamin Netanyahu. He should not.
Nor should racist demagoguery — wherever — prompt facile allusions to the murderous Nazi master of it.
Wash Times: "The pharmaceutical industry that long has benefited from Sen. Orrin G. Hatch´s legislative efforts has directed large sums of money to a charity he helped found - and still raises money for - while also hiring the Republican lawmaker's son as a lobbyist. [...] The tax form, obtained by The Washington Times, shows that five pharmaceutical companies and the industry's main lobbying group wrote checks in 2007 to the Utah Families Foundation - some as large as $40,000 - that far exceed what they could give publicly to Mr. Hatch´s campaigns. The donations, $172,500 in all, came at the same time that the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) was paying one of Mr. Hatch's sons, Scott, to be its lobbyist in Congress. ..."