The facade has changed in Washington DC, the policies are still the same

So says Cindy Sheehan, who hasn’t been fooled enough by Obama’s moderate anti-war stance to not notice the buildup of troops in Afghanistan or the fact that withdrawal from Iraq seems more talk than action. Like she did with Bush, she therefore turned up at Obama’s holiday address to protest. As she explained:

“The reason I am here is because … even though the facade has changed in Washington DC, the policies are still the same,” Sheehan told a handful of journalists, against a backdrop of her “Camp Casey” banner.

She told US peace activists to wake up and protest Obama’s escalation of the war in Afghanistan, and complained that despite the president’s anti-war stance, US troops remained in Iraq.

“We have to realize, it is not the president who is power, it is not the party that is in power it is the system that stays the same, no matter who is in charge.”

“We are here to make the wars unpopular again,” she said.

I’m not sure it’s just Obama’s election that has rocked the (US) antiwar movement to sleep. There also seems to have been a certain amount of normalisation of the war, as the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq dragged on and they became part of the background noise to our lives. What’s more, our own more immediate problems as the economy collapsed have seemingly left little interest in Afghanistan or Iraq with either the public or the newsmedia.

The US withdrawal from Iraq

Let Jon Steward explain it to you:

On a more serious note, it was clear long before he was elected that Obama was never going to be the great anti-war president we would like him to be. He was smart enough to see that the War on Iraq was a bad idea, but he’s still steeped in the ideology of American exceptionalism and has surrounded himself with hardline foreign policy hawks; Robert Gates, Hillary Clinton, undsoweiter.

On domestic policies he may well turn out to be the most leftleaning president of the last thirty years (which isn’t hard) but as post-war history shows, space for “radicalism” at home is often bought through hardline foreign policies. With Obama there will be less of the bull in the chinashop foreign policy practised by Bush and his cronies, there will be more international outreach, more of the sort of stuff Serious Liberals find important, but the fundamentals of America’s foreign policy won’t change. My prediction is that at the end of his term, the US will still have significant forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.

On message

Wherever you start looking, the same excuses crop up over and over again. From the NATO Media Operations Centre’s socalled “master narrative“, as leaked by Wikileaks, come the following points its P.R. people should push when talking about civilian casualties in Afghanistan:

Militants deliberately force civilians into situations where they are either killed or are at risk of being harmed by NATO/ISAF or coalition forces in order to undermine support for NATO/ISAF in Afghanistan and in the International Community.

Militants tactics are to launch attacks from civilian areas, retreat to civilian areas and use civilians as human shields. Militants want civilians caught up in the fighting, because they think this will undermine support for NATO/ISAF in Afghanistan and in the international community and weaken the legitimate Afghan government.

Where have we heard this before?

Spirit of ’68 ’09

Students turn out not to be apathetic proto-consumers shock!

Beginning with a 24-hour occupation at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) on 13 January, the sit-ins spread across the country. Now occupations have been held at the LSE, Essex, King’s College London, Birmingham, Sussex, Warwick, Manchester Metropolitan, Oxford, Leeds, Cambridge, Sheffield Hallam, Bradford, Nottingham, Queen Mary, Manchester, Strathclyde, Newcastle, Kingston, Goldsmiths and Glasgow.

Among the demands of students are disinvestment in the arms trade; the promise to provide scholarships for Palestinian students; a pledge to send books and unused computers to Palestine; and to condemn Israeli attacks on Gaza.

Technology has set these actions apart from those of previous generations, allowing a national momentum to grow with incredible speed. Through the linking up of internet blogs, news of successes spread quickly and protests grew nationwide.

Just three weeks after the first sit-in at SOAS, students gathered yesterday at Birkbeck College to draw up a national strategy. The meeting featured speeches from leaders in the Stop the War movement, such as Tony Benn, George Galloway MP and Jeremy Corbyn MP. There has also been an Early Day Motion tabled in Parliament in support of campus activism.

At the end of the month students from across the country will gather for a national demonstration calling for the abolition of tuition fees, an event that organisers say has rocketed in size following the success of the occupations over Gaza.

Vice chancellors and principals have been brought to the negotiating table and – in the majority of universities – bowed to at least one of the demands. The students’ success means that now there is a new round of protests. On Wednesday two new occupations began at Strathclyde and Manchester universities, and on Friday night students at the University of Glasgow also launched a sit-in.

I predict we’ll be seeing a further radicalisation of students in the coming few years. The people now in uni or starting uni have largely grown up under New Labour, have constantly been disappointed by New Labour, not in the least by the way it pulled up the ladder behind them (grants turned into loans, top-up fees etc). You’d think this would mean students would be more focused on getting a degree than on getting involved in politics, especially now the economy has collapsed, but this generation of students doesn’t toe the line easily.

Their most enduring political memory has to be the build-up to the War on Iraq in which they had been actively involved as well. When the war finally broke out you’ll remember it was the students that went out on strike, including primary and secondary school kids. The greatest political event of their lives was a war that millions of people protested against using all legal options available to them and that ended up happening despite a majority of the country being opposed to it.

The cynical way with which the antiwar protests were disregarded by a political establishment desparate to crawl into George Bush’s arse (or suffering from a messianic complex) has shown this generation that just going on marches is not enough. We’ve seen the results during Israel’s assault on Gaza. By putting pressure on their universities to divest themselves from Israel students took a radical and practical approach to the issue, a way to directly help the Palestinians. It’s a very good sign for the future.

Neocon hubris still causing trouble years later.

redrawn map of the Middle East at the height of neocon illusions

Remember the above map? It was drawn up by Infinite Star Armchair general Ralph “Blood ‘N Guts” Peters back in 2006 in the last flourish of neocon thriumphalism as the way to create a “better Middle East”. The idea apparantly being that since these borders were drawn up almost a century ago by a bunch of European imperialists and have caused a lot of trouble since, what better way to end this trouble by letting another bunch of imperialists, American this time, draw up another set of borders according to their prejudice and idee-fixes, because that worked out so well last time. Also, to stop ethnic cleansing by pre-emptively ethnic cleanse these countries. At the time it seemed like a joke, if a sick one made palatable by the idea that Peters is such a loon he would be too over the top even for Dr Strangelove.

Guess what? The joke’s on us:

NEW YORK: A redrawn map of South Asia showing a truncated Pakistan, reduced to an elongated sliver of land, has sparked fear among military planners in Islamabad who think India and Afghanistan are “colluding” to destroy the only nuclear powered-Muslim nation with the US help, a media report said on Sunday.

The map, first circulated as a theoretical exercise in some American neoconservative circles, has fueled a belief among Pakistanis that what the United States really wants is the breakup of their country, the New York Times reported.

Pakistani people have reason to be paranoid about the USA’s intentions for their country, considering their mutual history, which includes enthusiastic American support for succesive Pakistani dictators, CIA backed meddling in Afghanistan during the eighties which helped destabilise Pakistan as well, not tomention the recent American airstrikes on Pakistan itself. It may look absurd now, but an invasion of Iraq looked absurd too back in the nineties. That Obama will be president in January is no guarantee: Democrats are just as prone to stupid foreign policies: even Carter supported Somoza.

Found via Randy McDonald.