Now for one of Congressman Paul’s favorite talking points: the toxic influence of the United Nations. As one might expect, Hammond has a mouthful of complaints about Israel, American unilateralism, and unobserved U.N. resolutions. First, a note on Israel: the problem of undue Israeli influence on American foreign policy can be handled without a full withdrawal from the U.N. Second, the United States couldn’t “bully” the Security Council into supporting a “second resolution” on Iraq (thus, the war had to be carried out without explicit U.N. authorization). And third, a general observation about international law: it’s a budding enterprise. Hammond is correct in saying that “contrary to some attempts to claim such, Resolution 1441 did not authorize the use of force” in Iraq. However, as I’ve observed in an earlier article, the United Nations has had a terrible time enforcing its own resolutions over the past 25 years. Although the U.N. authorized the defense of Kuwaiti sovereignty in 1990, Resolution 687 disallowed Coalition forces from removing Saddam Hussein. This disgraceful capitulation violated Resolution 260 (the Convention on the Prevention and the Punishment of the Crime of Genocide) which mandates signatories to prevent or punish genocide (Saddam Hussein’s wicked, genocidal al-Anfal Campaign left over 180,000 civilians dead). And by failing to authorize the invasion of Iraq in 2003, the U.N. chose not to enforce Resolution 1373 (which requires all states to “prevent and suppress the financing of terrorism”). Saddam Hussein frequently granted the families of Palestinian suicide bombers cash rewards. However, these shortfalls can and should be remedied by a process of scrupulous reform – not the abandonment of the most ambitious project of international cooperation in history. International law may be in its infancy, but it can already boast of a few staggering successes. The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia has indicted a host of ghoulish slaughterers, including Ratko Mladic, Radovan Karadzic, and Slobodan Milosevic. The no-fly-zone over Libya (the merits of which I’ve already discussed) were sanctioned by the U.N. and the Arab League. The establishment of the International Criminal Court has led to the arrest and trial of a host of war criminals. These are unambiguous victories for universal justice.
My naïve perception of federal foreign aid must also be addressed, “He certainly has an innocent understanding of what U.S. foreign aid is all about. He completely ignores the billions in military aid to countries that engage in violations of international law and human rights abuses, such as the $3 billion given annually to Israel, the $1.3 billion given to the military establishment in Egypt, to Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Jordan, Yemen, Bahrain, etc.” If Hammond would take the time to do a little digging, he’d find that I wrote about the “$1.3 billion given to the military establishment in Egypt” just over a month ago (it should be withheld until the military surrenders its political power) and I discussed “…the people who suffer at the hands of their own brutal governments, autocracies propped up by the U.S. government” last April. Hammond feels confident he can pinpoint every one of my political positions after reading a 798-word article. But I digress – he’s kindly given me a lot more to work with.
First, it must be mentioned that there are times when the United States wants a return on its investment, and times when it doesn’t. What “strings” were attached to the naval fleet sent to help the Japanese after they were hit by a devastating tsunami? What’s wrong with the United States expecting Pakistan and Afghanistan to purge their lands of al-Qaeda and the Taliban? They want the aid and we want the assurance. And the article I provided from Medical News Today clearly wasn’t taken seriously. So, I’ll list a few of the “people in Africa” who Hammond scoffs at. To “prevent mother-to-baby HIV transmission,” 16 million pregnancies were monitored, 1.2 million were found to be HIV-positive and given antiretroviral prophylaxis, and 240,000 babies were born without HIV. Care was provided for 10.1 million people affected by HIV/AIDS (4 million of which were children), 2.1 million people received treatment, and 58.3 million people were informed about HIV/AIDS via community programs. This sort of thing is worth your tax dollars.
And it goes on – the above example is merely a sliver of the work done by federal aid agencies. USAID posts its annual performance reports online, and I urge you to read through them. For example, in the 2010 report, the following accomplishments were noted: 157 trainings, conferences, projects, and grants, with the participation of 1,000 scientists from 36 countries, improved pathogen security, laboratory biosafety, and bio-surveillance worldwide, the President’s Malaria Initiative (PMI), protected 30 million people with malaria prevention measures, 1 million more people now receive HIV/AIDS care (bringing the total to11 million), and 68,392 people were trained to work in their respective judicial systems. Again, Congressman Paul’s ugly word creeps into my head – “worthless.”
Beyond the immediate effects of these and other programs, federal foreign aid makes strategic sense. In a recent US News article, “Foreign Aid Programs Are Important for National Security,” Professor Andrew Natsios makes the case for foreign aid from a more pragmatic perspective, “Policymakers in Washington must be able to use aid resources to address global and national problems which affect America’s vital interests – such as efforts to stop disease pandemics, to respond after a tsunami or other natural disaster, to implement agricultural programs to combat destabilizing food price increases, or to help new emerging, but unstable democracies to build competent institutions.” The United States has a wealth of auxiliary interests around the world. When states collapse, they become vulnerable to infiltration by terrorist organizations (we can see this happening now in Nigeria) and can become direct threats to American national security. Economic aid can open up new possibilities for trade and reduce the likelihood of cross-border conflict. And a steady flow of aid can lend the United States moral authority. I agree with Hammond that some aid should be reconsidered, but his cutthroat argument is in keeping with Congressman Paul’s hack-and-slash agenda – forget about reform, just keep getting rid of things. Oh, and yes, people in Africa wouldn’t get medical care. I don’t think this is a fact that deserves a sneer.
If you walk away from this article with nothing, save for my next point, I’ll be satisfied. This is where Jeremy R. Hammond really comes up short, “…there isn’t any evidence Iran has a nuclear weapons program…” In early November of last year, the IAEA published an extremely disconcerting report entitled, “Implementation of the NPT Safeguards Agreement and relevant provisions of Security Council resolutions in the Islamic Republic of Iran.” Within this report, there is a section entitled, “Possible Military Dimensions.” This section discusses a) “…activities related to the development of a nuclear payload for a missile,” b) “Efforts, some successful, to procure nuclear related and dual use equipment and materials by military related individuals and entities,” c) “Efforts to develop undeclared pathways for the production of nuclear material,” d) “The acquisition of nuclear weapons development information and documentation from a clandestine nuclear supply network,” and e) “Work on the development of an indigenous design of a nuclear weapon including the testing of components.” The most recent IAEA report on Iran was released on May 25, and it restated the suspicions in the November report. Congressman Paul and Jeremy Hammond are enthusiastically ignoring the plain facts surrounding the Iranian nuclear weapons program.
Furthermore, Hammond argues that I’m “stupidly suggesting that Ron Paul would give Iran an American ‘blessing’ to develop nuclear weapons, a ridiculous strawman argument which just goes to show that either he has never actually listened to what Ron Paul has had to say about the matter or he just doesn’t care to be honest with his readers (take your pick).” I’ll appeal to the readers directly: this is the video I posted to back up my argument. Please try to actually watch it this time. Congressman Paul has promised to remain neutral whether or not Iran gets a nuclear weapon. He can understand why they want it and he’s prepared to let them have it (“blessing” simply means “approval” in this case). Hammond continues to misrepresent the truth even in the face Congressman Paul’s own words.
On the subject of Iraq, Hammond lists a series of American blunders and crimes over the past 30 years. For example, the United States gave Saddam Hussein funds, equipment, and logistical support during the Iran-Iraq war – a substantial portion of which was later used to conduct a nauseating campaign of genocide and plunder against the Kurds. President George H.W. Bush promised to abandon Kuwait to Saddam Hussein in 1990 (not President Bill Clinton, as Hammond erroneously states). The blackened hillsides of northern Iraq and sprawling wetlands of southern Iraq were the sites of mass carnage at the end of the Gulf War – after the peace treaty had been signed. American forces held back as Iraqi army helicopters sprayed opposition forces with lead and kerosene. And after Saddam Hussein blackened the sky with oil fires in Kuwait and mercilessly committed an entire catalogue of the most heinous crimes imaginable, he was left in power and the Iraqi people were punished with the slow, cruel decay of sanctions.
And this is the status quo Jeremy Hammond and Congressman Paul would have adhered to.
The decision to reverse the madness of this policy was considered in 1998 and finally made in 2003. It was a weighty responsibility and it’s been ineptly managed, but it was the only decent course. American complicity with Saddam Hussein’s crimes coupled with its willingness to leave him alone and punish the Iraqi population with sanctions made for an immoral, unsustainable jumble. Saddam Hussein and his loyalists flagrantly and repeatedly violated the NPT, aided terrorists (Abu Nidal, Abu Abbas, and Palestinian suicide bombers), invaded two neighboring states, and committed genocide, mass murder, and incalculable crimes against humanity on Iraqi soil. Before the invasion in 2003, there were already large no-fly-zones scattered across Iraq and the religious factions were hurtling toward a civil war. This is the folly of Congressman Paul’s thinking – not only is he indifferent to the plight of the most threatened people on earth; he can’t even support the rectification of past American injustices. The Iraq war, for all its flaws, was an attempt to claim responsibility for our actions and correct them. Congressman Paul trumpeted the line of stubborn self-interest and reaction on Iraq.
So, Mr. Hammond, you intentionally misrepresented my argument, neglected the facts about Congressman Paul’s support for the war in Afghanistan, blamed the United States for the crimes of al-Qaeda, trivialized the successful NATO campaign in Kosovo, made wildly unsubstantiated remarks about the civil wars in Libya and Syria, falsely accused the United States of “siding” with al-Qaeda, offered rash, nonsensical courses of action for handling the United Nations and federal foreign aid, lied about the Iranian nuclear weapons program, failed to watch an enlightening two-and-a-half-minute video on your hero’s position (or misunderstood plain English), and equated the American follies in Iraq with the American-led liberation of Iraq. But I must thank you. You’re the vicar of the venomous, illogical, and overconfident Ron Paul revolutionaries – and it shows.
Read Foreign Policy Journal editor Jeremy R. Hammond’s reply to Matt Johnson here.
This isn’t an article about anything except an argument full of misconceptions most likely on both sides. Decide if you want to contribute journalism or a gossip column… Either that or have a Facebook argument with each other.
This guy is the type, if drafted, would be a coffee runner for the generals at CENTCOM.
Don’t you hate a chicken hawk..
I can not believe this was actually published. You took exception to one bloggers comments and wrote an article about it? Seriously? I read one paragraph and scrolled to the bottom to post my comments which I have never done before. This is pure trash. Part of being an American is having the right to free speech whether you agree with the speaker or not. Libertarians understand this. Obviously you are not one. I wonder how much you made off of this piece of garbage. Oh wait, or do you write from home and collect your checks from the gov’t (us taxpayers). Try again.
Here’s a good glimpse at our insane foreign policy which puts our safety at risk and in bankrupting our nation:
http://youtu.be/wQs5hoHW_Qc
Sounds like a teen age rantt. Honestly, I have to,look elsewhere for some reliable, objective info. Oh for a mature objective jornalist.
Matt, you need to wake up. The cost of the wars have bankrupted the nation and now we are in the midst of a debt crisis which could lead to a dollar crisis.
Eventually the printing presses will have to stop. As a country we borrow 40 cents on every dollar we spend. Admiral Mullen has stated that our national debt is a threat to our national security.
You seem to want to paint anybody that just does not just accept the neocon point of view as an extremist. Regardless of that argument, the simple fact of the matter is the country can no longer afford the current foreign policy and spending. Until the Republican party wakes up and realizes that military and overseas spending is just as harmful to our long-term financial health as a country we are in big trouble. You just choose to live in your poli sci educated bubble and ignore history. A military is only great, when you have a country on sound financial ground. Empires crumble because of a financial system collapse.
This is not an extremist point of view, but a point of view based on a simple concept called math.
Way to go Ken. You have describe the true reality. As the old car repair commercial used to say, “you can pay me now, or………. you can pay me later? Unfortunately, the longer you wait the greater the problem and maybe not reversible. Cancer doesn’t disappear because you ignore it and wish it away, you have to cut it out if you want to be cured.
Government continues to run up mountains of debt, undeterred by reality
Military continues to engage in multiple foreign wars, undeterred by reality
Media continues to support both irrationalities, undeterred by reality
Go Ron Paul and the Liberty Movement.
Matt Johnson graduated from the University of Kansas in 2011 with a degree in political science. He’s currently pursuing a master’s degree
Just lost a lot of respect for the level of intellectual education at University of Kansas.
Matt, maybe you should have mentioned the reality of the U.S. Constitution.
You know the one that our military also Presidents as well as our U.S. foreign policy makers are suppose to honor and promise to protect and defend.
I agree with Kane VonDoom response. Seems like a Facebook/MySpace cat fight.
Keep it going Matt, clearly you’ve hit a nerve.
yes, his own.
did paul not vote to get bin laden?, rather than the invation of afganastan. plus you really need to visit kosovo if you think we made a great success, seeing the chaos first hand will be more bennificial to you than studying your masters degree.
Romney is a Mormon,he will lose miserably.Oh Im sorry what was the article about??Nevermind I didnt read more than the first paragraph anyway.Maybe you could do Oragami or Finger-painting, just do not write,this is 3-5 minute Ill never get back.
I’m embarrassed to share my name with you.
This hack-job of an article exemplifies everything that is wrong with the mainstream media today.
Election fraud has been committed @ the highest level and judging by all indications, electronic voting machines accross the country appear to be rigged. Couple that with the corrupt two-party system which is only concerned with shoving generic candidates down all of our throats. Yet, the typical cast of media outlets would like for all of us to accept these sham results.. It ain’t happening!
Ron Paul 2012
Thank you, soon our friends and fellow Americans will begin to wake. Lets hope its sooner than later.
Au Contraire:
Sorry Matt Johnson your argument has more holes than my fishing net. At least stay the course, Mr Jeremy R.Hammond graciously raises valid points and you deviate from them. Is that what they taught you at the University of Kansas in 2011, to duck-and-dive, I’d ask for a refund with regards to your degree in political science. Let’s hope your Master’s in the same field will teach you to be 1. Rational, 2. Logical, 3. Reasonable….Good luck and stop wasting our resources Matt Johnson.
Wow Matt I mean yeah you got pwnd by Jeremy’s rebuttal but you didn’t have to jump overboard w/ such a poorly thought out analysis of history in the middle east, which you obviously have only a minor grasp on.
“I didn’t list a theocratic, terrorized Afghanistan as a possibility under President Paul because he supported the invasion in 2001.”
-As far as I am aware, Representative Paul voted for the authority to go after the perpetrators of the 9/11 attack, not in favor of a full military invasion into the country to dominate and reform their political structure [read: westernize afghanistan]. It is widely understood by historians who study the middle east (and by our own CIA) that “blowback” is a real thing. Our meddling in the area over the course of the 20th century encouraged radicals to spring up; the same thing would happen here if foreigners were bombing our friends and neighbors for decades. You have to get your head out of your @55 and have some empathy for these people, though; the world does not revolve around Amer’cuh.
I’m not even going to touch on your other topics, because I feel [correctly] like I’m wasting my “breath” on people like you. You, sir, are part of the problem.
Well written article, I must say though. Makes it hurt a little bit more than you’re able to compose your thoughts so coherently, and yet you’re so rooted in your ideology that you fail to see the appeal of reason and our own constitution. Oh well.
lol… thats 2 strikes Matt… might be time to start looking for a new career.
Ron Paul …and that’s ALL!
PAULBOTS MAD!
catapult the propaganda
your article is very informative and easy to understand it will be very beneficial for users..you can also visit our site to see our content and see our site products…our site is providing different products..i hope you will like.