Somebody – I don’t quite remember who – opined recently that irony might still be with us, albeit just barely. Well, I’m here to tell you that rumors of its demise have not been greatly exaggerated. I’m referring of course to Rumsfeld’s Asia trip. Yes, the “Omega Man” of the Bush administration visited the region with which he is truly obsessed – more so, I’ll wager, than with the middle east. Recall that prior to the 9/11 attacks, there was that somewhat exciting stand-off with China over one of our spy planes, covered with typical disdain right here in Notes. Rumsfeld is a poster child for that faction of the Republican party that still has the 1954 map of Red China tacked up on its situation room wall; the folks that fueled the Wen Ho Lee spy controversy during the Clinton administration, which resulted in a bogus trial-by-media of Lee, incarceration, and subsequent retraction of the most serious allegations. (I forget which genius it was, but one Congressional Republican was so worked up in a lather about the Chinese menace that he fulminated over Clinton state department nominee Bill Lan Lee for some time without realizing he had the wrong Chinese guy.  

While in Singapore, Rumsfeld made some ludicrous statement about China’s military spending, which I believe comes in at around $35 billion U.S. per annum. Last I looked, that’s about eight percent of what we spend annually, if you leave out the intelligence budget and various extras. It should surprise no one that China is spending more on defense than it used to – this is a quite predictable response to our massive increases in military expenditure, particularly our stated intention to deploy “missile defense” (which, in truth, amounts to an offensive capability) along the Pacific rim. There is also a little thing called the Bush doctrine, which incorporates “preventive” (i.e. unprovoked) war and the development of a new generation of nuclear weapons. This has got Russia spending more on its military capabilities as well, which provides yet another stimulus for the Chinese, provoking India and Pakistan to follow suit. You can’t really call this an arms race, since we’re so far in the lead… but it’s something similar. 

As remarkable as this East Asia performance may have been, never has irony been so sorely missed as in the wake of Zarqawi’s death. There was Rumsfeld at the podium, earnestly commenting on how, in all the world, no man had been responsible for the deaths of more innocent civilians than the late Jordanian jihadist. I could only ask myself, how many people watching this are thinking the same thing I’m thinking? That, in terms of lives extinguished, no jihadist on Earth holds a candle to the rap sheet of mssrs. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and partners. That’s another league entirely. A member of Rumsfeld’s press entourage described the defense secretary’s mood on the plane as ebullient and optimistic about the future of the Iraq enterprise. No surprise there – visions of sweets and flowers still dancing in his tiny head. Back in the real world, it seems to me this execution will have two effects on the insurgency. For the foreign jihadists, it will provide a new martyr – a rank far higher than that of regional commander, to be sure. And for the vast majority (85%-90%) that comprise the native Iraqi resistance, it removes what can only be described as a major obstacle to their success – a mad dog bent on killing civilians, one they themselves would ultimately have had to put down. 

So someone has something to cheer about today. The question is, who?

The story of Haditha is finally emerging in its ghastly entirety, just the kind of tale this sort of conflict inevitably produces. A war of hostile occupation, fueled by a generalized distaste and even hatred of the people being occupied; a war with no discernible strategy or end point, in which soldiers are sent on patrol after pointless deadly patrol until their hopelessness and anger tears them apart from within. This is a brutal act, but it’s enormously easy for someone like me to sit safe at home and moralize — if I were there on patrol, I don’t know what the fuck I’d be doing, and let’s face it, neither would you. We are all responsible for this crime, because we have been unwilling to restrain our government from committing the larger crime of invading Iraq and compounding that crime with the evils that have proceeded from the occupation. I say “unwilling” because we are free to make our voices heard. If we demanded an end to this war, it would be over. 

One of our biggest problems as a society, in my opinion, is that we let ourselves off the hook too easily. It’s part and parcel of the prevailing trend in modern American politics — separate the voters from the costs of major policy decisions and you will gain their tacit support. This is especially true of anything involving our all-volunteer military. For the first time ever (I believe), our forces have been deployed in a major conflict for an extended period of time without the support of a national mobilization. In essence, the money to fund the deployment is entirely borrowed — another first. We are just barely aware that there’s a war going on, and yet the administration, members of Congress, and political pundits intone Churchillian rhetoric about the long struggle ahead, etc., etc., as if to sell the American public on a flattering image of itself as a defiant, heroic people facing incredible odds (like Britain during the blitz) without the inconvenience of, well, any actual sacrifice… unless you are among the unlucky minority with family members in the military. 

And when the inevitable happens — when it becomes clear that our soldiers are cracking under the stress of multiple tours of duty and shooting civilians like Cheney shoots caged quail — how do we react? Well, the military begins by blaming the messengers, calling the journalists who follow the stories traitors and dupes of al Qaeda, etc. After about 3 or 4 months of that, when they’re forced by mounting evidence to admit to some portion of the ugly truth, it becomes the individual soldiers’ fault. They then apply the dubious remedies of courts martial and sensitivity training slide shows, while the administration and its various flacks encourage us to look at the bigger picture (it took an endless war to get conservatives talking about “context”). But there’s one thing Bush’s cousin Tony Snow won’t tell us at the daily briefing — we are more responsible for those deaths than the soldiers who pull the trigger. This is the result of a criminal foreign policy, and because we enjoy the unparalleled freedoms of American democracy, we must also accept the responsibility for what our elected officials get us into. 

Our soldiers have very few options. We have many. If we don’t want them to kill, we should bring them the fuck home. Now.

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert pressed the flesh with Dubya this week, collecting his vaguely qualified endorsement of the unilateral “disengagement” plan that would complete the project of dispossession forced upon the Palestinians for the past 39 years. The plan, originally proposed by Sharon, seeks to redraw the borders of Israel to encompass major settlement blocks in the West Bank and virtually all of East Jerusalem, while securing the Jordan valley and dividing the Palestinian population into isolated cantons, cut off from one another and from Jerusalem, their cultural, political, and economic hub. It officially throws all relevant UN resolutions out the window from 242 forward, allowing Israel to claim land it seized in the 1967 war — land that is clearly not part of the State of Israel, illegally occupied by the IDF since that time. Bush’s reservation about the disengagement plan is really just a diplomatic chimera — he would like to see the same result achieved with some level of participation by the Palestinians. What they term being a “partner in peace” is really just taking part in your own oppression. 

There’s no question but that the occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza is illegal, and that any Israeli settlements built within those areas violate international law, aside from being so plainly unjust that any 5-year-old could see it. And yet it continues, with the support of our government and both major political parties. And like any occupying power since Roman times, the Israeli government has attempted to replace direct rule of the territories with some form of proxy rule, via compliant (and bribe-friendly) local agents. During the years prior to the first intifada, Tel Aviv tried to accomplish this by imposing collaborationist Palestinians as local officials, mayors, etc., while working to undermine the influence of the PLO. In fact, Israeli intelligence had a hand in getting Hamas established as a component of this divide-and-rule strategy. The Palestinian uprising in 1987-91 demonstrated to Israel that, even with a severely marginalized PLO, Palestinian nationalism could not be countered through the use of individual quislings. Then came Oslo. 

Indeed, the brilliance of the Oslo Accords was that they co-opted Arafat and the PLO as that long sought-after colonial administration, in the form of the Palestinian Authority. The PA was charged with handling security (Israeli security) while the development of Israel’s colonial infrastructure in East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and (to a lesser extent) Gaza continued at a steady pace. In return, the PA would distribute all aid and tax moneys (minus graft) and Arafat could call himself “president”. This gave us the spectacle of his overfed lieutenants living opulently amongst the unspeakable squalor that was Palestinian society, while the superimposition of the Israeli settlement infrastructure continued unabated by this sham peace accord, through both Labor and Likud administrations. Though virtually unknown to the American public (which has underwritten much of this construction), Israel’s project in East Jerusalem and the West Bank has been an inescapable reality for Palestinians, its trajectory very clearly discernable. They see the Fatah-dominated PA as an accomplice in this, at worst, or as an institution too ineffective and self-serving to stop the land grab, at best. Recall, too, that Abbas (Abu Mazen) was chosen by Sharon, and that more popular Fatah figures were kept from competing (some by remaining in Israeli jails). That’s largely why Hamas won the legislative elections — because they are obviously not in the pocket of Israel.

One thing hasn’t changed: there can be no peace without justice. We ignore this fact at our own peril. 

Looks like Admiral Rove is settling into his new post (job description: save Republican Congress at all costs). You can see the big juicy cultural issues being tossed out in time for November, as fat boy scrutinizes each race, each district, each county for that crucial wedge. Bush’s loopy plan to station National Guard troops at the Mexican border — in conjunction with fences, barriers, high-tech sensors, and unmanned drone aircraft — is a clear gambit to mobilize the “minuteman” vote in these crucial border districts. Congressional races are all about getting the base (and I do mean base) constituencies in action — that’s why we’ll see various draconian proposals aimed at immigration, gays, abortion, and other brain-stem targeted issues. Even with Bush’s ratings in the low to mid 30s, they can still carry the day if they capture the top-of-mind issues in enough districts and get the American Taliban to march zombie-like to the polling stations. Overall turnout in mid-term elections is usually way below even the poor numbers we see during presidential races, so the X-treme voters are far more influential. 

I can tell you, in my hometown Congressional district (the 24th in upstate New York), we are going to witness the most monumental political clash in living memory. Our 12-term Congressman is retiring this year — he’s a “moderate” Republican, though with an increasingly reactionary voting record as his party has swerved drunkenly to the right. The Democrats have an opportunity to pick up this seat for the first time in decades (the last time Utica, NY, was represented in Congress by a Democrat was 1948), and the GOP is desperate to hang onto it… so both parties will be spending like sailors this fall, bringing in the heavyweight political consultants. It’s going to get ugly, my friends, very ugly, and I can already smell the pungent aroma of the porcine Mr. Rove wafting up from the sewers. For a few brief moments, this backwater district will seem like the most important place on the planet… then, after the November vote, it will recede back into total obscurity, all promises forgotten once the hacks have packed up their tents and beat it. 

How do we stay important? Move the whole bloody district down to the Mexican border. There just aren’t enough economically desperate people of color streaming across the Canadian border for the national focus to remain fixed upon us. Not that all that attention is a positive thing — I for one would not want to live near what is increasingly becoming a militarized zone; a kind of Maginot line against immigration (it’s likely to be every bit as effective as the original, too). And another thing (ahem), how are they going to deal with ordering the National Guard to the southwest when so many of them have served multiple tours in Iraq? How are these guards people going to react to the situation at the border after having been shot at for months on end? Is there anything else we can ask of these citizen-soldiers? I mean, for chrissake, we’re giving them yet another mission? Meanwhile, Bush and company are awarding their rich constituents massive tax cuts — that’s their sacrifice. Some give up their lives, while others give up their tax burdens. They also serve who line their pockets. 

Next: the National Guard will be deployed as hood ornaments for the rich. Expect an address to the nation sometime soon.  

Well, well. Looks like the NSA has been checking into our phone records and keeping a big fat Orwellian eye on whom we’ve been calling, when, and for how long. Oh, damn! I shouldn’t be writing about this — the mere discussion of any topic detrimental to the Republicans gives aid and comfort to our enemies. So get that straight, people — talk = treason, okay? With the cooperation of their good friends and campaign contributors at Verizon et al, the government is opening your mail and checking out your phone bill… and it’s none of your goddamn business. They just want to know if you’ve been talking to any hardcore terrorists, like — say — the folks at the Thomas Merton Center. It’s a matter of national security, so don’t talk about it or you’ll make Senator Jeff Sessions very very angry. Don’t even think about it — the terrorists will read your mind and take comfort in our lack of discipline. There’s nothing they can’t do, nothing!   

Are you afraid yet? Good. So am I. 

God this is idiotic. I mean, does anyone seriously believe that al Qaeda operatives would never suspect their phone records are being scrutinized unless they read about it in USA Today? In this age of disposable cell phones and calling cards you can buy at your supermarket checkout counter, who the hell would plan terrorist attacks using their household phone? The Democrats are treating this like a privacy issue, but it’s more serious than that. Sure, the notion of the government checking my phone bill is annoying and invasive, but the larger question is what exactly are they looking for? When they vacuum up large volumes of calling data, what makes the NSA connect-the-dot-o-tron go ka-ching!? A call to Yemen? No… ’cause these are domestic calls. Once again, the administration is saying “trust us”, but after all we’ve seen in the last few years, that only recalls to mind the line from Animal House: “Hey… you fucked up. You trusted us.”

We know that they’ve been targeting lawful, peaceful organizing and activism. We know that they’ve been painting animal rights activists as “eco-terrorists” and the like. We know that they routinely engage in “pig-fucking” their political adversaries. What is the big picture here… the elephant in the room? Domestic spying is like a narcotic to the executive branch. Once they start using it, it’s hard to stop. Cointelpro is probably the most glaring example, but it’s not the only one. What we’re seeing may be the outlines of another massive abuse of power by an administration that’s politically on the skids, paranoid, and willing to do just about anything to advance its highly unpopular agenda. That’s not conspiracy mongering — I’m just observing that there is reason for concern. It’s similar to the detainee abuse scandal; the many disparate pieces strongly suggest a unifying policy at its base, one that reflects well established patterns of executive behavior stretching back decades. We were expected to believe that the abuses at Abu Ghraib — taken straight from the CIA torture manuals — were the work of rogue subalterns. Now we’re supposed to believe that opening our mail, listening to our phone conversations, and infiltrating our bridge clubs will make us safer, when all the while they’re failing to meet even the minimum standards for preparedness and prevention identified by the 9-11 Commission and dictated by common sense. 

I confess to being a wee bit skeptical.