DOCSLIB.ORG

Hearings to Examine Threats, Responses, and Regional Considerations Surrounding Iraq

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Hearings to Examine Threats, Responses, and Regional Considerations Surrounding Iraq S. HRG. 107–658 HEARINGS TO EXAMINE THREATS, RESPONSES, AND REGIONAL CONSIDERATIONS SURROUNDING IRAQ HEARINGS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION JULY 31 AND AUGUST 1, 2002 Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senate U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 81–697 PDF WASHINGTON : 2002 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate 11-MAY-2000 18:09 Sep 20, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 81697 SFRELA1 PsN: SFRELA1 COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware, Chairman PAUL S. SARBANES, Maryland JESSE HELMS, North Carolina CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut RICHARD G. LUGAR, Indiana JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts CHUCK HAGEL, Nebraska RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon PAUL D. WELLSTONE, Minnesota BILL FRIST, Tennessee BARBARA BOXER, California LINCOLN D. CHAFEE, Rhode Island ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia BILL NELSON, Florida SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming ANTONY J. BLINKEN, Staff Director PATRICIA A. MCNERNEY, Republican Staff Director (II) VerDate 11-MAY-2000 18:09 Sep 20, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 81697 SFRELA1 PsN: SFRELA1 CONTENTS WEDNESDAY, JULY 31, 2002 Page Ajami, Prof. Fouad, Majid Khadduri professor and director of Middle East Studies, School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins Univer- sity, Washington, DC ........................................................................................... 124 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 126 Butler, Hon. Richard, former Executive Chairman, UNSCOM; Diplomat in Residence, Council on Foreign Relations, New York, NY ................................. 9 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 13 Cordesman, Prof. Anthony H., senior fellow and Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington, DC .......................................................................................................................... 24 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 27 Duelfer, Charles, resident visiting scholar, Middle East Studies, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington, DC; former Deputy Exec- utive Chairman, UNSCOM ................................................................................. 69 Prepared statement including 2 op-ed articles .............................................. 71 Feingold, Hon. Russell D., U.S. Senator from Wisconsin, prepared statement .. 46 Gallucci, Hon. Robert L., dean, Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University, Washington, DC .......................................................... 64 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 67 Hagel, Hon. Chuck, U.S. Senator from Nebraska, prepared statement ............. 44 Halperin, Dr. Morton H., senior fellow, Council on Foreign Relations, Wash- ington, DC ............................................................................................................. 81 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 84 Hamaz, Dr. Khidhir, former Iraqi Nuclear Physicist; president, Council on Middle Eastern Affairs, New York, NY .............................................................. 15 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 20 Hoar, Gen. Joseph P., USMC (Ret.), former commander in chief of U.S. Central Command (1991-1994), Del Mar, CA .................................................... 76 Kemp, Dr. Geoffrey, director, Regional Srtategic Programs, The Nixon Center, Washington, DC ................................................................................................... 129 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 133 McInerney, Lt. Gen. Thomas G., USAF (Ret.), former Assistant Vice Chief of Staff, U.S. Air Force, Washington, DC ........................................................... 78 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 80 Parris, Hon. Mark R., senior policy advisor, Baker, Donelson, Bearman, & Caldwell, Washigton, DC ..................................................................................... 136 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 139 Telhami, Dr. Shibley, Anwar Sadat Professor for Peace and Development, University of Maryland, College Park, Md.; nonresident senior fellow, Brookings Institution, Washington, DC ............................................................. 117 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 121 Wellstone, Hon. Paul, U.S. Senator from Minnesota, prepared statement ........ 6 THURSDAY, AUGUST 1, 2002 Page Al-Shabibi, Dr. Sinan, consultant to the United Nations, Geneva, Switzerland 188 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 193 Berger, Samuel R., former National Security Advisor; president and CEO, Stonebridge International LLC, Washington, DC ............................................. 237 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 239 (III) VerDate 11-MAY-2000 18:09 Sep 20, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 81697 SFRELA1 PsN: SFRELA1 IV Page Feil, Col. Scott R., U.S. Army (Ret.), executive director, Role of American Military Power, Association of the U.S. Army, Arlington, VA ......................... 196 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 199 Francke, Rend Rahim, executive director, Iraq Foundation, Washington, DC .. 177 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 183 Hagel, Hon. Chuck, U.S. Senator from Nebraska, prepared statement ............. 161 Marr, Dr. Phebe, former professor, National Defense University, Washington, DC .......................................................................................................................... 165 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 170 Weinberger, Hon. Caspar, former Secretary of Defense; chairman, Forbes Magazine, Washington, DC ................................................................................. 231 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 235 ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD Bennis, Phyllis, Institute for Policy Studies .......................................................... 265 Byler, J. Daryl, director, Mennonite Central Committee U.S. Washington, DC .......................................................................................................................... 269 Pellot, Dr. Peter L., emeritus professor of Nutrition, University of Massachu- setts in Amherst and Dr. Colin Rowat, lecturer in Economics, University of Birmingham ...................................................................................................... 271 VerDate 11-MAY-2000 18:09 Sep 20, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 81697 SFRELA1 PsN: SFRELA1 HEARINGS TO EXAMINE THREATS, RE- SPONSES, AND REGIONAL CONSIDERATIONS SURROUNDING IRAQ WEDNESDAY, JULY 31, 2002 U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, Washington, DC. The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:30 a.m., in room SD–419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Joseph R. Biden, Jr. (chairman of the committee), presiding. Present: Senators Biden, Dodd, Feingold, Wellstone, Bill Nelson, Lugar, Hagel, Chafee and Brownback. The CHAIRMAN. The hearing will come to order. Welcome, everyone, here this morning to what is the beginning of, I hope, for lack of a better phrase, a national dialog on a very important question. There are some very difficult decisions for the President and for the Congress, and we think it’s important, the members of this committee, that we begin to discuss what is being discussed all over, but not here in the Congress so far. The attacks of 9/11 have forever transformed how Americans see the world. Through tragedy and pain, we have learned that we can- not be complacent about events abroad. We cannot be complacent about those who espouse hatred for us. We must confront clear danger with a new sense of urgency and resolve. Saddam Hussein’s pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, in my view, is one of those clear dangers. Even if the right response to his pursuit is not so crystal clear, one thing is clear. These weapons must be dislodged from Saddam Hussein, or Saddam Hussein must be dislodged from power. President Bush has stated his determina- tion to
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Non-Offensive Defence in the Middle East?
    UNIDIR/98/23 UNIDIR United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research Geneva Non-Offensive Defence in the Middle East? Bjørn Møller Gustav Däniker Shmuel Limone Ioannis A. Stivachtis UNITED NATIONS New York and Geneva, 1998 NOTE The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. * * * The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations Secretariat. UNIDIR/98/23 UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATION Sales No. GV.E.98.0.27 ISBN 92-9045-129-7 Table of Contents Page Preface—Ioannis A. Stivachtis .................................. vii List of Acronyms............................................ xv Part I Chapter 1 Non-Offensive Defence in the Middle East Bjørn Møller ............................................. 3 I. The Basic Idea of NOD ................................ 3 II. The Middle East and Europe Compared................... 34 III. Common Security and NOD for the Middle East? ........... 49 IV. The Role of External Powers ........................... 80 V. Perspectives ........................................ 87 Part II Chapter 1 Non-Offensive Defence in the Middle East: Necessity versus Feasibility Ioannis A. Stivachtis ...................................... 93 I. NOD and Related Concepts ............................ 93 II. NOD in the Middle East: Is it Feasible? .................. 106 III. Conclusion ........................................ 113 v vi Non-Offensive Defence in the Middle East? Chapter 2 Cooperative Security and Non-Offensive Defence in the Middle East Gustav Däniker ......................................... 115 I. NOD and the Middle East Challenge ...................
    [Show full text]
  • Turkey and Iraq: the Perils (And Prospects) of Proximity
    UNITED STATES INSTITUTE OF PEACE www.usip.org SPECIAL REPORT 1200 17th Street NW • Washington, DC 20036 • 202.457.1700 • fax 202.429.6063 ABOUT THE REPORT I RAQ AND I TS N EIGHBORS Iraq’s neighbors are playing a major role—both positive and negative—in the stabilization and reconstruction of “the new Iraq.” As part of the Institute’s “Iraq and Henri J. Barkey Its Neighbors” project, a group of leading specialists on the geopolitics of the region and on the domestic politics of the individual countries is assessing the interests and influence of the countries surrounding Iraq. In addition, these specialists are examining how Turkey and Iraq the situation in Iraq is impacting U.S. bilateral relations with these countries. Henri Barkey’s report on Turkey is the first in a series of USIP special reports on “Iraq The Perils (and Prospects) of Proximity and Its Neighbors” to be published over the next few months. Next in the series will be a study on Iran by Geoffrey Kemp of the Nixon Center. The “Iraq and Its Neighbors” project is directed by Scott Lasensky of the Institute’s Research and Studies Program. For an overview of the topic, see Phebe Marr and Scott Lasensky, “An Opening at Sharm el-Sheikh,” Beirut Daily Star, November 20, 2004. Henri J. Barkey is the Bernard L. and Bertha F. Cohen Professor of international relations at Lehigh University. He served as a member of the U.S. State Department Policy Planning Staff (1998–2000), working primarily on issues related to the Middle East, the eastern Mediterranean, and intelligence matters.
    [Show full text]
  • CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE, Vol. 155, Pt. 15 August 6, 2009
    August 6, 2009 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE, Vol. 155, Pt. 15 20997 Whereas, as a Nation, we are deeply grate- (3) encourages the Department of Defense Whereas, pursuant to sections 703(a) and ful and thankful for those men and women to continue the Nation’s efforts to provide 704(a)(2) of the Ethics in Government Act of who bravely served during the Vietnam War: clear and accurate information about what 1978, 2 U.S.C. §§ 288b(a) and 288c(a)(2), the Now, therefore, be it happened to our fallen heroes, to determine Senate may direct its counsel to represent Resolved, That the Senate— the nature and cause of Captain Speicher’s an employee of the Senate with respect to (1) designates the month of August 2009 as death, and to continue accounting for all any subpoena, order, or request for testi- ‘‘Agent Orange Awareness Month’’; who remain missing in action; and mony relating to their official responsibil- (2) calls attention to those veterans who (4) honors the United States Navy, the ities; were exposed to Agent Orange and the ad- United States Marine Corps, the Defense In- Whereas, by the privileges of the Senate of verse effects that such exposure has had on telligence Agency, and the Department of the United States and Rule XI of the Stand- their health; Defense for their efforts to bring Captain ing Rules of the Senate, no evidence under (3) recognizes the sacrifices that our vet- Speicher home. the control or in the possession of the Senate erans and servicemembers have made and may, by the judicial or administrative proc- continue to make on behalf of our great Na- f ess, be taken from such control or possession tion, especially those veterans who were ex- AUTHORIZING TESTIMONY AND but by permission of the Senate; posed to Agent Orange; Whereas, when it appears that evidence (4) reaffirms its commitment to our Na- LEGAL REPRESENTATION under the control or in the possession of the tion’s veterans; and Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Working Paper: Do Not Cite Or Circulate Without Permission
    THE COPENHAGEN TEMPTATION: RETHINKING PREVENTION AND PROLIFERATION IN THE AGE OF DETERRENCE DOMINANCE Francis J. Gavin Mira Rapp-Hooper What price should the United States – or any leading power – be willing to pay to prevent nuclear proliferation? For most realists, who believe nuclear weapons possess largely defensive qualities, the price should be small indeed. While additional nuclear states might not be welcomed, their appearance should not be cause for undue alarm. Such equanimity would be especially warrantedWORKING if the state in question PAPER: lacked DO other attributesNOT CITE of power. OR Nuclear acquisition should certainly notCIRCULATE trigger thoughts of WITHOUT preventive militar PERMISSIONy action, a phenomena typically associated with dramatic shifts in the balance of power. The historical record, however, tells a different story. Throughout the nuclear age and despite dramatic changes in the international system, the United States has time and again considered aggressive policies, including the use of force, to prevent the emergence of nuclear capabilities by friend and foe alike. What is even more surprising is how often this temptation has been oriented against what might be called “feeble” states, unable to project other forms of power. The evidence also reveals that the reasons driving this preventive thinking often had more to do with concerns over the systemic consequences of nuclear proliferation, and not, as we might expect, the dyadic relationship between the United States and the proliferator. Factors 1 typically associated with preventive motivations, such as a shift in the balance of power or the ideological nature of the regime in question, were largely absent in high-level deliberations.
    [Show full text]
  • Iraq: Differing Views in the Domestic Policy Debate
    Order Code RL31607 Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Iraq: Differing Views in the Domestic Policy Debate October 16, 2002 name redacted, Meaghan Marshall, name redacted Research Associates Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division name redacted Specialist in National Defense Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress Iraq: Differing Views in the Domestic Policy Debate Summary The debate over whether, when, and how to prosecute a major U.S. military intervention in Iraq and depose Saddam Hussein is complex, despite a general consensus in Washington that the world would be much better off if Hussein were not in power. Although most U.S. observers, for a variety of reasons, would prefer some degree of allied or U.N. support for military intervention in Iraq, some observers believe that the United States should act unilaterally even without such multilateral support. Some commentators argue for a stronger, more committed version of the current policy approach toward Iraq and leave war as a decision to reach later, only after exhausting additional means of dealing with Hussein’s regime. A number of key questions are raised in this debate, such as: 1) is war on Iraq linked to the war on terrorism and to the Arab-Israeli dispute; 2) what effect will a war against Iraq have on the war against terrorism; 3) are there unintended consequences of warfare, especially in this region of the world; 4) what is the long- term political and financial commitment likely to accompany regime change and possible democratization in this highly divided, ethnically diverse country; 5) what are the international consequences (e.g., to European allies, Russia, and the world community) of any U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Case Log October 2000 - April 2002
    Description of document: Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Case Log October 2000 - April 2002 Requested date: 2002 Release date: 2003 Posted date: 08-February-2021 Source of document: Information and Privacy Coordinator Central Intelligence Agency Washington, DC 20505 Fax: 703-613-3007 Filing a FOIA Records Request Online The governmentattic.org web site (“the site”) is a First Amendment free speech web site and is noncommercial and free to the public. The site and materials made available on the site, such as this file, are for reference only. The governmentattic.org web site and its principals have made every effort to make this information as complete and as accurate as possible, however, there may be mistakes and omissions, both typographical and in content. The governmentattic.org web site and its principals shall have neither liability nor responsibility to any person or entity with respect to any loss or damage caused, or alleged to have been caused, directly or indirectly, by the information provided on the governmentattic.org web site or in this file. The public records published on the site were obtained from government agencies using proper legal channels. Each document is identified as to the source. Any concerns about the contents of the site should be directed to the agency originating the document in question. GovernmentAttic.org is not responsible for the contents of documents published on the website. 1 O ct 2000_30 April 2002 Creation Date Requester Last Name Case Subject 36802.28679 STRANEY TECHNOLOGICAL GROWTH OF INDIA; HONG KONG; CHINA AND WTO 36802.2992 CRAWFORD EIGHT DIFFERENT REQUESTS FOR REPORTS REGARDING CIA EMPLOYEES OR AGENTS 36802.43927 MONTAN EDWARD GRADY PARTIN 36802.44378 TAVAKOLI-NOURI STEPHEN FLACK GUNTHER 36810.54721 BISHOP SCIENCE OF IDENTITY FOUNDATION 36810.55028 KHEMANEY TI LEAF PRODUCTIONS, LTD.
    [Show full text]
  • Conversation Number 39-1 Portion of a Telephone Conversation Between
    Conversation Number 39-1 Portion of a telephone conversation between the President and Henry A. Kissinger. This portion was recorded on May 24, 1973 at an unknown time between 1:27 and 1:29 p.m. [This conversation is cross-referenced with conversation 440-35.] The National Archives and Records Administration prepared the following log of this conversation. Watergate -White House response -White Paper -National security Conversation Number 39-4 Portion of a telephone conversation between the President and Hugh Scott. This portion was recorded on May 24, 1973 between 1:36 and 1:38 p.m. [This conversation is cross-referenced with conversation 440-38.] The National Archives and Records Administration prepared the following log of this conversation. Watergate -Scott's actions, May 23 -Ronald L. Ziegler Scott's schedule Watergate -White House response -National security -Effect on United States foreign policy -Scott's possible statement -Scott's statement, May 23 Conversation Number 39-5 Portion of a telephone conversation between the President and Leslie C. Arends. This portion was recorded on May 24, 1973 between 1:39 and 1:40 p.m. [This conversation is cross- referenced with conversation 440-39.] The National Archives and Records Administration prepared the following log of this conversation. Watergate -Republican congressmen's morale -White House response -White Paper -National security -Effect on United States foreign policy Conversation Number 39-16 Portions of a telephone conversation between the President and Alexander M. Haig, Jr. These portions were recorded on May 25, 1973 at an unknown time between 12:58 and 1:25 a.m.
    [Show full text]
  • Intelligence Legalism and the National Security Agency's Civil Liberties
    112 Harvard National Security Journal / Vol. 6 ARTICLE Intelligence Legalism and the National Security Agency’s Civil Liberties Gap __________________________ Margo Schlanger* * Henry M. Butzel Professor of Law, University of Michigan. I have greatly benefited from conversations with John DeLong, Mort Halperin, Alex Joel, David Kris, Marty Lederman, Nancy Libin, Rick Perlstein, Becky Richards, and several officials who prefer not to be named, all of whom generously spent time with me, discussing the issues in this article, and many of whom also helped again after reading the piece in draft. I would also like to extend thanks to Sam Bagenstos, Rick Lempert, Daphna Renan, Alex Rossmiller, Adrian Vermeule, Steve Vladeck, Marcy Wheeler, Shirin Sinnar and other participants in the 7th Annual National Security Law Workshop, participants at the University of Iowa law faculty workshop, and my colleagues at the University of Michigan Legal Theory Workshop and governance group lunch, who offered me extremely helpful feedback. Jennifer Gitter and Lauren Dayton provided able research assistance. All errors are, of course, my responsibility. Copyright © 2015 by the Presidents and Fellows of Harvard College and Margo Schlanger. 2015 / Intelligence Legalism and the NSA’s Civil Liberties Gaps 113 Abstract Since June 2013, we have seen unprecedented security breaches and disclosures relating to American electronic surveillance. The nearly daily drip, and occasional gush, of once-secret policy and operational information makes it possible to analyze and understand National Security Agency activities, including the organizations and processes inside and outside the NSA that are supposed to safeguard American’s civil liberties as the agency goes about its intelligence gathering business.
    [Show full text]
  • Daniel Ellsberg
    This document is made available through the declassification efforts and research of John Greenewald, Jr., creator of: The Black Vault The Black Vault is the largest online Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) document clearinghouse in the world. The research efforts here are responsible for the declassification of hundreds of thousands of pages released by the U.S. Government & Military. Discover the Truth at: http://www.theblackvault.com NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY CENTRAL SECURITY SERVICE FORT GEORGE G. MEADE, MARYLAND 20755-6000 FOIA Case: 101038A 10 July 2017 JOHN GREENEWALD Dear Mr. Greenewald: This is our final response to your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request of 6 March 2017 for Intellipedia entries on "PENTAGON PAPERS" and/ or "Daniel Ells berg" and/ or "Daniel Sheehan" as well as any search results pages. A copy of your request is enclosed. As stated in our initial response to you, dated 7 March 20 17, your request was assigned Case Number 101038. For purposes of this request and based on the information you provided in your letter, you are considered an "all other" requester. As such, you are allowed 2 hours of search and the duplication of 100 pages at no cost. There are no assessable fees for this request. Your request has been processed under the provisions of the FOIA. For your information, NSA provides a service of common concern for the Intelligence Community (IC) by serving as the executive agent for Intelink. As such, NSA provides technical services that enable users to access and share information with peers and stakeholders across the IC and DoD.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bush Revolution: the Remaking of America's Foreign Policy
    The Bush Revolution: The Remaking of America’s Foreign Policy Ivo H. Daalder and James M. Lindsay The Brookings Institution April 2003 George W. Bush campaigned for the presidency on the promise of a “humble” foreign policy that would avoid his predecessor’s mistake in “overcommitting our military around the world.”1 During his first seven months as president he focused his attention primarily on domestic affairs. That all changed over the succeeding twenty months. The United States waged wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. U.S. troops went to Georgia, the Philippines, and Yemen to help those governments defeat terrorist groups operating on their soil. Rather than cheering American humility, people and governments around the world denounced American arrogance. Critics complained that the motto of the United States had become oderint dum metuant—Let them hate as long as they fear. September 11 explains why foreign policy became the consuming passion of Bush’s presidency. Once commercial jetliners plowed into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, it is unimaginable that foreign policy wouldn’t have become the overriding priority of any American president. Still, the terrorist attacks by themselves don’t explain why Bush chose to respond as he did. Few Americans and even fewer foreigners thought in the fall of 2001 that attacks organized by Islamic extremists seeking to restore the caliphate would culminate in a war to overthrow the secular tyrant Saddam Hussein in Iraq. Yet the path from the smoking ruins in New York City and Northern Virginia to the battle of Baghdad was not the case of a White House cynically manipulating a historic catastrophe to carry out a pre-planned agenda.
    [Show full text]
  • Obscene Gestures: Sexual Transgression and Late Twentieth-Century American Political Culture
    Obscene Gestures: Sexual Transgression and Late Twentieth-Century American Political Culture Patrick Scott Lawrence, PhD University of Connecticut, 2016 Tracing a cultural history from the 1970s to the 1990s, Obscene Gestures places popular and legal notions of obscenity in conversation with anti-consumerist and anti-capitalist resistance movements, women of color feminism, and LGBTQ activism. Since the 1973 Supreme Court ruling in Miller v. California, obscenity discourse has policed the shape of the nation by marking non-normative bodies as objectionable. The dissertation’s study of the cultural artifacts this discourse concerns opens by situating the history of literary obscenity alongside the key theories of sexuality, power, race, and knowledge. The first body chapter links the Miller ruling with 1970s-era neoconservative policies by considering some of the decade’s major novels, including Thomas Pynchon’s Gravity’s Rainbow (1973), revealing a home- front cultural politics that stymied dissent by classing as out of bounds many forms of political speech, including Huynh Cong Ut’s 1972 photo The Terror of War. Chapter Two builds upon the polarization this moment caused via an analysis of the feminist battles over pornography in the early 1980s. I juxtapose figures on both sides of this debate with works by women of color, such as Alice Walker’s The Color Purple (1983), that address the histories of embodiment that this debate tended to obscure. The occlusion of race in organizing around pornography parallels the role of possessive individualism in justifying racial wealth disparities during the Reagan administration, which the third chapter highlights. Working in the shadow of the 1986 Meese Commission report, this chapter interprets neoliberal economic policies as an enactment of racial indifference through the metaphors of sex and violence in The Bonfire of the Vanities (1987) and American Psycho (1990).
    [Show full text]
  • The Real Outcome of the Iraq War: US and Iranian Strategic Competition in Iraq
    The Real Outcome of the Iraq War: US and Iranian Strategic Competition in Iraq By Anthony H. Cordesman, Peter Alsis, Adam Mausner, and Charles Loi Anthony H. Cordesman Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy Revised: December 20, 2011 Note: This draft is being circulated for comments and suggestions. Please provide them to [email protected] Chapter 6: US Strategic Competition with Iran: Competition in Iraq 2 Executive Summary "Americans planted a tree in Iraq. They watered that tree, pruned it, and cared for it. Ask your American friends why they're leaving now before the tree bears fruit." --Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.1 Iraq has become a key focus of the strategic competition between the United States and Iran. The history of this competition has been shaped by the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988), the 1991 Gulf War, and the US invasion of Iraq in 2003. Since the 2003 war, both the US and Iran have competed to shape the structure of Post-Saddam Iraq’s politics, governance, economics, and security. The US has gone to great lengths to counter Iranian influence in Iraq, including using its status as an occupying power and Iraq’s main source of aid, as well as through information operations and more traditional press statements highlighting Iranian meddling. However, containing Iranian influence, while important, is not America’s main goal in Iraq. It is rather to create a stable democratic Iraq that can defeat the remaining extremist and insurgent elements, defend against foreign threats, sustain an able civil society, and emerge as a stable power friendly to the US and its Gulf allies.
    [Show full text]