Environmentalists Against War
Home | Say NO! To War | Action! | Information | Media Center | Who We Are

 

 

War or Peace? Hillary Clinton's Path to War with Russia


October 23, 2016
Dennis Kucinich / World Without War & Zoltan Grossman / CounterPunch

The most consequential statement by Secretary Clinton in the last presidential debate was her pronouncement that a no-fly zone over Syria could "save lives and hasten the end of the conflict." It would do none of the above. If the US has not been invited into a country to establish a "no-fly zone" such an action is, in fact, an invasion, an act of war. As Secretary Clinton once confided to a Goldman Sachs audience, such an action would"kill a lot of Syrians" -- and trigger a shooting war with Russian jets.

http://worldbeyondwar.org/dennis-kucinich-war-peace/

War or Peace?
Dennis Kucinich / World Without War

(October 20, 2016) -- The most consequential statement by Secretary Clinton in last night's debate was her pronouncement that a no-fly zone over Syria could "save lives and hasten the end of the conflict," that a no-fly zone would provide "safe zones on the ground" was in "the best interests of the people on the ground in Syria" and would "help us with our fight against ISIS."

It would do none of the above. A US attempt to impose a no-fly zone in Syria would, as Secretary Clinton once cautioned a Goldman Sachs audience, "kill a lot of Syrians," and, according to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Dunford, lead to a war with Russia.

If the US has not been invited into a country to establish a "no-fly zone" such an action is, in fact, an invasion, an act of war.

It is abundantly clear from our dark alliance with Saudi Arabia and our conduct in support of jihadists in Syria that our current leaders have learned nothing from Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya as we prepare to plunge head-long into the abyss of a world war.

Our international relations are built upon lies to promote regime changes, the fantasy of a unipolar world ruled by America, and a blank check for the national security state.

As others prepare for war, we must prepare for peace. We must answer the mindless call to arms with a thoughtful, soulful call to resist the coming build up for war. A new, resolute peace movement must arise, become visible and challenge those who would make war inevitable.

We must not wait until the Inauguration to begin to build a new peace movement in America.

Comment
John Warmann
(October 21, 2016) -- Good to see there's still some honestly left in some politicians. This is just common sense but if history has told us anything, the US government has none. Not that the US has learned nothing from past military failures, they've learned a lot. What they've learned is military failure is good for business, if you're the military industrial complex, which profits of spreading death and carnage, and has the US government and politicians like Hillary Clinton in their pocket.



Stop the Next President From Waging the Next War
Zoltan Grossman / CounterPunch

(October 18, 2016) -- Hillary Clinton now says her "number one priority" in Syria is the removal of Bashar al-Assad, putting us on the path of war with Syria and Russia next year. Whether or not you are voting for her, you should commit yourself to stopping her from this insanity, which President Obama wisely averted in 2013. Syria and Russia are indeed committing war crimes in Aleppo, but if you're tempted to buy in to a "no-fly zone" or "humanitarian intervention" against Syrian, Russian, and Iranian forces, consider these ten facts and observations:

1/ We never hear about the atrocities committed by the Sunni rebel forces backed by the US, including the Al Qaeda-aligned Islamists that are now tacitly included in the rebel ranks. A sudden regime change in Syria will result in these forces being in charge, and fighting each other for power. Some victorious rebels would commit ethnic/sectarian cleansing against Alawites, Christians, and Kurds, causing many of these and other minorities to fear the rebels as much as the Sunni majority fears Assad. Yes, the war can and will get even worse with more outside intervention.

2/ Any "no-fly zone" over Syria will certainly be followed by the shooting down of both Russian and US jets, in an unpredictable escalation that could easily spread elsewhere in the region or world. Bombing Syrian/Russian forces would result in more civilian deaths, not fewer civilian deaths.

In a leaked 2013 transcript, Hillary admitted, "To have a no-fly zone, you have to take out all of the air defense, many of which are located in populated areas. So our missiles, even if they are standoff missiles so we're not putting our pilots at risk– you're going to kill a lot of Syrians."

3/ The US is actively aiding Saudi bombing of Houthi rebels in Yemen, with devastation and civilian deaths that differs little from the Syrian/Russian bombing of Aleppo. The US just directly launched missiles against the Houthis, embroiling us in a very dangerous part of the regional proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran. State Department spokesperson John Kirby became tongue-tied when reporters asked him to define the difference between the Russian in Syria and the Saudis in Yemen.

4/ The US has around 800 foreign military bases around the world. Russia has exactly two bases outside former Soviet territory -- both of them in Syria. Putin is trying to emulate what the US did in Iraq and Afghanistan, by establishing Russia as a regional and global power.

Russia is doing exactly what the US did in Panama–brazenly intervene in the affairs of a country that hosts its bases. The US has zero legitimacy to criticize an upstart in global imperialism, or to demonize Russia for committing the same atrocities that US forces did in Fallujah and elsewhere.

5/ Russia will not back down if we start shooting down its aircraft. Putin was the "Butcher of Grozny" in Chechnya (as the West turned a blind eye), and has intervened against nationalist governments in Georgia and Ukraine. He will pivot to somewhere else in the world–arming Iran, establishing a naval base in Egypt, or threatening Latvia.

One way to lessen his popular appeal is to stop feeding into his nationalist propaganda that NATO is encircling Russia and tacitly backing fascists and ultranationalists on its borders. He only thrives politically when the West's military pressure increases, and he can portray himself as standing up to NATO. Both Russia and Iran also thrive when US and Israeli saber-rattling drives up global oil prices.

6/ The practice of "humanitarian intervention" upholds double standards that only highlight atrocities by the other side and not by US allies. Bill Clinton's bombings in Bosnia and Kosovo stopped ethnic cleansing by Serbian forces, but actively enabled ethnic cleansing by Croatian and Albanian militias.

Obama's bombing of Libya to supposedly "save" Benghazi ended up turning Libya into a free-fire zone. It wasn't stepping in as a neutral party, but taking sides in a civil war and prolonging it. A real "humanitarian intervention" would order all sides to freeze in place, not attack one human rights abuser in favor of another.

7/ The US seems to want to rubberstamp the partition of Syria into ethnic/sectarian enclaves as part of a "settlement," just as it did in Yugoslavia and to a large extent in Iraq. Partition does not bring lasting peace, as the examples of Palestine and India demonstrate.

Regional autonomy is helpful to build peace, but communities and even families are too mixed together historically to allow for a "clean" territorial separation without massive violence and genocidal ethnic/sectarian cleansing. But it helps neoliberal capital to have large multiethnic states divided into more easily controllable mini-states.

8/ There have been many paths not followed in bringing peace to Syria since the genuine democratic revolution against Assad began in 2011. There has never been a choice between "doing something" and "doing nothing."

The US and Israel could stop supporting Sunni Islamist rebels in return for Russia and Iran holding back the worst of Assad's Alawite-led military atrocities, and vice versa. They could both support the Kurds' valiant defense against ISIS, instead of selling them out (once more) to the Turkish military. They could engage with Syrian civil society that began the revolution, instead of only arming the militaries and militias. They could negotiate for a regional deescalation and coalition government that guarantees minority rights, and allows Syrians to focus on the real threats of ISIS and the economic ruin of war.

9/ The regime change in Iraq will look like small potatoes, if the new Administration tricks the American people into allowing a so-called "humanitarian intervention" in Syria. We could very quickly get involved in a full-blown regional war–with the US, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Gulf states, and Syrian, Iraqi, and Yemeni Sunnis on one side, and Russia, Iran, Syria, Iraqi Shi'as, Hezbollah, and Houthis on the other side.

The region is a powder keg, with entangled alliances much like Europe on the eve of World War I. It wouldn't take much for that nightmare to escalate into a nuclear confrontation. Russia is clearly mobilizing for a possible conflict, and signaling its warnings through state media and civil defense exercises, but we haven't been told by our leaders how risky the situation has become.

10/ A lot more is at stake in Syria in 2017 than in Iraq in 2003.
The Iraq War never had the potential of escalating into a full-blown war with Russia and Iran, or triggering a nuclear confrontation. And since both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump uncritically accept Benjamin Netanyahu's view of Iran as the main enemy in the Middle East, Israel and the Gulf States will be unleashed next year to restart military brinkmanship with Iran, which could also bring us to the gates of hell.

It is possible to stand against Assad and Putin, and still oppose wars waged by Clinton or Trump that will inflame the Middle East. Whoever wins on November 8th, the names of the losing candidates will quickly fade. Our "number one priority" the next day should be to stop the new president from taking us down the path of a new major war.

Zoltan Grossman is a professor of Geography and Native Studies at The Evergreen State College in Olympia, Washington, who has been a warm body in peace, justice, and environmental movements for the past 35 years. His website is http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz and email is grossmaz@evergreen.edu

back

 

 

Stay Connected
Sign up to receive our weekly updates. We promise not to sell, trade or give away your email address.
Email Address:
Full Name:
 

 

Search Environmentalists Against War website

 

Home | Say NO! To War | Action! | Information | Media Center | Who We Are