CFR-Brookings to Dominate Obama “Strategy”
December 4, 2008
It doesn’t get more in your face than this. “CFR-Brookings report reveals Obama’s Mideast strategy,” a headline on the United Press International website declares. In other words, the CFR and the “liberal” think tank at the Brookings Institute are handing down Obama’s marching orders in the form of a publicly released report.
“There are many reasons to take these recommendations seriously,” reports the UPI. “First, the Brookings Institution has been for more than half a century the most influential and significant think tank to influence Democratic administrations, especially on foreign policy.”
You bet these Brookings-CFR “recommendations” (actually marching orders) will be taken seriously. In fact, they will the only recommendations on the table.
Less is said about the CFR, the Rockefeller run global government cabal that has steered American foreign policy since the early part of the last century. It was established by the same guys — J.P. Morgan, John D. Rockefeller, Paul Warberg, Otto Kahn, and Jacob Schiff — who gave us the Federal Reserve and the current economic “crisis,” in fact yet another engineered bank robbery on a global scale.
Once again, we are told the Arab-Israeli “peace” issue needs to be addressed. It’s a sick joke how the globalists keep exploiting this one to put forward their “peacemaking” (making war) and “promoting democracy” (handing countries over the to the banksters for looting) agenda.
In order to accomplish this, the neocons are out and neolibs such as Strobe Talbott and Dennis Ross are in. So is Kenneth Pollack, who runs the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at Brookings. If you think the Palestinians will get a fair shake with this one, think again: Haim Saban is an Israeli media-mogul and has proudly declared “I’m a one issue guy, and my issue is Israel.” Saban personally recruited Martin Indyk, a former Clinton administration official and AIPAC’s former deputy director of research, as the center’s director.
“The small but tightly organized and exceptionally influential network of neoconservatives who kept a tight grip on U.S. policymaking in the Middle East for the entire length of the Bush administration are going to be cast into the outer darkness.”
In fact, one look at the membership list of the CFR reveals considerable neocon crossover, including notable neocons such as Elliot Abrams, Robert Kagan, Douglas Feith, Zalmay Khalilzad, Irving Kristol, Francis Fukuyama, and Max Boot, who is a senior fellow. In actuality, there is basically no difference. U.S. foreign policy is a tag team game between two factions spawned by the ruling elite. The basic rules and objectives are immutable.
“The power of personality also will give a boost to peacemaking diplomacy. Sources in Sen. Hillary Clinton’s inner circle have made clear she is eager, as secretary of state, to finish the job her husband, President Bill Clinton, started in his enthusiastic commitment to the seven-year Oslo Peace Process that broke down at the Camp David II summit in 2000.”
It was an engineered break down, of course. The Oslo accords increased the number of Israeli settlers — from 110,000 to 195,000 in the West Bank and Gaza — and resulted in the annexation of East Jerusalem. Under Oslo, Israeli authorities confiscated 35,000 acres of Arab land for roads and settlements. The CFR brokered “peace plan” worked marvelously for the globalists and their Israeli partners: in mid-2000, more than one out of five Palestinians had consumption levels below $2.10 a day and at the end of 2000 unemployment stood at 40 percent.
“During the Oslo years, Washington gave Israel more than $3 billion per year in aid and $4 billion in FY 2000, the highest of any year except 1979,” writes Stephen R. Shalom. “Of this aid, grant military aid was $1.8 billion a year since Oslo, and more than $3 billion in FY 2000, two-thirds higher than ever before.”
Hillary Clinton will finish the job — maybe we should interpret that to say she will finish off the Palestinians — a job drawn up by her handlers at the CFR and Brookings.
Dennis Ross is reading the script closely, too. He joined the pro-Israel Washington Institute for Near East Policy after leaving government in 2001. WINEP is associated with the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University and its director was the late Maj. Gen. Aharon Yariv, former Israeli government minister and director of intelligence. WINEP, however, is a small player when compared to the American Enterprise Institute, the Brookings Institution, the Center for Security Policy, the Foreign Policy Research Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the Hudson Institute, the Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis, and the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, all dominating American foreign policy when it comes to the Middle East.
“Much of the report, however, deals with Iran. Here it is consistent in following the same broad conceptual and strategic approach it applies to the Israel-Arab conflict,” the UPI continues. “The report suggests a ‘comprehensive diplomatic initiative to attempt to engage (the United States’) most enduring Middle Eastern foe.’ It also says the approach ’should involve direct and unconditional talks’ with Iran” in an effort to get the Islamic nation to stop developing “nuclear weapons and long-range missiles to carry them.”
There is no evidence Iran is developing nuclear weapons, a fact repeatedly asserted by the International Atomic Energy Agency and various other experts. “I have not received any information that there is a concrete active nuclear-weapons program going on right now,” IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei told CNN last October.
Under the terms of the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty, Iran is entitled to develop nuclear energy. Iran has signed the NPT and opened its nuclear facilities to international inspectors, while Israel has not. But then there are special rules for the Israeli client state that do not apply to the Arabs and the Iranians, not that any of this appears in the globalist CFR-Brookings report.
“The report’s policy recommendations on Iran also will give Obama political cover for implementing his famous campaign rhetoric — some of which he was castigated for —in favor of engaging the leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran without preconditions.”
It also gives him political cover the bomb the daylights out of Iran after this supposed dialogue “without preconditions” fails, as it most certainly will because the Iranians are determined to develop nuclear energy and resist efforts to deny them their rights under the NPT. “The likelihood that this approach actually will get the mullahs in Tehran to change direction, in fact, appears negligible,” the CFR-Brookings report admits.
“Obama’s foreign policy team and the liberal think tank establishment serving them will take office filled with energy, confidence and good intentions. But the pattern of history is against them,” the UPI concludes. Johnson, Carter, and Clinton, we are told in standard American history fairy tale fashion, failed to establish peace in the Middle East.
In fact, this is simply more pablum for public consumption. The CFR plan for the Middle East is going as planned. In order to soften the region up for globalist domination — in one-worlder doublespeak, this is called spreading democracy — nations must be broken up and violently balkanized and cultures and societies destroyed by way of bunker-buster and depleted uranium diplomacy. Israel will remain a proxy outpost in this effort.
It should be obvious to even the most ardent Obamatron that there is no difference between the Bush administration and the incoming Obama administration. Once again, these childish followers are so effortlessly deceived and will pay the price after the CFR and Brookings folks are firmly installed in the White House, especially with a complaisant Democrat Congress.
Finally, it is not an exaggeration to say Obama’s “change” is indeed lipstick of a pig.