House Republican Caucus Chairman Mike Pence (Ind.) on Friday adamantly advocated for his House bill on Iran and "respectfully disagreed" with President Obama's position.
The House is currently debating H.Res. 560, which Pence introduced and was reworked by House Foreign Relations Chairman Howard Berman (D-Calif.).
The legislation, Pence said on MSNBC, is a "word of support not to one candidate over another but to the people of Iran who I really believe have gotten a whiff of freedom here."
(1) expresses its support for all Iranian citizens who embrace the values of freedom, human rights, civil liberties, and rule of law;
(2) condemns the ongoing violence against demonstrators by the Government of Iran and pro-government militias, as well as the ongoing government suppression of independent electronic communication through interference with the Internet and cellphones; and
(3) affirms the universality of individual rights and the importance of democratic and fair elections.
"The administration has drawn the line where they see fit," Pence said. "I respectfully disagree with the president."
"Despite the calls by many commentators for America to, essentially, stay neutral," Pence added, "the American people, through their congress...is going to condemn the violence."
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
In response to reports that North Korea is readying a missile launch toward Hawaii, Defense Secretary Robert Gates has moved ground to air missile defense equipment to the Aloha State.
News broke on Thursday that North Korea may be preparing to launch a Taepodong-2 long-range missile around July 4. The missile is believed to be able to fly 4,000 miles, which would put Hawaii out of range by about 500 miles.
The Wall Street Journal reports that the U.S. has moved a (rather cool looking) sophisticated floating radar system near Hawaii. The U.S. has also moved ground to air anti-missile equipment to the area.
"We do have some concerns if they were to launch a missile...in the direction of Hawaii," Mr. Gates said, according to the Journal. "We are in a good position, should it become necessary, to protect American territory."
If North Korea does fire the missile, the administration will be faced with a tough decision. Launching the ground to air anti-missile system in an attempt to strike down the missile mid-air could be unsuccessful and, if it fails, could be interpreted as a sign of weakness in Pyongyang.
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
North Korea may be preparing to fire a long-range missile toward Hawaii around July 4, the Associated Press is reporting.
The country, which has taken an increasingly bellicose position toward the international community in developing its nuclear program, is reportedly preparing to launch a Taepodong-2 missile, which has a range of 4,000 miles. That apparently puts Hawaii out of range.
This news, of course, come shortly after North Korea's second recent nuclear test on May 25, several long and short-range missile tests and its threatening war last weekend in protest of U.N. sanctions following the test.
President Obama on Tuesday said that that "something has happened" in Iranian election in response to the country's "antagonistic postures" toward the international community.
Speaking at a press conference, Obama reiterated that he has "deep concerns" about the protests in the country and that he believes the election shows something - he was careful not to say "progress" - is happening in Iran.
"I do believe that something has happened in Iran where there is a questioning of some of the antagonistic postures toward the international community" that have occurred in the past, he said.
The remarks indicate a slight increase in the intensity of Obama's rhetoric on the election and the protests that have followed. On Monday, Obama said that he is "deeply troubled" by the protests.
As a result, Obama has come under criticism for Republicans for not speaking out more strongly on the issue.
On Tuesday, Obama was again careful with his words. He said it would be "not productive" for the U.S. to be seen as "meddling" in Iran's election results.
"My hope," Obama said, "is that the Iranian people will make the right steps in order for them to be able to express their voices."
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Former Bush administration deputy defense secretary Paul Wolfowitz has an interesting op-ed in Tuesday's Wall Street Journal that sets the stage for the meeting. Obviously, I doubt that Wolfowitz and Obama agree on many foreign policy fronts, but Wolfowitz lays out the case for addressing North Korea's refugees, which he says is a "purely humanitarian issue."
Wolfowitz writes that the most important factor in helping refugees is developing a partnership with "first asylum" countries and "resettlement" countries.
Read more...
President Obama has earned an 'A' in foreign policy so far, Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) said today.
Obama has maintained many of President Bush's policies, Lugar said, but has approached them in a more conciliatory, humble manner.
"The idea of being more inclusive and reaching out, alliances, working with the international comities, his own vigor in going all over the world giving these speeches in the first few weeks or months of the administration are really remarkable," Lugar told a group of reporters Monday morning.
"The idea of being more inclusive and reaching out, alliances, working with the international comities, his own vigor in going all over the world giving these speeches in the first few weeks or months of the administration are really remarkable," Lugar added.
Lugar, the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is one of Congress's most influential voices on foreign affairs. When Obama was a Senator, the two teamed up on a number of issues, including nuclear non-proliferation.
While suggesting Obama's conduct was an improvement from Bush's, Lugar gave the former President credit for acting in a chaotic and dangerous environment.
Bush felt that the country was in "such an embattled position that we had to act unilaterally whether the international organizations responded or not in terms of our own defense and security. Time has passed since that point, and it's appropriate that the new administration adopt, as President Obama has, a very new position."
The Oklahoma Republican called Obama's speech "un-American" for labeling Iraq a war of choice and failing to condemn Iran's nuclear program.
"I just don't know whose side he's on," Inhofe said. Yikes.
For the record, here's what Obama said about Iran's nuclear program:
The third source of tension is our shared interest in the rights and responsibilities of nations on nuclear weapons.
This issue has been a source of tension between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran. For many years, Iran has defined itself in part by its opposition to my country, and there is indeed a tumultuous history between us. In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically-elected Iranian government. Since the Islamic Revolution, Iran has played a role in acts of hostage-taking and violence against U.S. troops and civilians. This history is well known. Rather than remain trapped in the past, I have made it clear to Iran's leaders and people that my country is prepared to move forward. The question, now, is not what Iran is against, but rather what future it wants to build.
It will be hard to overcome decades of mistrust, but we will proceed with courage, rectitude and resolve. There will be many issues to discuss between our two countries, and we are willing to move forward without preconditions on the basis of mutual respect. But it is clear to all concerned that when it comes to nuclear weapons, we have reached a decisive point. This is not simply about America's interests. It is about preventing a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that could lead this region and the world down a hugely dangerous path.
I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that others do not. No single nation should pick and choose which nations hold nuclear weapons. That is why I strongly reaffirmed America's commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons. And any nation - including Iran - should have the right to access peaceful nuclear power if it complies with its responsibilities under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. That commitment is at the core of the Treaty, and it must be kept for all who fully abide by it. And I am hopeful that all countries in the region can share in this goal.
Here is President Obama speech in Cairo Thursday morning, as prepared for delivery.
Stay tuned for more on the address.
Remarks of President Barack Obama
A New Beginning
Cairo, Egypt
June 4, 2009
I am honored to be in the timeless city of Cairo, and to be hosted by two remarkable institutions. For over a thousand years, Al-Azhar has stood as a beacon of Islamic learning, and for over a century, Cairo University has been a source of Egypt's advancement. Together, you represent the harmony between tradition and progress. I am grateful for your hospitality, and the hospitality of the people of Egypt. I am also proud to carry with me the goodwill of the American people, and a greeting of peace from Muslim communities in my country: assalaamu alaykum.
We meet at a time of tension between the United States and Muslims around the world-tension rooted in historical forces that go beyond any current policy debate. The relationship between Islam and the West includes centuries of co-existence and cooperation, but also conflict and religious wars. More recently, tension has been fed by colonialism that denied rights and opportunities to many Muslims, and a Cold War in which Muslim-majority countries were too often treated as proxies without regard to their own aspirations. Moreover, the sweeping change brought by modernity and globalization led many Muslims to view the West as hostile to the traditions of Islam.
Violent extremists have exploited these tensions in a small but potent minority of Muslims. The attacks of September 11th, 2001 and the continued efforts of these extremists to engage in violence against civilians has led some in my country to view Islam as inevitably hostile not only to America and Western countries, but also to human rights. This has bred more fear and mistrust.
So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, and who promote conflict rather than the cooperation that can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity. This cycle of suspicion and discord must end.
I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles - principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.
I do so recognizing that change cannot happen overnight. No single speech can eradicate years of mistrust, nor can I answer in the time that I have all the complex questions that brought us to this point. But I am convinced that in order to move forward, we must say openly the things we hold in our hearts, and that too often are said only behind closed doors. There must be a sustained effort to listen to each other; to learn from each other; to respect one another; and to seek common ground. As the Holy Koran tells us, "Be conscious of God and speak always the truth." That is what I will try to do - to speak the truth as best I can, humbled by the task before us, and firm in my belief that the interests we share as human beings are far more powerful than the forces that drive us apart.
Part of this conviction is rooted in my own experience. I am a Christian, but my father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of Muslims. As a boy, I spent several years in Indonesia and heard the call of the azaan at the break of dawn and the fall of dusk. As a young man, I worked in Chicago communities where many found dignity and peace in their Muslim faith.
As a student of history, I also know civilization's debt to Islam. It was Islam - at places like Al-Azhar University - that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe's Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality.
I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of America's story. The first nation to recognize my country was Morocco. In signing the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, our second President John Adams wrote, "The United States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims." And since our founding, American Muslims have enriched the United States. They have fought in our wars, served in government, stood for civil rights, started businesses, taught at our Universities, excelled in our sports arenas, won Nobel Prizes, built our tallest building, and lit the Olympic Torch. And when the first Muslim-American was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend our Constitution using the same Holy Koran that one of our Founding Fathers - Thomas Jefferson - kept in his personal library.
So I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed. That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn't. And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.
But that same principle must apply to Muslim perceptions of America. Just as Muslims do not fit a crude stereotype, America is not the crude stereotype of a self-interested empire. The United States has been one of the greatest sources of progress that the world has ever known. We were born out of revolution against an empire. We were founded upon the ideal that all are created equal, and we have shed blood and struggled for centuries to give meaning to those words - within our borders, and around the world. We are shaped by every culture, drawn from every end of the Earth, and dedicated to a simple concept: E pluribus unum: "Out of many, one."
Much has been made of the fact that an African-American with the name Barack Hussein Obama could be elected President. But my personal story is not so unique. The dream of opportunity for all people has not come true for everyone in America, but its promise exists for all who come to our shores - that includes nearly seven million American Muslims in our country today who enjoy incomes and education that are higher than average.
Read more...
Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) said today that he hopes to force a vote on re-listing North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism.
The Bush administration removed the communist regime from the State Department list after the country pledged to drop their nuclear weapons program and agree to inspections. But North Korea's recent nuclear and missile tests has some lawmakers clamoring to reverse that decision.
Fifteen Republican senators have signed on to DeMint's amendment, which he plans to attach to the FDA Tobacco Bill up for a vote this week. (That bill would give the FDA authority to regulate tobacco products.)
"Now is not the time for rhetoric," said Senator DeMint. "North Korea's provocative actions must have immediate consequences."
Listing North Korea as a state sponsor of terror would trigger a number of economic and diplomatic sanctions.
The White House went out of it's way to praise John McCain today after the Arizona Republican called for an end to nuclear weapons.
In a floor speech today, McCain cited Ronald Reagan's stated commitment to rid the world of nuclear weapons and said the U.S. should work steadily toward that goal.
"[T]he Cold War ended almost twenty years ago, and the time has come to take further measures to reduce dramatically the number of nuclear weapons in the world's arsenals," McCain said. "In so doing, the United States can---and indeed, must--show the kind of leadership the world expects from us[.]"
President Obama quickly released a statement concurring with McCain's goal of a nuke-free world.
"I welcome Senator McCain's important statement on President Reagan's legacy and the need to move toward a world free of nuclear weapons," the President said, adding that he "look[s] forward to working with Senator McCain and the entire Congress to ensure that we accomplish these goals together for the American people and the security of the entire planet."
The President stated his desire to abolish nuclear weapons in a speech in Prague earlier this year.
The agreement between the President and his former rival comes as arms control advocates are pushing a number of treaties and international agreements--including the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and a bilateral agreement with Russia--aimed at curbing nuclear proliferation.
The CTBT, which would ban nuclear testing, is seen as the holy grail for many non-proliferation advocates. Opponents say the U.S may need to conduct tests in the future to ensure the reliability of its current stockpile.
McCain opposed the CTBT when it came up for a vote in 1999 but said during the campaign that it was time to reconsider the measure. In his speech today, he was deliberately vague, saying the treaty was one of "a number of important decisions in the coming months."
Obama, for his part, pledged during his Prague speech to push for ratification "aggressively and immediately."
As an international treaty, the CTBT needs 67 votes to pass, and McCain's support is seen as crucial in convincing a number of moderate Republicans to sign on.
Most Viewed RSS Feed »
