This is a post written by Senator Kerry and cross-posted on Talking Points Memo today.

A New Strategy Against Extremism and Terrorism
By John Kerry - July 31, 2008

 

I just got back from giving a speech this morning at the Center for American Progress where I tried to lay down a baseline about how you actually win the struggle against radical extremism and terrorism -- and the new mindset required to do it. I wanted to continue the conversation, and TPM graciously agreed to host it here.

Here's the deal -- we don't need a rebranding -- this isn't a semantics game -- we need a wholesale rethinking. Instead of a military-dominated "war on terror," we should be fighting the global counterinsurgency campaign it always should have been. We need to fold our military efforts to capture and kill today's terrorists into a larger "information war" designed to prevent tomorrow's from ever being recruited.

I start from the premise that our current strategy is not working. Five years ago, Donald Rumsfeld famously asked: "Are we capturing, killing, or deterring and dissuading more terrorists every day than the madrassas and the radical clerics are recruiting, training, and deploying against us?" So where are we today? Attacks -- historic highs; Al Qaeda -- reconstituted along the Afghan-Pakistan border. The Taliban -- resurgent. Hamas -- tightening its grip on Gaza. Hezbollah -- running a state within a state in Lebanon. The answer to Rumsfeld's question, I'm afraid, is no -- not by a longshot.

So what does a global counterinsurgency doctrine tell us about the war on terror? What's the correct take-away?

First -- understand the real battlefield. In a local counterinsurgency, the people are the center of gravity and the core objective is to isolate the insurgents by winning the support of the local population. Applied globally, the battlefield is the hearts and minds of the Muslim world. As Defense Secretary Robert Gates said: "We cannot capture and kill our way to victory." He's right. Which is why you fight not just a military battle but an "information war." Frankly, Al Qaeda is fighting an information war - even including an online town hall meeting conducted by Ayman al-Zawahiri.

We need to fight one too.

Second -- Another core principle of counterinsurgency doctrine is that "the more force you use, the less effective it is." Those aren't my words, they're General Petraeus'. And if you read the front page article in today's Washington Post they're pretty damn close to Secretary Gates' words too. Our most important weapons are often non-military: Ironically, some of our military's most significant successes against extremists have actually been humanitarian efforts after an earthquake in Pakistan and a Tsunami in Indonesia.

Third -- legitimacy, legitimacy, legitimacy. Without legitimacy, winning over hearts and minds is impossible. That's why this Administration's embrace of torture and indefinite detention has been so self-defeating. Our enemies have already overreached in places like Anbar and Amman, and we need the moral authority to capitalize on their failures. That starts with shutting down Guantanamo and making clear once and for all that the United States does not torture. Period.

Fourth -- know your enemy. Counterinsurgency doctrine emphasizes understanding our enemy. The theorist David Kilcullen has described Al Qaeda as 60 different organizations in 60 different countries, loosely linked by a shared ideology. Taken together, these groups form a global insurgency. The goal of Al Qaeda is to draw these disparate extremists into their broader struggle against the West, sometimes with logistical support, but more broadly by offering a unifying narrative: "Islam under attack."

Fifth -- be nimble. To defeat the enemy, we must adapt as they adapt and tailor our response to circumstances on the ground. In some places, that means development projects and television broadcasts. In others, it means visits to sheikhs in their tents and - when necessary - it means Predator strikes on high value targets. We can't fight Al Qaeda in sixty countries by ourselves, and so we have to recognize the importance of strengthening relationships and working with foreign governments and security forces.

Sixth -- and finally -- we must prevent local grievances from rising to a global level and drawing small groups of disaffected people into the larger struggle. That's why we need to draw the right connections and recognize how each theater impacts the others.

Obviously -- seen through this lens, invading Iraq was a grave mistake: We diverted resources from Al Qaeda. We failed to differentiate between a secular dictator and religious terrorists and in so doing played directly into Bin Laden's hands. Our own intelligence agencies called our presence in Iraq a "cause celebre" for terrorists worldwide.

And rather than ads about Britney Spears which insult Americans, we ought to have one hell of a debate about this: The Administration misunderstood the facts Đand when it comes to events in Iraq, John McCain continues to misstate those facts and mangle history. We need to set the record straight.

Look, I've known John McCain for years as a fellow Vietnam veteran and a friend. But I just think his recent judgment has been dead wrong. We need to spell out the details here very clearly.

A quick example: as a testament to his superior judgment, John recently declared that the surge -- and I quote -- "began the Anbar Awakening I mean that's just a matter of history." In fact, history shows just the opposite.

Let's look at what happened: tensions between Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) and Sunni leaders were apparent nearly two years before the surge - culminating in battles in May 2005. Why? Al Qaeda was brutal, disrespectful to tribal sheikhs, and bad for local business.

Colonel Sean MacFarland and his Ready First Brigade arrived in Ramadi in June 2006, with Al Qaeda fully in control, and - on their own - launched an extensive outreach campaign to win over the local population, starting with the local sheikhs. They emphasized getting local police forces out into neighborhoods by deputizing tribal militias. This culminated in September 9, 2006 - four months before the surge was even announced - when a young Sheikh Sittar Albu Risha declared the Anbar Awakening and created the Awakening Council. That created a snowball effect. And, as MacFarland noted, with the 2006 US election approaching "a growing concern that US forces would leave Iraq" made tribal leaders open to our overtures. By late October, nearly every tribe around Ramadi had either joined the Awakening or was openly considering it. As security improved, a major campaign was launched to rebuild Ramadi, culminating in the Ramadi Reconstruction Conference in January 2007.

For those of you keeping score, this is the point in the story where the surge actually begins. Bush announced the surge on January 10th 2007. By the time those troops arrived, Colonel MacFarland had actually rotated out of Iraq.

These aren't small details -- we can't draw the right lessons from the reduction in violence if we don't understand what actually happened: The actions that led to the Awakening reflected our understanding that U.S. military action alone would not defeat the terrorists: we needed to win over the population by co-opting the tribal sheiks, utilizing indigenous security forces, and delivering goods, services and good governance. Moreover, the reduction in violence depended on many other factors -- the sectarian segregation of formerly mixed neighborhoods, Sadr's August 2007 ceasefire, and -- with US military support -- the Iraqi security forces' success in reclaiming the streets of places like Basra from Shi'a militias.

In other words? Not merely "the surge." Not merely more troops. Counterinsurgency. When you say "the surge began the Awakening" you have it exactly backwards and you're drawing all the wrong lessons" in particular that the military can solve what are fundamentally political problems.

That's why I think there's a big choice in this election: McCain is taking a global counterinsurgency and trying to shoehorn it into the old "war on terror" rubric that doesn't do justice to the lessons our troops have learned the hard way.

The big picture is this: winning a war of ideas will not only enable us to defeat the terrorists, but will also restore our ability to affect positive change in other arenas. Let George Bush be remembered for an overly narrow militarized focus on fighting terrorism at the expense of our moral authority and our standing in the world. Let the next President fight terror by emphasizing the best about America to usher in a new paradigm of using force wisely, and in so doing allow us to emerge from this struggle stronger and better able to lead the world into the 21st century.

Last week the US House and Senate passed the Housing Bill and today President Bush signed that bill into law.  Senator Kerry had four different provisons in the bill that will assist families in obtaining funding for home loans and in assisting some families in danger of losing  their homes in the current foreclosure crisis.

The National Low Income Housing Coalition (NIHLC) praised Senator Kerry for the work he did in getting the provision establishing a National Affordable Housing Trust Fund legislation through the Congress.

In 2000, Kerry wrote the first National Affordable Housing Trust Fund legislation to construct, rehabilitate, and preserve 1.5 million units of housing over the next 10 years.

"For too long, our nation's poorest citizens have gotten the short of the stick when it comes to housing. By establishing the National Affordable Housing Trust Fund we will help our most vulnerable families live in decent, safe and affordable rental housing," said Senator Kerry. "Foreclosures are devastating thousands of families across Massachusetts each and every day and this housing bill will finally help them stay in their homes and help put our economy on the road to recovery."

"The National Housing Trust Fund campaign began under Senator Kerry's leadership when he introduced a bill to establish a National Affordable Housing Trust Fund in 2000. With the enactment of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 today, together we have achieved success. The result is a renewed commitment by the Federal government to solving the housing problems of the very poorest families in our nation, who have been overlooked and neglected for too long," said Shelia Crowley, President and CEO of the National Low Income Housing Coalition.

 

The NIHLC has been engaged in the fight to pass this legislation for years.  Sen. Kerry, as the above passage notes, filed this bill initially in the 106th Congress in 2000.  It has been a long fight to get this needed initiative passed and establish a way to help a lot of families obtain a means to get housing. This is truly a great accomplishment and it's great to see the NIHLC celebrate the passage of this needed initiative.

 

Senator Kerry was one of the US observers of the Pakistani elections that were held in February of this year.  Americans, as well as people from all over the world, were shocked and saddened by the murder of Benazir Bhutto last December.  Mrs. Bhutto had been a voice of hope and a strong advocate for democracy for Pakistan.  Senator Kerry issued this statement about the elections in February while on that Foreign Relations Committee trip, "First and foremost, this election is a tribute to the Pakistani people, who were not deterred by the threat of violence or the tragic assassination of one of their most revered political figures, and who went to the polls and made a powerful statement about their commitment to democracy."

Mrs. Bhutto was an inspiration to a lot of people around the world.  She was a leader and a symbol of the possibilities open to women in Pakistan. Myra Chaudhary once again offers some perspectives on Pakistan and what Mrs. Bhutto and her message meant to so many Pakistanis the world over.  Again, Myra is not writing as a foreign policy expert but as an American with roots in Pakistan. These blog posts are a wonderful way to share some insights into a country that is critical to the future of the Near East and critical to America's foreign policy plans in a troubled region of the world.

 

Women of Pakistan

My thoughts go back to that beautiful New England autumn day when I met Benazir Bhutto, the Prime Minister of Pakistan. There she was a beautiful and graceful woman who had been in such a powerful position-- leading a country of 160 million. Loved and supported by millions, the first ever woman prime minister of a Muslim country and also the youngest prime minister to be elected twice. She was a woman who had gone through struggles and hardships beyond imagination. There was an air of elegance to her. You could feel her wisdom. Every gesture of hers was a testament to her strength and determination. But what touched me most was her simple human side. The way she talked about her children and expressed how difficult it was to be away from them. How she spoke with such compassion and warmth. I fondly remember how she looked at the blue sky and the red-orange leaves and said "this is my version of heaven on earth". Little did I understand what she had meant then: that the simple little joys of life are often its biggest pleasures.

Four years later, on an ordinary day in December while on school vacation, things changed. I woke up, and then I heard the devastating news of her assassination. How could anybody be so cruel as to take the life of this woman, a mother of three beautiful children? How could they deprive a nation of a much needed leader? Why did they do that?

Benazir was a symbol of hope, courage, and determination. She was very progressive and she never gave up her struggle for democracy. She was loved by millions but she was also feared by many because of that same strength and determination. She was a threat to them. And that is why they wanted to stop her. They knew they could not, so they took her life. What a terrible tragedy. She is gone but her legacy to never ever lose hope will live on.

Such are the stories of the ongoing struggles of the people of Pakistan and the women who have never stayed behind. This goes back to even before Pakistan was created. Fatima Jinnah the sister of the founder of Pakistan, Mohammad Ali Jinah, stood by the side of her brother all the way to the creation of Pakistan. Then, it was in 1965, when Fatimah Jinnah, ran for president. One million people came to support her on her 293 mile campaign train route called the "Freedom Special". People were so energized by her words that they kept on pulling the emergency breaks at each station, begging her to speak and delaying her train by 22 hours. It is so inspiring that even so long ago one woman was able to captivate such large audiences. She tirelessly fought against a dictator. People were very fond of her and began to call her Mother of the Nation (Madar E Millat), embodying hope, equality, justice, and unity.

Women in Pakistan have continued to play a very important role. They are actively involved in the government, politics, and society at all levels. They are doctors, business women, engineers, lawyers, diplomats, ambassadors, artists, teachers, writers, poets, singers, workers, farmers, mothers, wives, students, and the list goes on and on. The current speaker of the national assembly is also a woman. Women in fact are a strong part of the fabric of society in Pakistan just like they are in America.

We need to remember, though, that a vast majority of the population in Pakistan lives in rural areas many of which are lacking even basic facilities and amenities. This is especially true in the remote areas. In our struggle for peace in this very important part of the world, let us not ignore the importance of woman. Women are central to a family and it all begins there. We cannot afford to leave these women behind. The world needs to help empower them with possibilities and keep hope alive.

I dedicate this little piece to the struggling women of Pakistan and women all over the world.

Other articles in this series:

Hope Within Pakistan- July 5, 2008
Education and Poverty in Pakistan- July 13, 2008

Women of Pakistan- July 28, 2008

A Message of Hope and Determination- August 12, 2008

 

-Myra Chaudhary

Myra is a junior at Brandeis University. She is majoring in Economics and International and Global Studies.

 

The U.S. Senate overwhelmingly voted to pass the Housing Bill and send it to President Bush for his signature. The bill, formally called the Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008, included four provisions that Senator Kerry introduced and helped guide through the legislative process this year. The Senator's office explained the four provisions in a press release that went out shortly after the 72-13 vote on the bill in an unusual Saturday session:

• Kerry worked with Senator Gordon Smith (R-Oregon) to include the Mortgage Revenue Bond Provision, which provides an additional $11 billion of tax-exempt private activity bonds to housing finance agencies. The provision would allow the proceeds from the bonds to be used to refinance subprime loans, provide mortgages for first time homebuyers and for multifamily rental housing. This means that approximately $209 million in targeted mortgage relief will be available to the homeowners of Massachusetts, which could result in as may as 1,000 new loans in Massachusetts. Nationwide this would result in close to 87,000 additional loans.
• The bill also contains provisions to amend the Service Members Civil Relief Act (SCRA) by extending the period a lender must wait before starting disclosure procedures from 90 days to nine months after a service member has returned from active duty and capping interest on mortgages at 6 percent for one year after a serviceperson completes his/her services.
• The bill also establishes a National Affordable Housing Trust Fund, introduced by Kerry and Senator Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) which requires Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to set aside a portion of their profits of which, 65 percent will be used for the Housing Trust Fund (approximately $3.4 billion over ten years), and 35 percent will go toward a Capital Magnet Fund to leverage affordable housing development and community development activities. In 2000, Kerry wrote the first National Affordable Housing Trust Fund legislation to construct, rehabilitate, and preserve 1.5 million units of housing over the next 10 years.
• The bill includes $3.92 billion for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program which will help local communities fight the effects of foreclosure. Earlier this year, Kerry, along with Senator Edward Kennedy, sent a letter to the Senate leadership underscoring the need for $2 billion in additional funding for CDBG in the upcoming housing legislation.

 

Senator Reid said today that 8,500 people receive a foresclosure warning every working day in America.  That's 8,500 working families that have to face the agony of being forced out of their homes.  This bill offers some relief to those hard-pressed Americans who simply want to be given a chance to fairly pay off their loans and keep their homes.  Congratulations to all who helped this bill pass.  The American people won this victory today and thousands of people will be the beneficiaries of this legislation.

  

If you haven't read it yet, please see the previous post current goings on regarding Zimbabwe.

The overarching question here is, having looked at the immediate situation, is now: where do we go from here? What is the appropriate U.S. response to the situation in Zimbabwe?

The situation on the ground in November was dire, and has become even more so in the ensuing months. As the currency devalues further from, when I was there, $1 USD to $1.3 million Zim dollars to the rate now of $1 USD to $5 billion Zim dollars, the government simply prints out worthless bills (when the paper is available to do so) in larger denominations that must be carried around in backpacks. This is a currency that was once pegged, one to one, to the British pound. The actual foreign exchange (or, forex) rate is established on the parallel market: in the bus while crossing the border from South Africa where people yell out numbers and the price rises and falls as if it were the New York Stock Exchange; in living rooms where teethy professionals who have abandoned their jobs to work as full time forex dealers regale you with (unsubstantiated) stories of assisting the Governor of the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe sell the forex he stole from the Zimbabwean people for a higher price than those very people, who still diligently queue for days outside of its main Harare branch on the rumor that they will be able to access their accounts, will ever receive. Good people sighed as they told me that it costs them more to get to work than they make in a month, but that somehow (bartering, importing, pilfering) they survive. A mother cried as she told me what the Bank told her when she tried to pay for her son's college tuition- that the Bank had no more money, not even for Zanu-PF party loyalists like herself. 

As for party loyalty, it's become confined to the individuals who are able to drive Hummers in a country without petrol; go to the arcade in a brightly lit mall near Mugabe's Presidential compound in a country without electricity for a majority of the time I was there; and eat out in restaurants on Friday nights while the majority of the population starves as they wait for the individuals in their towns who can afford to get through and back to South Africa on a Greyhound come back with huge tubs of imported luxuries like bread, flour, and cooking oil. Even Zanu-PF loyalists who I talked to said that at this point they just needed their country back on track: Zanu-PF and MDC be damned. Whoever could make a difference at that point needed to step in immediately- and that was from a member of Zanu-PF, in November.

And with good reason. At the pro-Mugabe seed and fertilizer rally I attended, the domestic workers who were the main participants gave half-hearted fists when the revolutionary song was sung and the Zanu-PF rally cry chanted. All they were looking forward to is the high price the seed and fertilizer would fetch on the parallel market- as domestic workers they really had no use for such things. The organizers of the event (local Zanu-PF politicians) were even quite friendly, although one of them quickly cautioned me off of taking pictures of the event- they "liked me" and wanted to see me again. When I asked what they meant, they smiled and plainly said that they wouldn't want the CIO to take away their new American friend- the CIO, or Central Intelligence Organization, is Mugabe's personal secret police force (I was fortunate enough to be able to tour a newly built CIO housing complex later in my trip, built brand new near the Presidential compound). I still managed to get some videos taken of the event, which are posted below.

 

 

The seed and fertilizer which I sat atop of late at night on a local politician's flatbed, whose heart (or, at the very least, pickup) I had bought my way into, never even reached the people at the rally, much less the people who might actually utilize them. As we drove along the highway and people pointed out the vast acreages of "white man's land" that used to be maize, wheat, and generally edible products, irony hit like a hammer. One well-maintained and functioning plot still owned by a white man was a cow farm. Apparently Robert Mugabe believes that milk does a body so good that it will hold over his starving populace until the politics of princes are sorted out.

Not that milk is an affordable commodity any longer. While I was there it cost $20 million Zim dollars to get from the Low-density suburbs to downtown Harare and back. For workers regardless of collar-color, it was an almost unthinkable sum where a monthly salary could have been $2 million Zim dollars, and yet people still got to and from work (these days the population has become even more harried and less able to commute due to the drastic increase in inflation). They afford this the same way we were able to buy petrol in a country supposedly devoid of it: the gas was distributed off the back of another pickup truck in front of a gas station by the attendants who used to work there. A main method of sustenance is to take from ones job and sell whatever one takes, be it petrol or computer services or lightbulbs, on the parallel market for a market price.

The plight of Zimbabwe's people deserves a rapid regional solution with heavy influence from the major international powers, like U.S. and the U.K, that support democratic resolutions and regional stability. That said, when such strong divisions exist not only in the international and regional community (UN and AU, respectively), it creates a delicate situation regarding what action to be taken. The AU recommends a Kenya-like unity government to be adopted until the election issues have been sorted out. However, from statements given by MDC and Zanu-PF spokespeople, it seems unlikely that either side will readily agree to working together. Just as it is unlikely that Mugabe will give up power unless forced to, based on his treatment of the runoff elections and statements made since to international media and at the AU summit. On the other hand, the MDC seems unwilling to negotiate unless Mugabe is willing to admit the election's illegitimacy- a similarly unlikely scenario.

The United States has presented a draft resolution to the UN, placing travel bans and asset freezes on 14 members of the Zanu-PF party (technically on "anyone who helped the government 'undermine democratic processes"), and an embargo on arms shipments to Zimbabwe. If the majority of the UN Security Council who voted for the resolution are able to persuade Russia and China that these sanctions are not an interventionist intrusion into the national sovereignty of a sovereign nation but appropriate measures for the international community to take against a tyrant and his entourage, Mugabe may be further encouraged to come to the negotiating table.

Even if Mugabe and the Zanu-PF can be persuaded to negotiate, it would not effect a real change on the ground until after negotiations took place.
As to whether sanctions would work or not, Mugabe's elite base of support does rely on a great deal of deliverable goods, and would be sincerely disrupted by the proposed travel bans and asset freezes, especially if influxes of foreign currency are ceased to the men at the top. The arms embargo, while a useful step, is less likely to affect the outcome of this situation- Zimbabwe, and specifically Mugabe's party, seems to have enough weapons and enough of a militia force to continue to inflict their will upon the unarmed populous and, more importantly in the post-election environment, against targeted members of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) party.

The Senator has previously called for Mugabe to step aside after the initial March 29th election , but much has changed since then. With regional leaders calling for a coalition-style government, and all parties involved saying that the solution must come ultimately from Zimbabwe, it seems unlikely that the U.S. will take a strong stand for Mugabe's outright removal at this point. As President Thabo Mbeki steps up the pressure on negotiations between Zanu-PF and MDC members due to the pressure placed on him at this month's G8 meeting, it looks like the best option right now for a new dawn in Zimbabwe is at the negotiating table.

 

 

Rhick Bose is a member of the Class of 2009 at Boston College in Chestnut Hill, MA majoring in International Studies

Fred Jennings is Senior at the Elliott School of International Affairs at The George Washington University in Washington, DC.

 

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee is holding a hearing on the situation in Zimbabwe on Tuesday, July 15th at  10:15 AM.  Rhick Bose has travelled to Zimbabwe last November and witnessed some of the unrest in that country. He had a front row seat to some of the political rallies that preceeded the election and saw the difficulties the people of Zimbabwe were having with the terrible economic and political situation there.  Rhick Bose is an intern in the JohnKerry.com office and has generously offered to share what he observed and offers some insights based on his experiences with members of the Zanu-PF. His co-writer on this post is Fred Jennings who shares Rhick's interest in African Affairs and in the situation in Zimbabwe in particular. His blog on International Relations is at blog.simnatic.com.

Part 1, the current situation

By the dawn's early light last week in Zimbabwe, the runoff election took place despite sharp criticism from the international community and the African Union. On June 27th, the second round of voting was carried out. Those unwilling to go to the polls were, in some areas, taken there by armed militiamen.

Opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai withdrew, stating that the violence and bloodshed surrounding the upcoming elections had made a free and fair election impossible. Thus, Mugabe went unopposed in the decisive run-off election.

The day after the elections, President Bush made a statement calling for strong sanctions on Zimbabwe as a follow-up to a joint statement by G8 countries on June 27th. On June 30th, this was followed by a US draft resolution to the UN titled "Draft Elements for a Chapter VII Sanctions Resolution." It would levy travel bans and freeze assets for members of the Zimbabwe African National Union - Patriotic Front (Zanu-PF), Mugabe's political party, and would place an embargo on arms sales to Zimbabwe like the controversial shipment from China that happened in April of this year. (Humans Rights First has an excellent summary of China's arms sales to Zimbabwe.) This resolution was introduced into the Security Council agenda on July 12, and vetoed by Russia and China. The U.S. and U.K. characterized the veto as "incomprehensible" and saying it "called into question Russia's reliability as a G8 partner." 

Apart from the stated reason of noninterference in what Russia and China had deemed to be Zimbabwe's "internal affairs," a possible reason for the veto could be time to gauge the effectiveness of the recent high-level negotiations held in South Africa between the ruling Zanu-PF and Morgan Tsvangirai's MDC with mediators representing South African President Thabo Mbeki. Progress remains to be seen however, as Tsvangiari has characterized the meetings as "talks about talks."

According to journalist Caiphas Chimhete and allAfrica.com, the current violence may be less widespread but is much more coordinated:

" University of Zimbabwe political science lecturer Eldred Masunungure said the attack on MDC activists and their properties by suspected Zanu PF supporters was an attempt to pressure the opposition party to the negotiating table. 'If you look at the violence, it is no longer targeted at the general public as it was prior to the 27 June election but at key MDC activists. It an attempt to force them to the negotiating table,' Masunungure said.

He said soon after the March election, the violence was directed at the general public in order to force them to vote for Mugabe. But now the violence was targeting key MDC officials."

Despite strong statements by the UN, AU, and many leading nations both African and Western, very little international action has been undertaken yet to relieve the plight of the Zimbabwean people. Notably, Botswana, a neighbor country with longtime relations with Zimbabwe, has called for barring Mugabe from the African Union and the South African Development Community (SADC) . More recently, the Botswana Defense Forces have been deployed along the Botswana-Zimbabwe border, and Botswana has severed diplomatic ties with Zimbabwe .

For more information, Reuters has organized a fairly comprehensive and digestible "Factbox" entitled "What might the world do about Zimbabwe?"

 

 Fred Jennings is Senior at the Elliott School of International Affairs at The George Washington University in Washington, DC.

Rhick Bose is a member of the Class of 2009 at Boston College in Chestnut Hill, MA majoring in International Studies

 

 

This is another in a series of articles that Myra Chaudhary has graciously consented to write about Pakistan. Ms. Chaudhary is an American student studying at Brandeis University just outside of Boston who is interning for JohnKerry.com this summer. Myra is not writing as a foreign policy expert. Her wonderful posts offer a view on Pakistan from someone who was born and raised in America but who has strong ties and knowledge of Pakistan and some insight into some of the problems facing that extremely important country. Sometimes the best diplomacy doesn't come from a think tank or a policy board. It comes from individuals who share their own experiences and observations.

Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware recently held a hearing in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee about American relations and outreach to the Pakistani government and the Pakistani people. He said how Sen. Kerry and the other members of the Committee absolutely believed that if there is one area of the world that America needs to "get right" in terms of how it conducts diplomatic efforts, it's Pakistan. Sen. Biden spoke about America's efforts being concentrated in military aid and that we also need to assert what is called our "soft power" in the region. That soft power was on display in October of 2005 when the Kashmir region of Pakistan suffered a devastating earthquake. American relief workers, doctors and aid agencies immediately responded to the people of Pakistan and offered humanitarian services. Aid spent on education, infrastructure, food programs and so forth pays powerful dividends to the Pakistani people and presents America as a positive friend that Pakistanis can rely on as allies.

    Pakistan has been experiencing many serious problems. It cannot be expected for everything to be fixed overnight. It is very important though to establish goals and set up priorities. What is needed most is a stable democratic government, basic essentials for all, access to proper education and healthcare and justice for ALL.

    Pakistan provides a very large number of highly skilled professionals including doctors, engineers, scientists and many others all over the world .That is something surely to be proud of. But wait a minute and look more carefully. Why do we let so many beautiful minds go to waste? There is so much difference between the rich and the poor there. That is so sad. Only if everyone truly had opportunities what a beautiful world it would be. I know that once given a chance people have a lot of potential.

    There is one poor family I personally know in Pakistan with a remarkable story. The husband earned a living selling somosas, a fried snack made with potatoes and flour, on a cart for less than an American penny a piece. The wife washed dishes and clothes for a living. In spite of their hardships and very meager resources, they sent their eldest son, Saleem, to school. By the time he finished high school, some of his family members told him that he had studied enough. This boy never gave up. He was very brilliant and determined so he went to college, which he paid for by tutoring wealthy students. He eventually became a Charted Accountant. He persuaded his sister to study, and helped her to get her B.A. and M.A. They were able to earn enough money to leave the servant quarters of the house where the mother washed dishes and moved to a house of their own. All of this happened because of education. Education opened doors for them to possibilities which they could not have dreamed of otherwise.

    Three years ago, I went to a Human Development foundation event in Boston where I saw a video of a little girl in a Pakistani village, living in extreme poverty. She excitedly said that "When I grow up, I will study and become a doctor!"( "Jab mein bari hon gi main doctor banoon gee!") I was really moved and still see her face. Why should she not be able to fulfill her dreams? There are many children like this who are eager to learn. This is the kind of excitement and energy that Pakistan needs to invest in. Once ignited, this fire will never be extinguished. It must be the biggest priority and a goal to provide education to all in Pakistan.

    Poverty and ignorance is a very dangerous combination. It can trap people in inescapable circles and could lead to frustration and despair. It not only makes one vulnerable to disease and suffering but to all kinds of exploitations. This is especially true in remote areas.

    The world needs to help Pakistan provide its people with education and provide them with possibilities.

    It may sound simplistic but it is well proven to be the strongest weapon and a solution to many complex problems. For when there are possibilities there is hope. And when there is hope, life is worth living.

 

    Other articles in this series:

    Hope Within Pakistan--July 5,2008

    Education and Poverty in Pakistan--July 13,2008

    Women of Pakistan--July 28th, 2008

    A Message of Hope and Determination--August 12, 2008
   

Myra Chaudhary

    Myra is a junior at Brandeis University. She is majoring in Economics and International and Global Studies.

Top McCain economic advisor, former Senator Phil Gramm, laid out his thoughts on the economic downturns experienced by many Americans over the past few months.  He referred to the recent loss of homes, loss of real wage for families, and increased prices of food and oil as a "mental recession."  Also referring to the United States as a "nation of whiners."

The full quotes from The Washington Times.

"You've heard of mental depression; this is a mental recession."

"We have become a nation of whiners," he said.  "You just hear this constant whining, complaining about a loss of competitiveness, America in decline" despite a major export boom that is the primary reason that growth continues in the economy, he said.

This is who McCain has picked as his top financial man? So, who's his top health care advisor, Dr. Kevorkian?

From America, Pakistan seems like a totally different world full of cultural and religious differences, and political chaos. I have seen Pakistan with my own eyes. The most important lesson I have learned is that Pakistanis are ordinary people just like Americans. Why should anyone even care about Pakistan? I personally cannot stop caring about this important country. As a Pakistani-American student at Brandeis University, born and raised in Massachusetts, I would like to show you my Pakistan.

I have traveled to Pakistan many times throughout my life.The memories of my visits will always be very dear to me. I continue to stay in touch with my relatives who live in the province of Punjab in the northeast. My family has been quite active in the Pakistani Association of Greater Boston, Association of Pakistani Physicians of North America, and Human Development Foundation. In Massachusetts, there are literally thousands of Pakistanis, all who are a very special part of my life. My fascination and understanding of Pakistan has intensified through interactions with a range of people including professionals, prime ministers, diplomats, ordinary shop keepers, poor servants, and Pakistanis of all ages and views.

It would be naïve not to recognize that Pakistan is experiencing problems. But it would be equally foolish to think that everything in Pakistan is bad. The Pakistan that I know is full of children happily playing in fields, fragrant flowers, mango trees, people meeting friends at shops, families and friends celebrating weddings, holidays together, and ordinary people trying to live their lives in peace and happiness. Pakistanis have an immense love for any kind of music, singing, poetry, fashion, dancing, and parties. The culture is a vibrant celebration of love, family, and life.

Pakistanis are generally kind, hardworking, charitable people. My own grandmother has been actively involved in the Rotary Club, which travels throughout Pakistan and the world gathering donations for needy children, establishing schools and community centers for women and children, taking care of the sick, and helping families in need. I have seen many other similar compassionate acts in Pakistan and in America.

Pakistan desperately wants peace, prosperity, hope, democracy, freedom, safety, education, healthcare, elimination of poverty, and an end to terrorism. A vast majority of the people are moderate and progressive. They are totally against terrorism, religious fundamentalism and madrassas, all things which have caused them a great deal of suffering. Their wishes and goals are not any different from what America wants.

There are stories in American newspapers about the Taliban making inroads in the Northwestern Frontier privince of Pakistan.  This is the area of the country that shares a border with Afghanistan and also shares a lot of the same problems due to poverty, lack of educational opportunites and rural remoteness. Pakistan is a large and very diverse country. Most Pakistanis want a country that functions under constitutional guidelines and according to an established rule of law. 

As Americans, it is in our interests not to alienate the Pakistani people, a vast majority of whom want what Americans want; democratic rule and educational and economic opportunities for the people.  America can help to bring hope to the Pakistani people and develop friendship between our two countries. I hope to continue this discussion about Pakistan in some future blog posts.  Feel free to ask me any questions in comments to this post.  I will check back in and answer them regularly.

 Others articles in this series:

Hope within Pakistan -- July 5th, 2008

Education and Poverty in Pakistan-- July 13th, 2008 

Women of Pakistan-- July 28th, 2008

A Message of Hope and Determination-- August 12th, 2008

-Myra Chaudhary

Myra is a junior at Brandeis University. She is majoring in Economics and International and Global Studies.

 

The recent HBO miniseries on John Adams reminded viewers of the incredible sacrifices that the Founding Fathers -- and Mothers -- went through to get this country started. John and Abigail Adams endured years of separation, long periods of economic and political uncertainty and family hardships that tested their commitment to the American cause.

That cause and the ideals of the American Revolution can get lost in all the bunting and fireworks that we associate with the 4th of July. The phrases most people know by heart from the Declaration of Independence are the stirring pronouncements that "all men are created equal" and that we have a right to "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Yet the Declaration is more than even those profound words. It is a full fledged bill of indictment against a callous government that didn't want to listen to the concerns of its citizens.

Thomas Jefferson's Declaration lays out a complete case for why the American colonies had to separate from an unfeeling government that was no longer concerned with the rule of law or the rights of a whole citizenry under that law. King George III, through his Ministers had broken faith with his American subjects. Jefferson laid out a whole series of actions he felt demanded a break for America from political union with Great Britain. Among these affronts to freedom were:

He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.

He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to civil power.

These are just a few of the charges that Jefferson included in his argument for American Independence. Great Britain had lost the moral and ethical right to any claim of governance over America and the free people of the colonies because of these abuses of power. Governments exist to secure the rights of the people, Jefferson wrote, and when basic rights are ignored and purposefully disregarded, then a change in governments is mandated. As the Declaration states in the preamble:

That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

 

These are the founding sentiments of the American experiment in democracy. This is the document that John Hancock signed that long ago hot July day in Philadelphia with an extra large signature so that, in his words, "fat George can read it without his spectacles." (Okay some things, like Massachusetts wit and bluntness never change.)

John Adams, the "Colossus of Independence" knew the significance of these actions. America was a small nation of under 3 million people. Great Britain was the most powerful nation on earth at that time and it was by no means certain that the colonies would prevail in their fight. Adams himself, along with all his co-signers of this impertinent document, could have been signing their own death warrants. They risked hanging for the offense of treason if the War for Independence had gone the other way. Yet Adams called for celebrations of what had happened in July in Philadelphia when he wrote to his wife Abigail about the adoption of Independence:

The Second Day of July 1776, will be the most memorable Epocha, in the History of America.

I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated, by succeeding Generations, as the great anniversary Festival. It ought to be commemorated, as the Day of Deliverance by solemn Acts of Devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with Pomp and Parade, with Shews, Games, Sports, Guns, Bells, Bonfires and Illuminations from one End of this Continent to the other from this Time forward forever more.

You will think me transported with Enthusiasm but I am not. -- I am well aware of the Toil and Blood and Treasure, that it will cost Us to maintain this Declaration, and support and defend these States. -- Yet through all the Gloom I can see the Rays of ravishing Light and Glory. I can see that the End is more than worth all the Means. And that Posterity will tryumph in that Days Transaction, even altho We should rue it, which I trust in God We shall not.

--  Letter from John Adams to Abigail Adams, 3 July 1776, "Had a Declaration..." [electronic edition]. Adams Family Papers: An Electronic Archive. Massachusetts Historical Society. http://www.masshist.org/digitaladams/

Happy 4th of July. This is indeed a glorious celebration of "We the People" and the reverence we hold for the rule of law. This last paragraph of the Declaration is what Mr. Adams found so transporting and transformative. I think most Americans would agree with him; this is what we are about as a people.

We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by the authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.