"Most Progressive Dem Platform in History" Disturbingly Hawkish on Foreign
Policy
Published on
Thursday, July 28, 2016
by
The Progressive
"Most Progressive Dem Platform in History" Disturbingly Hawkish on Foreign
Policy
by
Stephen Zunes
(Image by Joeff Davis)
The Democratic Party platform may indeed be, as some have proclaimed, the
"most progressive" in the history of the party-at least on various important
domestic issues. But some of its foreign policy planks reflect a
disturbingly hawkish worldview consistent with those of Democratic nominee
Hillary Clinton.
Declaring that "we must defeat ISIS, al-Qaeda and their affiliates," the
platform calls for the United States and its allies to "destroy ISIS"
strongholds in Iraq and Syria. There is no acknowledgement that these
strongholds are in heavily populated urban areas, thereby risking
large-scale civilian casualties, and no mention that the rise of these
extremist organizations are a direct consequence of previous U.S. military
interventions in the region.
Regarding Iran, while there are many legitimate criticisms of that country's
reactionary regime, the platform appears to go overboard with its
accusations, such as the claim that "Iran is the leading state sponsor of
terrorism." Many analysts would give that designation to Saudi Arabia, with
whom the platform says the U.S. should "strengthen its security
cooperation."
It also says the party will "push back" against Iran's "support for
terrorist groups like Hamas." While there was a brief period of some limited
past Iranian support of that Palestinian Islamist organization, there is no
apparent evidence that it continues. Indeed, there are major tensions
between Hamas and Iran, including support for opposite sides in the Syrian
civil war. (By contrast, there is fair amount of evidence that Qatar-a U.S.
ally-does provide support for Hamas, but there is no mention of that.)
It also portrays some of the bizarre statements of former Iranian president
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad-such as his denial of the Nazi genocide against the
Jews-as current government policy. (Interestingly, there is nothing in the
platform regarding the ongoing denial by Turkey of the Ottomans' genocide of
the Armenians.)
The platform insists that Iran "has its fingerprints on almost every
conflict in the Middle East," ignoring the fact that in regard to the
important conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, Iran is on the same side as the
United States.
Most disturbingly, while endorsing the United Nations-backed seven-party
nuclear agreement, the platform claims that the party "will not hesitate to
take military action if Iran violates the agreement." Such a unilateral
attack would constitute a direct violation of the U.N. Charter.
The Democrats are taking the position that the United States and its allies
(Israel, Pakistan, and India) somehow have the right to maintain their
nuclear monopoly in the region, but that any non-allied country that seeks
to develop the technological infrastructure to potentially challenge this
monopoly should be attacked.
Perhaps the most disappointing plank in the platform is in regard to Israel
and Palestine.
Clinton and her representatives in the platform committee defeated a measure
calling for an end of Israel's occupation and illegal settlements. Indeed,
the platform pegs challenges to the occupation and settlements by the United
Nations and others as efforts to "delegitimize Israel." This is particularly
problematic language since, under Clinton's leadership, the State Department
formally listed efforts to "delegitimize" Israel as part of its definition
of anti-Semitism.
And rather than saying Israel should have a strong enough military to defend
itself from potential adversaries, it instead insists that Israel be
provided a "qualitatively military edge."
And even though the Obama administration-like all previous
administrations-refused to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital until the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict is resolved, the platform states that Jerusalem
"should remain the capital of Israel." It says nothing about Palestinian
aspirations that it serve as the capital of their country as well.
In addition, stating that Jerusalem remain "accessible to people of all
faiths" ignores the fact that Israeli occupation authorities have made it is
extremely difficult for Muslim and Christian Palestinians in the West Bank
to have access to the holy sites in the Old City and impossible for
Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.
The platform praises Israel's supposed "democracy, equality, tolerance, and
pluralism"-which would be news for the country's Palestinian minority and
those Palestinians living under direct military occupation or in forced
exile. It calls on the Palestinians to negotiate an agreement that
"guarantees Israel's future" as a "Jewish state," making it the world's
first peace treaty in which one party is obliged to recognize another
country's ethnic or religious identity over that of others.
Whatever the problems with the Democrat's foreign policy planks, the
Republican platform is far worse. To give but a few examples: the
Republicans call for dramatic increases in the already-bloated military
budget; insist on abrogating the Iran nuclear deal; make no mention of
Palestinian rights; and declare "We reject the false notion that Israel is
an occupier."
It is still disappointing, however, that-despite polls showing the Democrats
and independents are more progressive on foreign policy issues than at any
time in recent history-the Democratic Party platform skews so far to the
right.
C 2016 The Progressive
Stephen Zunes
Stephen Zunes is a Professor of Politics and International Studies at the
University of San
Skip to main content
//
. DONATE
. SIGN UP FOR NEWSLETTER
Thursday, July 28, 2016
. Home
. World
. U.S.
. Canada
. Climate
. War & Peace
. Economy
. Rights
. Solutions
"Most Progressive Dem Platform in History" Disturbingly Hawkish on Foreign
Policy
Published on
Thursday, July 28, 2016
by
The Progressive
"Most Progressive Dem Platform in History" Disturbingly Hawkish on Foreign
Policy
by
Stephen Zunes
. 21 Comments
.
. (Image by Joeff Davis)
. The Democratic Party platform may indeed be, as some have
proclaimed, the "most progressive" in the history of the party-at least on
various important domestic issues. But some of its foreign policy planks
reflect a disturbingly hawkish worldview consistent with those of Democratic
nominee Hillary Clinton.
. Declaring that "we must defeat ISIS, al-Qaeda and their affiliates,"
the platform calls for the United States and its allies to "destroy ISIS"
strongholds in Iraq and Syria. There is no acknowledgement that these
strongholds are in heavily populated urban areas, thereby risking
large-scale civilian casualties, and no mention that the rise of these
extremist organizations are a direct consequence of previous U.S. military
interventions in the region.
. Regarding Iran, while there are many legitimate criticisms of that
country's reactionary regime, the platform appears to go overboard with its
accusations, such as the claim that "Iran is the leading state sponsor of
terrorism." Many analysts would give that designation to Saudi Arabia, with
whom the platform says the U.S. should "strengthen its security
cooperation."
. It also says the party will "push back" against Iran's "support for
terrorist groups like Hamas." While there was a brief period of some limited
past Iranian support of that Palestinian Islamist organization, there is no
apparent evidence that it continues. Indeed, there are major tensions
between Hamas and Iran, including support for opposite sides in the Syrian
civil war. (By contrast, there is fair amount of evidence that Qatar-a U.S.
ally-does provide support for Hamas, but there is no mention of that.)
It also portrays some of the bizarre statements of former Iranian president
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad-such as his denial of the Nazi genocide against the
Jews-as current government policy. (Interestingly, there is nothing in the
platform regarding the ongoing denial by Turkey of the Ottomans' genocide of
the Armenians.)
The platform insists that Iran "has its fingerprints on almost every
conflict in the Middle East," ignoring the fact that in regard to the
important conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, Iran is on the same side as the
United States.
Most disturbingly, while endorsing the United Nations-backed seven-party
nuclear agreement, the platform claims that the party "will not hesitate to
take military action if Iran violates the agreement." Such a unilateral
attack would constitute a direct violation of the U.N. Charter.
The Democrats are taking the position that the United States and its allies
(Israel, Pakistan, and India) somehow have the right to maintain their
nuclear monopoly in the region, but that any non-allied country that seeks
to develop the technological infrastructure to potentially challenge this
monopoly should be attacked.
Perhaps the most disappointing plank in the platform is in regard to Israel
and Palestine.
Clinton and her representatives in the platform committee defeated a measure
calling for an end of Israel's occupation and illegal settlements. Indeed,
the platform pegs challenges to the occupation and settlements by the United
Nations and others as efforts to "delegitimize Israel." This is particularly
problematic language since, under Clinton's leadership, the State Department
formally listed efforts to "delegitimize" Israel as part of its definition
of anti-Semitism.
And rather than saying Israel should have a strong enough military to defend
itself from potential adversaries, it instead insists that Israel be
provided a "qualitatively military edge."
And even though the Obama administration-like all previous
administrations-refused to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital until the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict is resolved, the platform states that Jerusalem
"should remain the capital of Israel." It says nothing about Palestinian
aspirations that it serve as the capital of their country as well.
In addition, stating that Jerusalem remain "accessible to people of all
faiths" ignores the fact that Israeli occupation authorities have made it is
extremely difficult for Muslim and Christian Palestinians in the West Bank
to have access to the holy sites in the Old City and impossible for
Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.
The platform praises Israel's supposed "democracy, equality, tolerance, and
pluralism"-which would be news for the country's Palestinian minority and
those Palestinians living under direct military occupation or in forced
exile. It calls on the Palestinians to negotiate an agreement that
"guarantees Israel's future" as a "Jewish state," making it the world's
first peace treaty in which one party is obliged to recognize another
country's ethnic or religious identity over that of others.
Whatever the problems with the Democrat's foreign policy planks, the
Republican platform is far worse. To give but a few examples: the
Republicans call for dramatic increases in the already-bloated military
budget; insist on abrogating the Iran nuclear deal; make no mention of
Palestinian rights; and declare "We reject the false notion that Israel is
an occupier."
It is still disappointing, however, that-despite polls showing the Democrats
and independents are more progressive on foreign policy issues than at any
time in recent history-the Democratic Party platform skews so far to the
right.
C 2016 The Progressive
/author/stephen-zunes
