What's New in the Middle East

When Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, the former chief of staff for Secretary Colin Powell, and I were visiting with members of Congress and their staff to jointly oppose a resolution that would lower the threshold for war with Iran (H.Res. 568), he warned that “this resolution reads like the same sheet of music that got us into the Iraq war”.

The military authorization bill includes billions for weapon systems designed for saber-rattling toward Iran, and possibly for use in an attack on Iran. The bill would also require the administration to prepare for war by dramatically escalating the U.S. military presence in the Mideast.

While the bill does not explicitly state that the new weapons systems it includes would be used for a war with Iran, a staffer from the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) has reportedly explained that the additional funding for weapon systems 'could be used in a war with Iran'. This detailed weapons and policy outline pushing for a war with Iran is adapted from legislation (H.R. 4485) introduced last month by Rep. Mike Conaway (TX), and has been supported by only 13 Republican co-sponsors.

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) is a bill that has been passed by Congress every year for over 50 years. Most authorization bills are taken up once every two-five years, but Congress has a special affinity for the military authorization bill—often calling it a “must-pass” bill. This year will be no different.

Last year, the fiscal year (FY) 2012 NDAA became synonymous with indefinite detention due to provisions included that allow for detention of U.S. citizens by the U.S. military. President Obama signed the NDAA on December 31, 2012, after it was passed by both chambers. Often forgotten, however, are some of the other momentum-building votes that happened on amendments to the FY2012 NDAA.

As early as next week, the Senate could vote on a far reaching, aggressive Iran sanctions package which is likely to include a resolution endorsing a lower threshold for war with Iran. Senator Jeff Merkley (OR), as he explained in a recent town hall meeting, has not yet taken a position on the resolution, but has acknowledged concerns that the pending Iran legislation could be considered as a push for war.

For over a year now, the Syrian government has violently repressed its citizens. In what started out as a largely peaceful movement in March 2011, has resulted in nearly 9,000 deaths and protracted armed violence.

This week marked one year since the violent crackdown against what began as a nonviolent uprising in Syria began. Since that time, thousands of people have been killed and the country now appears to be slipping toward full civil war. The Syrian government continues a campaign of violent repression, including the recent attack on Homs that killed hundreds of civilians. Many opposition groups are now actively taking up arms against the regime, convinced that ending the Assad regime through force is the only option left. President Bashar al-Assad himself has demonstrated strong resistance to international diplomatic and even humanitarian efforts to address the escalating crisis.

Here in Washington, talk of military intervention in Syria is also escalating quickly. Despite warnings by many experts, including military officials, that foreign armed intervention in Syria could spark broader regional conflict and increase the humanitarian suffering, some members of Congress, administration officials, and human rights advocates are urging "something" be done. Once again, in the midst of violence, our toolbox seems tragically sparse.

I'm shocked, though, at the calls for military intervention. While I know far too little about Syria to propose a comprehensive way forward, what I have learned through the crisis illustrates what a disaster military intervention would be.

The willingness of both Democrats and Republicans in the United States Congress to sponsor resolutions that would press for a military action is unnerving. Fortunately, there are some in Congress willing to speak out for diplomacy. The fact is: words matter, particularly the words spoken about war by the President, leaders of other countries and the people elected to national office, such as our members of Congress.

As early as Wednesday, Senators Bob Casey (PA), Lindsey Graham (SC), and Joe Lieberman (CT) are expected to introduce a resolution that would effectively endorse a new redline for war with Iran, and a new ultimatum that, if pursued by the administration, would virtually guarantee failure for any diplomatic efforts to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran and prevent war.

Reading the recent article in the New York Times Magazine, "Will Israel Attack Iran?", you might begin to think a war with Iran is inevitable and coming very soon. But no war is inevitable until it is underway, and there are real diplomatic solutions to the escalating crisis with Iran.

President Obama finished his third State of the Union Address the same way he began it—by touting what the administration considers foreign policy successes. “For the first time in nine years, there are no Americans fighting in Iraq” President Obama said, concluding his address by stating, “Ending the Iraq war has allowed us to strike decisive blows against our enemies.”

This kind of rhetoric is incredibly unfortunate. The logic contained within these thoughts says that force has worked to end wars when it has, in fact, failed to deliver long term peace and stability. We can clearly see this playing out in Iraq today—not to mention, as I wrote in December, the U.S. war in Iraq may have concluded, but the long term damage is far from done running itscourse.

On January 5th, President Obama and Secretary of Defense Panetta released the Pentagon's new military strategy document, designed to guide military budgets and operations for years to come. Despite the heavy rhetoric from President Obama and Secretary Panetta claiming the new strategy represents big changes, I find little more than cosmetic touch ups to the same old war policies that have gotten the US into its current economic and security problems and reaped horrendous global damage along the way.

Yes, the size of the forces will be reduced somewhat. Yes, there's a shift away from the idea of the US being able to fight two major wars simultaneously (that one has been buried in Iraq and Afghanistan already). Yes, military planners will be focusing more on Asia and the Middle East, less on Europe and Latin America. And yes, there will be changes in the budget line items (think more drones and cyberwarfare) presented to Congress.

When the U.S. pulled its last soldiers from Iraq this week, it almost went unmarked here at FCNL. Despite the fact that the U.S. march toward war 10 years ago spawned the well-known “war is not the answer” slogan found on bumper stickers and yard signs across the country, and despite the fact that FCNL’s lobbying Congress over the last 9 years helped create the timetable for withdrawing troops by December 2011 through the creation of the Iraq Study Group, we held no party.

The uncertainty of the results we got for the price we paid for the war in Iraq should give everyone pause.

As the last U.S. soldiers leave Iraq, our nation is reflecting on the legacy of this war for returning veterans, for taxpayers, and for U.S. relations with the rest of the world. But nine years later, I’m concerned that as a nation we are simply trying to put Iraq behind us rather than learn some lessons from this conflict. Let us all not forget the biggest lesson of all: the Iraq war was a mistake.

When I deployed to Iraq in 2004, our government argued we were in Iraq to break Saddam Hussein’s ties to al Qaeda, to continue the search for weapons of mass destruction and to bring freedom and democracy to the Iraqi people. Today, very few people argue there were strong links between Iraq and al Qaeda before the U.S. invasion (al Qaeda moved in after the invasion). The CIA has acknowledged that it was the United Nations and the international community that blocked Iraq from developing weapons of mass destruction. And looking at the headlines from Iraq, freedom and democracy still seems a long way away for the Iraqi people.

Last night, the House voted 410-11 in support of a bill that would outlaw any contact between U.S. officials and certain Iranian officials, which could close down prospects for diplomatic communication and increase the threat of war.

Congress ignored the warnings of a host of former ambassadors, national security analysts, and other experts and voted in favor of this counterproductive legislation that would criminalize any contact between any U.S. government officials and any Iranian official who "presents a threat to the United States" or is "affiliated with terrorist organizations." If this legislation were to be enacted into law, in a crisis, U.S. diplomats could find themselves unable to talk to their Iranian counterparts to prevent war from erupting.

In the coming weeks, the last of US combat troops will be deployed out of Iraq. For those of us who worked hard to prevent and end this war it is a great relief to see this deplorable chapter of US policy coming to an end. But I find it hard to celebrate.

2011 has been a remarkable year in our lobbying for a world without war. I'm also acutely aware of how many challenges remain and how much work we have ahead in 2012.

As speculation mounts that a covert war with Iran is already well underway, the House is expected to vote Tuesday on a bill that could sabotage diplomacy with Iran, heightening the risk of a full-scale regional war.

After Thanksgiving, your Senator will cast some of his or her most important votes on war and peace of the year, so this is a crucial time to weigh in, and ask your Senator to vote to end current wars and prevent new ones.

More than 2,000 people took action on FCNL’s alert “War or Diplomacy? Senate Prepares to Vote” last week to ask Senators to support diplomacy, and reject anti-peace amendments to the international affairs funding bill.

That message is still crucial for the Senate to hear because even though the international affairs funding bill is now stalled indefinitely, and the Supercommittee folded completely, after Thanksgiving the Senate will resume debate on the military authorization act.