The misleading and mediocre Bernie Sanders foreign policy when in Congress
There is this impression among many that Bernie Sanders is a peace candidate or that his foreign policy is decent or better than decent. Let us examine his failures on foreign policy to show that is not the case at all and why his successes/correct calls (Iraq 91, Iraq 03, Yemen bill, current Iran etc.) are nowhere near enough to call his foreign policy decent.
A list of the big failures :
- Voted for regime change in Iraq in 98 (twice)
- Voted for Kosovo bombing in 99
- Co-sponsored resolution for regime change in Libya in 11
- Has been calling for regime change in Syria for many years. Still hasn’t changed position on it. Does not know/admit US armed terrorist groups in Syria
- Agreed with Obama in 15 to extend Afghan war to beyond 2016 because of Taliban. Mission/AUMF was only for Al Qaeda which was done in 2011.
- Evaluated and called Obama’s foreign policy as impressive in 2016 without being asked about it.
- Pushed Russiagate/neoMcCarthyism - including resolution to ensure sanctions on Russia in mid-2018
Some other recent ones - probably not as big as above, but still important. Bernie has pushed MSM propaganda on Venezuela (for significant part), Kashmir/Modi and China (Hong Kong and Uighurs). These and his positions on Syria and Russiagate show clearly that he has not changed much recently.
There are other ones as well, but will get to them in future articles. Let's look at the big ones here.
Regime change in Iraq in 98 :
1. Bernie voted yes on this bill : Iraq Liberation Act of 1998
The most relevant parts :
Declares that it should be the policy of the United States to seek to remove the Saddam Hussein regime from power in Iraq and to replace it with a democratic government.
Authorizes the President, after notifying specified congressional committees, to provide to the Iraqi democratic opposition organizations: (2) Department of Defense (DOD) defense articles and services and military education and training (IMET)
2. H.Res.612 - Expressing unequivocal support for the men and women of our Armed Forces who are currently carrying out missions in and around the Persian Gulf region.
The summary :
Declares that the Congress: (1) supports the men and women of the armed forces who are carrying out their missions; and (2) reaffirms that it should be U.S. policy to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime.
Kosovo bombing in 99 :
This was a very bad vote. Not just because of what happened because of US bombings, but because it was amply clear that he should have voted no. He was forewarned by his advisor Jeremy Brecher. Brecher lays out that US wasn’t really going there for humanitarian purpose, that there was a less violent alternative (ceasefire and assembling a peacekeeping force under U.N. authority ) and that giving a free reign to the executive branch resulted in Pentagon dropping unguided weapons from B-52 bombers - in an imprecise technique that resulted in large-scale civilian casualties in World War II and the Vietnam War.
The whole letter is a fantastic read, not just of that situation, but explaining that criteria for supporting the use of military violence must be extremely stringent and what minimal criteria for those should be.
The bombing killed as many, if not more people than what Milosevic’s people did at that particular time.
Point 1 : A United Nations court has ruled that Serbian troops did not carry out genocide against ethnic Albanians during Slobodan Milosevic's campaign of aggression in Kosovo from 1998 to 1999.
Point 2 : Crimes against humanity and war crimes did take place, it said, but "the exactions committed by Milosevic's regime cannot be qualified as criminal acts of genocide, since their purpose was not the destruction of the Albanian ethnic group... but its forceful departure from Kosovo".
Point 3: The decision comes as authorities in Serbia begin the excavation of another mass grave believed to contain the bodies of around 50 Kosovar Albanians.
Four graves have already been investigated, revealing the remains of 340 victims.
Point 1 : Approximately 1,500 Serb civilians were killed by NATO bombing in one of the biggest sham morality plays of the modern era.
Point 2: In March 2000 renewed fighting broke out when the KLA launched attacks into Serbia, trying to seize territory that it claimed historically belonged to ethnic Albanians. UN Human Rights Envoy Jiri Dienstbier reported that “the [NATO] bombing hasn’t solved any problems. It only multiplied the existing problems and created new ones. The Yugoslav economy was destroyed. Kosovo is destroyed. There are hundreds of thousands of people unemployed now.
Oh and the vote in the House failed 213-213. Any bombing/intervention action usually gets a majority in the house. This one didn't.
Bill Clinton went ahead with the strikes anyway.
And to top it off, Bernie still has not apologized for this vote.
Co-Sponsored resolution for regime change in Libya in 11:
S.Res 85 on March 1st, 2011 that includes :
Point 1 : Calls on Muammar Gadhafi to desist from further violence, recognize the Libyan people's demand for democratic change, resign his position, and permit a peaceful transition to democracy.”
Point 2 : The Security Council to take such further action to protect civilians in Libya from attack, including the possible imposition of a no-fly zone over Libyan territory.”
The 1st part is a call for regime change. The 2nd part includes no-fly zone(violence) as part of action to help make it happen.
From a Fox interview on March 28th, 2011 :
“Look, everybody understands Qaddafi is a thug and murderer. We want to see him go, but i think in the midst of two wars, I'm not quite sure we need a third war, and I hope the president tells us that our troops will be leaving there, that our military action in Libya will be
ending very, very shortly."
Note he didn’t say don’t intervene.
Now, lets see what was really happening:
Furthermore, it has long since been revealed that the motive behind Gaddafi’s overthrow was not that he was “killing his own people” — as the official story goes – but that he had backed a Pan-African gold-backed currency, which presented a threat to the U.S.-backed petrodollar system; that he had illegally financed the campaign of then-President of France Nicolas Sarkozy, representing a major liability to the powerful French politician; and that he had called on a united Africa to stop depending on the U.S. and the West.
Basically it was a Hillary Clinton headed propaganda campaign to make it the official story that Gadaffi was carrying out a genocide.
And after Gadaffi’s fall, Libya turned from one of the most prosperous countries in Africa (arguably the most prosperous) to a failed state, including where slaves are sold openly.
Syria:
Bernie has been calling for regime change in Syria for many years. Still hasn’t changed position on it.
In 2015,
“I support President Obama’s efforts to combat ISIS in Syria while at the same time supporting those in that country trying to remove the brutal dictatorship of Bashar Assad”
In April 2017,
Sen. @BernieSanders
on Syria: The US needs a strategy that demands Russia stop providing weaponry to Assad #CNNSOTU
This is bad on multiple levels. The US was arming rebel groups (including terrorist groups) to overthrow Assad. It was not welcomed by the Syrian government into Syria.
Russia being a trusted ally was invited into Syria to help combat terrorist groups.
So Bernie’s position on Syria was wrong because he was openly backing regime change in that country.
Bernie does not know/admit US armed terrorist groups in Syria (Al Qaeda/its affiliates).
Check out project Timber Sycamore (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timber_Sycamore),
a CIA Covert program to overthrow Assad. This program included supplying rebels with weapons, many of which ended up in the hands of Al Qaeda and its affiliates.
Here are is another link pointing out US supporting AQ/its affiliates.
Now how do we know Bernie does not know/admit that US supported AQ/its affiliates in Syria ? This is because Rep. Tulsi Gabbard in late 2016 introduced a bill called “Stop Arming Terrorists Act” stating that the US was arming terrorist groups in Syria and it must be stopped. https://gabbard.house.gov/news/press-releases/video-rep-tulsi-gabbard-introduces-legislation-stop-arming-terrorists
Rand Paul introduced the same in the Senate in Mar 2017. Bernie has been silent on it and did not co-sponsor the Senate version of the bill.
Agreeing with Obama in 15 to extend Afghan war to beyond 2016
Recently, in a debate, Bernie admitted his vote for AUMF(Authorization for Use of Military force) in Afghanistan in 2011 was wrong. But this came after moderators cited recent reporting on the "Afghanistan Papers" by the Washington Post who published an exposé a week before based on internal government documents that showed the U.S. government knowingly misled the American people about the war's progress.
He was hailed as a hero by many for apologizing. But let us look at what “really” happened, shall we ?
In late 2015, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said Sunday that he supports President Barack Obama's decision to keep troops in Afghanistan, prolonging the war beyond 2016.
"Well, yeah, I won't give you the exact number. Clearly, we do not want to see the Taliban gain more power, and I think we need a certain nucleus of American troops present in Afghanistan to try to provide the training and support the Afghan army needs," he said.
Oh, really ?
The AUMF was against Al Qaeda which had attacked the US in 2001. US mission to defeat it in Afghanistan was over in 2011, including the death of its leader Bin Laden (in Pakistan).
Taliban did not pose a threat to the US. So why did Bernie support Obama’s decision to try to stop the Taliban's influence in Afghanistan ? Yes, the Taliban are “bad guys” , but its not the right or job of US to go after every “bad guy”. The AUMF was never for that.
So given this, Bernie’s admitting that his AUMF vote in 2001 was wrong is plainly hollow. He only did it because of the release of the Afghanistan papers. I do not even blame Bernie for the 2001 AUMF vote. US needed some AUMF after 9/11. The given AUMF was wider in scope than required and few understood how badly it could be misused. But the 2015 decision to agree with Obama ? Clearly, horribly wrong.
Calling Obama’s foreign policy as impressive in 2016 without being asked :
In an early 2016 interview :
Q : “And what Secretary Clinton is saying is that you don’t have the experience to be ready for those kinds of challenges on day one.”
Bernie Sanders : “Well, that’s what she said about Barack Obama in 2008, and it turned out not to be true. I am impressed by the quality of his foreign policy.”
Bernie was not asked about Obama’s foreign policy. So there is no excuse that he was trying not to alienate voters by going against the then current Democratic President in Obama.
No, that is his honest evaluation of Obama’s foreign policy - after 7 years.
Obama’s foreign policy was bad overall in spite of some successes. For Bernie to say his foreign policy was impressive shows his judgement is sorely lacking with regard to foreign policy.
Pushing Russiagate/neo-McCarthyism :
“As someone who campaigned hard for Hillary Clinton from one end of this country to another, it is an outrage that she had to run against not only Donald Trump but also the Russian government.”
The Russian interference role was minimal. It most certainly did not have a significant impact on the 2016 general election. Hillary Clinton most certainly did not have to run against Russia.
Trump and Clinton spent $81M on US election Facebook ads, Russian agency $46K
https://techcrunch.com/2017/11/01/russian-facebook-ad-spend/
Trump and Clinton spent $81M on US election Facebook ads, Russian agency $46K
https://techcrunch.com/2017/11/01/russian-facebook-ad-spend/
In July 2018, Bernie Sanders introduced a resolution in the Senate that demanded that the Sanctions enacted against the Russian Federation be fully implemented.
Firstly, he was mostly silent or meek regarding Hillary Clinton/democratic establishment cheating him in the 2016 primaries. I am not talking about before the 2016 general election had happened. I’m talking about after the 2016 general election. He should have gone after the Democratic cheating full throttle. But no , he chose to be defend Hillary Clinton in February 2018 as shown above !
Oh and there is this :
New book by 'Shattered' by Clinton insiders reveals that "blame Russia" plan was hatched "within twenty-four hours" of election loss.
https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/862801658132254720
Note : The authors were not Clinton insiders. They had access to insiders.
Note : The authors were not Clinton insiders. They had access to insiders.
Finally, the US has interfered in the elections of other countries countless times. There are countries like Saudi Arabia, China, Qatar, Israel etc. which have also influenced US election outcomes. So why so much outrage and specific singling out of Russia for demonization? Why not focus on the solution?
Why not support or introduce Rep. Tulsi Gabbard’s Securing America’s Elections Act, introduced in March 2018 ? It calls for paper ballots or paper trail for votes through Electronic Machines among other things. There is protection against election interference - internal and external with this bill.
Then there is this,
Bernie told Chuck Todd that sanctions should be used to pressure Russia to the table regarding Syria, if they did not agree by themselves.
Wait. Syria is a sovereign country. Russia is a sovereign country. So even in the case Russia refused to come to the negotiating table regarding Syria, why on earth should one attempt to sanction Russia for it ? There is literally no common sense here.
The dangers of promoting Russiagate are multiple and have a significant impact. Firstly it allows people operating in bad faith to blame anything and everything on Russia, avoiding investigation/accountability. Secondly it increases tensions with Russia with whom US needs to be engaging in diplomacy, not be completely demonizing. This is not to say the US should not criticize Russia where it deserves criticism. It should, but don’t blame Russia for everything or unnecessarily demonize it.
Conclusion :
So from the above, we can see that since Bernie joined Congress he has been a "bad guy gotta go" regime change signalling guy (Saddam, Gadaffi and Assad). His Russiagate position is New Cold War signalling, i.e., the gateway to trillions of $$ for the MIC. His FP has been Empire-friendly (MIC friendly) with some positions/votes to showcase/pretend otherwise.
This article is already a long enough read. For elaboration on how he is repeating propaganda on Venezuela, Kashmir/Modi and China (Hong Kong and Uighurs), stay tuned for the next part(s). The same goes for some other possible failures that I may report on in the future. Also why and when this change happened and why I specifically mention his foreign policy once he got to Congress. Stay tuned...
Thanks for reading !
Comments
Post a Comment