The Right to Defend Oneself

By Michael Ruhl, University of New Mexico – Talk Radio News Service

“We all have an inherent right to self defense in international waters,” according to Senator Jim Webb (D-VA). This remark came out of a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing that saw testimony from Richard Phillips, Captain of the Maersk Alabama. Phillips received international media attention several weeks ago while being held hostage by pirates off of the coast of Somalia.

Both the Senators and the witnesses acknowledged that Piracy off of the coast of Somalia has been on the rise recently. Committee Chairman John Kerry (D-Mass.) said that America’s “ability to project naval power and to help ensure the free passage of goods and humanitarian aid is as important as ever.”

Phillips acknowledged that more needs to be done to secure vessels of the merchant marine, specifically arming the crew.

“In my opinion, arming the crew cannot and should not be viewed as the best or ultimate solution to the problem. At most, arming the crew should only be one component of a comprehensive plan and approach to combat piracy,” he said.

The comprehensive approach the committee discussed could include increased U.S. Navy presence in the most dangerous areas, the creation of a protected corridor that civilian ships can travel within, the rooting out of pirates in their land based sanctuaries and the “hardening” of ships, to make the ships structurally more resistant to pirates. “Hardening” measures include razor wire on railings, fire hoses to repel the pirates, and unbolting ladders that lead onto the boat. Phillips does not believe this will stop the pirates, but rather, that they will find a way to adapt.

Maersk Chaiman John Clancey, also present at the hearing, does not believe that arming the crews is a good idea.

“Our belief is that arming merchant sailors may result in the acquisition of even more lethal weapons and tactics by the pirates, a race that merchant sailors cannot win. In addition, most ports of call will not permit the introduction of forearms into their national waters,” Clancey said.

Clancey also posed that greater liability may be assumed by the companies if sailors are traveling with weapons. Neither Chairman Kerry nor Phillips felt that this argument was strong, because of the intense amount of training that mariners go through already. Kerry, a former member of the U.S. Navy, feels that the benefits outweigh the risks, and that multinational agreements can be reached to work out the issue of bringing weapons into port.

Richard Phillips is scheduled to testify next week before the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Group: Obama and Bush the same on Israel

By Kayleigh Harvey - Talk Radio News Service

The Obama administration is no different than its predecessor when it comes to providing intelligence and military aid to Israel, an action that continues to hamper positive U.S. relations with other Middle East countries. That is the opinion of representatives of the Council For the National Interest, which conducted a public hearing to discuss the implications of current U.S. military aid to countries in the Middle East.

“The Obama administration has shipped replacement munitions that were used up in Gaza, very high-tech missiles and that sort of thing, to Israel in an emergency effort just about 10-days ago,” said Eugene Bird, President for the Council of National Interest. “I think this reflects that the Obama administration – with regard to the re-supply of Israel – is no different than the Bush administration.”

Some speakers suggested the United States should re-evaluate its unconditional support of Israel, especially within the current political identity.

“We do not sell arms to Israel, we give arms to Israel,” said Edward Peck, former U.S. Ambassador to Iraq and deputy director of President Reagan's terrorism task force. Additionally, the Israeli government decides how it wants to utilize the resources and funds given by the U.S. “There is no purchase involved, which is a nice thing. It’s a blank check, and, as you know, that blank check is delivered on the first day of the fiscal year, October 1st, and the Israeli’s can then earn interest on this money while they decide how to spend it... (This) is not necessarily in our interests,” Peck said.

Bird estimates that over the next 10-years the U.S. will give Israel $30 billion to Israel and “that there will be 150,000 more Jewish colonists on the West Bank during that period… The American taxpayer, over the years and in the future, will be paying about $200,000 for each colonist that is placed on Arab land and which destroys the chances for a two-state solution.”

Israeli peace activist, journalist and writer, Uri Avnery said, “I think American arms to Israel should be conditioned...so that the peace agreement will be signed between Israel and the Palestinian people, hopefully a Palestinian unity government including both Fatah and Hamas – I would (expect such results) by the end of 2009 or the middle of 2010 not later.”

Some say that the Middle East is an issue of which Americans remain uninformed and that American politicians view the subject as a killer of constituent support.

Peck blamed said that the lack of information available was a result of the pro-Israel lobby. “They don’t allow anyone else to talk....We’ve been silenced. We are not allowed to criticize Israel. You’re instantly an anti-Semite if you do, He said. “In Israel you are allowed to criticize Israel government policy...but you cannot do it here without provoking a fire-stone.”

Panel discusses progress, future of U.S. aid to Africa

This morning Senator Bill Frist (R – TN) moderated a panel entitled "American Leadership on Global Health" at the Minneapolis Convention Center. The discussion was hosted by ONE.org and focused on the progress made since President Bush approved PEPFAR (President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief), which nearly quadrupled aid to African nations.

One panel member said that while a large number of people are being treated, more are being infected. Everyone was in agreement that the focus needed to be on education for prevention purposes or else treatment would not matter. One mark of success is the expanded focus on other diseases affecting poor nations throughout Africa.

The need for more money to help ailing African countries was also discussed. Syndicated columnist Michael Gerson said, "Americans will be extremely generous when they feel they have an impact." Sally Canfield, senior program officer of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation emphasized the importance of contributions from the government as well as the private sector in order to have a successful fight against issues facing poor countries.
The group also discussed the Millennium Challenge Corporation. They discussed the continued need of MCC to challenge some of the poorest countries to work toward their own prosperity. Resources are currently being dispersed among the countries that have reached certain benchmarks, such as passing women's rights legislation.

The consensus of the panel was that only phase 1 had been completed and it was time to move to the next stage of expanding knowledge and "not creating an Africa that is dependent on US aid, but creating an Africa that is healthy enough to focus on prosperity in business."

U.S. food aid system antiquated and inefficient

The United States, a country with so much abundance, cannot sit back as impoverished nations suffer from high food prices, said John Hamre, President and CEO of The Center for Strategic and International Studies.

J. Stephen Morrison, Co-Director of the CSIS Task Force on the Global Food Crisis, listed several steps to a pragmatic policy for bipartisan efforts against poverty. He said the emergency response system must be modernized, and monetary commitments doubled. He said rural agriculture must be supported as well. Also, approaches to fuel security must be clarified as well as U.S. trade policy adjusted to support third world capabilities.

Senator Robert Casey (D-Pa.) said the gravity of the world food crisis cannot be overstated. He said the current U.S. food assistance program is antiquated, costly, and inefficient, sometimes taking as long as six months for aid delivery. He plans to work on new development legislation to double the U.S. food assistance commitment. Senator Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) emphasized the potential of genetically modified foods in the fight against rising food costs. He said undeveloped countries are starved of both food and science. The 40countries threatened by food shortages do not use genetically modified foods, and in some cases reject genetically modified food aid.