tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-70295293320356693352024-03-28T20:29:39.996-07:00Current Events and Book QuotesUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger160125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7029529332035669335.post-7379190599711143952012-08-17T17:01:00.001-07:002012-08-18T13:19:29.593-07:00Evidence of Intellectual Fraud in Ryan's Budget<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
Ryan's Debt Graph</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-NxpTCpim65I/UC_vOABHQyI/AAAAAAAAAEg/ZHyiW6lhas0/s1600/Ryan.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="180" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-NxpTCpim65I/UC_vOABHQyI/AAAAAAAAAEg/ZHyiW6lhas0/s320/Ryan.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
CBO's Debt Graph</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ha7WRhvayPg/UC_vMjq9VRI/AAAAAAAAAEY/YN8G5dQrR4M/s1600/CBO.png" imageanchor="1" style="color: blue; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-decoration: underline;"><img border="0" height="256" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ha7WRhvayPg/UC_vMjq9VRI/AAAAAAAAAEY/YN8G5dQrR4M/s320/CBO.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Sources: Ryan's Budget, p. 6 (<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 17px;"><a href="http://paulryan.house.gov/uploadedfiles/pathtoprosperity2013.pdf" style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;">http://paulryan.house.gov/uploadedfiles/pathtoprosperity2013.pdf</a>) and </span>CBO Report on Ryan's Budget, p. 15 (<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 17px;"><a href="http://cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/03-20-Ryan_Specified_Paths_2.pdf" style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;">http://cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/03-20-Ryan_Specified_Paths_2.pdf</a>).</span><br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
*********************</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
In recent days there have been too many trees sacrificed to
laud the supposedly visionary, serious, courageous Ryan Budget. (Washington
Post: “Ryan is articulating <span class="published-content-body">clear
convictions about fiscal austerity and offering an intellectual vision” (<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/romney-ryan-rally-supporters-in-nascar-country/2012/08/12/3692324c-e491-11e1-8741-940e3f6dbf48_story.html">http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/romney-ryan-rally-supporters-in-nascar-country/2012/08/12/3692324c-e491-11e1-8741-940e3f6dbf48_story.html</a>),
etc. )</span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
I read his initial
evidence (<a href="http://paulryan.house.gov/uploadedfiles/pathtoprosperity2013.pdf">http://paulryan.house.gov/uploadedfiles/pathtoprosperity2013.pdf</a>).
It is a pack of lies.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br />
Of course, this is a
political document. It’s primarily focus-group tested rhetoric about how “<span style="font-family: "Corbel","sans-serif";">this budget
offers a blueprint for safeguarding America from the perils of debt, doubt and decline</span>”
(p. 7) and complementary, unproven allegations about how severely cutting health
care for the elderly and poor will somehow help society (this is a moral
judgment). I’m not interested in trading political barbs or rehashing talking
points. It’s much better to look at factual evidence. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The first thing we should know is that the Ryan Budget is
designed to address supposedly high levels of federal debt, which in Austrian
School economic theory, lead to higher interest rates and stifle borrowing and
business growth. What have the bond markets said so far about the spike in debt
the federal government has experienced over the past decade? Oh, that’s right, Treasury
bond yields are at the lowest levels ever recorded (<a href="http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h15/data.htm">http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h15/data.htm</a>).
But let’s move on to the actual budget.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="Default">
<br />
The first footnote we get to (p. 6) cites a CBO study
comparing Obama’s budget to Ryan’s until 2022. Why do you stop at 2022, Mr. Ryan?
The cited CBO Report (<a href="http://cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/03-20-Ryan_Specified_Paths_2.pdf">http://cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/03-20-Ryan_Specified_Paths_2.pdf</a>)
notes that “<span style="font-size: 11.5pt;">Those calculations do not represent
a cost estimate for legislation or an analysis of the effects of any given
policies. In particular, CBO has not considered whether the specified paths are
consistent with the policy proposals or budget figures released today by
Chairman Ryan as part of his proposed budget resolution. The amounts of
revenues and spending to be used in these calculations for 2012 through 2022
were provided by Chairman Ryan and his staff. The amounts for 2023 through 2050
were calculated by CBO on the basis of growth rates, percentages of gross
domestic product (GDP), or other formulas specified by Chairman Ryan and his
staff.” So the first graph is a letter to Santa Claus. Let’s move to the second
one, which extends beyond 2022 and thus doesn’t merely allow Ryan staffers to
pull numbers out of thin air.</span><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="Default">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The second footnote we get to (“Source: OMB/CBO;” p. 6) is a
startling graph showing federal debt rising from its post-World War II average
of around 40% of GDP (70% now) all the way to 900% by 2080. Scary! The Ryan
Budget decreases debt to 0% by 2050. Salvation!Luckily I am familiar with these things called footnotes and
this curiosity called the federal budget. The reference is found here (<a href="http://cbo.gov/publication/43289">http://cbo.gov/publication/43289</a>)
and the report is here (<a href="http://cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/03-20-Ryan_Specified_Paths_2.pdf">http://cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/03-20-Ryan_Specified_Paths_2.pdf</a>).
If you look at the CBO Budget Report that he relies on, you will find that the
estimates do not go to 2080. Hmm, this is curious. Why do they stop in 2050,
Mr. CBO? Well, on page 3, Mr. CBO tells us that: “<span style="font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 115%;">The results discussed here stop in 2050 because uncertainty
about the economy and the budgetary effects of given policies in the more
distant future makes calculations beyond that point less meaningful.” So these
2080 estimates that Ryan cites are just a fabrication. Oh, and there are two
scenarios that the CBO cites. The rosier one is not mentioned in the Ryan
Budget. In 2050, the CBO estimates that the Ryan Budget will have a debt/GDP
ratio of 10%, which is bizarrely, and without evidence, rounded down to 0% in
2051.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 115%;">The CBO
Report on the Ryan Budget is only 17 pages long and about half of that is
pretty graphs and tables. Page 15 has the same damn graph as Ryan’s page 6 but
the numbers are completely different. It’s pretty hard to fuck up reading this
thing. I imagine that an intellectual leader and House Budget Committee
Chairman would have read this thing backwards and forwards, named his dog
Fiscal, slept with the federal budget under his pillow and so on.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 115%;">In other
words, we can tell the first “evidence” in Ryan’s Budget is a pack of lies just
by reading his footnotes. Even if Cindy Lou Who did this, I’d send him or her
to the principal for academic dishonesty. </span><br />
<span style="font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 115%;">To say this man is somehow an
intellectual leader is to believe in a profound fraud.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 115%;">Public
opinion polling indicates that majorities of every demographic group studied
think that maintaining Medicare and Social Security benefits are more important
than reducing the budget deficit – every group except for two: Republicans with
$75,000+ annual income and self-identified Tea Party conservatives (<a href="http://pewresearch.org/pubs/2051/medicare-medicaid-social-security-republicans-entitlements-budget-deficit">http://pewresearch.org/pubs/2051/medicare-medicaid-social-security-republicans-entitlements-budget-deficit</a>).
<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 115%;">To say that
politicians are liars is like talking about red fire trucks. Neither is it very
interesting to note that partisan political hacks dominate the editorial pages
and 24-hour squawk boxes. What is interesting is what the dissemination of
these lies through our legislative and electoral process says about who
controls the country and whether or not we live in a democracy.</span><o:p></o:p></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7029529332035669335.post-31179214267883133192012-08-09T05:44:00.003-07:002012-08-10T04:33:03.500-07:00The Incongruous Cheesecake Factory Metaphor in Atul Gawande's "Big Medicine" Piece<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Al6uXJ5TNQo/UCOuR7n9mbI/AAAAAAAAAEI/KFfyePda43o/s1600/logo_cheesecake.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="183" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Al6uXJ5TNQo/UCOuR7n9mbI/AAAAAAAAAEI/KFfyePda43o/s320/logo_cheesecake.gif" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
Surgeon, author and medical error expert <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atul_Gawande">Atul Gawande</a> has a <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/08/13/120813fa_fact_gawande?currentPage=all">new piece</a> in this month's New Yorker focusing on best practice in medical care. Another of Gawande's articles prompted an <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/09/us/politics/09health.html?_r=1">Oval Office strategy meeting</a> that helped formulate major cost controls in Obamacare. In other words, while we may not agree with everything Gawande has to say, we should read him because he has the President's ear and we are interested in future policy actions.<br />
<br />
The current New Yorker piece essentially argues for standardization and quality control while focusing on improving patient outcomes. He spends a great deal of time discussing food at the Cheesecake Factory, where, in a fit of slurpishness he revels: <br />
<br />
"The typical entrée is under fifteen dollars. The décor is fancy, in
an accessible, Disney-cruise-ship sort of way: faux Egyptian columns,
earth-tone murals, vaulted ceilings. The waiters are efficient and
friendly. They wear all white (crisp white oxford shirt, pants, apron,
sneakers) and try to make you feel as if it were a special night out. As
for the food—can I say this without losing forever my chance of getting
a reservation at Per Se?—it was delicious. The chain serves more
than eighty million people per year."<br />
<br />
Let's just say that quality control is not exactly unique to the restaurant industry or politically controversial. In other words, who gives a shit whether the Cheesecake Factory can cut down on cost?<br />
<br />
To tie it back to the health care industry where (unsurprisingly) there are plenty of people engaged in patient-outcome and cost-control research, he summarizes work by his colleague John Wright, an orthopedic surgeon who relies on comparative outcome data to find out what knee implants work best. If implants cost more while not improving outcomes, his surgical team is basically forbidden from using them. And data used by Knight came from Australia's single-payer, national health care system? OK, Atul, this all makes sense. What's the point of spending half your time talking about the Cheesecake Factory?<br />
<br />
Atul has a gift for language and metaphor. As a single-payer advocate (<a href="http://www.cepr.net/calculators/hc/hc-calculator-old.html">a
system that in all other countries leads to much less cost and much
better patient outcomes</a>), Gawande is undoubtedly aware of the communications constraints (socialism!) faced by advocating single-payer health care. <br />
<br />
Talking about the Cheesecake Factory is just a way to sell the idea. It's a way to talk about Australia and national data-collecting through the back door. Although there's certainly better or pithier ways to phrase it for public consumption, the public doesn't read the New Yorker. The Cheesecake Factory is a Trojan Horse: it's a way to talk about single-payer while attempting to ensure the reader doesn't think about Big Government and consequently dismiss the idea. <br />
<br />
So, serious readers, forget about how chefs make that perfect veggie burger. There's already plenty of research about quality control in health care settings. Health policy folks know what works better than the American system. When we read Gawande, we just have to keep in mind what he's trying to sell.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7029529332035669335.post-77057829658382038702012-06-29T06:39:00.001-07:002012-06-29T13:38:28.042-07:00Obamacare Ruling: John Roberts' Power Play<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-q1hdl0Xdd-A/T-2i2F4f3qI/AAAAAAAAADs/Rk7RtvVMrCY/s1600/roberts.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-q1hdl0Xdd-A/T-2i2F4f3qI/AAAAAAAAADs/Rk7RtvVMrCY/s320/roberts.jpg" width="240" /></a><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ovaCkj7pVr8/T-2lR-bHESI/AAAAAAAAAD4/V0AxNr80JnI/s1600/question_mark_alternate.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ovaCkj7pVr8/T-2lR-bHESI/AAAAAAAAAD4/V0AxNr80JnI/s320/question_mark_alternate.png" width="247" /></a></div>
<br />
I've long thought that Supreme Court were a bunch of political hacks who dressed up their personal opinions in pseudo-legalese and pomposity (see my <a href="http://bbbooksss.blogspot.com/#%21/2012/04/pros-and-cons-of-obamacare-are-just.html">earlier post</a>). Indeed, viewing the Court in this way helped predict 8 of the 9 votes and the pundit reaction to those votes. None of those votes or responses interest me. What interests me is John Roberts' decision, the only time he has ever brought victory for the liberal wing of the Court.<br />
<br />
There's only one person who can truly know what was going on in his head. But I can make a guess. <br />
<br />
First, some brief background. Let's not pretend John Roberts was a closet commie biding his time until he could reveal his true principles. John Roberts was the guy (one of the five, at least) who ruled just a few months ago (this April!) that <a href="http://articles.cnn.com/2012-04-02/justice/justice_scotus-strip-search-ruling_1_invasive-strip-intrusive-search-minor-offenses?_s=PM:JUSTICE">police officers can stick their gloved hands up people's bottoms and vajajays for any reason</a> (i.e., seat belt violations, jaywalking, etc.) and that this doesn't violate the Fourth Amendment prohibition of unreasonable search and seizure. He presided over the ludicrous 2010 ruling in Citizens United that <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/22/us/politics/22scotus.html?pagewanted=all">money is speech is freedom</a>. He worked for Reagan and was nominated to the Supreme Court by the that great liberal GW Bush.<br />
<br />
Let's assume that in the ruling on Obamacare/the Affordable Care Act, the other Justices were split 4-4. Roberts then had a choice: vote for, against or abstain. Why would he choose to vote for and go against EVERY OTHER 5-4 VOTE HE HAS TAKEN since he became a Justice in 2005? <b>John Roberts' decision can come down to one word: power.</b><br />
<br />
1. Personal legacy. The aspirations and historical legacy of one man can have profound effect on their conduct. Prior to the Obamacare ruling, Democratic commentators were basically deriding Roberts as a partisan hack <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/05/25/090525fa_fact_toobin#ixzz1zBZ6dqsN">(according to Jeffrey Toobin</a>, who for some reason lots of people seem to respect as a legal journalist, "Even more than Scalia, who has embodied judicial conservatism during a
generation of service on the Supreme Court, Roberts has served the
interests, and reflected the values, of the contemporary Republican
Party."). Today, there are thousands of Democratic commentators and media outlets saluting the fortitude and moderation of John G. Roberts, Jr. Although it's impossible to predict what may happen in the remaining, potentially very long time he has as Chief Justice, it's likely this will be in the first sentence of his obituary ("Chief Justice John Roberts, who oversaw a Court that solidified the standing of conservatism in American life while simultaneously reaching principled decisions on programs dear to liberals, died today..."). Hell, this decision may well get him Time's Man of the Year. <b>With one fell swoop, the image of a rigid partisan has been transformed into one of wisdom and statesmanship.</b> <br />
<br />
2. The new swing vote. In a 4-4 Court, the swing Justice has all the power. He (they are males, in this case) can write the entire opinion himself. And he can write it in a way that has far-reaching, expansive interpretations that set the stage for future victories (see #5: Poison Pill). Prior to this ruling, Justice Kennedy had all the power on controversial decisions. But now, John Roberts can extract what he wants from the liberal Justices. In one move, <b>John Roberts is now</b><b> one of a handful of the most powerful people in America</b>.<br />
<br />
3. Supreme Court validation. Even before the recent Obamacare opinion (whose effect on public opinion of the Court has yet to be determined), the Supreme Court was unpopular by historical standards. The polling organization Rasmussen provides the following <a href="http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/supreme_court_update">Supreme Court job approval ratings</a>:<br />
<br />
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="renderedtable"><tbody>
<tr><td valign="top">Excellent
</td>
<td valign="top">8%
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top">Good
</td>
<td valign="top">28%
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top">Fair
</td>
<td valign="top">42%
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top">Poor
</td>
<td valign="top">17%
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top">Not Sure
</td>
<td valign="top">5%
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Also unprecedented was Obama's famous, very <a href="http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/01/obamas-state-of-the-union-address-criticism-of-the-supreme-court-campaign-finance-ruling.html">public scolding</a> of the Court in his 2010 State of the Union address. Certainly that wasn't enough to sway Roberts' opinion, but it must not have been a feel-good moment for a guy and a Court who basically try to live cloistered lives.<br />
<br />
<b>This ruling gets the Democrats off the Court's back. It provides a veneer of independence. And, perhaps most importantly, it provides cover for future major opinions </b>(e.g., Yes, he overturned Roe v. Wade, but he also gave us Obamacare!).<b><br /></b><br />
<br />
4. Political effects. At first glance, this seems a political victory for the Republican Party, although the effects cannot yet be ascertained. Rightly or wrongly, the backlash to Obamacare brought lots of Republicans to the polls for the 2010 midterm shellackings. In a close race, every vote counts. <b>If Romney ends up winning the election, Obamacare will be overturned anyways.</b> And this decision probably helps Romney get out the Republican vote and win the election.<br />
<br />
5. A poison pill interpretation for conservatives. Another significant point of the decision was the ruling that Obamacare is not covered under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution (this is obviously distinct from a ruling of unconstitutionality). <a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/06/chief-justice-roberts-comes-into-his-own-and-saves-the-court-while-preventing-a-constitutional-debacle/">According to Laurence Tribe</a>: <br />
<br />
"In a step I had considered unlikely and entirely lacking in
precedential, textual and historical support, five members of the Court
determined that Congress did not possess authority under the Commerce
Clause to regulate “inactivity.” ... With future Supreme Court offices occupied by appointees of a
President Romney, <b>today’s limited holding could become the muse for
another, perhaps more successful, wave of attacks on federal power</b>."<br />
<br />
[Tribe himself rejects this "Poison Pill" interpretation, and I am quoting only parts of what he wrote in order to illustrate the argument.]<br />
<br />
6. A tax. The ruling upholding almost all of Obamacare was based on the power of Congress to tax. Of course, Obama promised many, many times that this did not increase taxes. It's unclear how this will play out, but it has the potential to be a victory for Republicans, a la #5.<br />
<br />
Although the validity of any of these points is open to discussion, I think it's important to keep some of them in mind as we try to read the tea leaves about the future direction of the Court. Roberts' decision may very well have been principled, but stating as such ignores the very real power he accrued for himself and his usual political alliesUnknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7029529332035669335.post-80046920925224108742012-06-18T20:18:00.003-07:002012-06-18T20:18:34.323-07:00Intersections of the Civil Rights Movement and the Cold War: The Imperative of Propaganda<link href="file:///C:%5CUsers%5CJTHOMA%7E2.TSL%5CAppData%5CLocal%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml" rel="File-List"></link><o:smarttagtype name="City" namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype name="date" namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype name="place" namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype name="country-region" namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype name="PlaceName" namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype name="PlaceType" namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype name="address" namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype name="State" namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype name="Street" namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:smarttagtype><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:TargetScreenSize>800x600</o:TargetScreenSize>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><link href="file:///C:%5CUsers%5CJTHOMA%7E2.TSL%5CAppData%5CLocal%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_themedata.thmx" rel="themeData"></link><link href="file:///C:%5CUsers%5CJTHOMA%7E2.TSL%5CAppData%5CLocal%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_colorschememapping.xml" rel="colorSchemeMapping"></link><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves/>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/>
<w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/>
<w:OverrideTableStyleHps/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="267">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><img src="//img2.blogblog.com/img/video_object.png" style="background-color: #b2b2b2; " class="BLOGGER-object-element tr_noresize tr_placeholder" id="ieooui" data-original-id="ieooui" />
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]--><style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:swiss;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:-520092929 1073786111 9 0 415 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-unhide:no;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:10.0pt;
margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
p.MsoFootnoteText, li.MsoFootnoteText, div.MsoFootnoteText
{mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Footnote Text Char";
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:10.0pt;
margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
p.MsoFooter, li.MsoFooter, div.MsoFooter
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Footer Char";
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:10.0pt;
margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
tab-stops:center 3.25in right 6.5in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.MsoFootnoteReference
{mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
vertical-align:super;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;
text-underline:single;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
mso-themecolor:followedhyperlink;
text-decoration:underline;
text-underline:single;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
mso-style-unhide:no;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:10.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;
mso-add-space:auto;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
p.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst
{mso-style-priority:34;
mso-style-unhide:no;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-type:export-only;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-add-space:auto;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
p.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle
{mso-style-priority:34;
mso-style-unhide:no;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-type:export-only;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-add-space:auto;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
p.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast
{mso-style-priority:34;
mso-style-unhide:no;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-type:export-only;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:10.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;
mso-add-space:auto;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.FooterChar
{mso-style-name:"Footer Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-unhide:no;
mso-style-locked:yes;
mso-style-link:Footer;
mso-ansi-font-size:11.0pt;
mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;}
span.bold
{mso-style-name:bold;
mso-style-unhide:no;}
span.FootnoteTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Footnote Text Char";
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-unhide:no;
mso-style-locked:yes;
mso-style-link:"Footnote Text";}
span.a-hometext
{mso-style-name:a-hometext;
mso-style-unhide:no;}
span.article14
{mso-style-name:article_14;
mso-style-unhide:no;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
mso-default-props:yes;
font-size:10.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;}
/* Page Definitions */
@page
{mso-footnote-separator:url("file:///C:/Users/JTHOMA~2.TSL/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_header.htm") fs;
mso-footnote-continuation-separator:url("file:///C:/Users/JTHOMA~2.TSL/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_header.htm") fcs;
mso-endnote-separator:url("file:///C:/Users/JTHOMA~2.TSL/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_header.htm") es;
mso-endnote-continuation-separator:url("file:///C:/Users/JTHOMA~2.TSL/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_header.htm") ecs;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
-->
</style><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-e6Md6_RZFrg/T9_vfffdRLI/AAAAAAAAADc/Ph_MC9r3Qi0/s1600/M485442f943fe1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="252" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-e6Md6_RZFrg/T9_vfffdRLI/AAAAAAAAADc/Ph_MC9r3Qi0/s320/M485442f943fe1.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;"><br /><br />“The <em><span style="font-style: normal;">Oriental</span></em> doesn't <em><span style="font-style: normal;">put the same high</span></em>
price on <em><span style="font-style: normal;">life</span></em>
as <em><span style="font-style: normal;">does</span></em>
a Westerner….We <em><span style="font-style: normal;">value</span>
</em><em><span style="font-style: normal;">life</span></em>
and <em><span style="font-style: normal;">human</span></em>
dignity. They don't care about <em><span style="font-style: normal;">life</span></em> and <em><span style="font-style: normal;">human</span></em> dignity.”<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;"><span> </span>General
William Westmoreland, Commander, US <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">Army</st1:city>,
<st1:country-region w:st="on">Vietnam</st1:country-region></st1:place><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;"><span> </span>(<i>Hearts and Minds</i>, 1974)<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">“[Desegregation] was crucial to the
nation’s ability to win the Cold War with the <st1:place w:st="on">Soviet Union</st1:place>.”<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;"><span> </span>Secretary
of State Dean Rusk<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;"><span> </span>(<i>As I Saw It</i>, 1990)<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">“I believe that as the barriers to
equal rights and opportunities for all in our Nation are broken down, the fact
that the <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">United States</st1:place></st1:country-region>
is a multiracial society will prove one of our greatest assets in the contest
of ideologies.”<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;"><span> </span>Edward
Murrow, Director, United States Information Agency<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;"><span> </span>(Senate
Commerce Committee Hearing, 1963)</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;"></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;"></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;"></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in; text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Introduction:
Necessary Hypocrisies<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Despite the
immense amounts of scholarship devoted to the civil rights movement and the
Cold War, few scholars have explored the interrelations between the two. One
finds that segregation tarnished <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">America</st1:place></st1:country-region>’s international reputation,
a problem that was ameliorated through controlling popular opinion.<b><o:p></o:p></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">At the time, the
<st1:place w:st="on">Soviet Union</st1:place> presented an ideological
counterbalance to American hegemony (Chomsky 2003:69-72). The American system
represented capitalism, while the Soviet system represented communism. During
the 1950s and 1960s many countries that were formerly colonized were gaining
their independence. All of these newly independent countries, such as <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region>, <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Ghana</st1:place></st1:country-region>, <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Indonesia</st1:place></st1:country-region>, and
many others, were majority nonwhite, and their citizens abhorred <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">America</st1:place></st1:country-region>’s racist
policies.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Because of the
economic dominance exerted by the two superpowers, these newly independent
colonies had three choices: <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">1. Become part
of the American-dominated capitalist system; <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">2. Become part
of the Soviet-dominated communist system; or, <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">3. Pursue their
paths independently of the superpowers.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">For economic reasons, American
officials sought to incorporate the newly independent countries (Layne and
Schwarz 1993:5-6) into the American-dominated capitalist world economy (Wallerstein
2003:13-14). It was feared that negative perceptions of American race relations
would drive these newly independent countries into the Soviet economic system
or to independent paths. To counter this fearful prospect, American officials falsely
portrayed American race relations as egalitarian and democratic. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">These chapters
will review the means by which this propaganda campaign was orchestrated.
Chapter One will examine the broad trends in American censorship and
promulgation of prominent personalities. Chapter Two will illustrate how the
word “communism” was a vacuous phrase that used to bolster the arguments of both
integrationists and segregationists within the context of a 1963 Senate hearing.
Chapter Three will depict the activities of the United States Information
Agency, which was the propaganda arm of the American government. These three
chapters are designed both to stand alone and to be complementary. Together, they
present a picture of a government concerned primarily with self-image, and
tangentially with justice. Indeed, major victories for the civil rights
movement were useful only as propaganda tools for the American government.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Throughout, this
paper will rely on a definition of propaganda provided by Cull, et al. (2003:318):<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">“Propaganda
is best seen as the deliberate attempt to influence public opinion through the
transmission of ideas and values for a specific purpose, not through violence
or bribery.” Furthermore, “modern political propaganda is consciously designed
to serve the interests, either directly or indirectly, of the propagandists and
their political masters.”<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Propaganda
is not necessarily divorced from reality. Bogart (1976:131) notes that “truth
in itself is not enough. [Some types of] propaganda require ‘a truth that
registers as a truth.’” In other words, propaganda can have a basis in
objective reality, although the message will reflect the same ideology
regardless of the reality. Thus, in these chapters, “propaganda” will denote
non-objective, governmental campaigns to influence mass opinion for the benefit
of the government.<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=7029529332035669335#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">[1]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a> <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Chapter One: Propaganda and
Diplomacy<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">American
officials considered containment of Soviet communism the most important facet
of the Cold War (Metz 1984:521). As part of containment, America sought to
dominate newly independent countries, most of which were majority nonwhite, by
instituting a capitalist economic system (Wood 1994:207) under propagandistic
guises of “freedom,” “democracy,” and other political slogans (Dossa
2007:889-890). On the home front, American repression of blacks belied such egalitarian
rhetoric. The 1950s and 1960s was a brutal time for American blacks. For most,
racism was a fact of life. Legalized segregation was a defining characteristic
of many Southern states. But these facts undermined <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">America</st1:place></st1:country-region>’s broad foreign policy
goals of expanding the territory under its economic dominion. American
officials worried that segregation served as a crucial ideological tool for the
<st1:place w:st="on">Soviet Union</st1:place> (Fairclough 2002:84). Therefore,
domestic racism was problematic insofar as it jeopardized American economic control
of newly independent <st1:place w:st="on">Third World</st1:place> countries. This
chapter will explore how Cold War considerations broadly shaped American
propaganda and diplomacy with respect to the 1950s and 1960s civil rights
movement.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">American Propaganda<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">American
officials were well aware of the international implications of segregation and
sought to mitigate negative viewpoints. Skrentny (1998:251) argues that the
chief goal of American opinion makers was not to abolish inequitable policies
but to control public perception of the problem. Chomsky (2003:16) contends
that democratic governments influence public opinion through orchestrating
propaganda campaigns. American officials sought to depict a free <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">America</st1:place></st1:country-region> on the
road towards liberating its black underclass from the vestiges of racial
bondage, a lie by almost any standard. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Propaganda
included promoting uncritical cultural and intellectual icons. Government
reactions to civil rights scholarship amplified pro-government viewpoints while
censoring criticism. The government sponsored trips for famous entertainers who
echoed the State Department line (Eschen 1997:177-180). This cultural exchange
had significant effects. For example, the South African <i>Bantu World </i>opined that the Harlem Globetrotters were “one of the <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">United States</st1:place></st1:country-region>’ most
effective weapons in the Cold War”. The American government was also extending
its interests in social science research (Solovey 2001:173-176). The interplay
of the Cold War and civil rights is illustrated in the first international
Congress of Colored Writers, in <st1:city w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Paris</st1:place></st1:city>
in 1956. James Baldwin, the “prominent Black activist intellectual” (Marable
2004:11) orated that there was a significant difference between two groups of
the black race, because black Africans could not understand black Americans’
freedoms (Eschen 1997:174-175); Africans could not understand what it was like
to be free. Eschen laments “that one of the most searching critics of <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">America</st1:place></st1:country-region> in the
twentieth century could in this context defend the <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">United States</st1:place></st1:country-region> as a society that was
‘open’ and ‘free’.” <st1:place w:st="on">Baldwin</st1:place>’s trip and,
tacitly, his speech, were paid for by the State Department. Here, <st1:place w:st="on">Baldwin</st1:place> was ostensibly rebutting the critical
philosophies of W.E.B. Du Bois, who advocated uniting black diasporas with
African blacks (Conyers 2003:67). <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Contrapuntally,
government propagandists tried to downplay the popular appeal of famous activists
like Du Bois and Malcolm X by disseminating scholarly refutations of their
arguments (Dudziak 2002:224-225). This included CIA funding of pro-government black
academics and scholarly societies (Eschen 1997:175-176). At the aforementioned 1956
Congress of Colored Writers, DuBois was prevented from defending his views, or
even attending the conference, because the State Department had revoked his
passport for the past six years (Dudziak 2002:62). Like DuBois, black
entertainer-activists with critical viewpoints did not travel under the
government’s good graces. Particularly prominent critics, such as Ella Baker
and Paul Robeson, were often denied international travel, spied on by the FBI, harassed
at its request and otherwise censored (Dudziak 2002:62-74). <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">American Diplomacy<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">American
image was not solely founded on direct prevarication. Policy considerations
were sometimes motivated by a desire to ameliorate oppressive conditions for
public relations purposes. Kennedy’s Secretary of State, Dean Rusk (1990:583-588),
argued that mitigating the discrimination encountered by foreign black
diplomats “depended on racial progress throughout <st1:state w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Washington</st1:place></st1:state> and indeed the entire country.”
In light of this attitude, in 1963 Rusk made a unique appearance before a Senate
Commerce Committee hearing on desegregating public accommodations<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=7029529332035669335#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">[2]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a>
(Romano 2000:546-548). According to Rusk, foreign black diplomats driving between
United Nations headquarters in <st1:state w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">New
York</st1:place></st1:state> and embassies in <st1:state w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Washington</st1:place></st1:state> were being refused service at <st1:state w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Maryland</st1:place></st1:state> restaurants and
gas stations. Rusk believed desegregation “was crucial to the nation’s ability
to win the Cold War with the <st1:place w:st="on">Soviet Union</st1:place>.”
The State Department would go on to give “its full weight to the Civil Rights
Acts of 1964 and 1965” (Rusk 1990:583-584), “for pragmatic reasons as well as
the simple rightness of the cause.”<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Conclusion<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;"><span> </span>This chapter has demonstrated that the
American government was concerned over spreading lies and partial truths abroad
through promotion of supportive scholars and viewpoints and censorship of
dissent. The support for the civil rights movement from powerful sectors was
not primarily motivated by concern for human dignity. Indeed, in the lies in
support of the ‘greater good’ of civil rights, the greater good was ultimately exploitation
of the masses of destitute, nonwhite <st1:place w:st="on">Third World</st1:place>
peoples. This rationale is not ironic, for it consistently seeks to help those
in power.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Chapter Two: Communism in a
Microcosm<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">From
July 1 to <st1:date day="2" month="8" w:st="on" year="1963">August 2, 1963</st1:date>,
the Senate Commerce Committee convened a hearing on “A Bill to Eliminate
Discrimination in Public Accommodations Affecting Interstate Commerce” (S. 1732
1963). In the end, this bill “became [sic] [part of] the Civil Rights Act of
1964” (Romano 2000:546). The hearing brought together a wide range of the most
influential government actors in the civil rights movement. Attorney General
Robert Kennedy opened the hearings with three days of testimony (Thomas
2002:22). Secretary of State Dean Rusk, making “a historic appearance” before a
domestic committee (Romano 2000:546), opined that the bill’s “passage was
crucial to the nation’s ability to win the Cold War.” Later, Alabama Governor
George Wallace, “the most famous symbol of white resistance” (Levy 2003:3),
came as a self-proclaimed “loyal American” (S. 1732 1963:434-435) to argue for
the protection of his conception of freedom. Other witnesses included Burke
Marshall, Roy Wilkins, Franklin Roosevelt, Jr., and twenty-eight governors. As
the only Southerner on the Committee, <st1:state w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">South
Carolina</st1:place></st1:state>’s Strom Thurmond, famous for delivering the
longest filibuster in history, against the 1957 Civil Rights Act, complemented
Wallace’s vitriol. The <i>New York Times </i>published
approximately one article on the hearing per day for one month. E.W. Kenworthy,
who wrote eighteen of these articles, called the hearing “a three-ring show”
(Kenworthy August 4<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=7029529332035669335#_ftn3" name="_ftnref3" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">[3]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a>). This
article will demonstrate that in this particular hearing, fears and accusations
of Communism were malleable ideological weapons for officials on both sides of
the civil rights movement. The use of these weapons are evidenced in: 1)
Kenworthy’s near-yellow journalism; 2) Rusk’s testimony; Wallace’s testimony;
and, 4) Thurmond’s interrogations of the two witnesses.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Kenworthy’s </span></i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">New
York Times<i> Coverage <o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;"><span> </span>Kenworthy’s articles indicate the
power that anti-communist ideology held over the committee members – as well as
the media. The <i>New York Times </i>published
more than thirty articles on the Senate hearing during the time period July 1 –
<st1:date day="4" month="8" w:st="on" year="1963">August 4, 1963</st1:date>.
Leading the activity was Kenworthy, of later Pentagon Papers fame, who
published eighteen articles on the subject. If Kenworthy is taken at his word,
then Senator Thurmond had the most significant effect on the witnesses when he
attempted to link them with communism. “The only time Mr. Kennedy’s voice took
on an emotional timbre was when Mr. Thurmond” accused him of playing into the
Soviets’ hands by providing ammunition for Soviet criticism (Kenworthy July 2).
Thurmond also upset Secretary of State Rusk and Acting Secretary of Commerce
Franklin Roosevelt Jr. when he implied they were communists. This made Rusk
“drop his normal diplomatic manner of speaking” (Kenworthy July 11) and <st1:place w:st="on">Roosevelt</st1:place> Jr. respond “angrily” (Kenworthy July 24). <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Secretary of State Dean Rusk,
Witness<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;"><span> </span>Rusk (586-588) contends that
President Kennedy asked him “to lead off the administration’s testimony” by
focusing on the bill’s effects on foreign affairs. This statement is important
for two reasons. First, it was not Rusk, but the President’s brother who began
the testimony on behalf of the executive branch. Second, of all the sources,
only here is Rusk’s motive asserted. President Kennedy’s directive has
important implications for how one views Rusk’s testimony. Indeed, it brings
the veracity of his testimony into question. Did Rusk believe in his most
grandiose statements, that if facilities along the nation’s highways weren’t
desegregated then “it would be regarded as a diminution of our commitment to
this great idea of human dignity” (Kenworthy July 11)? Senator Thurmond
seemingly catches Rusk’s inconsistency (S. 1732 1963:302):<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Thurmond</span></i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">:
When did you, as Secretary of State, tell the President that you felt that
Congress should pass these laws because the lack of such laws was hurting our
foreign relations?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Rusk</span></i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">:
Senator, it isn’t customary for a Cabinet officer to discuss the dates or
details of conversations with the President.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;"><span> </span>Regardless of Rusk’s motives, this
example indicates the tone for his entire testimony. Few Northern Senators
elected even to question Rusk; those that did chose not to pose difficult
questions. However, Rusk faced serious questioning from Thurmond (S. 1732
1963:288-319). Thurmond’s questioning reveals a logic that dismantles the
objective arguments for civil rights. Thurmond discovers that Rusk’s reasoning
is hypocritical. For example, in response to Thurmond’s second question, Rusk
testified that he would not cut off aid to foreign governments that practice
discrimination. Later, Thurmond intimated that Rusk’s concerns with the
negative impacts of Soviet criticism of American race relations gave credence
to it. An adjourning bell cut off Thurmond’s intense questioning. Afterward, Rhode
Island Senator John Pastore’s conclusion that Rusk had “been one of the most
effective witnesses that ha[d] ever appeared before this Commerce Committee”
drew an ovation. In response, Thurmond lamented that “the audience here is
packed with civil righters and left wingers.” <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Alabama Governor George Wallace,
Witness<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;"><span> </span>If Rusk was conciliatory and cogent,
Governor Wallace (S. 1732 1963:434-477) was condemnatory and caustic and
reveals a different type of red-baiting. As an example of the style of his
testimony, the first page of his opening statement reads: “The leaders of the
Federal Government have so misused the Negroes for selfish political reasons
that our entire concept of liberty and freedom is now in peril.” The second
page of his testimony is devoted almost entirely to criticizing “Martin Luther
King and his pro-Communist friends.” The third page in part states: “I will
tell you what this Senate bill 1732 does: It places upon all businessmen and
professional people the yoke of involuntary servitude. It should be designated
as the ‘Involuntary Servitude Act of 1963.’” In Wallace’s view, desegregation
“constitute[d] the first step towards land reform…a long step in a socialistic
scheme of government which will bring the total destruction of private property
rights” (441). Indeed, if Governor Wallace “were caught sitting, consorting
with a Communist, I dare say this administration would already have
investigated me” (467).<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">If
all the Senators except for Thurmond supported Rusk, the dynamics were reversed
with Governor Wallace. The Chairman of the Committee, Washington state Senator Warren
Magnuson, broke off Wallace’s bombastic opening statement with the stern
rebuttal that “we are not going to be intimidated by anyone.” But Wallace would
not be dissuaded. He soon opined: “I am not saying for one instant that every
member of the Negro race is a mobster, I am saying the leaders and those who
have participated in these demonstrations are. A President who sponsors
legislation such as the Civil Rights Act of 1963 should be retired from public
life.” <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Unlike
Thurmond, Wallace had virtually no logical consistency. Wallace stated that “I
have never made a single statement in my whole political career…in which I
reflected on a man because of his color.” Humorously, Chairman Magnuson
interjected, “our guests are going to have to refrain from making loud
comments.” <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;"><span> </span>Thurmond’s examination of Wallace
used up the remainder of the time for testimony. Thurmond led Wallace down a
simple path of racist logic. Thurmond’s questions are well represented by the
following one: “If a man tried to stand up for the Constitution, isn’t it a
fact that some of the liberal news media today try to claim he is a racist?”
Most of Thurmond’s queries were such thinly veiled reformulations of the
earlier arguments he put forth to Rusk.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Conclusion<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">This
chapter has demonstrated the salience that communism held in a particular
Senate hearing on integration. This hearing was chosen for three reasons, as intimated
in the chapter title, “Communism in a Microcosm.” First, the hearing illustrates
well the attitudes of prominent officials and a respected journalist towards
communism during the civil rights movement. Secondly, it indicates the important
interstices between the Cold War and civil rights for government ideologues on both
sides of the civil rights issue. Thirdly, despite the importance of the
hearing, little has been written about it. Pickerill’s (2004:86-89) book
briefly delves into the testimony. In Loevy’s three hundred and eighty page
edited history of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, only a footnote (Loevy 1997:164-165)
indicates that this bill was one of two predecessors to the 1964 Civil Rights
Act. Dudziak (2002:184-186) mentions Rusk’s testimony, and only briefly.
Romano’s lengthy article attempts to address why Rusk would testify on a
nominally domestic bill, but addresses the hearing itself only on three pages
(2000:546-548). The lack of scholarship on this hearing is surprising, and
presents potent grounds for further, broader research beyond the question of
the impact of communism as a propagandistic slogan.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Chapter
Three: The Illusory Voice<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;"><span> </span>The United States Information Agency
(USIA) was “one of the five major foreign affairs agencies of the <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">United States</st1:place></st1:country-region>
government” (Elder 1968:x), the others being the CIA, Departments of State and
Defense, and USAID. Of these agencies, Elder maintains that the USIA was the
least recognized. Two factors contributed to this relative anonymity. First, the
public mission of the USIA was “to inform and influence peoples abroad” (FRC 68
A 1415 1961). Stated more clearly internally, USIA Director Edward Murrow wrote
that “we are not in the news business as such, but in the business of
furthering <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">U.S.</st1:place></st1:country-region>
objectives through information activities abroad” (FRC 68 A 4933 1962). Secondly,
the USIA sought to efface the origin of its own activities. Murrow advised:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0.5in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;"><span> </span>“Receptivity to USIA media output is nearly
always greater when the output is not attributed to the Agency or the U. S.
Government. I have therefore instructed our field posts not to carry USIA
attribution on pamphlets, motion pictures, television shows and other media
products (but excluding [sic] periodicals) except when local custom or law
dictates otherwise.” <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">In
short, the USIA was the propaganda arm of the American government (Cull, et al.
2003:420). <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraph" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">As with the American
government generally, USIA employees recognized the dualism of propaganda and
truth with respect to the civil rights movement. On the one hand, “Racial and
Ethnic Progress” (Elder 1968:89) was one of five themes for Agency propaganda.
On the other, Murrow opined “that as the barriers to equal rights and
opportunities for all in our Nation are broken down, the fact that the United
States is a multiracial society will prove one of our greatest assets in the
contest of ideologies” (S. 1732:16-17). This chapter will explore how the USIA dealt
with the paradox of propaganda and truth in relation to the 1950s and 1960s
civil rights movement.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">USIA: Propaganda<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraph" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;"><span> </span>As
part of its research into public opinion, the USIA reported to American
officials throughout the 1950s and 1960s that domestic racial discrimination
was the foremost criticism of America among the international community (Dudziak
2002:56, 166, 208). As long as segregation existed, these opinions could only be
countered through propaganda.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">The
USIA fulfilled its mission with great energy. The USIA cabled daily its pro-American
media to its dozens of information bureaus, which were housed within American
embassies (Elder 1968:7-10). It distributed propagandistic movies and radio
shows through its Voice of American broadcasting network. The USIA also
published books, including English textbooks. <span> </span>Other mediums could be disguised as scholarship.
For example, the USIA released “The Negro in American Life” (Dudziak 2002:49),
an informational pamphlet presenting American race relations as utopian. In all
these cases, the American government held the moral high ground in race
relations. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Audiences
were carefully selected as targets for propaganda. For example, Murrow noted
that “African students studying in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Russia</st1:place></st1:country-region>…are a receptive target for
information, and could be particularly useful in their travels to other European
capitals and returning home” (FRC 68 A 4933 1962). Similarly, “feature stories
dealing with Negro progress in the <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">U.S.</st1:place></st1:country-region> are good output for <st1:place w:st="on">West Africa</st1:place>” (Bogart 1976:108). As in the Peace Corps
(Dudziak 2002:157), in USIA media a black person was a “useful” tool for
propaganda. In addition to such “directly influential persons” (Bogart
1976:56), the USIA also focused on “mass media operators” and “the cultural
elite,” in order to legitimize the lies of the officials of the American
government.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">USIA: Partial Truths<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">USIA
officials recognized that American race relations posed difficulties that could
not necessarily be fixed by propaganda (S. 1732:16-17). When the civil rights
movement gained important victories, a partial truth could be presented and its
negative qualities effaced. Readers should keep in mind a crucial qualifier when
analyzing ‘partial truths.’ According to Bogart (1976:131), “truth in itself is
not enough. Propaganda requires ‘a truth that registers as a truth.’”<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraph" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Major victories for
black equality, such as the <i>Brown</i>
decision, James Meredith’s admission to the University of Mississippi, the March
on Washington in 1963 and the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 and 1965 (Dudziak 2002:107-109,
165, 188-198, 210-213, respectively), were immediately used in USIA international
press releases. One theme predominated: civil rights victories were examples of
American democracy, which demonstrated the morality of the majority of the
American people when confronted with the racist tendencies of a few marginalized
bigots. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Demonstrating
its usual treatment of partial truths, the USIA made a faux-documentary for the
civil rights movement that focused on the 1963 March on <st1:state w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Washington</st1:place></st1:state> (Eschen 1997:216-217). In <i>The March</i>, a diverse group of harmonious
marchers are portrayed as quintessential American citizens. Of the speeches,
“only Martin Luther King Jr.’s speech was included;” however, King’s criticism
of the American government was removed in order to focus on “the
forward-looking ‘dream’ segment.” Additionally, Eschen points out that the protestors’
motivations are unexamined.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Conclusion<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">The
chapter has illustrated the myriad efforts of the USIA to brainwash its
audiences into believing that <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">America</st1:place></st1:country-region>
was a paragon of racial concord. In the mid-1960s, USIA’s audience was
estimated at over 1 billion people, or approximately one third of the world’s
population (Elder 1968:1, 10). In addition, the USIA had a budget of $170
million and more than 10,000 employees. The power of the USIA should not be
underestimated. Officials recognized (Bogart 1976:22) that accepting USIA
propaganda in terms of the racial question could open the door for further
opinion molding on broader American foreign policy objectives. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Dudziak
(2002:235-242) maintains that the dual campaign of lies and partial truths worked.
USIA activity reached its crescendo and ultimate success in the mid-1960s, when
the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 and 1965 offered a façade of legal equality. Hereafter,
“foreign opinion was [now] developing along the lines the USIA and State
Department had long hoped for” (Dudziak 2002:241) and international
condemnation of American racism declined to virtually zero. Despite the reality
of entrenched racism (Sitkoff 1993:210-235), American propaganda, bolstered by
partial truths, had succeeded in its mission.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Interestingly,
in 1964 Carl Rowan, an African-American, was appointed to head the USIA. Unfortunately,
Elder (1968) and Bogart’s (1976) extensive histories of the USIA do not
speculate as to a possible racial motivation, a possibility for future
research.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Conclusion:
A Completed Campaign?<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Self-interest
and hypocrisy were key features of American foreign policy with respect to the
civil rights movement. This paper has critical implications for scholars as
well as the public. Scholars must be wary of revisionist histories that seek to
depict a disinterested or benevolent American government with respect to the
civil rights movement. Revisionist histories of this type mirror the propaganda
reviewed in these chapters. A cursory examination of the facts shows this
depiction to be false. In reality, government officials used civil rights as a
propaganda weapon in order to secure economic domination over emerging <st1:place w:st="on">Third World</st1:place> nations. For the government and its
propagandists, mired in lies, civil rights were utilitarian. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">For the those
who may dismiss the fallacy of foreigners who believed government
self-adulation about egalitarian race relations, it is instructive to remember
that the civil rights movement has declined in America from its 1960s heights,
despite, at best, marginal economic gains following civil rights legislation in
this country. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">The idea that
propaganda has ceased to be a vital component of American foreign affairs is an
illusion. In 1999, the Bureau of International Information Programs replaced
the USIA as chief propaganda arm of the American government. The Voice of
America (VOA) radio network continues to operate. Its “journalistic code” (Voice
of America 2009) states in part:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0.5in; text-align: justify;">
<span class="a-hometext"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">“Adhering to the principles outlined in the Charter,
VOA reporters and broadcasters must strive for accuracy and objectivity in all
their work. They do not speak for the <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">U.S.</st1:place></st1:country-region> government. They accept no treatment
or assistance from <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">U.S.</st1:place></st1:country-region>
government officials or agencies that is more favorable or less favorable than
that granted to staff of private-sector news agencies. Furthermore, VOA
professionals, careful to preserve the integrity of their organization, strive
for excellence and avoid imbalance or bias in their broadcasts.”<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<span class="a-hometext"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">The “objectivity” of Voice of America should make
the readers of this paragraph laugh out loud. The “fast facts” </span></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">(Voice
of <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">America</st1:place></st1:country-region>
2009) <span class="a-hometext">on its website claim an audience of over 130
million people per week, as well as </span><span class="article14">“the largest
integrated digital audio system in the world.” </span>One may ask, are we and
others now being propagandized? And if one looks at the overwhelming evidence,
the answer is, yes. <span class="article14">The public must eschew supposedly
unbiased information from government sources.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraph" style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0in; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Self-interest,
hypocrisy, and the practical applications of human rights continue to
predominate within respected circles supposedly far removed from propagandistic
coercion. For example, on April 25, Nicholas Kristof (2009), the most liberal
opinion columnist for the <i>New York Times,
</i>called for an inquiry into the American government’s support of torture: <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="line-height: 200%; margin-left: 0.5in; text-align: justify;">
“because
otherwise the next major terror attack — and there will be one — will be
followed by Republican claims that the president’s wimpishness [sic] left <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">America</st1:place></st1:country-region>
vulnerable. His agenda on health care, climate change and education will then
risk a collapse into dream dust. The way to inoculate his agenda is to seek
common ground through a nonpartisan commission. Second, a commission could help
restore <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">America</st1:place></st1:country-region>’s
standing by distancing ourselves from past abuses.”<span class="article14"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 200%; text-align: justify;">
<span class="article14"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;"><span> </span>In
a democracy the public presumably have a right to some control over the actions
of its government. It is extremely unlikely that many people would choose to be
indoctrinated. In a somewhat free and open country like our own, the possibilities
for reform are much greater than in totalitarian societies. The more the facts
are known, the less able the government is able to resist them. The changing mission
statements of the propaganda arms of the U.S. government from 1961 to today is
evidence of a probable shift in public attitudes – and the need for government
propagandists to hide behind greater façades. Thus, as long as people continue
to chip away at the mountain of injustice, there is hope that one day it will
be dismantled.</span></span><b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;"><o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Bibliography<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Primary<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Rusk, Dean. 1990. <i>As I Saw It</i>. W. W. Norton.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">FRC 68 A 1415. 1961. <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Washington</st1:placename> <st1:placename w:st="on">National</st1:placename> <st1:placename w:st="on">Records</st1:placename>
<st1:placetype w:st="on">Center</st1:placetype></st1:place>, RG 306, USIA
Files: FOIA/Classified Folder. Accessed at http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/frus/kennedyjf/xxv/6010.htm
on <st1:date day="28" month="4" w:st="on" year="2009">April 28, 2009</st1:date>.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">FRC 68 A 4933. 1962. <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Washington</st1:placename> <st1:placename w:st="on">National</st1:placename> <st1:placename w:st="on">Records</st1:placename>
<st1:placetype w:st="on">Center</st1:placetype></st1:place>, RG 306, USIA
Files: Policy and Plans-General (IOP)/62. Accessed at http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/frus/kennedyjf/xxv/6010.htm
on <st1:date day="28" month="4" w:st="on" year="2009">April 28, 2009</st1:date>.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">S. 1732. 1963.
“Hearings before the Committee on Commerce<strong><span style="font-weight: normal;">, United States Senate, Eighty-eighth
Congress, First Session, n S. 1732, a Bill to Eliminate Discrimination in
Public Accommodations Affecting Interstate Commerce.”</span></strong><b> </b>Government Printing Office.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Selected
1963 <i>New York Times </i>articles on S.
1732:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">“<a href="http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=86&did=357362412&SrchMode=1&sid=1&Fmt=10&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1237259154&clientId=8956"><span style="color: windowtext; text-decoration: none;">Atlanta's
Mayor Speaks</span></a>.” July 28.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">“<a href="http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=32&did=82075976&SrchMode=1&sid=1&Fmt=10&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1237258664&clientId=8956">Civil
Rights--For Our Own Sake</a>.” July 12.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">“<a href="http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=41&did=82080662&SrchMode=1&sid=1&Fmt=10&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1237258664&clientId=8956"><span style="color: windowtext; text-decoration: none;">Excerpts From
Gov. Wallace's Testimony.” July 16. <span> </span></span></a><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"><span> </span>“<a href="http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=30&did=89541413&SrchMode=1&sid=1&Fmt=10&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1237258664&clientId=8956">Excerpts
From Rusk's Testimony on Civil Rights.” </a><span class="bold">July 11.</span><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">“<a href="http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=83&did=81818832&SrchMode=1&sid=1&Fmt=10&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1237259154&clientId=8956">Excerpts
from the Statement by Allen.” July 27. </a><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">“<a href="http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=38&did=356853882&SrchMode=1&sid=1&Fmt=10&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1237258664&clientId=8956"><span style="color: windowtext; text-decoration: none;">Rights
Tension Rises.” </span></a>July 14.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">“<a href="http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=63&did=80453203&SrchMode=1&sid=1&Fmt=10&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1237259154&clientId=8956">Senator
Magnuson, Running High Fever, Is Hospitalized</a>.” July 23. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">“South
Seeds to Water Down Civil Rights Bill.” July 21.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">“<a href="http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=49&did=80452104&SrchMode=1&sid=1&Fmt=10&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1237258664&clientId=8956">Transcript
of the President's News Conference on Foreign and Domestic Matters</a>.” July
18.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Kenworthy,
E. W. “Civil Rights Session Enlivened by Flurry of Partisan Sniping.” July 24. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Kenworthy,
E. W. “Senators Press Robert Kennedy on Rights Plan.” July 2. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Kenworthy,
E. W. “Rights Bill: Large Questions.” July 7.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Kenworthy,
E. W. “Rusk and Thurmond Clash Coldly over Civil Rights.” July 11.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Kenworthy,
E. W. “Barnett Charges Kennedys Assist Red Racial Plot.” July 13.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Kenworthy,
E. W. “Rights Bill: The Arguments in Congress.” August 4. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Kenworthy,
E. W. “Wallace Asserts Air Force Offers Aid to Race Riots.” July 16.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Lewis,
Anthony. “Issue in Rights Debate.” July 14.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Phillips,
Cabell. “<a href="http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=6&did=89540631&SrchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt=10&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1237258547&clientId=8956">Senate
Opens Hearings Today On President's Rights Program.” </a>July 1.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Raymond,
Jack. “<a href="http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=26&did=107176087&SrchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt=10&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1237258547&clientId=8956">Tower
Attacks Rights Proposal.” </a>July 7.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Voice of <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">America</st1:place></st1:country-region>. 2009.
“Fast Facts.” Accessed at http://www.voanews.com/english/<br />
About/FastFacts.cfm on <st1:date day="30" month="4" w:st="on" year="2009">April
30, 2009</st1:date>.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Voice of <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">America</st1:place></st1:country-region>. 2009.
“Journalistic Code.” Accessed at http://www.voanews.com/english/<br />
About/JournalisticCode.cfm on <st1:date day="30" month="4" w:st="on" year="2009">April
30, 2009</st1:date>.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Secondary<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Bogart, Leo. 1976. <i>Premises for Propaganda: The United States
Information Agency’s Operating Assumptions in the Cold War</i>. Free Press.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Chomsky, Noam. 2003. <i>Hegemony or Survival</i>. Metropolitan
Books.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Chomsky, Noam. 2003. <i>Media Control</i>. Open Media.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Conyers, James. L
(ed.). 2003. <i>Afrocentricity and the
Academy: Essays on Theory and Practice</i>. McFarland.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<st1:city w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Dalton</span></st1:place></st1:city><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">,
Russell J., Paul A. Beck and Robert Huckfelt. 1998. “Partisan Cues and the
Media: Information Flows in the 1992 Presidential Election.” <i>American Political Science Review</i> 92(1),
111-126.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Dossa, <st1:city w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Shiraz</st1:place></st1:city>. 2007. “Slicing Up ‘Development’:
Colonialism, Political Theory, Ethics.” <st1:place w:st="on"><i>Third World</i></st1:place><i> Quarterly</i> 28(5):887-99.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Dudziak, Mary. 2002. <i>Cold War Civil Rights</i>. <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Princeton</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">University</st1:placetype></st1:place>
Press.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Elder, Robert E. 1968. <i>The Information Machine: The United States
Information Agency and American Foreign Policy</i>. <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Syracuse</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">University</st1:placetype></st1:place>
Press. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Eschen, Penny Marie von.
1997.<i> Race against Empire: Black
Americans and Anticolonialism, 1937-1957</i>. <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Cornell</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">University</st1:placetype></st1:place>
Press.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Fairclough, Adam. 2002.
“The Cold War and the Color Line/Nixon’s Civil Rights.” <i>History Today </i>52(11):84.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Holloway, Jonathan
Scott. 1997. “Review: The Soul of W.E.B. Du Bois.” <i>American Quarterly</i> 49(3):603-614.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Layne, Christopher and
Benjamin Schwarz. 1993. “American Hegemony: Without an Enemy.” <i>Foreign Policy</i> 92 (Autumn):5-23.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Levy, Peter B. 2002. <i>Civil War on <st1:street w:st="on"><st1:address w:st="on">Race Street</st1:address></st1:street>: The Civil Rights Movement in
<st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">Cambridge</st1:city> <st1:state w:st="on">Maryland</st1:state></st1:place></i>.
University Press of <st1:state w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Florida</st1:place></st1:state>.
<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Loevy, Robert D. 1997. <i>The Civil Rights Act of 1964: The Passage of
the Law That Ended Racial Segregation. </i>SUNY Press. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Kristof, Nicholas.
2009. “Time to Come Clean.” <i>New York
Times</i>. April 25.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Marable, Manning. 2004.
“Living Black History.” <i>Souls </i>6(3):5-16.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Metz, Steven. 1984.
“American Attitudes towards Decolonization in <st1:place w:st="on">Africa</st1:place>.”
<i>Political Science Quarterly</i> 99(3):513-533.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Pickerill, J. Mitchell.
2004. <i>Constitutional Deliberation in
Congress: The Impact of Judicial Review in a Separated System</i>. Duke
University Press. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Romano, Renee. 2000.
“No Diplomatic Immunity: African Diplomats, the State Department, and Civil Rights,
1961-1964.” <i>The Journal of American
History </i>87(2):546-579.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Sitkoff, Harvard. 1993.
<i>The Struggle for Black Equality</i>. Hill
and Wang.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Skrentny, John David.
1998. “The Effect of the Cold War on African-American Civil Rights: <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">America</st1:place></st1:country-region> and the
World Audience, 1945-1968.” <i>Theory and
Society </i>27(2):237-285.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Solovey, Mark. 2001.
“Project Camelot and the 1960s Epistemological Revolution: Rethinking the
Politics-Patronage-Social Science Nexus.” <i>Social
Science Studies </i>31(2):171-206.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Thomas, Evan. 2002. <i>Robert Kennedy: His Life</i>. Simon and
Schuster. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Vercellotti, Timothy
and Paul R. Brewer. 2006. “ ‘To Plead Our Own Cause’: Public Opinion toward
Black and Mainstream News Media among African Americans.” <i>Journal of Black Studies</i> 37(2), 231-250.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Wallerstein, Immanuel. 2003.
<i>Historical Capitalism</i>. Verso.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Wood, Robert. E. 1994.
“From the Marshall Plan to the <st1:place w:st="on">Third World</st1:place>.”
Pp. 201-214 in <i>Origins of the Cold War:
An International History</i>, edited by Melvin P. Leffler and David S. Painter.
Routledge Press.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Tertiary<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Cull, Nicholas J.,
David Culbert, David Welch. 2003. <i>Propaganda
and Mass Persuasion: A Historical Encyclopedia, 1500 to the Present</i>.
ABC-Clio.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div>
<!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><br clear="all" />
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
<!--[endif]-->
<div id="ftn1">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=7029529332035669335#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">[1]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"> For a further discussion of the
definition of propaganda, see Cull, et al. 2003:317-322.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn2">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=7029529332035669335#_ftnref2" name="_ftn2" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">[2]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"> Related aspects of this hearing
are examined in Chapter Two.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div id="ftn3">
<div class="MsoFootnoteText">
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=7029529332035669335#_ftnref3" name="_ftn3" title=""><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">[3]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"> Due to the large number of
Kenworthy (1963) references, his articles are cited by day.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
</div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7029529332035669335.post-58482781880145250732012-06-17T19:18:00.001-07:002012-06-17T19:18:13.234-07:00Ross Douhat Makes Things Up in His Article "Sympathy for the Radical Left"<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-TO2bTGD3xdM/T96PweEzyOI/AAAAAAAAADM/VQeIYhwtchk/s1600/esq-ross-douthat-douche-121911-lg.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-TO2bTGD3xdM/T96PweEzyOI/AAAAAAAAADM/VQeIYhwtchk/s320/esq-ross-douthat-douche-121911-lg.jpg" width="217" /></a></div>
In this Sunday's column "<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/17/opinion/sunday/douthat-sympathy-for-the-radical-left.html?hp">Sympathy for the Radical Left</a>," Ross Douhat<br /><br />"This weekend Greece is voting again, and the Coalition of the Radical Left has a chance to improve on that performance. If it does, and its leadership finds a way to form a coalition government, Syriza has promised to cancel the austerity program that the euro zone effectively imposed on Athens in exchange for loans and bailouts. In doing so, its leaders would be daring the E.U. to push Greece out of the currency union — and the E.U. might have no choice then but to shove. The elite consensus is that this would represent economic suicide for the Greeks, as well as a potential disaster for Europe as a whole."<br /><br />Oh, he forgot to tell you, when Argentina faced a similar situation and defaulted on its debt it took the country from the worst recession to the biggest economic boom in its history.<br /><br />(<a href="http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&met_y=ny_gdp_mktp_cd&idim=country:ARG&dl=en&hl=en&q=argentina+gdp">Graph of Argentina's GDP</a>; defaulted in 2002)<br /><br />http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&met_y=ny_gdp_mktp_cd&idim=country:ARG&dl=en&hl=en&q=argentina+gdp<br /><br />It's unclear what "elite consensus" he is referring to. There have been hundreds of articles written in across the spectrum of media sources arguing that Greece should pull an Argentina.<br /><br />(<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=argentina+debt+crisis&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3Aofficial&sclient=psy-ab&q=argentina+greece+default&oq=argentina+greece+default&aq=f&aqi=g1g-bK2&aql=&gs_l=serp.3..0j0i8i30l2.815749.819906.0.820052.14.13.0.0.0.0.112.928.12j1.13.0...0.0.q1JEIzbb1ng&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=1d62f2a36ee5bdd6&biw=1680&bih=833">Google search for argentina greece default</a>)<br /><br />http://www.google.com/search?q=argentina+debt+crisis&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3Aofficial&sclient=psy-ab&q=argentina+greece+default&oq=argentina+greece+default&aq=f&aqi=g1g-bK2&aql=&gs_l=serp.3..0j0i8i30l2.815749.819906.0.820052.14.13.0.0.0.0.112.928.12j1.13.0...0.0.q1JEIzbb1ng&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=1d62f2a36ee5bdd6&biw=1680&bih=833<br /><br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7029529332035669335.post-74213160580080801582012-06-04T16:48:00.000-07:002012-06-04T16:48:54.952-07:00History of the Iraq War, Part XX: The Costs to American Taxpayers<div style="text-align: center;">
Number of Jobs Created by Category of Federal Spending (Garrett-Peltier, 2011)</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-s4QoAUBorwI/T81ItT2237I/AAAAAAAAACM/hOzFtdn77K8/s1600/Untitled3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="268" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-s4QoAUBorwI/T81ItT2237I/AAAAAAAAACM/hOzFtdn77K8/s400/Untitled3.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
Estimated Effect of Increasing Oil Price on National GDP (Adams & Osho, 2006)</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-FySZ9vXW-6k/T81I1IgkazI/AAAAAAAAACU/cu2c-uLOuMc/s1600/Untitled4.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="141" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-FySZ9vXW-6k/T81I1IgkazI/AAAAAAAAACU/cu2c-uLOuMc/s400/Untitled4.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
Stiglitz and Bilmes’ (2009) book-length study provides a detailed analysis of the financial cost of the Iraq War. They maintain (p. 31): <br /><br />"The total cost of the war ranges from $2.7 trillion in strictly budgetary costs to $5 trillion in total economic costs. We also considered a ‘best case’ scenario in which the United States would withdraw all its combat troops by 2012 and fewer veterans would need medical care and disability pay. Even under this extremely optimistic scenario, the total economic cost of the war exceeds $2 trillion. Under the circumstances, a $3 trillion figure for the total cost strikes us as judicious, and in all likelihood errs on the low side. Needless to say, this number represents the cost only to the United States. It does not reflect the enormous cost to the rest of the world, or to Iraq."<br /><br />Nor does this calculation include lost productivity, which they conservatively estimate elsewhere to be in excess of $1 trillion (Bilmes & Stiglitz, 2008). In light of conventional Keynesianism, the war produced substantial deficits prior to the 2008-2009 financial crisis and its aftermath, year, during comparably ‘good years’ when a saner policy would have resulted in more modest deficits or surplus (Feinstein, 2011, pp. 428-429).<br /><br />
They provide some context for these almost unfathomable numbers (2009, p. xv): <br /><br />"A trillion dollars could have built 8 million additional housing units, could have hired some 15 million additional public school teachers for one years; could have paid for 120 million children to attend a year of Head Start; or insured 530 million children for health care for one year; or provided 43 million students with four-year scholarships at public universities. Now multiply those numbers by three."<br /><br />The war has also substantially increased the price of oil. Bilmes and Stiglitz summarize their analysis (2009, p. 117): <br /><br />"Exactly how much the war increased prices cannot by gauged with precision, so we are putting forward two estimates: a conservative one that assumes only $5 per barrel of the price increase is due to the war; and a more realistic one that assumes the figure is $10. (We have discussed these estimates with oil industry experts; and although they disagree on the relative importance of different factors in the soaring prices, they have all agreed that, if anything, we have underestimated the role of the Iraq war.) Our conservative estimate assumes the duration of these higher oil prices to be seven years; the realistic-moderate estimate eight years."<br />
<br />
References<br />
<br />
Adams M, Osho G. 2006. “Policy Implications of the War in Iraq and Its Influence on the Global Market: A Public Affairs Perspective.” International Business & Economics Research Journal 5(10), pp. 21-25.<br />
<br />
Bilmes, Linda and Joseph Stiglitz. March 9, 2008. “The Iraq War Will Cost Us $3 Trillion, and Much More.” Washington Post. <br />
<br />
Feinstein, Andrew. 2011. The Shadow World: Inside the Global Arms Trade. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. <br />
<br />
Garrett-Peltier. Heidi. 2011. “The Job Opportunity Cost of War,” at http://costsofwar.org/article/lost-jobs. Brown University Costs of War Project. http://costsofwar.org/. <br />
<br />
Stiglitz, Joseph and Linda Bilmes. 2009. The Three Trillion Dollar War: The True Cost of the Iraq Conflict. Penguin.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7029529332035669335.post-23524425753250472972012-06-04T16:44:00.000-07:002012-06-04T16:44:21.334-07:00History of the Iraq War, Part XIX: The Costs for American VeteransThe costs to those fighting the wars have been immense. According to Department of Defense statistics on May 29, 2012, 4,409 American soldiers died and 31,928 were wounded (Department of Defense, 2012). Another Army study estimated that 18% of Iraq War veterans have sustained some level brain damage from improvised explosive devices (e.g., roadside bombs), in addition to 1,000 suffering amputations. Meanwhile, the average wait for disability claims processing has grown to six months. In one six month period (October 1, 2007 – March 31, 2008), 1,467 veterans (from any war) died while their claims were pending (Glantz, 2009, p. 10, 111-115). Approximately 100,000, or one in three, have serious mental health disorders, including depression and post-traumatic stress disorder (Stiglitz & Bilmes, 2009, p. xi). Recent data shows that military suicide rates are at the highest levels ever recorded (Barnes & Chong, 2009). Despite the growing need, the number of mental health professionals decreased drastically during the first few years of the Iraq War: by 8 percent in the Army, 15 percent in the Navy and 20 percent in the Air Force (Glantz, 2009, p. 96). Meanwhile, of the approximately 200,000 homeless veterans in the United States, 3,700 are veterans of the wars Iraq or Afghanistan (Eckholm, 2009).<br />
<br />The psychological hell visited on Iraqis is also visited on American veterans. Wright (2004, p. 218) describes a disturbing episode where US soldiers fire on a civilian car and check the passengers: <br /><br />"[Private] Graves sees a little girl curled up in the backseat…She seems to be cowering. Graves reaches in to pick her up – thinking about what medical supplies he might need to treat her, he later says – when the top of her head slides off and her brains fall out. When Graves steps back, he nearly falls over when his boot slips in the girl’s brains. It takes a full minute before Graves can actually talk."<br /><br />When one group of enlisted soldiers debated what to do if an Iraqi child was in the way of a convoy, a lieutenant told them, “Run him over. They don’t value human life like we do and they don’t share our same Western values” (Hedges & al-Arian, 2008, p. 12-13). American combat medic Patrick Resta also witnessed officially sanctioned dehumanization (Glantz, 2009, p. 2): <br /><br />"When I would walk through these cities I had people bringing their children up to me who were ill and had to be treated, and we were threatened with being court-martialed if we took any medicine to treat these Iraqis in the city."<br />
<br />
References<br />
<br />
Barnes, Julian and Jia-Rui Chong. January 30, 2009. “Army Suicides Rate Hits a Three-Decade High, Officials Say.” Los Angeles Times. <br />
<br />
Department of Defense. 2012. Untitled. http://www.defense.gov/news/casualty.pdf. <br />
<br />
Eckholm, Erik. July 25, 2009. “For Veterans, A Weekend Pass from Homelessness.” New York Times.<br />
<br />
Glantz, Aaron. 2009. The War Comes Home: Washington’s Battle against America’s Veterans. University of California Press. <br />
<br />
Hedges, Chris and Laila al-Arian. 2008. Collateral Damage: America’s War against Iraqi Civilians. Nation Books.<br />
<br />
Stiglitz, Joseph and Linda Bilmes. 2009. The Three Trillion Dollar War: The True Cost of the Iraq Conflict. Penguin. <br />
<br />
Wright, Evan. 2004. Generation Kill: Devil Dogs, Iceman, Captain America and the New Face of American War. Putnam Adult.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7029529332035669335.post-40353322616819415532012-06-04T16:41:00.000-07:002012-06-04T16:41:19.357-07:00History of the Iraq War, Part XVIII: Iraqi Children, Health and EducationChild Born with Birth Defects after American Use of Chemical and Radiological Weapons in Falluhaj (Fisk, 2012)<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-U4OlBqgGbs8/T81HByoQ50I/AAAAAAAAACE/mJkViQxlWkI/s1600/Untitled2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-U4OlBqgGbs8/T81HByoQ50I/AAAAAAAAACE/mJkViQxlWkI/s320/Untitled2.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Of the living, the innocent children of Iraq have borne the heaviest and most tragic burden. Seventy percent of primary school pupils suffer symptoms of trauma-related stress such as bed-wetting or stuttering (Sassoon, 2009, p. 29). In 2006, the Association of Iraqi Psychologists estimated that more than 90% of Iraqi children had learning difficulties, primarily due to the war (World Health Organization, 2006, p. 29), while Oxfam (2007, p. 3) noted that child malnutrition rates rose from 19 percent before the invasion to 28 percent. From 2006 to 2007, school attendance was more than halved, from 75 percent to 30 percent (Baker, Ismael & Ismael, 2010, p. 130). Child mortality (<5 years) has doubled from one in sixteen before the war to one in eight (Sassoon, 2009, p. 18).<br />
<br />
The chemical and radiological weapons, particularly white phosphorous and depleted uranium rounds, used by the United States military during the war have almost certainly caused severe birth defects in the infants of Fallujah, and presumably elsewhere. The increases in infant mortality, cancer and leukemia are greater than those suffered by survivors of the atomic bombings in Japan (Fisk, 2012). Samira Alani, a pediatrician at Fallujah General Hospital, has recorded 669 cases of birth defects from October 2009 to December 2011. Most of these deformities are fatal within one month postpartum. Depleted uranium has also been linked to sharply increasing cancer incidence in that city (Jamail, 2012). <br />
<br />The once vibrant health system is no longer recognizable and has been turned into the province of death squads and living nightmares. Sassoon (2009, p. 19) states that:<br /><br />"Some of the ‘officials’ trusted with taking care of the health of the people were arrested for the killing and kidnapping of hundreds of Sunnis, ‘many of them snatched from hospitals by militias.’…Hospitals had been turned into hunting grounds for Shi’i militias determined to spread fear among local Sunnis and drive them out of the capital."<br /> <br />Seventy percent of Iraqi doctors have fled (Jamail, 2009) and less than one hundred psychiatrists remain nationwide (Leland, 2010). <br />
<br />The destruction of the Iraqi intellectual class is recorded in the aforementioned heroic collection of essays (Baker, Ismael and Ismael, 2010; see “Iraqi Unions: Resistance and Counterinsurgency”). The authors describe the campaign of assassinations against medical personnel and other intellectuals in Iraq. In the first five years of the invasion, more than eighty faculty members at the prestigious University of Baghdad were murdered (p. 129), and a total of between 400 and 1,000 academics nationwide. Of the causes of death that have been identified, 54% are due to small-arms fire at close range. Survivor and eyewitness accounts of assassinations reveal that victims are usually murdered or kidnapped by a group of Iraqi men, often in police or interior ministry uniforms, arriving in cars while the targets are in transit between home and work. The authors report that the killers operate with impunity and are not apprehended, providing strong evidence for clandestine support from American and Iraqi intelligence (pp. 149-172).<br />
<br />
<br />References<br />
<br />
Baker, Raymond, Shereen Ismael and Tareq Ismael (ed.). 2010. Cultural Cleansing in Iraq: Why Museums Were Looted, Libraries Burned and Academics Murdered. Pluto Press.<br />
<br />
Fisk, Robert. April 25, 2012. “The Children of Fallujah – Sayef’s Story.” Independent (UK). <br />
<br />
Jamail, Dahr. February 21, 2009. “Doctors in Hiding Treat as They Can.” Inter Press Service. <br />
<br />
Leland, John. January 30, 2010. “Iraq Mends a System to Treat Trauma.” New York Times. <br />
<br />
Oxfam. July, 2007. “Rising to the Humanitarian Challenge in Iraq.” http://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/Rising%20to%20the%20humanitarian%20challenge%20in%20Iraq.pdf.<br />
<br />
Sassoon, Joseph. 2009. The Iraqi Refugees: The New Crisis in the Middle East. International Library of Migration Studies. IB Tauris.<br />
<br />
World Health Organization. 2006. “Social Determinants of Health in Countries in Conflict.”Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7029529332035669335.post-32765996910288464692012-06-04T16:37:00.000-07:002012-06-04T16:53:36.243-07:00History of the Iraq War, Part XVII: Iraqi Torture Victims<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/--72ni-gkqvU/T81GsuP1bAI/AAAAAAAAAB8/dqh5lADhXoI/s1600/Untitled1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">Iraqi Prisoner Bearing Signs of Torture (Amnesty International, 2010)</a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/--72ni-gkqvU/T81GsuP1bAI/AAAAAAAAAB8/dqh5lADhXoI/s1600/Untitled1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><br /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/--72ni-gkqvU/T81GsuP1bAI/AAAAAAAAAB8/dqh5lADhXoI/s1600/Untitled1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><br /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/--72ni-gkqvU/T81GsuP1bAI/AAAAAAAAAB8/dqh5lADhXoI/s1600/Untitled1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="280" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/--72ni-gkqvU/T81GsuP1bAI/AAAAAAAAAB8/dqh5lADhXoI/s400/Untitled1.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Iraqi journalist Muntadar al-Zaidi described his personal grief as he: <br />
<br />
"was roaming throughout the past years of the war in our scorched land and I was seeing with my own eyes the pains of the victims and hearing the weeping of the grieving women and orphans. Shame was chasing me, like an ugly name for my helplessness."<br />
<br />
At a press conference he famously threw his shoes at President Bush, shouting, “This is your farewell kiss, you dog!” He was tackled, beaten with pipes, electrocuted, imprisoned for nine months and then released to his tearful family (Santora, 2009).<br />
<br />
The American-led torture of people like Muntadar al-Zaidi in Iraq, Cuba, Afghanistan and throughout the world has been a subject of repeated scrutiny since late 2001. The philosophy was described in the McCain-Levin ‘Torture Report’ by the Senate Armed Services Committee as: “If the detainee dies, you’re doing it wrong” (Warrick, 2008). The resulting practices have become familiar: beatings; mock executions; sexual humiliation; long periods of sleep deprivation and exposure to extremes of heat and cold; sexual abuse; religious humiliation; threats of rape and other crimes made against family members (Mayer, 2009, p. 250). The impetus behind America’s brand of torture at Abu Ghraib, including the death by torture of Manadel Al-Jamali (images of his body covered with bags of ice were printed globally) resulted from Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s order to “Gitmoize” Iraqi prisons (Mayer, 2009, p. 41). In Senate testimony on the Abu Ghraib ‘scandal,’ retired Army Major General John Batiste testified that “probably 99 percent of [prisoners] were guilty of absolutely nothing.” Estimates of the Iraqi prison population range from 60,000 to 120,000 (Hedges & al-Arian, 2008, p. 72). <br />
<br />
The violence is similar in prisons and torture chambers nominally controlled by the Iraqi army and intelligence services (Figure 10). According to the UN Special Rapporteur Martin Scheinin, inmates are (2010, p. 8):<br />
<br />
"Severely ill-treated, including by beating with cables, suspension from the ceiling with either the feet or hands upwards for up to two days, or electro-shocks. Some had black bags put over their heads and were suffocated for several minutes until the bodies became blue several times in a row. Also, some had plastic sticks introduced in the anus. They were also threatened with the rape of members of their families. They were forced to sign and fingerprint pre-prepared confessions."<br />
<br />
The Christian Science Monitor reports that some refugees have experienced state-sponsored rape (Badhken, 2008). An elaborate state torture regime makes all the more courageous the resistance of the Iraqi unions and individuals like Muntadar al-Zaidi.<br />
<br />
References<br />
<br />
Amnesty International. 2010. “New Order, Same Abuses: Unlawful Detentions and Torture in Iraq.” http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/report/thousands-iraqi-detainees-risk-torture-after-us-handover-2010-09-13. <br />
<br />
Badkhen, Anna. November 24, 2008. “Rape’s Vast Toll in Iraq War Remains Largely Ignored.” Christian Science Monitor. <br />
<br />
Hedges, Chris and Laila al-Arian. 2008. Collateral Damage: America’s War against Iraqi Civilians. Nation Books. <br />
<br />
Mayer, Jane. 2009. The Dark Side: The Inside Story of How the War on Terror Turned into a War on American Ideals. Anchor Books.<br />
<br />
Santora, Marc. September 15, 2009. “Freed, Shoe-Hurling Iraqi Alleges Torture in Prison.” New York Times.<br />
<br />
Scheinin, Martin. February 18, 2010. “Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms while Countering Terrorism.” United Nations General Assembly Human Rights Council. http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/13session/A-HRC-13-37-Add1_EFS.pdf. <br />
<br />
Warrick, Joby. June 18, 2008. “CIA Played Larger Role in Advising Pentagon.” Washington Post.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7029529332035669335.post-22824873950217483732012-06-04T16:33:00.000-07:002012-06-04T16:52:44.221-07:00History of the Iraq War, Part XVI: 'Liberation' and the Effects on the Iraqi People<div style="text-align: center;">
Mortality due to Violence in Iraq, 2003 (Roberts, et al., 2004)</div>
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-uum5lSyvMZc/T81KLEWhsnI/AAAAAAAAACs/spu_7DP9yro/s1600/Untitled7.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="324" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-uum5lSyvMZc/T81KLEWhsnI/AAAAAAAAACs/spu_7DP9yro/s640/Untitled7.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
The Iraqi people have paid the heaviest price for American greed, hubris, jingoism and bloodlust. The war was found to be responsible for more than 650,000 Iraqi deaths – 600,000 by violence and the remainder from a economic collapse – (Brownstein & Brownstein, 2008) and, at its peak, 4.7 million out of a population of 27 million, or one in six, had been made refugees (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, 2007). The unfathomable destruction of these people and their country is the preeminent legacy of this disastrous, criminal war. Simply reading and writing about the stories and statistics of this unending nightmare is at times hard to bear and no language can possibly do justice for the victims.<br />
<br />
Nuremberg Principle VI defines “war crimes” in part as “wanton destruction of cities,…or devastation not justified by military necessity” (International Committee of the Red Cross, 2012). During the November 2004 invasion of Fallujah (Schwartz, 2008, p. 112): <br />
<br />
"US forces surrounded the city and barred entry to everyone. Even humanitarian and medical personnel were not allowed to enter for the next two months. The commanders of the siege then invited all women, children, and older men to leave through a few of [the] heavily guarded checkpoints. All fighting-age men were prohibited from exiting….Civilians who stayed in the city during the fighting, estimated to be about fifty thousand of the two hundred fifty thousand residents, found themselves in a kill-anything-that-moves free-fire zone."<br />
<br />
The city was destroyed, has not been rebuilt and will probably not recover in a generation. This great victory was mimicked in Baiji and Ramadi, cities of 200,000 and 500,000, respectively. A study by the Iraq Body Count found that of all people in Iraq killed by air strikes, 46% are women and 39% are children (Sengupta, 2009). Mortality due to violence in Iraq increased 58-fold in 2003 (Roberts, et al., 2004).<br />
<br />
Victims’ compensation is disgustingly low, at $2,500 per death, $1,500 for serious injury and $200 for minor injuries. Of course, most people receive nothing at all: from 2003 to 2006, the Pentagon paid out $31 million in total claims for both the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (Hedges & al-Arian, 2008, pp. 44-45). Only one in six Iraqi widows receive the government stipend for widows ($50 per month plus $12 for each child). As a response to this inconvenience, the government is starting “a campaign to arrest beggars and the homeless, including war widows” (Williams, 2009). The Iraqi surplus, which could easily provide a modicum of dignity for those that have lost everything, rests in US and European banks, the oil and banking sectors partially sold to foreign investors, and the proceeds used to construct opulent military suburbias, swimming pools and fast-food restaurants in the Green Zone, as discussed above.<br />
<br />
The purported ‘democracy’ in Iraq is a rhetorical façade. After invading the country, the United States installed an American viceroy, who appointed a temporary government to hold elections. The Ba’ath party, which would be the chief political opposition to the occupation, is still banned from running in elections (Shadid, 2010). According to the 2009 UN Arab Human Development Report, “it is a crime to insult any public institution or official. It is also a crime, under article 227, to publicly insult a foreign country or an international organization with an office in Iraq.” The Report concludes: “Bad as Iraq’s economic legacy was, it does not compare to the economic breakdown that followed the US-led invasion...standards of living are still lower than they were before the invasion.” Iraq ranks 152nd out of 179 countries in Reporters without Borders’ Press Freedom Index (2012). <br />
<br />
<br />
References<br />
<br />
Brownstein, Catherine A. and John S. Brownstein. 2008. “Estimating Excess Mortality in Post-Invasion Iraq.” New England Journal of Medicine, 358(5), pp. 445-447.<br />
<br />
Hedges, Chris and Laila al-Arian. 2008. Collateral Damage: America’s War against Iraqi Civilians. Nation Books.<br />
<br />
International Committee of the Red Cross. 2012. “Principles of International Law Recognized in the Charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal, 1950.” http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/full/390. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Reporters without Borders. 2012. Press Freedom Index. http://en.rsf.org/press-freedom-index-2011-2012,1043.html <br />
<br />
Roberts, et al. November, 2004. “Mortality before and after the 2003 Invasion of Iraq: Cluster Sample Survey.” Lancet 364(9448), pp. 1857-1864.<br />
<br />
<br />
Schwartz, Michael. 2008. War without End: The Iraq War in Context. Haymarket Books.<br />
<br />
Sengupta, Kim. April 16, 2009. “Iraq Air Raids Hit Mostly Women and Children.” Independent. <br />
<br />
Shadid, Anthony. January 14, 2010. “Iraqi Commission Bars Nearly 500 Candidates.” New York Times. <br />
<br />
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. 2007. “Statistics on Displaced Iraqis around the World.” http://www.unhcr.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/home/opendoc.pdf?tbl=SUBSITES&id=470387fc2.<br />
<br />
Williams, Timothy. February 22, 2009. “Iraq’s War Widows Face Dire Need with Little Aid.” New York Times.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7029529332035669335.post-83583417262824996072012-06-04T16:29:00.000-07:002012-06-04T16:29:58.282-07:00History of the Iraq War, Part XV: Who Benefitted? American Politicians and Their AlliesLarge amounts of war profits were recycled as campaign contributions. “According to The New York Times, ‘the top 20 service contractors have spent nearly $300 million since 2000 on lobbying and have donated $23 million to political campaigns.’ The Bush administration, in turn, increased the amount spent on contractors by roughly $200 billion between 2000 and 2006” (Klein, 2007, p. 412). To take just one example, the rise of the mercenary force Blackwater (now called Xe Services) and others can be credited to the Iraq War (Bryer, 2008).<br />
<br />The connections between Vice President Cheney and his former employer Halliburton almost exceed the historically brazen corruption expected during wartime. For the first five years of his vice presidency, Cheney received not only deferred compensation of approximately $200,000 per year (more than his government salary), but also held 433,000 Halliburton shares, or about $10 million worth, in a form of stock options (Chatterjee, 2004, p. 43). During the period of the war, KBR, which was spun off from Halliburton in 2007, received more in war contracts than any other company, an astonishing $38.4 billion (Feinstein, 2011, p. 404). In one example of the sort of leadership this money bought, a GAO investigation discovered a “$700 million ‘discrepancy’ between Halliburton’s estimate of $2.7 billion to provide food and other logistics services to the government, and the company’s own line-by-line breakdown of the estimated expenses. After the Defense Department’s questioning, the company slashed its estimate for the work to $2 billion” (Chatterjee, 2004, p. 55). If this is not a conflict of interest, then nothing is.<br />
<br />Feinstein (2011, p. 404) summarizes a fifty year-old Vietnam veteran’s report on the corporate pep talk he received as a newly hired KBR contractor being sent to Iraq: <br /><br />"The recruits were told they were going to Iraq ‘for the money.’ The trainer told them they were not going to help the troops, not going to help the Iraqi people, not going for America, but ‘FOR THE MONEY,’ a slogan they had to chant repeatedly."<br /><br />At least they were honest.<br />
<br />Halliburton/KBR is far from an isolated case. Hogan, et al. (2006, p. 284) found that there was a statistically significant relationship between campaign finance activities and the awarding of contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan. In particular, “campaign donations, donation amounts, and corporate political connections in the form of lobbyists and political action committees are positively associated with the likelihood that a company will receive a post-war [sic] contract.”<br />
<br />It is not that this tremendous corruption went unnoticed. A 2010 audit by the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction found that the Pentagon could not account for an astonishing 96% of $9.1 billion it has received from Iraqi oil revenues for reconstruction (Chwastiak, 2011). And of the 185,000 AK-47s, 170,000 pistols, 215,000 body armor pieces and 140,000 helmets that the US delivered to the Iraqi army from 2003-2005, the majority could not be accounted for by 2007 (Feinstein, 2011, p. 419). Chwastiak (2011) reviews fourteen additional audits from the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction and found the audits variously shift the blame from political and corporate corruption to: incompetence; low-level employees; the fog of war; government regulators; Iraqis. Though the number of war contracts increased by 328% from 2001-2009, audit staff levels remained the same (Feinstein, 2011, p. 406). Of all of the billions in fraud, only one company has been convicted: Raman International, which has two employees and revenues of $170,000 (Chwastiak, 2011).<br />
<br />One of the reasons the victors and victims of the war were not articulated to the American people was a six year-long Pentagon information campaign that paid retired military officers, who themselves were often on the payroll of contractors, to appear on television networks and other media with administration talking points (Barstow, 2008). This group of more than 75 retired officers was extremely prolific in orchestrated media appearances on ABC, CBS, CNN, Fox, NBC, NPR and influential print media. Many were paid by the number of times they could appear on TV. While their paymasters were not revealed to viewers, the program was micromanaged by Donald Rumsfeld and the purposes of the financial arrangements appeared clear to those involved. As retired Marine colonel and Fox News ‘analyst’ John Garrett put it in an email to Pentagon staffers in 2007, “Please let me know if you have any specific points you want covered or that you would prefer to downplay.” By contrast, William Cowan, another former Marine colonel and Fox analyst, was fired from the information program after he criticized the war on Fox in August, 2005. The Pentagon provided its “surrogates” (their wording) not only media talking points, but also frequent access to Cabinet officials and supervised trips to Cuba and Iraq. Columnists were also paid to write themselves or submit ghost-written columns (nine of them for the New York Times, which exposed the story). Canned segments were provided for free to local TV news stations. The type of viewpoints that would emerge from this information campaign serve to hide the nature of the propagandists – and war (Herman and Chomsky, 2002, pp. 1-2).<br />
<br />Aside from the corporate-political connections, the Bush administration also used the Iraqi occupation to reward domestic and foreign political allies. Chandrasekaran (2006, pp. 91-92) recounts a CPA staffer lamentation that he “watched résumés of immensely talented individuals who had sought out CPA to help the country thrown in the trash because their adherence to ‘the President’s vision for Iraq’ (a frequently heard phrase at CPA) was ‘uncertain.’ I saw senior civil servants from agencies like Treasury, Energy… and Commerce denied advisory positions in Baghdad that were instead handed to prominent [Republic National Committee] contributors.” <br />
<br />This favoritism also extended to foreign political allies, as the United States excluded from lucrative reconstruction contracts companies from those countries – like Russia, Germany and France – that had opposed the initial invasion. Unfortunately for Iraqi citizens and US taxpayers, 3/4 of the power plants in Iraq had been built by manufacturers in those three countries (Chatterjee 2004, p. 62). At the World Bank, the short-lived presidency of Bush hawk Paul Wolfowitz saw him appoint five officials, three of whom were conservative politicos from governments supporting the war rather than qualified economists (Peet, 2009, pp. 175-176).<br />
<br />References<br />
<br />
Barstow, David. April 20, 2008. “Message Machine – Behind TV Analysts, Pentagon’s Hidden Hand.” New York Times. <br />
<br />
Bryer, Thomas A. 2008. “Warning: The Hollow State Can Be Deadly.” Public Administration Review 68(3), pp. 587-590.<br />
<br />
Chandrasekaran, Rajiv. 2006. Imperial Life in the Emerald City: Inside Iraq’s Green Zone. Knopf.<br />
<br />
Chatterjee, Pratap. 2004. Iraq, Inc.: A Profitable Occupation. Seven Stories Press.<br />
<br />
Chwastiak M. 2011. “Profiting from Destruction: The Iraq Reconstruction, Auditing and the Management of Fraud.” Critical Perspectives on Accounting. In press.<br />
<br />
Feinstein, Andrew. 2011. The Shadow World: Inside the Global Arms Trade. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. <br />
<br />
Herman, Edward and Noam Chomsky. 2002. Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. Pantheon.<br />
<br />
Hogan, Michael, Michael A. Long, Paul B. Stretesky & Michael J. Lynch. 2006. “Campaign Contributions, Post-War Reconstruction Contracts, and State Crime.” Deviant Behavior, 27:3, pp. 269-297.<br />
<br />
Klein, Naomi. 2007. The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. Metropolitan Books. <br />
<br />
Peet, Richard. 2009. Unholy Trinity: The IMF, World Bank and WTO. 2nd ed. Zed Books.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7029529332035669335.post-91795185158252361742012-06-04T16:25:00.000-07:002012-06-04T16:25:54.665-07:00History of the Iraq War, Part XIV: Who Benefitted? American CorporationsIn a practice recalling the mandated importation of goods under the now defunct Oil-for-Food Program, “U.S. government regulations dictated that everything, even the water in which hot dogs were boiled, to be shipped in from approved suppliers in other nations…Whatever could be outsourced was” (Chandrasekaran, 2006, pp. 9, 13). Chatterjee (2004) recounts that from schools to electricity to the military itself, what had been sacrosanct was now up for sale. Mega-corporations like Bechtel, Halliburton and KBR received no-bid, cost-plus contracts, leading to blundering mismanagement, inefficiencies and even dismantlement of the country’s electricity, health, education and sanitation infrastructure.<br /><br />
An accounting by Chandrasekaran (2006, p. 288) summarizes the entire snafu: <br /><br />"Because of bureaucratic delays, only 2 percent of the $18.4 billion Supplemental [appropriation from the US Congress] had been spent. Nothing had been expended on construction, health care, sanitation, or the provision of clean water, and more money had been devoted to administration than all projects related to education, human rights, democracy, and governance combined. At the same time, the CPA had managed to dole out almost all of a $20 billion development fund fed by Iraq’s oil sales, more than $1.6 billion of which had been used to pay Halliburton, primarily for trucking fuel into Iraq."<br /><br />Reflecting the particular style of Keynesianism favored by the dominant class, the American government used Iraqi oil to guarantee profits for American companies. Chatterjee describes the financing mechanism (2004, p. 93): <br /><br />"The money from ExIm [the United States Export-Import Bank] ensured that the investments of US corporations in Iraq were risk-free. If Iraqi ministries defaulted on any of their payments to US companies, ExIm would be required to pay in their place. Then ExIm would take its money back from Iraq’s Development Fund, the acting budget for Iraq that is 95 percent made up of oil revenues."<br /><br />Furthermore, “the occupation authority did take possession of $20 billion worth of revenues from Iraq’s national oil company, to spend as it wished” (Klein 2007:345). As will be discussed later, a medium-term oil bubble clearly benefits companies and governments that control oil and negatively affects any production or consumption that depends on oil, e.g., everything else (see “American Taxpayers”).<br />
<br />American banks have made out handsomely during the Iraq War. About $10 billion from Iraq’s coffers is deposited with U.S. banks (Glanz, 2008) through a bizarre mechanism that funnels all oil revenue through the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, skims off 5% for Kuwaiti reparations, and deposits the remaining 95% in a Ministry of Finance account at the Central Bank of Iraq (Blanchard, 2009, p. 16). Part of the substantial Iraqi surplus is the result of debt forgiveness that the United States orchestrated in 2004 to the tune of $29.7 billion, with a fraction ($4.1 billion) coming from the United States Treasury (Stiglitz & Bilmes 2009, p. 134), an extremely generous handout to the investment banks that owned that debt. All of this was in addition to CPA Order 39, which allowed Iraq’s banks to be 100 percent foreign-owned.<br />
<br />The Iraq War may have enshrined military Keynesianism to an extent unfathomable even by Eisenhower (Hossein-Zadeh, 2006, pp. 132-133). In Klein’s (2007, p. 13) opinion:<br /><br />"Before, wars and disasters provided opportunities for a narrow sector of the economy – the makers of fighter jets, for instance, or the construction companies that rebuilt bombed-out bridges. The primary economic role of wars, however, was as a means to open new markets that had been sealed off and to generate postwar peacetime booms. Now wars and disaster responses are so fully privatized that they are themselves the new market."<br />
<br />
<br />References<br />
<br />
Blanchard, Christopher M. 2009. “Iraq: Oil and Gas Legislation, Revenue Sharing and US Policy.” Congressional Research Service. <br />
<br />
Chandrasekaran, Rajiv. 2006. Imperial Life in the Emerald City: Inside Iraq’s Green Zone. Knopf.<br />
<br />
Chatterjee, Pratap. 2004. Iraq, Inc.: A Profitable Occupation. Seven Stories Press.<br />
<br />
Glanz, James. August 5, 2008. “High Oil Prices Giving Iraq up to $79 Billion in Surplus Cash.” International Herald-Tribune. <br />
<br />
Hossein-Zadeh, Ismael. 2006. The Political Economy of US Militarism. Palgrave MacMillan.<br />
<br />
Klein, Naomi. 2007. The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. Metropolitan Books. <br />
<br />
Stiglitz, Joseph and Linda Bilmes. 2009. The Three Trillion Dollar War: The True Cost of the Iraq Conflict. Penguin.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7029529332035669335.post-41668157560926567332012-06-04T16:22:00.000-07:002012-06-04T16:22:21.329-07:00History of the Iraq War, Part XIII: The US Agency for International Development and Iraq's EconomyThe United States Agency for International Development (USAID) is not typically mentioned in discussions of neoliberalism, but its role in Iraq was even more instrumental than the those of World Bank or WTO. According to the report Moving the Iraqi Economy from Recovery to Sustainable Growth, USAID “was to lay ‘the groundwork for a market-oriented private sector economic recovery.’ The plan envisioned the sale of state-owned enterprises through a ‘broad-based mass privatization program,’ the establishment of a ‘world-class exchange’ for trading stocks, and ‘a comprehensive income tax system consistent with current international practice’” (cited in Chandrasekaran, 2006, p. 115; see also USAID, 2005, p. 21). This money was distributed with liberal doses of incompetence and corruption.<br />
<br />The USAID was heavily involved in creating what is misleading called ‘civil society,’ or a collection of American-funded nonprofits supportive of the occupation. Muttitt (2011, pp. 71-72) observes that from 2003-6, USAID distributed civil society grants totaling $337 million, supplemented by funds from the International Republican Institute and National Democratic Institute, which are controlled by their respective American political parties. Much of the money was doled out through a $167 million grant to the Research Triangle Institute in North Carolina, a think tank founded to foster communication between local universities and businesses, now almost comically refocused on a mission to bring democracy to Iraq. An unknown amount of this money was corruptly recycled to the United States. For example, one beneficiary was Women for a Free Iraq, headed by neoconservative jingoists William Kristol and Richard Perle (Chatterjee, 2004, p. 183).<br />
<br />An audit report from the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction indicates the environment in which USAID taxpayer money was flushed down the drain. One Inspector General report described how Bechtel siphoned USAID reconstruction funds. Bechtel subcontracted out 90% of the tasks of their largest contract while pocketing 21.8% of the total contact value. The corporation also subcontracted out all of a $50 million deal to build the Basra Children’s Hospital to a Jordanian company for $37 million. After cost overruns, the Army Corps of Engineers replaced Bechtel and projected cost dropped from $131 million to $90 million solely on the basis of removing Bechtel as an intermediary. Prior to this replacement, not even one Western engineer was working on-site (Chwastiak, 2011). It is of note that Donald Rumsfeld had served on Bechtel’s board of directors (Randall, 2005, p. 310).<br />
<br />
References<br />
<br />
Chandrasekaran, Rajiv. 2006. Imperial Life in the Emerald City: Inside Iraq’s Green Zone. Knopf.<br />
<br />
Chatterjee, Pratap. 2004. Iraq, Inc.: A Profitable Occupation. Seven Stories Press.<br />
<br />
Chwastiak M. 2011. “Profiting from Destruction: The Iraq Reconstruction, Auditing and the Management of Fraud.” Critical Perspectives on Accounting. In press.<br />
<br />
Muttitt, Greg. 2011. Fuel on the Fire: Oil and Politics in Occupied Iraq. Bodley Head: Random House.<br />
<br />
Randall, Stephen. 2005. United States Foreign Oil Policy since World War I: For Profits and Security. 2nd ed. McGill-Queen’s University Press.<br />
<br />
United States Agency for International Development. 2005. “Our Commitment to Iraq.”Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7029529332035669335.post-12188686066960250602012-06-04T16:19:00.000-07:002012-06-04T16:19:40.660-07:00History of the Iraq War, Part XII: The International Monetary Fund Reforms Iraq's EconomyThe CPA dissolved in 2004 but the implementation of its laws continued through the actions of the IMF and the nascent, puppet Iraqi government. The IMF is the primary agency that orchestrates Washington Consensus reforms globally through structural adjustment programs. These programs are usually foisted on countries as conditions to secure loans from the IMF (Peet, 2009, pp. 136-137).<br />
<br />During its tenure in Iraq, the IMF has advocated moving towards implementation of neoliberal economic reforms. Early IMF actions were limited to changing the picture on the Iraqi currency from Saddam Hussein to Iraqi monuments (CPA Order 43, 2003). In 2004, however, the IMF resumed its traditional role as purveyor of structural adjustments. In its first contract with the Iraqi government, the IMF (2004b) stated its goals were to:<br /><br />"Stabilize the economy, lay the groundwork for the development of a reform program that could be undertaken in years to come, and to begin the process of restoring Iraq's external debt sustainability. The authorities' program is to be underpinned by a prudent fiscal policy that aims to limit spending to available government revenues and external resources, the use of the exchange rate to anchor inflationary expectations, and the implementation of key structural reforms to transform Iraq into a market economy."<br /><br />This loan was labeled as “Emergency Post-Conflict Assistance” because the IMF’s mission allows it to dictate the disbursement of funds to other countries if they are “unable to implement and prepare a comprehensive economic program” for themselves. When Iraq received this loan of approximately $440 million from the IMF, both parties agreed to continue the reforms that the CPA began (Boon, 2006, pp. 525-526).<br />
<br />The second contract, which was signed on December 23, 2005, garnered Iraq a loan of roughly $730 million. As with the first IMF action, for the second the Iraqi government promised to continue the reforms that the CPA initiated. An important additional reform was the promise to move towards “putting oil sector enterprises on a full commercial basis” (IMF 2005, p. 10), a key step towards gaining foreign control over Iraq’s oil revenues. Iraq paid back its first two loans one week ahead of schedule, on December 12, 2007 – and then almost immediately took another one. Iraq had a surplus of tens of billions of dollars at the time (United States Government Accountability Office, 2008a) and had no legitimate reason for a multi-year loan of less than $1 billion. The conditions were the contract.<br />
<br />IMF austerity measures are often justified by the alleged need to control inflation (Peet, 2009, p. 67). In the case of Iraq, the IMF itself caused the high inflation, then took punitive mitigation measures. Based on the advice of the IMF, the Iraqi currency was taken off of a fixed exchange rate at the end of 2006. Inflation quickly jumped to sixty-five percent. Fiscal and monetary austerity measures were subsequently used to cut down inflation (Vrijer et al., 2008). In light of evidence to be discussed later (“Who Pays the Costs?”) it is particularly outrageous that international development experts could justify behavior that destroyed millions of lives.<br />
<br />
<br />The third IMF loan followed the trend of furthering Washington Consensus reforms. Iraq agreed to a loan of approximately $740 million from the IMF on January 16, 2008 despite having a projected budget surplus of $50 to $60 billion (Sassoon, 2009, p. 133), a number that ballooned with oil prices that summer to nearly $80 billion. About $10 billion of that was deposited with U.S. banks (Glanz, 2008) while social services continued to decline. The London-based branch of one of the last two remaining state banks was liquidated in order to pay off foreign debt, principally owed as reparations to Kuwait for the Gulf War. The IMF loan (2008) also came with conditions that cuts would be made in social services. While overall social spending was increased by hiring slightly more workers, the government froze wages while decreasing social spending elsewhere. The agreement continued policies to decrease the number of items offered to the Iraqi people in a ration basket by “limit[ing] the number and rations of goods in the basket, increas[ing] the price of a ration card, and further restrict[ing] eligibility to well-off families” (2008, pp. 45-50). In 2006, a Government Accountability Office stated that “it is unclear how US efforts are helping Iraq obtain clean water, reliable electricity, or competent health care” (Chwastiak, 2011). But the IMF succeeded in deepening the involvement of Iraq in neoliberal economic policies. <br />
<br />
References<br />
<br />
<br />
Boon, Kristin E. 2006. ““Open for Business”: International Financial Institutions, Post-Conflict Economic Reform, and the Rule of Law.” New York University Journal of International Law and Politics 39, pp. 514-580. <br />
<br />
Chwastiak M. 2011. “Profiting from Destruction: The Iraq Reconstruction, Auditing and the Management of Fraud.” Critical Perspectives on Accounting. In press. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Coalition Provisional Authority Orders, full text. http://www.iraqcoalition.org/regulations/. <br />
<br />
Glanz, James. August 5, 2008. “High Oil Prices Giving Iraq up to $79 Billion in Surplus Cash.” International Herald-Tribune. <br />
<br />
International Monetary Fund. September 29, 2004b. “IMF Executive Board Approves US$436.3 Million in Emergency Post-Conflict Assistance to Iraq.” Press release no. 04/206.<br />
<br />
<br />
International Monetary Fund. December 5, 2005. “Iraq: Letter of Intent, Memorandum of Economic and Financial Policies and Technical Memorandum of Understanding.” <br />
<br />
International Monetary Fund. January 16, 2008. “Iraq: Letter of Intent, Memorandum of Economic and Financial Policies and Technical Memorandum of Understanding.” <br />
<br />
Peet, Richard. 2009. Unholy Trinity: The IMF, World Bank and WTO. 2nd ed. Zed Books.<br />
<br />
Sassoon, Joseph. 2009. The Iraqi Refugees: The New Crisis in the Middle East. International Library of Migration Studies. IB Tauris.<br />
<br />
United States Government Accountability Office. January, 2008a. “Better Data Needed to Assess Iraq’s Budget Execution.”<br /><br />United States Government Accountability Office. 2008b. “Stabilizing and Rebuilding Iraq: Iraqi Revenues, Expenditures, and Surplus.”<br />
<br />
Vrijer, Erik, Udo Kock, and David Grigorian. February 13, 2008. IMF Survey.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7029529332035669335.post-25142050643603532302012-06-04T16:15:00.000-07:002012-06-04T16:15:00.026-07:00History of the Iraq War, Part XI: Neoliberal Reaganomics and Changing Iraq's EconomyWith the 2003 invasion of Iraq came the opportunity for the United States to remake Iraq’s economy in a neoliberal mold. The economic reforms carried out by the United States in Iraq fall under Williamson’s (2000, pp. 252-255) classic ten-point definition of the Washington Consensus framework (Table 1). Soon after the invasion, neoliberal economic policies were implemented by the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) within two months, a duty that was shifted to the IMF a year later. Contrasting this approach with other economic wars, Klein argues that “in Iraq, Washington cut out the middlemen: the IMF and the World Bank were relegated to supporting roles, and the U.S. was front and center. Paul Bremer was the government” (Klein, 2007, p. 343). Bremer instituted neoliberal economic reforms by fiat, backed by an army. <br /><br />Table 1: Agencies Implementing Neoliberalism in Iraq<br /><br />Reform Implementing Agency<br />Fiscal Discipline CPA, IMF, World Bank<br />Decrease in Social Spending CPA, IMF<br />Flat Tax CPA<br />Financial Liberalization CPA, IMF, World Bank<br />Floating Exchange Rate IMF<br />Trade Liberalization CPA, IMF, USAID<br />Unregulated FDI CPA, USAID<br />Privatization CPA, USAID<br />Deregulation CPA<br />Property Rights CPA<br /><br />Table 2: Evidence of Implementation of Neoliberalism in Iraq<br /><br />Reform Evidence<br />
<br />Fiscal Discipline Based on an oil price of $100/bbl., Iraq was estimated (United States Government Accountability Office, 2008b) to have an approximately $68 billion surplus by the end of 2008. This represented more than 50% of GDP (CIA World Factbook, 2012).<br />
<br />Decrease in Social Spending The first two IMF loans (IMF, 2004a; 2005) have included decreasing social spending as conditions while the current one (IMF, 2008) contains three mandates: an overall increase in social spending through hiring more workers; freezing wages; and decreasing all other social spending.<br />
<br />Flat Tax Under CPA Order 37, NGOs, foreign governments, CPA employees and contractors pay no taxes. Other individuals and corporations pay 15% (Bremer, 2003a). Due to this and lack of even minimal enforcement, the Iraqi government now receives 99% of its revenues from oil rents (Figure 6).<br />
<br />Financial Liberalization Capital import and export restrictions are placed only on money tied to ‘terrorism’ (CPA Order 46, 2003).<br />
<br />Floating Exchange Rate The Iraqi currency was pegged to the dollar until the end of 2006. It is now free-floating (IMF, 2005).<br />
<br />Trade Liberalization This was carried out by the CPA (Bremer, 2003b) and continued by the IMF (2004b; 2005; 2008). Interestingly, UNSC Resolution 1483 “abolish[ed] trade restrictions,” (2003) an unusual and ultimately toothless foray into neoliberal restructuring (Looney, 2003).<br />Unregulated FDI Foreign investors are legally considered the same as domestic investors (Bremer, 2003b).<br />
<br />Privatization The CPA permitted private foreign ownership in all sectors except oil (wholly state owned) and banking (50% foreign ownership limit). The IMF (2005, p. 10) moved to privatize the oil sector and liquidate some national bank holdings (2008).<br />
<br />Deregulation On September 19, 2003, Bremer abolished all previous economic laws except harsh anti-union laws, which Saddam himself had ordered in 1987 (Chatterjee, 2004, p. 18).<br />
<br />Property Rights CPA order 4 established a government group reporting to the CPA for people to pursure property claims (2003).<br /><br />Note: the full text of CPA Orders can be found at http://www.iraqcoalition.org/regulations/ (accessed May 29, 2012).<br /><br />
It is worth quoting at length the summary given by Schwartz (2008, p. 34) of the consequences and rationales behind the neoliberal destruction of the Iraqi economy:<br /><br />"Besides dismantling both the army and the state apparatus, [Bremer] sought to implement virtually every neoliberal reform that had been adopted piecemeal in other countries during the previous thirty years. These included immediately shuttering all state-run (nonoil [sic]) enterprises (which were viewed as inefficient, unprofitable, and corrupt); selling those that were potentially viable (at distress prices, if necessary); dismantling tariff and tax barriers that prevented the entry of foreign products and companies (which would be expected to introduce superior products, modern technology, and efficient methods into the economy); voiding state regulations and subsidies that protected domestic businesses (which were accused of selling worse goods at higher prices than foreign competitors); weakening some and outlawing other labor unions (because they produced or protected wages and benefits and therefore created an unprofitable business climate); eliminating laws that restricted the use of foreign workers (who were expected to work harder for lower wages); and removing state subsidies on food and fuel (which gave unemployed workers sufficient resources to demand wages that could undermine profitability)."<br /><br />Chandrasekaran (2006, p. 110) reports that under Saddam, “nobody paid for electricity, not even the state-owned factories that guzzled hundreds of megawatts. Every family received monthly food rations from the state. Education, even college, was free. So was health care.” Baker, Ismael, & Ismael (2010, p. 225) put it well: in a socialist nation, “the public sector as a whole was now under suspicion.”<br />
<br />This can be contrasted with the American treatment of the Iraqi oil industry, which was left intact and reconfigured piecemeal. Klein contends, with some poetic license, the reasons for this seemingly schizophrenic difference in treatment: “The U.S. government presence in Iraq during the first year of its economic experiment had been a mirage – there had been no government, just a funnel to get U.S. taxpayer and Iraqi oil dollars to foreign corporations, completely outside the law” (Klein, 2007, p. 358). The following sections will discuss how the IMF, USAID, World Bank and WTO implemented neoliberalism in Iraq during the war.<br />
<br />
References<br />
<br />
Baker, Raymond, Shereen Ismael and Tareq Ismael (ed.). 2010. Cultural Cleansing in Iraq: Why Museums Were Looted, Libraries Burned and Academics Murdered. Pluto Press.<br />
<br />
Bremer, Paul. 2003a. “Coalition Provisional Authority Number 37: Tax Strategy for 2003.”<br /><br />Bremer, Paul. 2003b. “Coalition Provisional Authority Number 39: Foreign Investment.”<br />
<br />
Central Intelligence Agency World Factbook. 2012. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/iz.html. <br />
<br />
Chandrasekaran, Rajiv. 2006. Imperial Life in the Emerald City: Inside Iraq’s Green Zone. Knopf.<br />
<br />
Chatterjee, Pratap. 2004. Iraq, Inc.: A Profitable Occupation. Seven Stories Press.<br />
<br />
International Monetary Fund. October 18, 2004a. “Iraq: Use of Fund Resources – Request for Emergency Post-Conflict Assistance.” <br /><br />International Monetary Fund. September 29, 2004b. “IMF Executive Board Approves US$436.3 Million in Emergency Post-Conflict Assistance to Iraq.” Press release no. 04/206.<br /><br />International Monetary Fund. December 5, 2005. “Iraq: Letter of Intent, Memorandum of Economic and Financial Policies and Technical Memorandum of Understanding.” <br /><br />International Monetary Fund. January 16, 2008. “Iraq: Letter of Intent, Memorandum of Economic and Financial Policies and Technical Memorandum of Understanding.” <br />
<br />
Klein, Naomi. 2007. The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. Metropolitan Books.<br />
<br />
Schwartz, Michael. 2008. War without End: The Iraq War in Context. Haymarket Books.<br />
<br />
United States Government Accountability Office. January, 2008a. “Better Data Needed to Assess Iraq’s Budget Execution.”<br /><br />United States Government Accountability Office. 2008b. “Stabilizing and Rebuilding Iraq: Iraqi Revenues, Expenditures, and Surplus.”<br />
<br />
Williamson, John. 1990. “What Washington Means by Policy Reform.” In John Williamson, ed., Latin American Adjustment: How Much Has Happened? Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7029529332035669335.post-66897226965492651132012-06-04T16:09:00.000-07:002012-06-04T16:09:48.965-07:00History of the Iraq War, Part X: Oil Contracts at GunpointThe first foreign oil contract was signed in 2004. The salient fact is that this contract was signed by the semi-autonomous Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) with a little-known Norwegian company (Muttit, 2011, p. 127). The parties to this contract, brokered clandestinely by American diplomat Peter Galbraith, may indicate why the larger oil companies chose not to participate. The Iraqi national government has declared such contracts unconstitutional under a 1967 law requiring parliamentary approval for any oil contracts. Any company signing an oil contract with the KRG is banned from operating in the rest of the country (O’Sullivan, 2011, p. 11). [Interestingly, the author of this paper, Meghan O’Sullivan, worked as head of Iraq policy at the National Security Council. After her resignation, she signed a contract to consult with Hess executives on oil policy and Hess signed an oil contract with KRG (Coll, 2012, pp. 568-571).] No firms partaking in such contracts have been prosecuted (Coll, 2012, p. 569).<br />
<br />
Instead, many oil companies chose to sign bilateral contracts with the national Iraqi government to provide relatively modest services along the lines of those initially opposed by Bremer, who favored more drastic steps toward full privatization. Chevron signed the first, in June 2004, in order to provide technical assistance on the extraction of oil from previously undeveloped fields. Unlike the naked privatization schemes proposed by Bremer, Allawi (Schwartz, 2008, p. 60) and others, there may have been some benefits to the Iraqi people from such agreements, since Iraqi technology was far behind global advances due to years of war and sanctions (Yergin, 2011, pp. 151-152). Within a year, roughly thirty oil companies had jointly signed a relatively modest – and legal – contracts to provide training worth about $20 million to Iraqis (Coll, 2012, p. 563), which had the mutual benefit of allowing seismic exploration and other intelligence gathering. Unlike larger contracts, there was little to lose if the Iraqi government collapsed (Muttit, 2011, pp. 144-145).<br />
<br />
As larger privatization ploys failed, the US turned to structural adjustment under the auspices of ‘debt relief.’ Of course, the IMF faced the same resistance that the CPA and the later American puppet government had. Due to the dual prongs of union resistance in the south and violent resistance in the non-Kurdish north, rewriting Iraq’s oil laws proceeded at what, to the oil companies, must have seemed like an exceedingly slow pace (Schwartz, 2008, pp. 61-67). The Iraqi government ultimately signed a series of contracts with the IMF with the conditions that the Iraqi oil sector move towards privatization (see “The IMF in Iraq”).<br />
<br />
An eerily similar agreement, the International Compact for Iraq, was reached at the United Nations in 2007. In exchange for debt relief and a $2.5 billion loan from the World Bank, the Iraqi government agreed to develop an oil law favorable to foreign direct investment. As if the Mafioso implications were not clear enough, sources in al-Maliki’s office reported that the US threatened to withdraw support for his status as prime minister if he refused to pass such an agreement. The message was reinforced by a US Congressional resolution calling for passage of an amenable oil law (Muttitt, 2011, pp. 243-246).<br />
<br />
Yet progress on an oil law continued to stall, thanks to resistance from virtually all levels of Iraqi society, including parliament. Perhaps drawing conclusions from the prior successful manipulation of al-Maliki, General Ray Odierno, commander of US forces in Iraq, issued a warning that, if Iraqis continued to prevent their national wealth from being stolen, the Americans would implode the entire Iraqi government. Reflecting the dependency that had been created over the past five years, these measures included:<br /><br />"An end to $6.3 billion in aid and $10 billion a year in arms sales. The US would also stop sharing intelligence, providing air defence [sic], protecting the coast and oil export terminals, guarding the borders and training the military. It would no longer maintain the military hardware it had supplied, nor provide secure air transit to Iraqi officials. It would stop operating air traffic control and thereby close down Iraqi airspace. It would not hand over the Iraqi prisoners it held, and it would stop employing 200,000 Iraqis."<br /><br />The agreement to auction off oil fields and remove US troops was signed within one month (Muttitt, 2011, pp. 290-291).<br />
<br />
With the threat and use of force to create a pliant government and make a formerly self-sufficient economy utterly reliant on outsiders, the stage had been set for contracts to be signed with the oil giants. In symbolism indicative of the haughtiness and contempt of the war’s architects, the first non-Kurdish oilfields went up for auction on June 29, 2009 (International Resource Journal, 2009), the very day that American combat troops officially withdrew from Iraqi cities in accordance with the Status of Forces agreement (Rubin, 2009). This day also marked the first time ExxonMobil employees had entered the country since before the invasion, having preferred to meet with Iraqi officials outside of Iraq (Coll, 2012, p. 558).<br />
<br />
In the auctions held since 2008, oil companies have made out like robber barons, though not quite as handsomely as they would have liked. Baker, Ismael, & Ismael (2010, p. 19) quote a study from Oil and Gas Journal to the effect that “Western oil companies estimate that they can produce a barrel of Iraqi oil for less than $US 1.50 and possibly as little as $US 1.’” The oil giants, on the other hand, offered initial bids of at least $4 and settled them at approximately $2 per barrel of pure profit (Muttitt, 2009, p. 4). For just one oil field, this could mean estimated profits of tens of billions of dollars and a 19 percent return on investment, according to Deutsche Bank. Furthermore, this oil can be booked on the companies’ reserve sheets, boosting the favored measure for oil company SEC and investor filings, and revenue to pay Kuwaiti reparations will not be scraped off the top (Coll, 2012, p. 574). As of the date of this writing, sixty percent of Iraq’s oil reserves have been sold. Such terms will lead to an estimated $74 to $194 billion in revenue for multinational corporations over the contracts’ twenty-year lifespan (Muttitt, 2009, p. 4). As if this weren’t enough, the American government invested $4 billion of taxpayer money to reconstruct Iraq’s oil sector. By 2010, this oil was flowing to supertankers on the Persian Gulf (Coll, 2012, pp. 559, 575). This would seem less egregious than full privatization but is missing the larger picture :the oil companies had met all of their objectives.<br />
<br />An oft-repeated point, particularly by apologists for American state violence, is that American interests did not win or even bid on contracts to drill most of Iraq’s oil fields (Walt, 2009). This is correct but misleading. American or British partnerships won the rights to four of the five largest fields in Iraq, with the lone exception being Russia and Norway’s contract on the West Qurna-2 field, the third-largest in Iraq (Halperin, 2011, p. 213-214). In addition to siphoning off Iraqi oil profits for foreign oil corporations, the occupation also expropriated petrodollars directly, as discussed in later posts.<br />
<br />
References<br />
<br />
<br />
Baker, Raymond, Shereen Ismael and Tareq Ismael (ed.). 2010. Cultural Cleansing in Iraq: Why Museums Were Looted, Libraries Burned and Academics Murdered. Pluto Press. <br />
<br />
Coll, Steve. 2012. Private Empire: ExxonMobil and American Power. Penguin Press. <br />
<br />
Halperin, Sandra. 2011. “The Political Economy of Anglo-American War: The Case of Iraq.” International Politics 48(2/3), pp. 207-228. <br />
<br />
International Resource Journal. 2009. “Iraq Oil Auctions.” http://www.internationalresourcejournal.com/features/oct09_features/iraq_oil_auctions.html. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Muttitt, Greg. 2011. Fuel on the Fire: Oil and Politics in Occupied Iraq. Bodley Head: Random House. <br />
<br />
O’Sullivan, Meghan. 2011. “Iraqi Politics and Implications for Oil and Energy.” Harvard Kennedy School Faculty Research Working Paper Series. <br />
<br />
Rubin, Alissa J. July 1, 2009. “Iraq Marks Withdrawal of US Troops from Cities.” New York Times. <br />
<br />
Schwartz, Michael. 2008. War without End: The Iraq War in Context. Haymarket Books.<br />
<br />
Walt, Vivienne. December 19, 2009. “US Companies Shut Out as Iraq Auctions Its Oil Fields.” Time Magazine.<br />
<br />
Yergin, Daniel. 2011. The Quest: Energy, Security, and the Remaking of the Modern World. Penguin Press. <br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7029529332035669335.post-55931371809240386142012-06-04T16:03:00.000-07:002012-06-04T16:03:54.034-07:00History of the Iraq War, Part IX: Iraqi Resistance and Oil UnionsCoalition Provisional Authority head Paul Bremer’s tenure from 2003-4 included steps designed to facilitate the privatization of Iraqi oil. Initially, he permitted continued oil extraction by the Iraqi national oil companies while attempting to transfer control over auxiliary services (refining, shipping, marketing) to Halliburton (Schwartz, 2008, pp. 58-59).<br />
<br />
This led to the first case of successful resistance to the occupation by Iraqi oil workers, on June 20, 2003, and dramatically illustrates the growing power that Iraqi unions, using both strikes and the threat of violence, had over the flow of oil and, hence, the American government. In the build-up to this event, workers at the Basra refinery in southern Iraq had not received their wages for two months. In response, that morning (Muttitt, 2011, p. 89): <br /><br />"Around 100 workers arrived at Basra refinery and, rather than going to work, placed a crane across the access road in protest, preventing vehicles getting in or out. It did not take long for Coalition troops to arrive, and several armoured [sic] vehicles accompanied the next convoy of tankers. The soldiers threatened to shoot. Some workers tore off their shirts. ‘Shoot!’ they shouted, pointing at their chests. Others ducked under the tankers. At first their aim was simply to stop the trucks driving off, but as the tension escalated, some of them took out their cigarette lighters and threatened to set fire to the tankers. The military offered to negotiate. Throughout his discussions with a British general, the refinery director kept in touch with union leaders by radio. By noon the problem was resolved: salaries would be paid within 24 hours."<br /><br />That day, membership in the union increased from 100 to 3,000, and grew to 23,000, or half of the national oil industry, within two years (Muttitt, 2011, p. 148). The offending contract transferring supporting services to Halliburton was voided. As if to reinforce the power of resistance centered on the oil industry, another strike at the Basra refinery in 2007 saw al-Maliki send in troops and armored vehicles, then withdraw them and accede to the unionists’ demands in face-to-face negotiations with the union leader (Blanchard, 2009, p. 14). <br />
<br />It is hard to imagine that the lessons of this showdown were lost to either American corporate boardrooms or the Iraqi resistance, who began attacks on oil infrastructure in the north. By June 2004, production of 1.6 million barrels of oil per day had dwindled to zero (Yergin, 2011, pp. 157-158), leading to the patrolling of pipelines by American snipers and attack helicopters (Klare, 2004, pp. 101-102).<br />
<br />
Nevertheless, ‘counterinsurgency’ death squads and the machinations of the puppet Iraqi government gradually wore down union effectiveness. Having seen that generalized repression of oil workers did not work, the American military turned to assassinations of union and other Iraqi leaders. In a heroic series of essays collected by Baker, Ismael, & Ismael (2010), Iraqi exiles and sympathizers document the destruction of the intellectual class in Iraq. The authors plausibly argue that because of the sophistication of the attacks and the ‘failure’ of any of the perpetrators to be brought to justice, these attacks were likely orchestrated by American intelligence. The targeted killing of union leaders is another facet of the decapitation of the Iraqi state apparatus (Muttitt, 2011, pp. 234-235), one consistent with the death squads deployed against unions in other American spheres of influence, such as a Ford factory in Argentina (Klein, 2007, p. 108), as well as instilling reliance on foreign technicians to operate the Iraqi oil sector.<br />
<br />
The efforts by Oil Minister Shahristani to crush Iraqi oil unions were no less subtle. He ordered the arrest of two prominent union leaders under Saddam’s 1987 law prohibiting union organization in the public sector, one law that Bremer was happy to keep on the books, and arrested another for sedition (Gentile, 2010). Shahristani’s favored tactic was to transfer union leaders (who were, after all, employed by the government) from their relatively peaceful sectors to areas of the country in the midst of a civil war (Muttitt, 2011, pp. 333-335).<br />
<br />Resistance from so-called ‘insurgents’ was a potent deterrent to the stability necessary for foreign investment and profits. However, large-scale violence of itself does not preclude resource extraction – and in fact is often the cause of violence. The wealth of multinational oil companies allows them to employ private mercenary forces, often in concert with co-opted national governments (Ferguson, 2005, p. 379). For foreign oil companies to operate in Iraq required not pacification, but rather security at oilfields and infrastructure often far removed from the centers of upheaval.<br />
<br />
References<br />
<br />
<br />
Baker, Raymond, Shereen Ismael and Tareq Ismael (ed.). 2010. Cultural Cleansing in Iraq: Why Museums Were Looted, Libraries Burned and Academics Murdered. Pluto Press. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Blanchard, Christopher M. 2009. “Iraq: Oil and Gas Legislation, Revenue Sharing and US Policy.” Congressional Research Service. <br />
<br />
Ferguson, James. 2005. “Seeing Like an Oil Company: Space, Security, and Global Capital in Neoliberal Africa.” American Anthropologist 107(3), pp. 377-382. <br />
<br />
Gentile, Carmen. 2010. “Union Leaders Taken to Court for Oil Sector Dissent.” Iraq Oil Report. http://www.iraqoilreport.com/politics/oil-policy/union-leaders-taken-to-court-for-oil-sector-dissent-4698/. <br />
<br />
Klare, Michael. 2004. Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America’s Growing Dependency on Imported Petroleum. Holt Books. <br />
<br />
Klein, Naomi. 2007. The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. Metropolitan Books. <br />
<br />
Muttitt, Greg. 2011. Fuel on the Fire: Oil and Politics in Occupied Iraq. Bodley Head: Random House.<br />
<br />
<br />
Schwartz, Michael. 2008. War without End: The Iraq War in Context. Haymarket Books.<br />
<br />
Yergin, Daniel. 2011. The Quest: Energy, Security, and the Remaking of the Modern World. Penguin Press.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7029529332035669335.post-79933598169955658942012-06-04T16:00:00.000-07:002012-06-04T16:00:06.642-07:00History of the Iraq War, Part VIII: Invasion and Initial Steps to Oil PrivatizationThe American oil industry was front and center in planning to ‘reconstruct’ the Iraqi oil industry after the war. Former Shell CEO Philip Carroll was brought on board in 2002 and encouraged planners to craft an orderly transition of power over the Iraqi oil sector. In early 2003, before the invasion, he committed to heading American efforts at the nominally Iraqi oil ministry (Yergin, 2011, p. 141) and was joined by a number of other American corporate oil officers (Juhasz, 2008, p. 3460. <br />
<br />Yet the decision to go to war might not have been as clear-cut as some commentators have suggested. Within the American oil industry, there was some tactical debate over the wisdom of the invasion. Make no mistake about it, oil executives care about profits – not the law, weapons of mass destruction, protect human rights, or any other obfuscation. ExxonMobil chief Lee Raymond pushed the Bush administration for stability conducive to investment (Coll, 2012, p. 248). A related concern was the status of Iraqi oil revenues: oil giants wanted control over reserves, an important metric for investors, while the current scheme ran oil revenues through UN-administered accounts to pay for Kuwaiti reparations and the Oil-for-Food Program (Coll, 2012, p. 564). As BP CEO Sir John Browne put it (Yergin, 2011, p. 147):<br /><br />"You know what I’ll say to the first person in our company who comes to us with a proposal to invest a billion dollars in Iraq? I’ll say, ‘Tell us about the legal system, tell us about the political system. Tell us about the economic system and about the contractual and fiscal systems, and tell us about arbitration. And tell us about security, and tell us about the evolution of the political system. Tell us about all those things, and then we’ll talk about whether we’re going to invest or not.’"<br /><br />These debates were moot once the bombs started falling and protection of oil facilities became a primary focus of American military force. Prior to the invasion, “US airships patrolled the pipelines and other vulnerable installations to prevent sabotage” (Schwartz, 2008, p. 51), while US Marines seized control of the Rumaila oil field in southern Iraq less than 24 hours into the invasion (Klare, 2004, pp. 100-101). At the onset of the 2003 invasion, while the US military was unleashing a terrorist bombing of the peaceful city of Baghdad and allowing Iraq’s social structure, including hospitals, schools, ministries, and libraries, to be burned and torn to shreds, and even did nothing to prevent looting of weapons depots, a nuclear research laboratory and a former chemical weapons complex (Muttitt, 2011, p. 53), full protection was given to “the Oil Ministry, oil facilities, and oil infrastructure” (Juhasz, 2008, p. 351). If the ultimate goal was to ensure viability of the oil sector, selective protection of these buildings and pipelines while the country crumbled to ashes around it was shortsighted. The oil sector relied on the function of the larger economy, such as electricity, water, computers, skilled workers, and even a police force that Saddam’s government had set up just for the industry (Yergin, 2011, p. 155).<br />
<br />After the fall of Baghdad, instead of allowing competent Iraqi technocrats to continue their work, “representatives of US oil companies ran Iraq’s oil ministry immediately following the invasion and held high-level oversight roles thereafter. Executives of ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell, and BP each took a turn guiding Iraq’s oil industry” (Juhasz, 2008, p. 346). Interestingly, if ConocoPhillips is replaced with Total, this is the same oligopoly that controlled Iraq’s oil after World War I (Baker, Ismael, & Ismael, 2010, p. 20). Despite these clear signals of American designs, the oil sector was not privatized for many years, and then, only partially.<br />
<br />It was not for lack of effort that oil was not privatized as quickly as the rest of the country’s industries, a conundrum lost on most commentators sympathetic to the ‘War for Oil’ theory. Juhasz (2008, pp. 344, 352-353), Schwartz (2008, pp. 52, 59-60) and Klare (2004, pp. 103-105) are all thorough scholars who nevertheless make the confused argument that Iraqi oil was not handed out to Western oil companies for three interconnected reasons: 1) Iraqi resistance, both violent and non-; 2) it is illegal under the Hague Conventions for an occupying government to drastically change the laws of the occupied country; 3) immediate privatization would risk raising the ire of the Iraqi public. The second argument is clearly disingenuous, as the entire war, along with Coalition Provisional Authority Paul Bremer’s economic laws, are themselves violations of international law (Falk, 2008), a fact that presumably will not cause oil profiteers to lose sleep. Since these authors’ books were published, dozens of contracts have been signed, all illegal under a still-in-force 1967 law that requires parliamentary approval of any oil contracts (O’Sullivan, 2011, p. 8). The third argument fails to pass scrutiny in light of the US-led destruction of Iraq. Indeed, “shock and awe” was designed to terrify the population! <br />
<br />
References<br />
<br />
<br />
Baker, Raymond, Shereen Ismael and Tareq Ismael (ed.). 2010. Cultural Cleansing in Iraq: Why Museums Were Looted, Libraries Burned and Academics Murdered. Pluto Press. <br />
<br />
Coll, Steve. 2012. Private Empire: ExxonMobil and American Power. Penguin Press. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Falk, Richard. The Costs of War: International Law, the UN, and World Order after Iraq. Routledge. 2008. <br />
<br />
Juhasz, Antonia. 2008. The Tyranny of Oil: The World’s Most Powerful Industry – and What We Must Do to Stop It. Harper.<br />
<br />
<br />
Klare, Michael. 2004. Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America’s Growing Dependency on Imported Petroleum. Holt Books. <br />
<br />
Muttitt, Greg. 2011. Fuel on the Fire: Oil and Politics in Occupied Iraq. Bodley Head: Random House.<br />
<br />
O’Sullivan, Meghan. 2011. “Iraqi Politics and Implications for Oil and Energy.” Harvard Kennedy School Faculty Research Working Paper Series. <br />
<br />
Schwartz, Michael. 2008. War without End: The Iraq War in Context. Haymarket Books.<br />
<br />
Yergin, Daniel. 2011. The Quest: Energy, Security, and the Remaking of the Modern World. Penguin Press.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7029529332035669335.post-45782586052605978922012-06-04T15:55:00.001-07:002012-06-04T15:55:11.976-07:00History of the Iraq War, Part VII: America's Quest for Iraqi Oil - Background (through 2003)In contrast to Saudi Arabia, Iraq has not always been a malleable nation. From the discovery of oil in Iraq in 1927, Western oil companies were granted extraction rights, out of which they paid royalties to the Iraqi government. In 1927, the Iraq Petroleum Company was formed and divided among a cabal of French, American, British and Iranian corporations, providing an American foothold for the first time (Zalloum, 2007, pp. 26-32). This system ended when Iraq fully nationalized its oil in 1972 (Coll, 2012, p. 558). Over the following seven years, production increased from 1.5 to 3.5 million barrels a day (Muttitt, 2011, p. 18). During the Reagan administration, steps were taken toward rapprochement, with US companies permitted to market Iraqi oil, as a possible quid pro quo for military aid and sizable loans to help Iraq fight Iran. Marketing contracts with the big oil companies continued – both legally and illegally – under the sanctions regime and Oil-for-Food program, and remain today (Juhasz, 2008, pp. 326-329).<br />
<br /> Sponeck discusses the impact of the sanctions at length in his dry and technical memoir describing the effects of the Oil-for-Food program, which he administered from 1998-2000. Iraqi oil proceeds were used by foreigners to administer initiatives that they deemed desirable. In this case, Iraqi oil funded 100% of the budget of the Oil-for-Food program and revenue was deposited in a trust account held at the Banque Nationale de Paris, which received the interest payments. Officials from permanent United Nations Security Council nations were then responsible for determining what goods (e.g., foods, medicines) would be purchased abroad for the Iraqi people using their money (Sponeck, 2006, pp. 11-13). The United States and Britain threatened use of their Security Council vetoes to prevent the lifting of sanctions (Halperin, 2011, p. 211). The pattern of resource extraction and paternalism will become familiar to the reader (see “Who Pays the Costs?” and “Who Reaps the Benefits?”).<br />
<br />The funding of the Gulf and Iraq wars presents illustrative contrasts. “Only the 1991 Gulf War stands as a direct example” of “extracting revenue to pay the costs of empire” (Rosen, 2003). Johnson (2000, p. 25) maintains that the Gulf War cost the American government nothing, and perhaps allowed it to extract a small profit. For example, Japan alone paid $13 billion and Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates and Germany each chipped in more than $1 billion (Arrighi, 2005). Ironically, since Iraq was forced to pay and continues to pay reparations to Kuwait for its bellicosity, Iraq partially financed its own invasion (Sponeck, 2006, p. 175). In the current Iraq war, Japan has paid $1.5 billion, an order of magnitude lower than its commitments for the Gulf War when adjusted for inflation (Arrighi, 2005). In Arrighi’s conception, the American protection racket was no longer as effective at extortion due to the demise of the Soviet-Russian threat and the destructiveness of neoliberalism.<br />
<br />
References<br />
<br />
Arrighi, Giovanni. May/June, 2005. “Hegemony Unraveling – II.” New Left Review 33.<br />
<br />
Coll, Steve. 2012. Private Empire: ExxonMobil and American Power. Penguin Press.<br />
<br />
Halperin, Sandra. 2011. “The Political Economy of Anglo-American War: The Case of Iraq.” International Politics 48(2/3), pp. 207-228.<br />
<br />
Johnson, Chalmers. 2000. Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire. Metropolitan Books. <br />
<br />
Juhasz, Antonia. 2008. The Tyranny of Oil: The World’s Most Powerful Industry – and What We Must Do to Stop It. Harper.<br />
<br />
Rosen, Stephen. Spring, 2003. “An Empire, If You Can Keep It.” National Interest. <br />
<br />
Sponeck, H. von. 2006. A Different Kind of War: The UN Sanctions Regime in Iraq. Berghahn Books. <br />
<br />
Zalloum, Abdulhay Yahya. 2007. Oil Crusades: American through Arab Eyes. Pluto Press.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7029529332035669335.post-20899455305844078142012-06-04T15:51:00.000-07:002012-06-04T15:51:26.056-07:00History of the Iraq War, Part VI: The US and Middle Eastern OilOil is the lifeblood of industrial economies. Klare notes that “from 1860 until World War II, [the United States] was the world’s leading oil producer, easily supplying its own needs and often generating a surplus for export…During World War II, for example, the United States was able to extract enough oil from domestic fields to satisfy the massive requirements of its own forces and those of its major allies.” However, after the war, the United States began importing far greater quantities of oil, a trend that has continued unabated (Klare, 2004, pp. 9-10). <br />
It has been recognized for at least one hundred years that global oil demand would outstrip and ultimately exhaust supply. The imperial powers have acted to control diminishing reserves. Chomsky (1996, p. 192) observes that:<br />
<br />
The United States did not need Middle East oil for itself. Rather, the goal was to ensure that the enormous profits from the energy system flow primarily to the United States, its British client, and their energy corporations, not to the people of the region, and that oil prices stay within the range most beneficial to the corporate economy, neither too high nor too low. <br />
<br />
American power could also be exerted by restricting Soviet access and controlling the tap for potential rivals like Japan that did not have America’s wealth of natural energy resources (Mercille, 2011, pp. 331-332). We will see in later sections that this conception of global affairs can explain American actions with respect to the Iraqi economy.<br />
<br />
Current domestic production can no longer feasibly satisfy American consumption. The United States economy and its reliance on oil has mushroomed to an extent that full reliance on domestic production for current oil uses would deplete all known American oil reserves in just four years (Figure 5). If oil is to stay a bulwark of the American economy, the United States, with 1.6% of proven worldwide oil reserves, must look elsewhere (Klare, 2004, pp. 17-19). As Dick Cheney put it when he was president of Halliburton (Baker, Ismael, & Ismael, 2010, p. 18): <br />
<br />
By 2010 we will need on the order of an additional 50 million barrels a day. So where is the oil going to come from? Governments and the national oil companies are obviously controlling about ninety percent of the assets. Oil remains fundamentally a government business. While many regions of the world offer great oil opportunities, the Middle East with two-third of the world’s oil and the lowest cost is still where the prize ultimately lies. <br />
<br />
Juhasz argues “one needs only a map showing Big Oil’s overseas operations, the world’s remaining oil reserves, and the oil transport routes to track the realignment and predict future deployments of the US military.” For example, since 2001 the United States has built new military bases in Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar, Turkey, Afghanistan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Pakistan (2008, p. 321).<br />
Along with the United States in general, Western oil corporations also need to find additional sources of reserves. Juhasz (2008, p. 320) reports that “within ten to fifteen years, the major oil companies will have depleted their own reserves unless major changes occur. The Federal Trade Commission estimated in 2004 that ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips would most likely run out of oil in 2017, Chevron in 2016, and Shell and BP in 2015.” <br />
<br />
There are two methods by which the United States government and its corporations control Middle Eastern oil: it is bought or stolen. The historical Saudi-American alliance is the preeminent example of the former. The Western-Saudi dependency was initiated by the British in the years preceding World War I and assumed by the Americans as the sun set on the British Empire. Though oil was not discovered in Saudi Arabia until 1938, imperial interest began in earnest as exploration in other Middle Eastern countries yielded large wells (Yergin, 2011, p. 286). In 1933, Standard Oil of California garnered a sixty-year lease on what was then an unknown quantity of Saudi Arabian oil, signaling the increasing clout of American power in the region. The first presidential action concerning Saudi Arabia was the 1943 extension by Roosevelt to of lucrative Lend-Lease aid to the kingdom. Substantial military and other aid began to flow to Saudi Arabia and has continued unabated, since supplemented by high-tech weapons sales (Klare, 2004, pp. 26-55). <br />
<br />
One should not pretend this relationship was based on altruism. Unlike Iraq, which previously got its weapons from Soviet bloc exporters, much of the oil money in Saudi Arabia is recycled to American defense contractors (Halperin, 2011, p. 210). Comparisons by Zalloum (2007, pp. 21-22) illustrate the effects of a century of exploitation: <br />
<br />
"The combined revenue of all OPEC countries from oil in 2003 was about $240 billion, less than the revenue of Wal-Mart for the same year. The total assets of the 480 Arab financial institutions and banks of all the Arab countries, including the oil-producing states, in 2004 amounted to $780 billion, less than two-thirds of the assets of just one American bank, Citigroup. Most of the petrodollars were recycled back to Western banks and American Treasury bills."<br />
<br />
In a broader cost-benefit formulation of finances before the Iraq War, “maintaining access to Persian Gulf oil requires about $50 billion of the annual US defense budget, including maintenance of one or more carrier task forces there, protecting sea lanes, and keeping large air forces in readiness in the area. But the oil we import from the Persian Gulf costs only a fifth that amount, about $11 billion per annum” (Johnson, 2000, p. 87). The World Bank gave more than $5 billion in subsidies to the global oil industry since 1992 (Juhasz, 2008, p. 392). Such oil imperialism is the modus operandi for the ‘agreements’ foisted on Iraq by force (see “Contracts at Gunpoint”). <br />
<br />
References<br />
<br />
Baker, Raymond, Shereen Ismael and Tareq Ismael (ed.). 2010. Cultural Cleansing in Iraq: Why Museums Were Looted, Libraries Burned and Academics Murdered. Pluto Press.<br />
<br />
Chomsky, Noam. 1996. World Orders Old and New. Columbia University Press.<br />
<br />
Halperin, Sandra. 2011. “The Political Economy of Anglo-American War: The Case of Iraq.” International Politics 48(2/3), pp. 207-228.<br />
<br />
Johnson, Chalmers. 2000. Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire. Metropolitan Books. <br />
<br />
Juhasz, Antonia. 2008. The Tyranny of Oil: The World’s Most Powerful Industry – and What We Must Do to Stop It. Harper.<br />
<br />
Klare, Michael. 2004. Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America’s Growing Dependency on Imported Petroleum. Holt Books. <br />
<br />
Mercille, Julien. 2010. “The Radical Geopolitics of US Foreign Policy: The 2003 Iraq War.” GeoJournal 75, pp. 327-337.<br />
<br />
Yergin, Daniel. 2011. The Quest: Energy, Security, and the Remaking of the Modern World. Penguin Press.<br />
<br />
Zalloum, Abdulhay Yahya. 2007. Oil Crusades: American through Arab Eyes. Pluto Press.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7029529332035669335.post-53161162434748582242012-06-04T15:47:00.000-07:002012-06-04T15:47:14.156-07:00History of the Iraq War, Part V: American Military Strength‘To those with a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.’<br />
<br />
Boswell (2004, p. 519) maintains that diminishing economic productivity is the cause of imperial wars that benefit the United States and not its allies. American military power, technology and expenditures are unparalleled. In conventional warfare capability, America stands alone, with military budgets at approximately 47% of global expenditures (Hossein-Zadeh, 2006, p. 14), up from a ‘low’ of 35% in the first half of 2001 (Greenberg, 2011), in addition to maintaining 60% of total sea power (Boswell, 2004, p. 518).<br />
<br />Just as no analysis of the Vietnam War would be complete without discussion of the Domino Theory, one should not dismiss the potency of a post-Cold War ‘demonstration effect.’ Launching an expeditionary force to destroy a diplomatically isolated country has potent geopolitical ramifications. For a country that seeks to create and dominate the global economy, nations outside of the world system represent a threat. As Biglaiser and DeRouen (2007) argue in their study of 126 countries that were subject to American military intervention, promotion of the free market and investor rights for American companies is a primary factor behind use of the American military. Worldwide, there are US troops in more than one hundred and fifty countries (Department of Defense, 2009). <br />
<br />The destruction of Iraq served as a symbol. Adams and Osho (2006, p. 23) remind us that “in late 2000, Iraq began selling its oil for Euros. Iran soon followed suit and converted the majority of its central bank reserve funds to euros [sic]. By late 2002, North Korea also started adopting the Euro as its standard currency of trade.” In 2000, the $10 billion fund used to administer the Oil-for-Food Program and pay reparations to Kuwait was shifted from an American to a French bank (Halperin, 2011, p. 213). By isolating, punishing and killing Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi people over two decades, the United States government could send a message to other states in the ‘axis of evil’ that sought to frustrate American geopolitical aims (Mercille, 2010, pp. 332-334).<br />
<br />We would fully expect that in the absence of economic or diplomatic power to mold Iraq, the United States will use its comparative advantage: force (Coyne & Pellillo, in press). <br />
<br />
<br />References<br />
<br />
Adams M, Osho G. 2006. “Policy Implications of the War in Iraq and Its Influence on the Global Market: A Public Affairs Perspective.” International Business & Economics Research Journal 5(10), pp. 21-25.<br />
<br />
Biglaiser, Glen and Karl DeRouen. 2007. “Following the Flag: Troop Deployment and U.S. Foreign Investment.” International Studies Quarterly 51, pp. 835-854.<br />
<br />
Boswell, Terry. 2004. “American World Empire or Declining Hegemony.” Journal of World-Systems Research 10(2), pp. 516-524.<br />
<br />
Coyne, Christopher and Adam Pellillo. In press. “Economic Reconstruction amidst Conflict: Insights from Afghanistan and Iraq.” Defence and Peace Economics.<br />
<br />
Department of Defense. 2009. “Active Duty Military Personnel Strengths by Regional Area and by Country.” http://siadapp.dmdc.osd.mil/personnel/MILITARY/history/hst0712.pdf.<br />
<br />
Greenberg, Maurice R. “Trends in US Military Spending.” Council on Foreign Relations.<br />
<br />
Halperin, Sandra. 2011. “The Political Economy of Anglo-American War: The Case of Iraq.” International Politics 48(2/3), pp. 207-228.<br />
<br />
Hossein-Zadeh, Ismael. 2006. The Political Economy of US Militarism. Palgrave MacMillan.<br />
<br />
Mercille, Julien. 2010. “The Radical Geopolitics of US Foreign Policy: The 2003 Iraq War.” GeoJournal 75, pp. 327-337.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7029529332035669335.post-42324876355238108552012-06-04T15:43:00.000-07:002012-06-04T15:43:41.833-07:00History of the Iraq War, Part IV: American Diplomatic Decline (1955-present)The United Nations and Global Power<br /><br />The shifting balance of global power away from the United States may explain the perception of an American pivot to a more unilateral and bellicose foreign policy, particularly in Iraq. The UN was formed in 1945 ostensibly to prevent future disastrous wars, but it has not functioned this way (Kagan, 2004). Rather, one could argue that the UN was meant to ensure the continuance of the status quo, with America at peak geopolitical power (Wallerstein, 2000, p. 259). Therefore, the UN is foremost a political body (Arrighi, 2005), in whose actions one can ascertain the relative influence of nations. A brief history of power distribution in the United Nations is necessary to demonstrate this point.<br />
<br />After the rush of post-1945 decolonization, most of the world’s people and countries were part of the Third World. Reflecting changing membership, the UN General Assembly became staunchly anti-colonial. Third World leaders used it as a forum to petition against colonialism and in 1960, the UN passed a resolution that called for “the end of colonialism in all its manifestations” (Emerson, 1965, pp. 495-496). The undemocratic structure of the UN Security Council also came under attack (Senghor, 1961, p. 325; Nkrumah, 1960, pp. 316-317). Partly because of Third World activism, in 1965 the Security Council was expanded from ten to fifteen countries, even as the five most powerful retained their vetoes. Despite ultimately impotent resolutions, the resulting change in UN power weakened American diplomatic leverage. <br /><br />Quantifying Declines in American Diplomatic Power<br /><br />The record of Security Council vetoes reflects changing global power dynamics and waning American influence. There have been striking variations in Security Council vetoes during different time periods. Chomsky (2004, pp. 29-30) observes “since the 1960s the US has been far in the lead in vetoing Security Council resolutions on a wide range of issues, even those calling on states to observe international law.” Declining American diplomatic power may provide some explanation as to why the United States government is perceived to have engaged in historically severe imperialism in its occupation of Iraq.<br />
<br />In the General Assembly, two recent UN votes depict the lack of American diplomatic control over a seemingly uncontroversial vote. Israel and the Federated States of Micronesia joined the US in abstaining from voting for a resolution on the Prevention of Outer Space Arms Race (globalissues.org, 2007). The Unclassified National Space Policy (2006, p. 1) explains that America is “committed to the exploration and use of outer space by all nations for peaceful purposes, and for the benefit of all humanity. Consistent with this principle, ‘peaceful purposes’ allow U.S. defense and intelligence-related activities in pursuit of national interests.” In 2008, America joined Zimbabwe in voting against creating a new UN Arms Trade Treaty, perhaps because America controls almost forty percent of the world’s arms trade (Baum, 2008).<br />
<br />At the least, diplomacy is necessary as a façade to placate those who might object to American unilateralism (Rosen, 2003). For countries with a powerful military, decreasing diplomatic power often leads to increasing violence.<br />
<br />
References<br />
<br />
Arrighi, Giovanni. May/June, 2005. “Hegemony Unraveling – II.” New Left Review 33.<br />
<br />
Baum, Geraldine. November 1, 2008. “US Opposes Arms Trade Treaty.” The Los Angeles Times. <br />
<br />
Chomsky, Noam. 2004. Hegemony or Survival: America’s Quest for Global Dominance. Holt Books.<br />
<br />
Emerson, Rupert. 1965. “Colonialism, Political Development, and the UN.” International Organization 19(3), pp. 484-503.<br />
<br />
GlobalIssues.org. January 21, 2007. “Militarization and Weaponization of Outer Space.” http://www.globalissues.org/article/69/militarization-and-weaponization-of-outer-space. <br />
<br />
Kagan, Robert. March, 2004. “America’s Crisis of Legitimacy.” Foreign Affairs 83(2):65-87.<br />
<br />
Nkrumah, Kwame. 1960. Speech to the United Nations. In M. Cook. 1964. On African Socialism. Praeger Press.<br />
<br />
Rosen, Stephen. Spring, 2003. “An Empire, If You Can Keep It.” National Interest. <br />
<br />
Senghor, Léopold. 1961. Nation et voies africaines du socilisme. Trans. M. Cook. 1964. On African Socialism. Praeger Press.<br />
<br />
Unclassified National Space Policy. August 31, 2006. http://www.ostp.gov/galleries/default-file/Unclassified%20National%20Space%20Policy%20--%20FINAL.pdf. <br />
<br />
Wallerstein, Immanuel. 2000. “The Three Instances of Hegemony in the History of the Capitalist World-Economy,” pp. 253-262 in The Essential Wallerstein. New Press.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7029529332035669335.post-17144650341068346862012-06-04T15:39:00.000-07:002012-06-04T16:51:02.138-07:00History of the Iraq War, Part III: American Economic Decline<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-EtmFmzZRfhk/T81JrdoTZ6I/AAAAAAAAACc/S8verW4yiFk/s1600/Untitled5.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">Private Profit Rate over the Keynesian-Neoliberal Shift (Duménil and Lévy, 2001)</a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<img border="0" height="218" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-EtmFmzZRfhk/T81JrdoTZ6I/AAAAAAAAACc/S8verW4yiFk/s320/Untitled5.jpg" width="320" /></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
Financial versus Non-financial Profit Rates over the Keynesian-Neoliberal Shift (Duménil and Lévy, 2001) <br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-P4X7DXaBkW0/T81JseEbYLI/AAAAAAAAACk/fIwT7EnsAkc/s1600/Untitled6.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="193" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-P4X7DXaBkW0/T81JseEbYLI/AAAAAAAAACk/fIwT7EnsAkc/s320/Untitled6.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
Why, then, does neoliberalism continue in the face of its disastrous consequences? Duménil and Lévy (2001, p. 578) argue that “neoliberalism is the ideological expression of the return to hegemony of the financial fraction of the ruling classes.” American economic decline may explain the dramatic shift towards neoliberalism. A number of metrics indicate that American economic power is in decline, which leads to a profit squeeze for capitalists (Wallerstein, 1996, pp. 90-91). As with the Netherlands and Britain in earlier centuries, American capitalists facing diminishing profits due to increased competitor productivity initiated neoliberal financial reforms (Zakaria, 2008). Due to the explosion of finance, “a new upward trend of the profit rate is apparent after 1982” (Duménil & Lévy, 2001, p. 589) (Figure 1a and 1b).<br />
<br />
For much of the past forty years, America has faced trade deficits, which have increased significantly as a percentage of GDP since 1991.The balance of trade is just one aspect of the broader index of balance of payments. Since 1991, America has also faced rapidly growing balance of payment deficits, which indicate that net capital is flowing out of the country. Theoretically, large balance of payments deficits cannot continue indefinitely. Eventually creditors will lose confidence in American solvency and drive up interest rates and inflation. When that may happen is a matter of great dispute and rhetorical bluster.<br />
<br />
Trade deficits can be partially mitigated through the operation of currency markets. Since 1945, the dollar has been the global reserve currency (Wallerstein, 2003), which has resulted in immense benefits for United States financiers and detriment to domestic industry via increasing valuation of the dollar relative to other currencies. In times of crisis, the United States has been protected from capital flight and has instead enjoyed relatively high capital inflows as nervous central banks, institutions and investors buy Treasury bonds. Because of increased demand, these bonds can be sold at lower interest rates during global or regional recessions, which thus create future profits for the United States government. Indeed, “using a conservative estimate of 10 percent as the average percent difference between [social development returns and bond yields], the actual cost to developing countries of holding the reserves [in Treasury bonds] is in excess of $300 billion per year” (Stiglitz, 2006, pp. 245-250). <br />
<br />
Paradoxically, artificially high valuation of the dollar exacerbates trade deficits, as exports from the United States become comparatively more expensive and imports relatively less so (Leahy, 1998, p. 814). The difference, then, is in whom the policies effect: bondholders and financiers, in the case of the benefits, and domestic (particularly, manufacturing) labor, in the case of the harms.<br />
<br />
American manufacturing profitability is consequently waning. In addition to artificially high dollar valuation, three other factors contribute to the shift from manufacturing to finance for profits (Wallerstein, 2000, pp. 261-262). First, technology disseminates from the United States to the other core members and, eventually, the semi-periphery. Since other countries can pirate intellectual property (something TRIPS is designed to address) and do not need to invest as heavily in research and development, their products may be cheaper than those from the core, especially in the absence of protectionist barriers. Secondly, domestic social welfare programs, including the minimum wage, decrease comparative advantages in industry through higher labor costs. Finally, more stringent environmental laws similarly squeeze profits. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
References<br />
<br />
Duménil, Gérard and Dominique Lévy. Winter, 2001. “Costs and Benefits of Neoliberalism: A Class Analysis.” Review of International Political Economy 8(4), pp. 578-607.<br />
<br />
Leahy, Michael. 1998. “New Summary Measures of the Foreign Exchange Value of the Dollar.” Federal Reserve Bulletin 84, pp. 811-819.<br />
<br />
Stiglitz, Joseph. 2006. Making Globalization Work: The Next Steps to Global Justice. W.W. Norton.<br />
<br />
Wallerstein, Immanuel. 1996. Historical Capitalism with Capitalist Civilization. Verso.<br />
<br />
Wallerstein, Immanuel. 2000. “The Three Instances of Hegemony in the History of the Capitalist World-Economy,” pp. 253-262 in The Essential Wallerstein. New Press.<br />
<br />
Wallerstein, Immanuel. April 1, 2003. “The End of the Beginning.” Commentary 110.<br />
<br />
Zakaria, Fareed. May/June, 2008. “The Future of American Power: How America Can Survive the Rise of the Rest.” Foreign Affairs 87(3), pp. 18-43.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7029529332035669335.post-86013525783165398362012-06-04T15:35:00.000-07:002012-06-04T15:35:57.501-07:00History of the Iraq War, Part II: American Economic Background (1945-present)Keynesianism, 1945-1973<br /><br />The postwar era has also been marked by a shift from Keynesian to neoliberal economic ideas. Keynes viewed unregulated capitalism as a system that benefited society’s wealthiest to the detriment of the poorest (Meier & Seers, 1984:152-154). In order to mitigate capitalism’s destructive economic bubbles, inequality and insufficient demand during economic downturns, Keynes argued that governments must institute countercyclical economic policies, including deficit spending (Quiggin, 2010, pp. 86-89). In addition to state investment, Keynes called for investment from private foreign and domestic sources (Toye, 2005, p. 127) and rejected the fanciful notion that unemployment in a market economy was voluntary (Krugman, 2009). <br />
<br />As Keynes was primarily concerned with the First World (Toye, 2005, p. 123), Keynesianism reflects the interests of theorists’ own nations. In other words, in order to enrich their own nations, Keynesians seek to place their group at the top of the capitalist pyramid, albeit in a more stable and equitable way than in neoliberalism. Keynesianism is associated with the period circa 1945-1973, a.k.a. the Bretton Woods system (Hossein-Zadeh, 2006, pp. 60-61). The end of this era is also associated with the removal of the United States from the gold standard (Quiggin, 2010, p. 80), stagflation (Palley, 2004), the ascendance of an intellectually “pure” and “beautiful” school of neoclassical economics backed by politicians and moneyed interests (Krugman, 2009), a backlash against the Great Society (Peet, 2009, p. 12) and the OPEC oil shocks, which led American policymakers to push the World Bank to invest in petroleum exploration and technology (Hossay, 2006, p. 86). For all of these reasons, neoliberal economics began to affect Bretton Woods policies.<br /><br />Neoliberalism, 1973-present<br />
<br />Neoliberalism provides a counterexample to Keynesianism and is characteristic of American foreign policy since the early 1970s. John Williamson, who coined the phrase Washington Consensus (1990), argues that neoliberalism has come to mean implementation of the following market-oriented economic policies: 1) fiscal discipline; 2) lower social spending; 3) flat tax rate; 4) financial liberalization; 5) floating exchange rate; 6) trade liberalization; 7) unregulated foreign direct investment; 8) privatization; 9) deregulation; and 10) property rights (2000, pp. 252-255). Neoliberal reforms have traditionally been carried out in the Third World by the successors of Bretton Woods: the IMF, World Bank and WTO.<br />
<br />The United States essentially controls the IMF and operates it to its own advantages. The US holds 17% of the votes at the IMF, while an 85% supermajority is required to make substantial changes to rules or governance (Vreeland, 2006, pp. 39-42). Consequently, “the Managing Director has been reported to rarely act against the will of the US.” IMF reforms involve offering developing countries large loans with attached economic reforms (Dreher and Jensen 2007:105-106). Countries receiving loans must move towards:<br /><br />1. Privatization of state industries;<br />2. Deregulation of foreign capital flows; <br />3. Dismantling of social safety nets;<br />4. Floating their currency; and<br />5. Dismantling regulations designed to inhibit the negative effects of business activities.<br /> <br />The World Bank is similarly dominated by the United States (Peet, 2009, pp. 127-128; Stiglitz, 2006, p. 13). We will see how American policymakers in Iraq implemented neoliberalism.<br />
<br />Considering that “property and markets rest on government and law” (Hacker and Pierson, 2010, p. 82), neoliberal anti-government fervor is more myth than reality. As Peet and Hartwick (2009, pp. 47-48) maintain, proponents of neoliberalism argue that “there are relatively limited instances when government should intervene to promote economic ends, other than encouraging market competition, providing adequate schooling, and encouraging savings and investment” and economic growth. In Chomsky’s view (1997), development policies reflect neoliberal values only when they benefit the ruling class in dominant countries. Then, the victims of neoliberalism are blamed by its proponents on some deviation from pure market discipline (Quiggin, 2010, p. 53).<br />
<br />In the early 1970s, neoliberalism began to be foisted on other countries. Nixon was a fine exemplar of this attitude, both orchestrating the violent Chilean coup that installed the neoliberal cabal of so-called “Chicago boys” (on the “other 9/11” – September 11, 1973) and famously claiming at home that “we are all Keynesians now” – echoing Milton Friedman, of all people (Klein, 2007, pp. 104, 133). Ultimately, the lessons of Keynesianism fell by the wayside as previous depressions and asset bubbles were re-characterized as consequences of insufficient adherence to market fundamentalism (Quiggin, 2010, p. 60).<br />
<br />These facts are illustrated within the WTO, which dictates the terms of international trade favoring rich countries (Stiglitz, 2006, pp. 94-107). Agricultural subsidies in rich countries, which lower the prices that farmers in the Third World receive for their goods, exceed all of the foreign aid to the Third World combined. The Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of International Property Rights (TRIPS) was orchestrated in 1994 to stem the loss of comparative advantage and increase profit drain from poor countries. TRIPS effectively extends American patent laws worldwide (Delgado 2002, pp. 297-298). Under TRIPS “the advanced industrial countries could at last use trade sanctions to legally enforce intellectual property rights” (Stiglitz, 2006, p. 117). Now, fines can be leveled on countries or corporations that violate TRIPS rules. TRIPS are but one example of how corporations can use the WTO’s nearly global legal regime to compel countries to nullify laws that decrease profits.<br />
<br />Neoliberal theory has a profound sway over contemporary journalists and scholars. One popular pundit in this vein is Pulitzer Prize-winning propagandist Thomas Friedman, who argues that the rich countries became so through embracing a form of state capitalism involving austere property laws, governmental restriction of labor flows, opening of markets to foreign competition and cuts in social services (i.e., neoliberalism) (2000, p. 102). For the richest perhaps ten percent of people in the world, on whom Friedman bases his book, undoubtedly globalization can feel this way. But for the vast majority, globalization is primarily a process of economic and military subservience to power, tracing the confines already outlined. Mainstream leftist scholarly literature is similar. In his celebrated work The Bottom Billion (2005), Oxford economist Paul Collier calls for expansion of foreign aid (p. 100) and neoliberal-style markets (p. 88), while dismissing the possibly relevant facts that “aid indeed makes a coup more likely” (p. 105) and “the exodus of capital from the bottom billion [people in the poorest countries] was only phase one of the global integration of the bottom billion. Phase two will be an exodus of educated people” (p. 94). He claims that practitioners of development should resist the temptation to focus on “photogenic social priorities – health and education” (p. 108) in favor of infrastructure projects like roads and ports and, if citizens resist, should utilize “military intervention” (p. 124). <br />
<br />If we reject these vulgarizations, we see that “almost all recent cases of collapses into anarchy were preceded by heavy World Bank and IMF involvement” (Easterly, 2006, p. 67) and every developed country became so through state protection of industry (Chang, 2007, pp. 15-16; Peet & Harwick, 2009, pp. 50-51) with the critical support of colonial violence (Chomsky, 1999, pp. 7-11). The brutal consequences of these policies for poor people have been recorded in detail (Chomsky, 2003; Birdsall & Subramanian, 2004; Chang & Grabel, 2004; Porrit, 2005; Easterly, 2006; Rodrik, 2006; Stiglitz, 2006; Chang, 2007; Klein, 2007; Lines, 2008) and are currently being faced by the Iraqi people.<br />Neoliberalism is a doctrine to foist on other countries, while American policymakers prefer to stick to a more Keynesian model at home. The underlying economic, military, and diplomatic factors driving the shift to neoliberalism from the Keynesianism characteristic of the Bretton Woods system will be reviewed in the following sections. We will see the tensions between neoliberalism abroad, Keynesianism at home and neocolonial violence in later discussion of the Iraq War.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />References<br />
<br />
Birdsall, Nancy and Arvind Subramanian. July/August, 2004. “Saving Iraq from Its Oil.” Foreign Affairs. <br />
<br />
Chang, Ha-Joon. 2007. Bad Samaritans: The Myth of Free Trade and the Secret History of Capitalism. Bloomsbury Press.<br />
<br />
Chang, Ha-Joon and Ilene Grabel. 2004. “Reclaiming Development from the Washington Consensus.” Journal of Post-Keynesian Economics 27(2), pp. 273-291.<br />
<br />
Chomsky, Noam. May, 1997. “The Passion for Free Markets.” Z Magazine.<br />
<br />
Chomsky, Noam. 1999. Year 501: The Conquest Continues. South End Press.<br />
<br />
Chomsky, Noam. 2003. Profit over People: Neoliberalism and Global Order. Seven Stories Press.<br />
<br />
Collier, Paul. 2005. The Bottom Billion. Oxford University Press.<br />
<br />
Delgado, Gian Carlo. 2002. “Biopi®acy and Intellectual Property as the Basis for Biotechnological Development: The Case of Mexico.” International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society 16(2), pp. 297-318.<br />
<br />
Dreher, Axel and Nathan M. Jensen. 2007. “Independent Actor or Agent? An Empirical Analysis of the Impact of U.S. Interests on International Monetary Fund Conditions.” The Journal of Law and Economics, 50, pp. 105-124.<br />
<br />
<br />
Easterly, William. 2006. The White Man’s Burden: Why the West’s Efforts to Aid the Rest Have Done So Much Ill and So Little Good. Penguin. <br />
<br />
Friedman, Thomas. 2000. The Lexus and the Olive Tree. Macmillan. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Hacker, Jacob S. and Paul Pierson. 2010. Winner-Take-All Politics: How Washington Made the Rich Richer – and Turned Its Back on the Middle Class. Simon & Schuster. <br />
<br />
Hossay, Patrick. 2006. Unsustainable: A Primer for Global Environmental and Social Justice. Zed Books.<br />
<br />
<br />
Hossein-Zadeh, Ismael. 2006. The Political Economy of US Militarism. Palgrave MacMillan.<br />
<br />
Klein, Naomi. 2007. The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. Metropolitan Books. <br />
<br />
Krugman, Paul. September 6, 2009. “How Did Economists Get It So Wrong?” New York Times Magazine. <br />
<br />
Lines, Thomas. 2008. Making Poverty: A History. Zed Books. <br />
<br />
Meier, G and Seers, Dudley. 1984. Pioneers in Development. Oxford University Press.<br />
<br />
Palley, Thomas. 2004. “From Keynesianism to Neoliberalism: Shifting Paradigms in Economics,” in Deborah Johnston and Alfredo Saad-Filho (eds.) Neoliberalism – A Critical Reader. Pluto Press.<br />
<br />
Peet, Richard. 2009. Unholy Trinity: The IMF, World Bank and WTO. 2nd ed. Zed Books.<br />
<br />
Peet, Richard and Elaine Hartwick. 2009. Theories of Development: Contentions, Arguments, Alternatives. 2nd ed. Guilford. <br />
<br />
Porrit, Jonathon. 2005. Capitalism as if the World Matters. Earthscan. <br />
<br />
Quiggin, John. 2010. Zombie Economics: How Dead Ideas Still Walk among Us. Princeton University Press.<br />
<br />
Rodrik, Dani. 2006. “Goodbye Washington Consensus, Hello Washington Confusion?” Harvard University Manuscript.<br />
<br />
Stiglitz, Joseph. 2006. Making Globalization Work: The Next Steps to Global Justice. W.W. Norton.<br />
<br />
Toye, Richard. 2005. “The Trials of a Biographer: Roy Harrod’s Life of John Maynard Keynes Reconsidered” in Gottlieb, Julie and Toye, Richard (eds.). 2005. Making Reputations: Power, Persuasion and the Individual in Modern British Politics. IB Tauris.<br />
<br />
Vreeland, James. 2006. The International Monetary Fund: Politics of Conditional Lending. New York: Routledge. <br />
<br />
Williamson, John. 1990. “What Washington Means by Policy Reform.” In John Williamson, ed., Latin American Adjustment: How Much Has Happened? Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics.<br /><br />Williamson, John. 2000. “What Should the World Bank Think about the Washington Consensus?” The World Bank Research Observer 15(2), pp. 251-264.<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7029529332035669335.post-89738084931670404142012-06-04T15:24:00.000-07:002012-06-04T15:24:17.817-07:00History of the Iraq War, Part I: American Miltary Background (1945-present)The United States has been the dominant geopolitical power since 1945. A brief discussion of American foreign policy aims will provide context for the recent aggression in Iraq.<br /><br />Background: American Economic and Military Hegemony<br /><br /> The American people possessed approximately half of the world’s wealth after World War II. In addition, America was by far the largest creditor (White, 1999, p. 172). This economic power, coupled with insurmountable military advantages, gave America immense advantages. In order to dictate the postwar new world order, America instituted three programs. The Bretton Woods system and the Marshall Plan were set up to facilitate American economic dominance, while National Security Council directive 68 (NSC-68) provided a military blueprint. The capital flows facilitated by the economic regime and backed by state violence spurred the further integration of many countries and their people into a worldwide capitalist system (Wallerstein, 1996, pp. 13-14).<br />
<br /> At Bretton Woods, New Jersey, in 1944, the Allied powers convened an economic summit that gave rise to many of the institutions that would dominate the world’s financial systems. The IMF was created as an alliance, ostensibly to finance the reconstruction of Europe’s industrial economies. Also founded were the predecessors to the World Bank, an agency similar to the IMF, and the WTO, which dictates the legal terms of international trade. To the present, each of these organizations represents the interests of the most powerful countries that run them (Birdsall, 2003, p. 3). <br />
<br /> The Marshall Plan set up a triangular trading system (Rostow, 1997) similar to that of the former Atlantic slave trade. Excess American dollars flowed first to Western Europe (and Japan) in exchange for manufactured goods. Western European nations provided these dollars to their colonies or former colonies in exchange for the natural resources critical for Western Europe’s reconstruction. The colonies or former colonies, as economies more and more devoted to export foods and raw materials, sent dollars to American agribusinesses, whose subsidized foods were vital to colonial survival. Thus, manufactured goods accrued in America and Western European nations were able to reconstruct their industries, to the detriment of exploited countries at the periphery of the economic system.<br />
<br /> NSC-68 divided up the globe into regions that would be influenced in different ways by the American military (Layne & Schwarz, 1993, pp. 5-6). The Western Hemisphere, falling under American dominion since the 19th century, could be more extensively exploited. Africa and other former colonies were to serve as resource bases for reconstructing Western Europe and Japan. The Middle East’s vast energy resources were to be controlled unilaterally by America through the imposition and support of autocratic regimes. If necessary, American military force could be brought to bear on nations unwilling to participate in this system. The Soviet Union and its satellites, nuclear-armed and resistant to American domination, would be strangled by American military and economic warfare. The history of the past sixty years proves the staying power of these designs.<br /><br />References<br />
<br />
Birdsall, Nancy. 2003. “Why It Matters Who Runs the IMF and the World Bank. Working Paper Number 22.” Center for Global Development. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1109073.<br />
<br />
Layne, Christopher and Benjamin Schwarz. Autumn, 1993. “American Hegemony: Without an Enemy.” Foreign Policy 92, pp. 5-23. <br />
<br />
Rostow, Walt. May/June, 1997. “Marshall Plan Commemorative Section: Lessons of the Plan: Looking Forward to the Next Century.” Foreign Affairs.<br />
<br />
Wallerstein, Immanuel. 1996. Historical Capitalism with Capitalist Civilization. Verso.<br />
<br />
White, Donald W. 1999. The American Century. Yale University Press.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0