Holbrooke: Insensitive Choice for a Sensitive Region

[balantz]

Holbrooke: Insensitive Choice for a Sensitive Region
by Stephen Zunes
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/01/30-3


Obama's choice for special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, arguably the most critical area of U.S. foreign policy, is a man with perhaps the most sordid history of any of the largely disappointing set of foreign policy and national security appointments.

Richard Holbrooke got his start in the Foreign Service during the 1960s, in the notorious pacification programs in the Mekong Delta of South Vietnam. This ambitious joint civilian-military effort not only included horrific human rights abuses but also proved to be a notorious failure in curbing the insurgency against the U.S.-backed regime in Saigon. This was an inauspicious start in the career of someone Obama hopes to help curb the insurgency against the U.S.-backed government in Afghanistan.

In Asia
In the late 1970s, Holbrooke served as assistant secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs. In this position, he played a major role in formulating the Carter administration's support for Indonesia's occupation of East Timor and the bloody counterinsurgency campaign responsible for up to a quarter-million civilian deaths. Having successfully pushed for a dramatic increase in U.S. military aid to the Suharto dictatorship, he then engaged in a cover-up of the Indonesian atrocities. He testified before Congress in 1979 that the mass starvation wasn't the fault of the scorched-earth campaign by Indonesian forces in the island nation's richest agricultural areas, but simply a legacy of Portuguese colonial neglect. Later, in reference to his friend Paul Wolfowitz, then the U.S. ambassador to Indonesia, Holbrooke described how "Paul and I have been in frequent touch to make sure that we keep out of the presidential campaign, where it would do no good to American or Indonesian interests."

In a particularly notorious episode while heading the State Department's East Asia division, Holbrooke convinced Carter to release South Korean troops under U.S. command in order to suppress a pro-democracy uprising in the city of Kwangju. Holbrooke was among the Carter administration officials who reportedly gave the OK to General Chun Doo-hwan, who had recently seized control of the South Korean government in a military coup, to wipe out the pro-democracy rebels. Hundreds were killed.


- clip -


At the UN
Holbrooke, as the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations in the late 1990s, criticized the UN for taking leadership in conflict resolution efforts involving U.S. allies, particularly in the area of human rights. For example, in October 2000 he insisted that a UN Security Council resolution criticizing the excessive use of force by Israeli occupation forces against Palestinian demonstrators revealed an unacceptable bias that put the UN "out of the running" in terms of any contributions to the peace process.


- clip -


Scott Ritter, the former chief UN Special Commission (UNSCOM) inspector who correctly assessed the absence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and predicted a disastrous outcome for the U.S. invasion, observes that "not only has he demonstrated a lack of comprehension when it comes to the complex reality of Afghanistan (not to mention Pakistan), Holbrooke has a history of choosing the military solution over the finesse of diplomacy." Noting how the Dayton Accords were built on the assumption of a major and indefinite NATO military presence, which would obviously be far more problematic in Afghanistan and Pakistan than in Europe, Ritter adds: "This does not bode well for the Obama administration."

Ironically, back in 2002-2003, when the United States had temporarily succeeded in marginalizing Taliban and al-Qaeda forces, Holbrooke was a strong supporter of redirecting American military and intelligence assets away from the region in order to invade and occupy Iraq. Obama and others presciently criticized this reallocation of resources at that time as likely to lead to the deterioration of the security situation in the country and the resurgence of these extremist groups.

It's unclear, then, why Obama would choose someone like Holbrooke for such a sensitive post. Indeed, it's unclear as to why - having been elected on part for his anti-war credentials - Obama's foreign policy and national security appointments have consisted primarily of such unreconstructed hawks. Advocates of a more enlightened and rational foreign policy still have a long row to hoe.

[EFerrari]

1. No kidding. What WAS Obama thinking. n/t

[NRaleighLiberal]

2. Most commentary I've seen, read or heard thought he was a great choice.

[Jim Sagle]

3. Stephen Zunes is a knee-jerk Palestine Firster who thinks only one side has any valid case to make

A Democratic administration oriented that way would tube itself along with the party.

[Still Sensible]

4. Agreed

this is just tripe from a hyper partisan. Nothing will be gained if our special envoy takes a one-sided viewpoint to the region. But Zunes would be happy.

[balantz]

6. In this article Zunes merely gives us facts about Holbrooke. n/t

[MarjorieG]

5. Other than Hillary's strong choice, also, we are in a war gone from bad to worse there.

I'd rather hear Kerry's view of Afghanistan/Pakistan now, but I'm not sure Holbrooke is necessarily bad.

We chose Obama so we won't get into another military first, imperialistic advneture.

[Jim Sagle]

8. There isn't any President of either party except w who would do something this lethally useless.

[Two Americas]

7. Afghanistan

Afghanistan is where empires go to die.

[Mudoria]

9. We're safe then since we don't have an empire

[Two Americas]

11. not quite

We think we are safe because we think we don't have an empire.

[FrenchieCat]

10. Holbrooke negotiated the Dayton Peace Accords,

which are still in effect 10 years later.

I don't want a peacenick dealing with the Pakistani hard liners in reference to Osama Bin Laden or Al Qaeda. Sorry, but 9/11 did happen, and there are folks out there who do not want the best to happen to the United States.....regardless of Zunes' opinion.

Holbrook is neither a dove or an hawk, and that is what is needed here.

This is why Zunes writes articles but doesn't have any peace treaties that he wrote to point to.

[balantz]

12. From the article:

- clip -

In the Former Yugoslavia
Holbrooke is perhaps best known for his leadership in putting together the 1995 Dayton Accords, which formally ended the conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Though widely praised in some circles for his efforts, Holbrooke remains quite controversial for his role. For instance, the agreement allows Bosnian Serbs to hold on to virtually all of the land they had seized and ethnically cleansed in the course of that bloody conflict. Indeed, rather than accept the secular concept of national citizenship that has held sway in Europe for generations, Holbrooke helped impose sectarian divisions that have made the country - unlike most of its gradually liberalizing Balkan neighbors - unstable, fractious, and dominated by illiberal ultra-nationalists.

- clip -