Get Right

President Obama, President Sarkozy, and Prime Minister Brown going after Iran this morning.

Iran Has A Second Nuclear Facility

I am not quite sure what to make of this yet other than its obvious both that Iran has been lying for years and that we have also known they were lying for years about whether they were building another nuclear facility. It doesn't appear clear whether or not this is evidence that they are trying to build a nuclear weapon or not, but it for damn sure doesn't look good at all. Looks like the rubber is going to hit the road when the P5+1 meets with Iran next week, I guess we had better all be paying a little closer attention to those meetings.

Update: Adam Sewer's take, "Don't Panic"

Considering that the instinct in some quarters to panic over the revelation that Iran has a second secret nuclear program, the Obama administration seems to have played this one pretty well. American intelligence appears to have known about the plant for some time, which was part of the reason Iran came forward in the first place. By improving relations with Russia by dismantling the missile shield and making nuclear non-proliferation a focus of the G-20 summit, the president has succeeded in putting the U.S. on high ground diplomatically and embarrassing Iran: first because of the deception, and second because the deception failed. The sanctions that the right has been clamoring for for months can now be applied with more international support.

Update II: Thanks to reader Africana for pointing me towards this Mark Lynch post.

It also demonstrates to the Iranians the quality of Western intelligence and the difficulty of deception and denial -- especially in the atmosphere of (quite warranted) mistrust of their intentions. That may reduce their reasons to oppose the intrusive inspections and monitoring regime which Gary Sick argues is the most likely reasonable negotiated outcome. Such an outcome would be far more in the interests of the U.S., Iran, and Iran's neighbors than any plausible outcome of a military strike, and has to be the target of the engagement process.

So despite what I expect to see swarming the media in the next few days -- wanna bet that John Bolton or John Bolton-equivalent oped is already in production over at the Washington Times Washington Post (sorry, it's hard to tell the difference on foreign policy issues sometimes) -- I actually think that this public revelation makes war less rather than more likely. The timing of the announcement, immediately following the consultations at the UN and the G-20 and just before the Geneva meetings, makes it seem extremely likely that the Obama administration has been waiting for just the right moment to play this card. Now they have. It strengthens the P5+1 bargaining position ahead of October 1, changes Iranian calculations, and lays the foundations for a more serious kind of engagement. So now let's see how it changes the game.

The Great Debunking

I didn't really feel like posting on the stupid assed fake photo of President Obama supposedly looking at some chick's booty. But after getting an email from a family member who had also been duped by the Drudge promoted picture I figured I should throw something up about it. Its really ridiculous that an respectable news outlet is taking Matt Drudge seriously any damn way.

Anyway, here you go.

The Negotiator In Chief

I don't know how true this story is (its from Jake Tapper after all and chocked full of anonymous sources) but if its even close its a pretty damn good start for President Obama.

According to sources inside the room, President Obama just played peacemaker in a spat between French President Nicolas Sarkozy and Hu Jintao, President of the People's Republic of China.

In the finaly plenary session among the G-20 leaders, Sarkozy and Hu were having a heated disagreement about tax havens.

France and other European nations have been pushing for rules and regulations to apply to various tax havens; Germany's Finance Minister Peer Steinbrueck has said "these tax havens are also places where unregulated financial market deals are made."

But Chinese leaders fear a crackdown would hurt banking centers in Macao, Shanghai and Hong Kong. Other countries agree, though they are less outspoken publicly.

The exchange between Sarkozy and Hu got so heated, said a source -- who is not a member of the Obama administration -- it was threatening the unity of the G-20 leaders' meeting.

snip

Sarkozy specifically was pushing for a list from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to be included in the G-20 Leaders' Statement.

Headquartered in Paris, the OECD has 30 member countries -- all capitalist democracies.

China opposed any such list being included in the final Leaders' Statement.

"China tends to have a problem endorsing the documents of organizations like the OECD that they're not a party to," the senior administration official said.

But Mr. Obama, according to this account, stepped between the two men, urging them to try to find consensus, and giving them a "pep talk" about the importance of working together.

The senior adminstration official said that Mr. Obama pulled Mr. Sarkozy aside, took him to a corner, "and discussed possible alternatives," the senior official said.

Once they arrived at one, President Obama "sent a message to the Chinese" that a counter-offer was on the table. The Chinese spent some time considering the offer. But they took a few minutes.

So Mr. Obama, with the assistance of translators, suggested that he and Mr. Hu have a conversation as well. They, too went to the corner to talk. After a few minutes, Mr. Obama called upon Mr. Sarkozy to join them.

"Translators and sherpas in tow, they reached an agreement," the official said. "There was a multiple shaking of hands."

I wonder if he got them to hug it out after it was all said and done. Nicely done, Mr President.

Not Out Of The Goodness Of Their Hearts.

There is breaking news from the AP that Israel now seems open to conditionally accepting a truce proposed by French President Nicolas Sarkozy and Egypt.

JERUSALEM – A government spokesman says Israel "welcomes" a proposal from France and Egypt to end fighting in the Gaza Strip.

Mark Regev says Israel could accept the proposal if it halts "hostile fire" from Gaza and includes measures to prevent Hamas from rearming.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy said Wednesday that Israel and the Palestinian Authority accepted the proposal. Israeli officials will not confirm that.

The precise details of the proposal remain unclear.

Earlier today, Israel ordered a pause in its Gaza offensive for three hours to allow food and fuel to reach besieged Palestinians, and the country's leaders debated whether to accept an international cease-fire plan or expand the assault against Hamas.

Now don't get me wrong, this is a very good development. Whatever needs to happen for Israel to stop their military action and compels Hamas to stop the rocket launches, I am all for it. But I just want to make sure that you understand where this is coming from. Israel didn't all of a sudden have an epiphany that they were handling this wrong and they for damn sure have not been looking for any kind of truce up until now. Way down in the bottom of the AP story the real motivation for their newfound willingness to exercise diplomacy over miltary aggression is exposed.

The Franco-Egyptian plan was given increasing urgency by the Israeli mortar strike near a U.N. school that stained the streets with blood.

The United Nations said the school was sheltering hundreds of people displaced by the onslaught on Hamas militants. Israel said its troops returned fire on a Hamas squad that fired mortars at them from nearby.

Israel's military said its shelling — the deadliest single episode since Israeli ground forces invaded Gaza on Saturday following a weeklong air bombardment — was an attack on a military target and accused Hamas militants of using civilians as cover.

Christopher Gunness of the U.N. Relief and Works Agency, responsible for the school, said the agency is "99.9 percent certain there were no militants or military activity in its school."
That would not necessarily contradict Israel's claim that the militants were just outside.
Gunness demanded an investigation, and punishment for anyone found to have violated international law.

Two residents of the area who spoke with The Associated Press by telephone said they saw a small group of militants firing mortar rounds from a street near the school. They spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal. Gunness said 1,300 people were taking shelter from the shelling at the school.

Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum said there were no militants there at the time.
The Gaza-based Palestinian Center for Human Rights said the presence of militants did not justify Israel's response. "The presence of armed resistance does not justify in any way the use of excessive force that is disproportionate," the center said in a statement.

See you can kill women and kids in the Gaza strip and call them collateral damage or say Hamas is using them as human shields up and until you try to pull that shit at a UN facility. Then its a lot harder to sell the same story that you have sold in defense of bombing other regular Palestinian schools as well as mosques some of which were bombed during prayer time. Mind you its still the same story and in both instances people are dead but while a lot of people WANT to believe the human shield theory when it comes to Hamas because of course they are "dirty arab terrorists". But NOBODY is going to believe that they were hiding out or stockpiling weapons at a UN school. Now for serious people this might also call into question previous claims about why Israel targeted the regular schools and mosques. I don't imagine our MSM folks will pursue that angle but I think probably the rest of us should.

I also want to take the opportunity to applaud Congressman Dennis Kucinich who has called for an investigation into the bombing of the UN schools. He wrote a letter to Secretary of State Condeleeza Rice requesting a report on the incident ASAP. The letter reads in part:

I believe that with the current escalation of violence in Gaza, a legal threshold has been reached, warranting a Presidential examination and report to Congress. I hereby request an examination of Israel’s compliance with the provisions of the Arms Export Control Act of 1976 (AECA).

While neither the AECA nor the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (FAA) define “internal security” and “legitimate self-defense,” I believe that Israel’s most recent attacks neither further internal security nor do they constitute “legitimate” acts of self-defense. They do, however, “increase the possibility of an outbreak or escalation of conflict,” because they are a vastly disproportionate response to the provocation, and because the Palestinian population is suffering from those military attacks in numbers far exceeding Israeli losses in life and property

snip

The extensive destruction of such civilian institutions violates Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits the wanton destruction of property and collective punishment of a civilian population. There have also been reports of bombings of United Nations (UN) schools, despite the fact that Israeli Defense Forces were allegedly given coordinates of the facilities prior to the current escalation in violence.

snip

I believe that Israel’s use of defense articles provided by the U.S in the current Gaza military attacks may constitute a violation of the AECA. At a minimum, the conflict is sufficient to warrant an immediate report to Congress as required by 22 U.S.C. §2753. Please contact my office by close of business on January 7, 2009 with the date the report will be submitted.

Kucinich is definitely one of the good guys and a believers in the rules of law. I will be very interested to see what comes of his letter though. Most of is fellow Congressman as well as our current President want nothing to do with finding any guilt on Israels part so I imagine this request just might be denied and the media won't cover it much if it all. But that would be par for the course right now.

So just remember as CNN, MSNBC, and FoxNews are trying to spin this as another example of Israel's "remarkable restraint" what the real impetus was for them to back down this time.