October 16, 2015
September 30, 2015
The Asia Pivot, U.S. Militarism and Agent Orange Relief
The Asia Pivot, U.S. Militarism
and Agent Orange Relief
Written by Tarak Kauff
 |
| 7 May 1954: A Vietnamese soldier waves flag after capturing the French command post in Dien Bien Phu. The fighting began March 13, 1954, and 56 days later, shell-shocked survivors of the French garrison hoisted the white flag to signal the end of one of the greatest battles of the 20th century. |
On March 11, 2015, U.S. Army Pacific Commander Gen. Vincent Brooks demanded that Viet Nam stop allowing Russian refueling jets to land in its Cam Ranh Bay military base. Brooks claimed Russia was carrying out "provocative flights" and that it was "acting as a spoiler to our interests and the interests of others." The following day Viet Nam rejected the demand in no uncertain terms, calling it "interference in the internal affairs of Viet Nam, a sovereign state that determines its own policies for cooperating with its friends and partners."
Viet Nam continues to trade with China, Russia and the United States. And while Russia supplies most of Viet Nam’s military hardware, the Vietnamese are not averse to obtaining sophisticated U.S. military technology as well. At the same time, since Viet Nam has long been able to get whatever it needed from its closest ally, Russia, it is doubtful that they will endanger that relationship by getting too cozy with the U.S.
Viet Nam also has a relationship with China to weigh in the balance, and there is concern among the Vietnamese about how China will react to U.S.-Viet Nam military dealings. The Vietnamese have not forgotten the 1979 border war with China which left 50,000 dead. China and Viet Nam have often been adversaries. In some respects the Vietnamese have more friendship and trust with the U.S. than with their powerful northern neighbor.
Viet Nam has a protective “Three-No’s” defense policy: no military alliances, no foreign military bases on Vietnamese territory, and no reliance on any country to combat others.
Nonetheless, the United States continues meddling, both overtly and covertly, attempting to bring Viet Nam into its orbit. Many Vietnamese are well aware of such U.S. machinations and watch closely such organizations as the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), both of which have a long history of less than benign covert operations.
In December 2014, police in Ho Chi Minh City arrested two bloggers for alleged anti-government postings. It turns out many dissident bloggers, and probably those two as well, are not simply critical of the Vietnamese government, they are funded by NED and represent U.S.-backed agents of sedition.
The United States, with such agencies as NED and USAID often working closely with the CIA, has wreaked havoc in many countries. Quite often however, they are exposed and by this time most politically sophisticated people are watchful of them.
The Vietnamese are no less so.
That being the case, USAID, in particular, although still watched carefully by the Vietnamese, has been on somewhat good behavior in Viet Nam since the end of the American war there.
The Vietnamese, as well as U.S. government operatives, recognize that if the organization pursued nefarious ends in all its “international development” projects, it would eventually lose its ability to further the goals of empire. In order to keep up their image, there are times when even the worst elements of oppressive governments actually do good. The Vietnamese are aware of that, as they are of the essential nature of superpowers like Russia, China and the United States.
Recently, there has been concern among U.S. activists over the Asia Pivot, U.S. military goals, and a perceived connection with USAID’s role in distributing increased millions of dollars in congressionally mandated funds for Agent Orange relief in Viet Nam.
Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) pushed through $21 million over five years for expanded and improved disability programs in Viet Nam specifically to deliver services to disabled families that need the most help.
Chuck Searcy, a Viet Nam War veteran living in Viet Nam for the past 20 years, is a co-founder and now international advisor for Project Renew, which for 14 years has dealt with unexploded ordnance (UXO) and Agent Orange (AO) Relief. Searcy, a member of Veterans For Peace states that “the unwritten message, communicated rather clearly from Sen. Leahy, is that this (new) effort should be targeted to the most severely disabled, with the greatest needs, i.e. families suffering from Agent Orange.”
 |
| Agent Orange victim in wheelchair. |
USAID has been the conduit for years for distributing smaller amounts of money for disability programs, some $3 to $4 million a year. Still, many are suspect of USAID even more so now with larger sums of money to give, that it will do what it has attempted in many other countries – use aid money to subvert and manipulate or even overthrow governments that do not exactly conform to U.S. wishes.
But Vietnamese officials involved in UXO and AO relief have told Searcy, "We know all about USAID. We have watched them carefully for years. Don't worry about us. Our people need your help."
July 18, 2015
Time To End The Myth
By Barry Ladendorf,
President, Board of Directors
Veterans For Peace
In a July 16 Associated Press article, “Atomic Bomb Test Marks 70th BirthdayAmid Renewed Interest,” Duane Hughes, retired physicist, is quoted as saying that the “history of the
Trinity test is important because it helped end World War II and set the stage
for a Cold War arms race."
No doubt the testing and use of atomic bombs set the stage for
the Cold War arms race, but that we needed to drop the bombs to end the war is
an ongoing American myth that needs to end now.
When the United States broke the Japanese code, the U.S. government was aware
that on July 13, 1945, Japan had contacted the Soviet Union to express its
desire to surrender and end the war.
President Truman was aware three months before he ordered the
bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, that, according to Swiss and Portuguese
sources, the Japanese government,
knowing they could not win, wanted to begin the process of surrendering.
The one thing the Japanese wanted was to retain the emperor. Presidential
advisor Jimmy Byrnes convinced
President Harry S. Truman that dropping the bombs would allow the United States to dictate the
terms to end the war and let the Soviets and the world know we had the “bomb.”
What was
the reaction of America’s top military leaders who led the allies to victory?
General Douglas MacArthur, commander of the allied forces in the
Far East during the war, stated he was never even consulted about using the
bomb against Japan. According to Norman Cousins, consultant to MacArthur during
the occupation of Japan, MacArthur stated that had he been
consulted, he would have said that he saw no military
justification for using the bomb and that if the United States would simply have agreed to
allow the emperor to stay the war might have been over weeks earlier.
General Dwight D. Eisenhower, when briefed on the atomic bomb tests in New
Mexico and of their planned use against Japan, expressed his belief that there
was no need to use the bomb because Japan was already defeated, and that the United States
should not shock the world by the use of a weapon that was no longer necessary
to save American lives. General “Hap” Arnold, commander of the Army Air Corps,
and General Omar Bradley shared Eisenhower’s opinion.
Perhaps one of the strongest critics of using the bomb was
Admiral William Leahy, chief of staff to both President Franklin D. Roosevelt and Truman. Leahy said, “It is my
opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of
no material assistance in our war against Japan.” In Leahy’s opinion, by
dropping the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, “we had adopted an ethical standard
common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages.”
Even former President Herbert Hoover weighed in, telling Truman
in May 1945 that if he were President he would, “make a shortwave broadcast to
the people of Japan — tell them they can have their Emperor if they surrender — that it will not mean unconditional surrender except for the militarists — you’ll
get a peace with Japan — you’ll have both wars over.”
In spite of this considered and widespread opposition by senior military officials who prosecuted the war and from a
former president, Truman ordered that Hiroshima and Nagasaki be bombed. On August 9,
the atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki and when the Japanese government did
surrender, they were permitted to keep the Emperor. Hiding behind the myth may
make it easier to accept the fact that we used this diabolical weapon in a senseless
slaughter of hundreds of thousands of people. Let’s end the myth and accept
responsibility for what our nation did.
July 14, 2015
June 27, 2015
One More Mile for Glicker!
By Tarak Kauff
Not everyone has to be a political activist.
There's a story on the back page of the summer issue of Peace in Our Times about a parrot who
curses and gets into mischief which will make you laugh until you cry.
There are many ways to make a positive contribution to life and living.
My
friend Joe was not a political activist per se, even though he was very
well informed and knowledgeable about history and politics.
Throughout his 56 years he crammed more life, living, and loving into that time than most of us would do in many lifetimes. He
was a big man physically but gentle. I never even saw him raise his
voice or argue with his wife Beth and I stayed at their place in
Brooklyn many times. The only time I saw him get angry
was when we spoke about how twisted this country has become. He was, to
me, revolutionary in human ways that counted. That’s why I want to share a little about the man.
He was an athlete, a kayak racer, a surf-ski competitor, writer, filmmaker, husband, and a great dad. He did it all, and did it well. He traveled a lot, mostly off on his wilderness or kayaking adventures, but when he was home, he was totally there.
“Big
Joe,” as some of us referred to him, or, as he was known to his
kayaking buddies, “Glicker” saw the best in people and just by who he was, inspired those who knew him to also live as fully, laugh and
love as much as possible. His sense of humor (almost a constant) and love
of people and life was contagious. He made people feel comfortable in
his presence. And eventually his keen and insightful, but
never pompous, wit had them laughing. There were so many times when we
were talking either in person or on the phone, when Joe would have me
literally gasping for breath laughing. He had a way of doing that with
people that seemed effortless, like that other Joe—Dimaggio, who, as Ted Williams once said, “made it look easy.”
We first met 24 years ago in a gym in Park Slope, Brooklyn. I had recently moved from Queens and one of the first things I did was to join a local gym. I
was at that time fairly strong for my 150
pounds, and I was on the pull-down machine pulling a lot of weight, actually the entire stack. I think that’s what got his attention. I was also wearing a well-worn marathon team t-shirt. As
soon as I finished the set, he came over and just started chatting, as
if we were old friends, asking me questions about myself and about
running. After a few inquiries, he found out I had run
marathons and triathlons, so he told me that he had cycled across the
country and I responded that I could appreciate that, having done
something similar, running through all 50 states.
That
qualified me in his eyes as a “wild man” and we became friends and
occasionally trained together, lifting weights, pushing ourselves to
exhaustion on Concept 2 rowing machines and running loops in Prospect
Park. He asked for my training advice often but as time went on and he
got stronger and more fit and I got older, it was I who asked more for
his. At the time we met, Joe was 33 and was just at the
take-off point of more major outdoors adventures and transcending of
physical and mental limits. Some years later, although he wasn’t a
mountain climber, he decided to climb the highest peaks in each of the
50 states and write a book about it, which he did—To the Top with
photographer Nels Akerlund. It was one of six great books and many articles he wrote.
As
I got more into social justice issues and working with Veterans For
Peace, and after I moved from Brooklyn to Woodstock, NY, we gradually
drifted apart a bit, but he always appreciated and encouraged my activism as I
appreciated his athleticism and adventures, and we stayed in touch.
Bush
of course, and Clinton before him repulsed him. But he had some hope
with Obama, then said to me after he’d been in office a while, “This
administration has been so spectacularly disappointing, sadly, you told
me so a long time ago. It’s just hard to fathom whether this president
is that weak or this vile system so corrupting and strong. Maybe some of
both.”
When Joe got into kayaking he
trained like a madman. He was out training on Jamaica Bay even in the
middle of winter! Soon he was competing and writing about the sport and
getting travel expenses to compete and write about races and events. He
wrote about a lot of things, articles appeared in National Geographic,
Outside magazine, and the LA Times, and also had a few dozen columns in the New York
Times called “Weekend Warrior.”
But
he wasn’t just a writer. His training and competition were totally
focused—the only things more important than training, racing, and
writing were Joe’s daughter, Willa, and his incredibly supportive, wise and
beautiful wife, Beth. But kayaking was a very close second, which was understood and appreciated by all who loved Joe and of those there were many. Like
other endurance sports, it became a way of life, and a positive one. He
became a two-time member of the U.S. National Marathon Kayak Team and
did many, many other kayak and surf-ski races around the world. He won
the Blackburn Challenge, a 20-mile open water circumnavigation of
Cape Ann, twice.
He
was a great competitor but it wasn’t all competition with others. He
competed with himself, with his own limits. He almost froze in a
snowstorm one night as he was kayaking solo from Montana to Chicago and
then to Brooklyn.
Joe
had great courage. He was not fearless, but courage is facing, fear not
being devoid of it. A little over a year ago he was diagnosed with
pancreatic cancer. Joe kept training, kept racing and kept
making people laugh, as he always did. He even won a doubles kayak race
while undergoing chemo!
He seemed unstoppable, but eventually the cancer caught up with him. I
hadn’t seen him in years, our paths, though not contrary, went separate
ways. We both “ran” in different circles but were mutually appreciative
and we kept in touch. A phone call or email now and then always saying
we had to get together, it’s been too long. It was good just to hear
his voice and invariably he made me laugh...
I
made it to the memorial in Brooklyn. Hundreds came from all over to
honor and remember him. As soon as I walked in, I could feel it. We were
all on the verge of tears but nobody was crying yet. We were all holding
it together, saying hello to people, hugging, talking. I wandered off
by myself. They had wine at the bar. I got a glass and drank it fast,
hoping it would steady me. People spoke about Joe and told stories. It
went on for a long time but the stories were never boring or tedious. We
laughed and we cried. We had all lost something irreplaceable but the
memories were there and would remain.
One of his dearest friends from childhood, Andy Zlotnick, whom Joe simply called “Z,” put it in a nutshell, “.
. . he lit up every room he entered, how he held court, always the
center of attention, regaling anyone who would listen to his long
circuitous tales that made you laugh until you cried. Tales packed with meshuggenuh characters
who performed improbable feats and got themselves in the most
unbelievable of pickles. His own brand of magic which took a whole life
to develop and market—the quips, the witticisms, that subversive slant
adjusted to those of us fortunate enough to be so close to the bright
lights of his stage, our laughter close to tears, and our tears to
laughter.”
Another
close friend, Chip, called from England when Joe was in the hospital.
It was close to the end. Andy was there and put Joe, who was by then in a
lot of pain from the cancer, on the phone. Chip said to Joe that he
heard that he wasn’t having a good day. Joe said, yeah, it wasn’t good.
Period. Chip replied that he had never known Joe to be the master of
understatement, at which point Joe, through the pain, went into one of
his riffs, adding with his classic humor, “Joan of Arc has nothing on
me. Burning at the stake would be easy going.”
When one of his kayak pals asked what they could do for him, Joe said, “Just paddle another mile for me.” That became One More Mile for Glicker.” These days at kayak races you will see OMMFG! pasted on kayaks all over.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)