The Long Peace Movement:
The Silence of MoveOn
By Tom Hayden
[first in a series]

http://www.alternet.org/world/140264/moveon_remains_silent_on_wars_in_iraq%2C_afghanistan_and_pakistan/

The most powerful grass-roots organization of the peace movement, 
MoveOn, remains silent as the American wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and 
Pakistan simmer or escalate.

The executive director of MoveOn, Justin Ruben, met with President 
Obama in February, told the president it was "the moment to go big", 
then indicated that MoveOn would not be opposing the $94 billion war 
supplemental request, nor the 21,000 additional troops to 
Afghanistan, nor the increased civilian casualties from the mounting 
number of Predator attacks. [See Ari Melber, The Nation, Feb. 27, 
2009]

What was MoveOn's explanation for abandoning the peace movement in a 
meeting with a president the peace movement was key to electing? 
According to Ruben and MoveOn, it was the preference of its millions 
of members, as ascertained by house meetings and polls.

The evidence, however, is otherwise. Last December 17, 48.3 percent 
of MoveOn members listed "end the war in Iraq" as a 2009 goal, after 
health care [64.9%], economic recovery and job creation [62.1%], and 
building a green economy/stop climate change [49.6%, only 1.5% ahove 
Iraq.] This was at a moment when most Americans believed the Iraq War 
was ending. Afghanistan and Pakistan were not listed among top goals 
which members could vote on.

Then on May 22 MoveOn surveyed its members once again, listing ten 
possible campaigns for the organization. "Keep up the pressure to the 
end the war in Iraq" was listed ninth among the options.

Again, Afghanistan and Pakistan were not on the MoveOn list of options.

Nor was Guantanamo nor the administration's torture policies. 
{"Investigate the Bush Administration" was the first option.].

MoveOn is supposed to be an Internet version of participatory 
democracy, but the organization's decision-making structure 
apparently assures that the membership is voiceless on the question 
of these long wars.

What if they included an option like "demanding a diplomatic 
settlement and opposing a quagmire in Afghanistan and Pakistan"? Or 
"shifting from a priority on military spending to civilian spending 
on food, medicine and schools?"

This is no small matter. MoveOn has collected a privately-held list 
of five million names, most of them strong peace advocates. The 
organization's membership contributed an unprecedented $180 million 
for the federal election cycle in 2004-2006. Those resources, now 
squelched or sequestered, mean that the most vital organization in 
the American peace movement is missing in action.

What to do? There is no point raving and ranting against MoveOn. The 
only path is in organizing a dialogue with the membership, over the 
Internet, and having faith that their voices will turn the 
organization to oppose these escalating occupations. The same 
approach is necessary towards other vital organs of the peace 
movement including rank-and-file Democrat activists and the 
post-election Obama organization [Organizing for America], through a 
persistent bottom-up campaign to renew the peace movement as a 
powerful force in civil society.

This is not a simple matter of an organizational oligarchy 
manipulating its membership, although the avoidance by MoveOn's 
leadership is a troubling sign. There is genuine confusion over 
Afghanistan and Pakistan among the rank-and-file. The economic crisis 
has averted attention away from the battlefront. Many who voted for 
Obama understandably will give him the benefit of the doubt, for now.

Silence sends a message. The de facto MoveOn support for the $94 
billion war supplemental reverberates up the ladder of power. Feeling 
no pressure, the Congressional leadership has abdicated its critical 
oversight function over the expanding wars, not even allowing members 
to vote for a Decmber report on possible exit strategies. In the end, 
a gutsy sixty voted against HR 2346 on May 14, but many defected to 
vote for the war spending, including Neil Abercrombie, Jerry Nadler, 
Obey, Xavier Becerra, Lois Capps, Maurice Hinchey, Jesse Jackson, 
Sheila Jackson-Lee, Patrick Kennedy, Charles Rangel, Lucille 
Roybal-Allard, Loretta Sanchez, Rosa De Lauro, Bennie Thompson, Jerry 
McNerney, Robert Wexler, and Henry Waxman. [Bill Delahunt, Linda 
Sanchez and Pete Stark were not recorded].

If there were significant pressures from networks like MoveOn in 
their Congressional districts, the opposition vote might have 
approached 85.

Appropriations chair David Obey in essence granted Obama a one-year 
pass to show results in Afghanistan. If the war appears to be a 
quagmire by then, he claimed, the Democrats will become more 
critical. Speaker Nancy Pelosi delivered the same message; according 
to the Washington Examiner May 6: " there won't be any more war 
supplementals, so my message to my members is, this is it." Pelosi's 
words were carefully parsed, saying that the White House would not be 
allowed another supplemental form of appropriation, which is 
different from an actual pledge to oppose war funding.

This one-year pass means that the grass-roots peace movement has a 
few months to light a fire and re-awaken pressure from below on the 
Congress and president. In the meantime, here are some predictions 
for the coming year:

- IRAQ. Will Obama keep his pledge to withdraw combat forces from 
Iraq on a 16-month timetable, and all forces by 2011? At this point, 
the pace is slowing, and the deadline being somewhat extended, under 
pressure from US commanders on the ground. Sunnis are threatening to 
resume their insurgency if the al-Maliki regime fails to incorporate 
them into the political and security structures. The President 
insists however, that he is only making adjustments to a timetable 
that is on track. Prognosis: precarious.
- AFGHANISTAN. Will the Obama troop escalation deepen the quagmire or 
be a successful surge against the Taliban by next year? Another 
21,000 troops and advisers are on their way to the battlefield. 
Civilian casualties are mounting, causing the besieged Karzai 
government to complain. Preventive detention of Afghans will only 
expand. US deaths, now over 600, are sure to increase this summer. 
Taliban may hold out and redeploy in order to stretch US forces thin. 
Prognosis: escalation into quagmire.
- PAKISTAN. US policies have driven al Qaeda from Afganistan into 
Pakistan's tribal areas, where US is attacking with Predators and 
turning Pakistan's US-funded armed forces towards counterinsurgency. 
Public opinion is being inflamed against the US intervention. 
Prognosis: an expanding American war in Pakistan with greater threats 
to American security.
- IRAN. With or without US complicity, Israel may attack Iran early 
next year, with unforeseeable consequences in Iraq and Afghanistan. 
Prognosis: crisis will intensify.
- GLOBAL. US will fail to attract more combat troops to fight in 
Afghanistan and Pakistan from Europe or elsewhere, causing pressure 
to increase for a non-military negotiated solution. Prognosis: Obama 
still popular, US still isolated.
- BUDGET PRIORITIES: Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan will deeply 
threaten the administration's ability to succeed on the domestic 
front with stimulus spending, health care, education and alternative 
energy. Prognosis: false hope for "guns and butter" all over again. #



Cindy Asner
<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to Mark Crispin Miller's 
"News From Underground" newsgroup.

To unsubscribe, send a blank email to 
[email protected] OR go to 
http://groups.google.com/group/newsfromunderground and click on the 
"Unsubscribe or change membership" link in the yellow bar at the top of the 
page, then click the "Unsubscribe" button on the next page. 

For more News From Underground, visit http://markcrispinmiller.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to