Democratic Palestine : 31 (ص 49)
غرض
- عنوان
- Democratic Palestine : 31 (ص 49)
- المحتوى
-
TL
carrier groups, and scale back «Star
Wars» research. He would pursue a test
ban, a missile flight test ban and
strategic arms cuts with the Soviet
Union. Yet he is unwilling to pledge
himself to cuts or even to a freeze in
military spending. Dukakis was an ad-
vocate of the 1982 US—Soviet freeze
on nuclear weapons testing, production
and deployment. He is deeply skeptical
of the eight years of nuclear rearma-
ment under Reagan. He said he would
try to negotiate bans on underground
nuclear explosions and ballistic missile
flight tests needed for weapon
development, and he would try to halt
the deployment of highly accurate
nuclear weapons. Yet, he was against a
«no first use» (of nuclear weapons)
platform at the Democratic National
Convention. He supports upgrading US
and NATO conventional forces.
In foreign policy, Dukakis is for a
new era of activism. He would reshape
America’s agenda on problems of debt
and conflict in the third world. He
would seek initiatives within existing
alliances and multilateral partnerships.
He is called a pragmatic problem-
solver. He feels the US should play a
greater role within the UN. However,
on many issues, Bush and Dukakis do
not disagree as much as they would
have liked voters to believe. As for the
Soviet Union, Dukakis believes in seiz-
ing the initiative from Gorbachev in
US-Soviet relations, arms _ control,
regional conflicts, and testing the limits
of Soviet «new thinking.» He said he
would challenge Soviet intentions with
some specific tests on global respon-
sibility, terrorism, emigration and
regional conflicts.
On South Africa, he vowed «to lead
the fight for South African sanctions
and against apartheid from the White
House» (Guardian, October 19, 1988).
But his record on South Africa is
uneven. He is vocal in his criticism of
apartheid, and has called for negotia-
tions between the Botha regime and the
ANC, but he is against military
assistance to Mozambique and other
frontline states. He is against funding
anti-government insurgence in Angola
but not in Afghanistan for example.
Dukakis says he would break sharply
with Reagan’s «constructive
engagement» approach to the white-
ruled South Africa and impose total
sanctions in an attempt to force change.
He told Ted Koppel of ABC’s
Nightline, «Apartheid has to go.»
Botha said he feared Dukakis’ propos-
ed sanctions. The labelling of South
Africa as a terrorist state in the
Democratic Party platform was truly
enforced by the Rev. Jesse Jackson who
refused to compromise on the question
of South Africa.
Concerning Central America,
Dukakis has consistently opposed con-
tra aid, and as governor refused to send
detachments of the Massachusetts Na-
tional Guard to Honduras for training
exercises. He is critical of the ad-
ministration’s fondness for repressive
dictatorships, and was against the in-
vasion of Grenada. He would like to
call a «hemispheric conference» of
Latin American leaders. He supports
the lead of President Oscar Arias San-
chez of Costa Rica in seeking to deal
with Managua. Dukakis believes that
the Rio Treaty and the Charter of the
Organization of American States pro-
vide the foundation for regional
security. He would use US aid to help
civilian leaders establish control over
their armies, and would impose human
rights conditions on military and
economic help.
Also concerning foreign policy, it can
be said that Dukakis differs slightly
from Bush, but in essence the bottom
line is the same: a shared interest in
protecting US global interests. Dukakis
is, however, less inclined towards.
military interventionism, and his posi-
tions on Central America and South
Africa are better than Bush’s. For these
reasons, progressive forces interna-
tionally, including the socialist com-
munity, would have felt more comfor-
table with him in the White House.
Still, his election would not have meant
a radical departure from the interna-
tional policies followed by the US over
the years.
CATERING TO
PRO—ISRAELI FORCES
If Dukakis had won the presidential
election, he would have followed the
same path other Democratic presidents
had in supporting ‘Israel’ - from
Truman and the recognition of ‘Israel’
to Kennedy who cancelled the arms
sales prohibition to ‘Israel’, to Johnson
who provided it with modern offensive
arms, and lastly Carter and the Camp
David Accords. Dukakis criticized
Reagan’s «take it or leave it» tactic for
stymieing the search for peace, and
favors the Carter approach of open-
ended negotiations as with Camp David
in 1978. An avid supporter of ‘Israel’,
Dukakis blamed «Arab intransigence»
for the lack of progress toward peace in
the region.
Dukakis went to the pre-convention
Democratic platform committee with a
formulation stating that the US «main-
taining the special relationship with
Israel founded upon mutually shared
values and strategic interest, should
provide new leadership to deliver the
promise of peace and security through
negotiations that has been held out to
Israel and its neighbors by the Camp
David Accords» (Frontline, September
26, 1988). Dukakis, in an attempt to
gain commitment from the Jewish
community, issued a 300-page docu-
ment entitled, «The Concerns of the
Jewish-American Community,» in
which he announced that he would
move the US embassy from Tel Aviv to
Jerusalem, thus giving an official US
recognition of Israeli occupation and
sovereignty over Jerusalem. Dukakis
also promised never to recognize a
unilateral declaration of a Palestinian
state. According to Middle East Report
(formerly MERIP, November
-December) Dukakis’ position on
‘Israel’ went through an interesting
series of turns during the course of the
primaries, in his attempt to cater to the
pro-Israeli forces: In May 1987 in Des
Moines, Iowa, he called for a Middle
East peace conference between ‘‘Israel’,
Jordan, Egypt and «responsible
elements of the Palestinian
community.» Then in October 1987 at
the Democratic National Committee
Forum in Miami, he emphasized re-
juvenating the UN’s role in resolving
international conflicts. The following
spring, Dukakis sided with the 30
Senators who had criticized Shamir
over the peace issue. But with the New
York primaries in sight, he quickly
shifted and in an early April speech in
Wisconsin, he said, «The first thing
that anyone must understand about the
Middle East is that we will never let
Israel down.» He _ sidestepped any
criticism of Israeli handling of the
Palestinian uprising. Additionally, at a >
49 - هو جزء من
- Democratic Palestine : 31
- تاريخ
- ديسمبر ١٩٨٨
- المنشئ
- الجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين
Contribute
Not viewed