Poetic Justice Finds US Enablers of Terror

Indeed, I asked myself, how could this happen, how could this happen in a country we helped liberate, in a city we helped save from destruction. – Hilary Clinton, US Secretary of State [1]

Humanitarian wars ... and counting
Anthony Freda Art

Nile Bowie, Contributor

The recent armed attack on a lightly defended United States diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya that took the life of Ambassador Christopher Stevens is an alarming reminder of the disastrous foreign policy direction being taken by Washington. Tired euphemisms of “liberation” and “freedom fighters” have grossly distorted public opinion into supporting a narrative that has very little relationship with reality. Images of the Ambassador being dragged through the streets of Benghazi are the product of a stark reality that the general public must recognize – one that is absent of the romance and fervor of televised “revolutions.”

For Ambassador Stevens, an early proponent of the no-fly zone and a staunch supporter of NATO’s campaign in Libya, the untimely death he was dealt came delivered by the very militants he enabled. The pathological reasoning of bombing a country to “save it from destruction” reflects the unrestrained irrationality of the foreign policy direction being taken under the Obama Administration and its rabid Secretary of State.

Trans-Pacific Partnership Takeover

Nile Bowie, Contributor

To commemorate Malaysia’s 55th Independence Day, Prime Minister Najib Razak published an article highlighting the nation’s various accomplishments, principally that while much of world’s economies are “either flat or falling,” Malaysia is steadily delivering high figures of economic growth. [1]

The ruling Barisan Nasional coalition, although perceived by the middle class to be unpopular, has overseen consistent economic development and has worked to raise incomes and provide consumer affordability. Despite these achievements, the upper echelons of Malaysia's ruling coalition have seemingly endorsed a controversial international trade agreement that will have enormous impacts on domestic consumers and will even undermine the government's own ability to issue legislation. 

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a free-trade agreement led by the United States in partnership with Asia-Pacific nations like Brunei, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, and others. If the agreement is accepted by all participatory nations and successfully passed, signatory countries must conform to a rigid set of legal regulations, including strict intellectual property protections, authored by representatives of big foreign corporations. 

Scenarios for Syria: War and Stabilization

Diplomatic attempts to solve the Syrian crisis have been rejected by both members of the Syrian government and the opposition. As Ankara laments bold rhetoric and militarizes its border with Syria, this article attempts to foresee three possible outcomes to the ongoing crisis.
Nile Bowie, Contributor
Activist Post

From the start of the crisis in Syria, the possibility of open foreign military intervention has loomed uncomfortably over the series of diplomatic measures taken in an attempt to diffuse the situation. While earlier attempts to implement the Peace Plan have failed to materialize, Kofi Annan has proposed a new Syrian solution, mandating the creation of a transitional national unity government consisting of both representatives of Assad’s administration and members of the opposition, insinuating that Assad would not have a place in the new government [1].

Although Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov would categorically oppose the idea of foreign powers dictating the future of Syria, stating, “We will not support and cannot support any meddling from outside or any imposition of recipes. This also concerns the fate of the president of the country, Bashar al-Assad,” a recent meeting of the "Syrian Action Group" (excluding Riyadh, Tehran and Damascus) in Geneva saw world powers agree to a basic roadmap for a Syrian-led power transition.