The Independent Women’s Forum has a history of opposing virtually every “women’s rights” initiative and supporting a right-wing “pro-Israel” agenda for U.S. Middle East policy. The group attracted headlines recently when one of its senior fellows testified before the Senate that guns, particularly those that can accommodate high-capacity magazines, “make women safer”—a claim that is directly at odds with independent research on the subject.
Since its founding in 1989, the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) has advocated “market-friendly” economic policies and a hawkish line on foreign policy from within the Democratic Party. Closely associated with the now-defunct Democratic Leadership Council, the group has supported the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, advocated a “get-tough” line on Iran, and backed aggressive Israeli military actions towards the Palestinians. More recently, Politico included the group among a list of think tanks that could “hamstring” President Obama’s nomination of Chuck Hagel to head the Department of Defense. PPI president Will Marshall, a long-time ally of the “Israel Lobby,” has criticized what he calls Hagel’s “instinctual recoiling from intervention.”
The House Immigration Reform Caucus is a mostly Republican coalition of House members that has promoted restrictive immigration policies, sometimes by linking immigration crackdowns to the “war on terror.” Some high-profile members of the caucus, which has been linked to “white nationalist” and “nativist” groups like the Federation for American Immigration Reform, have evoked anti-Islamic themes regarding Muslim and Arab immigrants to justify cracking down on “illegals.” Reps. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) and Louie Gohmert (R-TX), for example, have warned about “Muslim Brotherhood infiltration” in the U.S. government and promoted the widely ridiculed idea that immigrants are having “terror babies” on U.S. soil to secure U.S. citizenship for their “terrorist” offspring.
Wall Street Journal “Global View” columnist Bret Stephens has long trumpeted a hawkish right-wing line on the Middle East and Israel. Having suggested in the past that criticism of Israel is not “morally acceptable,” Stephens recently added his voice to the growing chorus of “pro-Israel” figures to accuse secretary of defense nominee Chuck Hagel of anti-Semitism for his past remarks on the influence of the Israel lobby in Washington.
The ostensibly centrist Bipartisan Policy Center has played an important role in shifting Beltway rhetoric on Iran to the hawkish right. In late 2012, for example, BPC “Iran Task Force” members Dennis Ross, Michael Makovsky, and Charles Robb took to the Wall Street Journal to argue that the economic impact of a hypothetical “nuclear Iran” would be more detrimental than an actual U.S. strike on the country. The argument, which was disputed by critics, essentially aimed to provide an economic case for going to war. The report came on the tail end of a year in which the center published a slew of documents devoted to pressuring the United States to “stop the clock” on Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons program.
In early 2013, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), a likely 2016 GOP presidential candidate, hired Jamie Fly, head of the neoconservative Foreign Policy Initiative and a vocal proponent of bombing Iran, to be his “counselor for foreign and national security affairs.” The appointment prompted one blogger to write: “Despite the neoconservative movement’s ideas being thoroughly out of the mainstream, the neocons remain with us, shaping the U.S. foreign policy debate.”
In late 2012, John Nagl, an important promoter of counterinsurgency strategy (COIN), apparently left behind his career in military policy to become headmaster at a wealthy prep school, prompting one writer to quip: “Today, there is no better symbol for the dramatic failure of COIN, the fading of the COINdinistas and the loss that is U.S war policy in Afghanistan than this week’s news that Nagl is leaving Washington to be the headmaster of The Haverford School, a rich preparatory school (grades k-12) for boys on Philadelphia’s Main Line.”
From the Wires
If reelected Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stays true to his political survivalism, he’ll take his coalition toward the center—but to what end?
Shifting political winds in the United States have brought immigration reform to the forefront of Washington’s agenda, but some observers worry that a right-wing insistence on more robust “border security” could stymie the deal.
A letter backing Chuck Hagel for secretary of defense, signed by 13 former cabinet-level officials from both parties, highlights the marginalization of the beltway neoconservatives who have opposed Hagel’s nomination.
A letter from seven exiled Iranian parliamentarians urges a nuclear deal between Iran and the West based on Iran’s right to peaceful enrichment.
A video calling for unspecified parties to set a “red line” for Iran’s nuclear program has gone viral thanks to the promotional efforts of right-wing, “pro-Israel” interest groups.
Benjamin Netanyahu has won another term as Israel’s prime minister even as his support base seems more tenuous than ever.
Israel’s centrist parties gained ground in the country’s recent elections, but it’s unlikely to result in any progress on the stalled peace process.
A recent poll reveals widespread U.S. support for various UN agencies—including UNESCO, which the U.S. has withheld its support from ever since the agency agreed to recognize the “state” of Palestine.
Hinting at the possibility of a more rapid withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan, President Obama announced recently that U.S. forces would shift into a strictly training and support role by the spring, leaving primary security responsibilities to the Afghan army.
Right Web encourages feedback and comments. Send letters to email@example.com call at 202-234-9382. We reserve the right to edit comments for clarity and brevity. Be sure to include your full name. Thank you.