Wayne Madsen Reports: Hillary Clinton to leave State Department?

This story appears to be a reliable single source report. It was apparent during the 2008 Democratic primary that Hillary Clinton has very hawkish views on the middle east and is pro-Israeli. 

Obama wanted a more neutral and realistic middle east policy that many foreign policy experts like John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt have advocated for years.

February 14, 2011
WMR's normally reliably informed sources are reporting that President Obama, upset that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had urged him, under false pretences, to name as the president's special envoy to Egypt, Frank Wisner, Jr. 

Obama has strongly privately suggested that Clinton ought to submit her resignation. Obama has offered the Secretary of State job to Senator John Kerry (D-MA). Kerry  has signalled his willingness to accept.

Clinton, Vice President Joe Biden, and Defense Secretary Robert Gates, according to a New York Times report, backed the naming of Wisner, a long-time CIA agent-of-influence who has operated under State Department official cover as a diplomat for decades. 

Wisner has been a close personal friend of Egyptian ex-President Hosni Mubarak, a relationship developed when Wisner served as President Reagan's ambassador to Cairo.

Obama, according to our sources, was unaware of Wisner's close ties to Mubarak and was shocked to discover that Clinton, Biden, and Gates were aware that Wisner was offering lightly-conditional U.S. support to Mubarak, while Obama was urging a quick transition of power.

It was the vote of confidence in Mubarak from the trio of Clinton, Biden, and Gates that delayed, for an entire day, Mubarak's previously-reported departure from office.

Mubarak was given the false impression by Wisner that the Egyptian leader had the full support of Clinton, Biden, and Gates and, therefore, the president also. It was not the case.

It turns out that Clinton, Biden, and Gates were following the dictates of key players in the pro-Mubarak Israel Lobby in Washington and the Council on Foreign Relations in New York rather than from the policy-makers in the office of the President.

WMR has also learned that Obama is scaling back Biden's involvement in fundamental foreign policy issues, preferring his interaction with key foreign governments, epsecially those in the Middle East, to be limited to public diplomacy and social functions.

Gates has announced he is leaving his post during 2011, however, Obama now needs Gates's continued support to shepherd a Defense budget, minus key pet weapons systems, through a hawkish Republican House of Representatives.

However, it is Mrs. Clinton who has earned Obama's focused anger. The White House was shocked when Wisner, after having returned from Cairo, told the Munich Security Conference by a video-link from New York that a temporarily leadership role for Mubarak was required during the transition phase in Egypt.

Wisner also echoed the views of the Israel Lobby that America's primary position in post-Mubarak Egypt was a firm commitment to the peace treaty with Israel and freezing out the Muslim Brotherhood from any political power.

Except for the peace treaty issue, Wisner's comments largely contradicted Obama's policy but reflected those of Clinton, Biden, and Gates.

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs told a news conference: "Former Ambassador Wisner is not an employee of the government . . . his views on who should or shouldn't be the head of Egypt don't represent the views of our administration."

But unbeknown to Obama and Gibbs, Wisner's views did represent those of a significant faction of the administration.

What infuriated Obama was Clinton's brash lie after she listened to Wisner's video speech in Munich, enunciating views that she supported: "Oh, we all respect Frank and his service for many years, and appreciate his travel to Egypt. But he does not speak for the administration.

Clinton had also stated in Munich that the administration supported the Muslim Brotherhood's participation in the Egyptian political dialogue but she covertly was undermining any role for the Muslim Brotherhood in encouraging Wisner's comments to the security conference.

Obama was also irked by Wisner's comments -- and Clinton's covert support for them -- to the Munich conference, made to key American allies and showing them that the United States appeared to have different policies on the events unfolding in Egypt.

Witnessing America's schizophrenic foreign policy in Munich were British Prime Minister David Cameron and German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Obama personally called both leaders, as well as others, to explain that what Wisner stated publicly and what Clinton reportedly said privately were not the president's policy.

Obama has let it be known that he will not be embarrassed again by Clinton and that is what is prompting his desire for her resignation and her replacement by Kerry.

Obama relied on Kerry to interface with Egyptian leaders to fully delineate Obama's policies amid the confusion created by Clinton, Biden, and Gates.

Netcraft rank: 6920 http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://rightardia.blogspot.com
 
Rightardia by Rightard Whitey of Rightardia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at rightardia@gmail.com.

US diplomacy accelerates: Hillary signs $10 billion accord with India

Clinton, left, met Manmohan Singh, India's prime minister, on Monday [AFP]

An accord between India and the United States has been reached in New Delhi aimed at clearing the way for the sale of US-made weapons to India.

The pact, known as an end-use monitoring agreement, was signed by Hillary Clinton on Monday during her first trip to India as the US secretary of state.

"We have agreed on the end-use monitoring arrangement which would refer to ... Indian procurement of US defence technology and equipment," S M Krishna, the Indian external affairs minister, told a joint news conference with Clinton.

The agreement, required under US law for arms sales, allows Washington to verify that India is using weapons for their stated purpose.

The deal is also designed to ensure that New Delhi is not passing weapons technology from the US on to other nations.

US defence contractors, such as Lockheed Martin Corporation and Boeing Company, are competing to win orders from New Delhi to build 126 fighter aircraft.

Nuclear reactors

Clinton said that India had also approved two sites on its territory for the construction of US nuclear reactors.

"I am also pleased that Prime Minister [Manmohan] Singh told me that sites for two nuclear parks for US companies have been approved by the government," she said.US officials estimate that the nuclear sites would represent up to $10bn in business for US nuclear-reactor builders such as General Electric Company and Westinghouse Electric Company, a subsidiary of Japan's Toshiba Corp.

Marie Lall, a specialist in South Asia affairs at Chatham House in London, said that the deal would go some way to easing the US trade deficit with India.

"You have to be aware that the balance of trade deficit of the United States is $13bn ... Obviously, signing a deal of $10bn will go a long way to balance out that trade deficit for the United States," she told Al Jazeera.

She also said that the deal would likely pave the way for some degree of co-operation over nuclear weapons.

"I would expect that in light of India receiving this civil nuclear agreement, it was seen that there would be a quid pro quo regarding weapons deals as well," she said.

Climate disagreement
 
Clinton is in India for three days for talks on climate change, security and nuclear power.
But while Washington and New Delhi have reached an agreement on weapons sales, the US government appears to have failed to convince India on the need to reduce its carbon dioxide emissions.

During a meeting with Clinton on Sunday, Jairam Ramesh, India's junior environment minister, refused to agree to limit the country's carbon output.

Developing nations should not be forced to sign up to legally binding targets on reducing carbon emissions, Ramesh said.

India is "simply in no position" to cut its levels of harmful emissions, he said.
The refusal comes five months before a UN climate conference in Copenhagen, where it is hoped that more than 190 nations will set targets for emission cuts up to 2020.

Clinton 'confident'
 
Despite the differences over the environmental targets, Clinton said she was optimistic that a compromise could be found.

India says it cannot easily commit to major cuts in carbon emissions [EPA]

"I am very confident ... that the United States and India can devise a plan that will dramatically change the way we produce, consume and conserve energy," she said. 

Bharat Desai, an expert on international environmental law at Delhi's Jawaharlal Nehru University, told Al Jazeera that developing countries will not [for the time being] take up legally binding commitments.

"But India is taking responsibility, it has various energy efficiency programmes ... we have already passed a law on climate change," he said.

"The developed countries need to take the lead so the developing ones feel comfortable [to follow]."

India is one of several developing nations who argue that their industrial ouput - and hence their economies - will be harmed should they be forced to commit to cuts in carbon emissions.

Get 30 days of free traffic analysis simply by going to Web-Stat: http://www.web-stat.com/?id=2955


Source: http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia/2009/07/20097203375638188.html



Contact Rightardia: eelder1@gmail.com


Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiu


Improve blog traffic with TrafficG http://trafficg.com/splash/splash01.php?uid=eelder1

Netcraft rank: 44637