HAMAS SENDS ANOTHER WARNING

NEWSFLASH: Hamas has struck again and the "negotiations" are "suspended" again. Two Israelis were assassinated by masked men while eating at a restaurant in Tulkarm. Though this time it was Israelis who were killed it was another warning to Yasser Arafat. Last week similarly masked men in Gaza killed a close Arafat friend, the head of Palestinian TV in Gaza, just as it was rumored Arafat was about to sign some kind of new deal with the Israelis. In a counter- warning the next day Arafat himself helped carry the coffin. This time the Arafat regime was quick to "condemn" the killings and appeal for the "negotiations" to promptly resume.

"COUNT TO 10, THEN CALL ME!"

GENERAL POWELL SAYS NO TO SANCTIONS ON BEHALF OF CORPORATE INTERESTS

"The pervasive use of trade embargoes and other forms of sanctions 'shows a degree of American hubris and arrogance that may not, at the end of the day, serve our interests all that well... I would like to participate with you in discussing how to get rid of most of them... Stop, look and listen before you impose a sanction... Count to 10, then call me."

Secretary of State Colin Powell Senate Foreign Relations Committee

A smarter and richer America will be even a more formidable power than a hubristic and arrogant one. That may be the "New Powell Doctrine". And understandably the General did not announce it until he was appointed and confirmed. But let's not get carried away here with thinking General Powell is turning away from Madeleine Albright's harshness. One of Powell's virtues in fact is his rather low-key ruthlessness. What's really going on here is the Bush Administration at work on behalf of all those corporations who put up all that money; and keep it coming. Corporate American has never been very pleased with the sanctions approach which in practice often lets foreign businesses cash in where the Americans aren't allowed to go. This new Bush Administration is nothing if not Corporate American in political disguise. It's not the million+ dead-because-of-sanctions Iraqis that are propelling Colin Powell, it's the billions more to be made by Corporate America that really lies behind this new initiative coming without delay from Corporate Washington (our new nickname for the Bush Administration). But don't expect the LATimes or other media representatives to put the right tag on all this. As in the article below the story is reported just as the General wants it to be, but the background and larger context are not.

POWELL WANTS TO SCRAP MOST U.S. SANCTIONS
By Robin Wright

WASHINGTON, Los Angeles Times Service Tuesday, January 23, 2001: They have been used against Hitler's Germany and Saddam Hussein's Iraq. They were imposed to isolate apartheid South Africa and force theocratic Iran to release 52 American hostages. They have been applied against friends such as Israel, to force its withdrawal from the Sinai in 1956, and such foes as Afghanistan's Taleban government, for harboring Osama bin Laden.

But Secretary of State Colin Powell is about to begin a quiet revolution in American diplomacy by proposing to scrap many, maybe even most, of the punitive sanctions imposed by the United States, the vast majority put in place over the past decade.

During his confirmation hearings last week, Mr. Powell was almost scornful in describing the use of sanctions, which along with warfare are one of the most enduring tools of foreign policy, dating back to ancient Greece. And he served notice on Congress that he intended to push for change.

The pervasive use of trade embargoes and other forms of sanctions "shows a degree of American hubris and arrogance that may not, at the end of the day, serve our interests all that well," Mr. Powell told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

"I would like to participate with you in discussing how to get rid of most of them," he said. And he appealed to Congress not to apply any new sanctions before letting him have his say: "Stop, look and listen before you impose a sanction." "Count to 10, then call me," he said.

About 75 of the world's 193 nations are subject to U.S.sanctions at the moment. Several have been sanctioned for multiple offenses, ranging from mislabeling cans of tuna, at one end of the scale, to engaging in egregious human rights violations and narcotics trafficking at the other.

In contrast, the United Nations currently enforces sanctions against fewer than a dozen countries, according to the State Department's Office on Economic Sanctions Policy.

One of the ironies for Mr. Powell is that many of the U.S. sanctions were initiated by the Republican-controlled Congress, although the president also is empowered to levy embargoes.

Mr. Powell's proposed reversal would be a boon to American business. USA Engage, a grouping of more than 670 U.S. companies that wants to ease embargoes, estimates that sanctions cost the United States as much as $19 billion annually in lost exports and deprive the economy of more than 200,000 high wage jobs. A range of industries, from oil to aerospace to agriculture, has been affected.

Almost half of the 125 unilateral economic sanctions imposed by the United States since World War I were started between 1993 and 1998, according to surveys by USA Engage and the National Association of Manufacturers.

Mr. Powell's position reflects a growing wariness among politicians and policymakers of both parties.

Sanctions imposed only by the United States "rarely succeed" in altering behavior, according to Senator Richard Lugar, Republican of Indiana. Senator Christopher Dodd, Democrat of Connecticut, has long called for a review.

"In most cases, the issue is rushed to the Senate or House floor, so that Congress can express its outrage at some perceived misdeed," Mr. Dodd said. "But there has never been any systematic effort by Congress to review sanctions once imposed, to consider whether they have achieved their objectives or have turned out to be counterproductive."

During its final two years, the Clinton administration became increasingly reluctant to impose or endorse sanctions because of the unintended consequences they sometimes have on bystanders, such as women, children and neighboring countries, a senior U.S. official said.

In 1999, President Clinton pushed to eliminate sanctions on humanitarian goods, opening the way for exports of food and medicine to Libya, Sudan and Iran, among others.

Yet sanctions are so central to U.S. policy that only two days before Mr. Clinton stepped down, his administration imposed new sanctions on Sierra Leone, restricting the importation of diamonds in response to a UN resolution.

Another set of UN sanctions promoted by the United States against Afghanistan, restricting travel by officials of the ruling Taleban and banning military aid, went into effect Friday, the day before Mr. Clinton left office.

Supporters of sanctions argue that they will continue to play a role.

"Sanctions as a tool of foreign policy can be very effective by exerting psychological and economic pressure," said Henri Barkey, a former member of the State Department's policy staff.

Along with NATO bombardment, sanctions on the Yugoslav government of Slobodan Milosevic helped isolate him from his own people, Mr. Barkey pointed out. Indeed, sanctions may have been critical to the process, because the NATO air strikes initially rallied the public around the regime, he said.

At his confirmation hearing, Mr. Powell acknowledged that sanctions generally have a "noble purpose from their origin."

But he offered few details about which countries or sanctions he wants to review, or what he would propose as an alternative when countries transgress international standards.

Addressing two specific cases, Mr. Powell said that he would maintain sanctions on Iraq but favors reassessing current restrictions on India. The United States imposed sanctions on India and Pakistan, as required by law, after the two governments tested nuclear devices.