[UFPJ] Confrontation 2006: It's All about the "War on Terror"

["Hany Khalil" <hanykhalil at igc.org>]

Dear UFPJ member groups,

With the Bush Administration on the defensive for months, the peace movement
has made substantial gains in influencing public opinion. But instead of
retreating, our opponents are launching an aggressive campaign to rebuild
support by portraying themselves as strong protectors of the nation and
baiting critics of their war policies as soft on terrorism. We are going to
have a hell of a fight on our hands in 2006, and we need to gear up for it.

Below is a new piece describing the emerging Republican strategy in 2006 and
why the peace and justice movements must directly challenge the "war on
terrorism" framework, with Iraq as the linchpin.  The author, Max Elbaum, is
a staff member of War Times/Tiempo de Guerras, a group represented on the
steering committee of United for Peace and Justice. We hope you'll share
this widely and discuss it in your groups.

You can also read the piece at http://www.war-times.org or download it at
http://www.unitedforpeace.org/downloads/RoveWonT_Elbaum.doc .

Hany Khalil
Organizing Coordinator, United for Peace and Justice

--------------------
ROVE'S WARNING FOR 2006:
IT'S ALL ABOUT THE "WAR ON TERROR"

By Max Elbaum

The speech that will define U.S. politics throughout 2006 has already been
given.

The audience was the Republican National Committee and the date was January
19. The speechmaker was Karl Rove, top political adviser to President George
Bush.

Rove laid out the political strategy that will shape the fight for U.S.
public opinion, the midterm elections and the terrain for all social
struggles in 2006. The cornerstone of this strategy is once again "You Are
With Us or You Are With the Terrorists."

This battle plan is a direct challenge not simply to the Democrats, but to
antiwar activists and every progressive and grassroots movement. The
responsibility falls squarely on us to meet Rove head on with an unequivocal
challenge to the war in Iraq and to the "war on terror" justification for
spying, torture, and racist injustice from the Gulf Coast to the U.S.-Mexico
border.

MARCHING ORDERS

Rove's speech was front-page news in the New York Times Jan. 20:

"Rove...left little doubt that once again - as has been the case in both
national elections since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks - he was intent on
making national security the pre-eminent issue in 2006.... He lacerated
Democrats for what he described their 'cut and run' policy on Iraq, for
blocking a renewal of the broad antiterrorism law known as the USA Patriot
Act, and for challenging the legality of the administration's widespread use
of warrantless wiretaps in the face of widespread criticism.

"'The United States faces a ruthless enemy, and we need a commander in chief
and a Congress who understand the nature of the threat and the gravity of
the moment America finds itself in,' Mr. Rove said. 'President Bush and the
Republican Party do. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for many
Democrats.'"

Rove's words are not individual opinions. They are marching orders with the
full power of the White House behind them. The official Republican Party
apparatus of political operatives, media flacks, multi-millionaire donors,
ambitious House and Senate candidates and more are already saluting and
marching to this tune. Rove's "unofficial" army of right-wing talk show
hosts, dirty tricksters and religious zealots are already pummeling away.

The last year hasn't gone well for Bush in public opinion. A majority now
disapproves of his policy in Iraq. The President's overall approval ratings
have plummeted to a dismal 40 percent. Even some Republicans are critical of
Bush's claim that he can spy on any U.S. citizen without a warrant and
display growing disquiet about the situation in Iraq.

Some have speculated that the Republicans might therefore shy away from a
focus on Iraq and the spying issue in 2006.

But the White House's response to adversity has never been to soften its
message or "move toward the center." It is to go on the offensive. Rove
believes Bush won the 2004 election by painting his opponent as "soft on
terrorism." With Republicans vulnerable in 2006, this means Attack and Smear
- and not just on electoral terrain - will be a daily fact of life.

Nothing should be ruled out as too low a blow. A right-wing campaign has
already begun spreading swift-boat style lies about Vietnam War veteran
turned Iraq war critic John Murtha. The extreme right is already chanting
the mantra that Osama Bin Laden equals Howard Dean equals Michael Moore. A
kind of 21st century McCarthyism is here right now. If Rove has his way,
terrorist baiting will become a powerful and lasting weapon to crush all
opposition.

Racism is an integral part of Rove's "Us against Them" appeal. His implicit
"us" is "White America." His most explicitly demonized "them" are Arabs and
Muslims. But with language filling right-wing airwaves and filtering
steadily into mainstream discourse about "hordes coming across the border"
and "protecting our way of life," a thinly coded ideological assault on all
peoples of color is part of the mix.

The immediate goal of this 2006 crusade is to protect Republican majorities
in the Senate and House. But Rove's plan has tremendous consequences beyond
the electoral arena.

It is crafted to bolster and harden Bush's policy of permanent occupation in
Iraq. It is designed to increase the rightwing's power in every arena of
struggle over policy, resources, and rights. It is a club to justify
repression against, and denial of resources to, every oppressed community
and progressive movement, from Gulf Coast victims of Katrina and the
immigrant communities that are now in Republican gunsights, to trade unions,
the women's and lesbian/gay movements, and human rights and civil liberties
organizations.

Headway for Rove's crusade means curtailed democratic rights and massive
cuts in social programs. His idea is not just to win one more election. He
and Bush aim to solidify rightwing control over all branches of government
for a generation. September 11, 2001 didn't just give the right an opening
to justify new imperial adventures abroad. Domestically Rove and Co. think
they can use 9/11 as a battering ram to prevent opposition movements from
gaining traction in the voting booths or in the streets for decades to come.


MEET POLARIZATION HEAD ON

Rove can be stopped this time around. The administration's failures in Iraq
and in response to Katrina, its "culture of corruption" scandals, and much
more have taken their toll on public opinion. Divisions have opened up
within the Republican Party apparatus and the party's social base.

But beating back Rove requires his "war on terror trumps everything" message
to be confronted head on. Only a hard-hitting "No!" to continuing the
occupation of Iraq and to using "national security" as a cover for
empire-building abroad and reaction at home will succeed. We need an
across-the board challenge to the entire "culture of fear" framework with
its relentless use of allegedly permanent enemies to silence all opposition.

Far more is at stake than the final tally in 2006 Congressional contests,
important as that is. Whether or not the White House is confronted and
beaten back on the phony "war on terror" will shape the foreign and domestic
policies pursued by whichever party is in office. It will determine which
side of the political spectrum has initiative and self-confidence, and
whether or not grassroots movements have space to organize.

There are a growing number of Democratic Party candidates who are now
willing, at least when pressed from below, to take Bush on regarding Iraq
and his imperial appropriation of executive power. But most top figures -
Hillary Clinton leading the pack - either duck the fight or are nearly as
backward as Bush regarding the pivot question of Iraq. No effective
resistance to Rove's reactionary juggernaut will come from this quarter.

The responsibility to meet Rove's polarization head on falls squarely on the
antiwar movement and all grassroots and progressive activists. The antiwar
movement is in the direct line of fire. Loudly and militantly, in the
streets and the media, inside town halls and outside military recruitment
centers, in actions on the third anniversary of the Iraq war and
mobilizations throughout the year, we need to anchor the 2006 fightback.

Activists whose main work is focused in other arenas will also play an
indispensable role. Linking the antiwar/anti-repression pivot to every other
part of the progressive agenda is not just a "Good Thing," but crucial for
political survival.

If we jump start our efforts and go all-out for the next year, we can stop
Karl Rove from being the person able to give the defining political speech
of 2007 and 2008.

- Max Elbaum is a staff member of War Times/Tiempo de Guerras
http://www.war-times.org , a group represented on the steering committee of
United for Peace and Justice http://unitedforpeace.org .