U.S. Politics

Most probably not. But this opening graf from LA Times reporter Josh Meyer makes it seem like U.S. counter-terrorism officials were taking the threat -- one of "of limited specificity and uncertain credibility" -- seriously enough to prepare for the possibility.

The swearing-in of Barack Obama came off without a security-related hitch Tuesday, but underneath the calm veneer, federal authorities were intensively investigating a report that a group of Somalia-based militants wanted to launch some kind of inauguration-related attack.

The group, evidently, was the infamous al-Shabaab, a splinter group of the Islamic militants currently en route to taking over Somalia. The rumored potential perpetrators may -- or may not -- also have had something to do with a naturalized, Minneapolis-based U.S. citizen who may or may not have blown himself up in Somalia this past October. At the end of his LA Times piece, Meyer admits the vagueness surrounding the threat.

The official said the threat did not specify Washington and could apply to inauguration-related festivities around the country, and that there was no indication that anyone connected with the threat has even tried to enter the United States.

A rumored threat of something, happening somewhere in the country by individuals who have not even entered the country is probably not worthy of insinuating a possible terrorist attack on Obama's inauguration. But, it's a testament to the intense security of the inauguration that such a possibility was fully vetted -- and anyway, al-Shabaab will pose enough problems for the Obama Administration's Somalia policy even without concocting far-fetched Inauguration schemes.

(image from flickr user Mrs. Gemstone, under a Creative Commons license)

I just received a copy of John Kerry's floor speech in which he urges his colleagues to vote quickly on the nomination of Hillary Clinton for Secretary of State. This reminded me that I had wanted to write about Kerry's new job as Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Watching the nomination hearings of Senator Hillary Clinton and Susan Rice, I must say that John Kerry looks very much at ease in his new role. He asked thoughtful, probing questions and cracked a few jokes when appropriate. Most signficantly, he conducted himself in a way that suggests the bi-partisan comity for which the Committee has been known under the chairmanships of Richard Lugar and Joe Biden will remain intact. This latter point is pretty important. I've never been much a fan of bi-partisanship for its own sake. Rather, the legislative results of bi-partisanship are what matter the most. Still, one case where bi-partisanship is literally essential to legislative success is in the ratification of treaties, which requires the support of two-thirds of the Senate. In the coming months, I expect some movement on two important treaties: The UN Convention on the Law of the Seas and the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. Additionally, testimony at the Rice and Clinton hearings suggest that the Obama administration wants to move on the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Ratifying any of these treaties would be an important step forward. But for ratification to be a success Kerry must tread carefully and be as inclusive as possible to the needs of his colleagues on both sides of the aisle. From what I have seen so far, I am hopeful that Kerry is the right person for the job.

Speaking of Gitmo...The United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture Manfred Nowak gave an interview to a German television statement in which he apparently ( I don't speak German) called on the United States government to prosecute former president George W. Bush and former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld for ordering the torture of detainees at Guantanamo. Via Think Progress.

"Judicially speaking, the United States has a clear obligation" to bring proceedings against Bush and Rumsfeld. [...] He noted Washington had ratified the UN convention on torture which required "all means, particularly penal law" to be used to bring proceedings against those violating it. "We have all these documents that are now publicly available that prove that these methods of interrogation were intentionally ordered by Rumsfeld," against detainees at the US prison facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, Nowak said.

There are two points to make about this. 1) President Ronald Reagan signed the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment in 1988 and the United States Senate ratified the treaty in 1990. Under the United States constitution, treaties ratified by the senate carry the force of law. Violations of the treaty would therefore be punishable under American jurisprudence. 2). This is not the most politic thing for Mr. Nowak to say. It puts the incoming administration in the unfortunate position of probably having to issue some sort of statement rebuking the Nowak as one of its first actions at the UN.

He may not be breaking ground on a new White House vegetable garden today, but I consider this an auspicious start to Barack Obama's presidency. From the Washington Post:

In one of its first actions, the Obama administration instructed military prosecutors late Tuesday to seek a 120-day suspension of legal proceedings involving detainees at the naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba -- a clear break with the approach of the outgoing Bush administration. The instruction came in a motion filed with a military court in the case of five defendants accused of organizing the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States. The motion called for "a continuance of the proceedings" until May 20 so that "the newly inaugurated president and his administration [can] review the military commissions process, generally, and the cases currently pending before military commissions, specifically." [snip] The legal maneuver appears designed to provide the Obama administration time to refashion the prosecution system and potentially treat detainees as criminal defendants in federal court or have them face war-crimes charges in military courts-martial. It is also possible that the administration could re-form and relocate the military commissions before resuming trials.

Elections have consequences, as they say.

I'm just returning from the National Mall, where I stood with millions of Americans of all shapes, colors, ages and sizes for the inspiring inauguration of our 44th President. It was cold outside, but the crowd was fired up. Here is President Obama's inaugural address as prepared for delivery. There were certainly some foreign policy high points that we at Dispatch will dissect shortly. For now, though, have a read of his speech. My fellow citizens: I stand here today humbled by the task before us, grateful for the trust you have bestowed, mindful of the sacrifices borne by our ancestors. I thank President Bush for his service to our nation, as well as the generosity and cooperation he has shown throughout this transition. Forty-four Americans have now taken the presidential oath. The words have been spoken during rising tides of prosperity and the still waters of peace. Yet, every so often the oath is taken amidst gathering clouds and raging storms. At these moments, America has carried on not simply because of the skill or vision of those in high office, but because We the People have remained faithful to the ideals of our forbearers, and true to our founding documents. So it has been. So it must be with this generation of Americans.

This is probably Dr. Martin Luther King Jr's most famous foreign policy speech, delivered in protest to the United States' war in Vietnam. It was delivered at the Ebeneezer Baptist Church in Atlanta in April 1967. A few weeks prior, Dr. King led an anti-Vietnam war protest in front of the UN building in New York City.

I'm off the Hill to liveblog the confirmation hearings for Susan Rice, nominee to be the next United States ambassador to the United Nations. Watch us watch her talk about the role of the United Nations in American foreign policy at Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Just prior to Dr. Rice's hearing is a "business meeting" of the SFRC in which they will vote on the nomination of Hillary Clinton for Secretary of State....should be an exciting few hours on the Hill.

4:23. That's it! Senator Kerry calls the hearing adjourned. Probably seemed longer if you weren't liveblogging... 4:17. For those of you who missed the fireworks brief sputterings of heat without much light, Megan Carpentier posts a fairly withering critique of Senator Vitter's distractions over at Madam Secretary. 4:11. Kerry citing some pretty scary climate change numbers -- you can tell he's serious about this issue. 3:46. Kerry says it's time to have some fun! Except he's beginning with Afghanistan... 3:44. At least she understands that there are an "enormous number of bad options" re: Somalia. This is not, of course, reason not to try to figure out the best...or at least the least bad. 3:42. Clinton talking about piracy...she's not a pirate in disguise, so take serious her support for an international anti-piracy coalition. 3:43.Clinton admits "no wisdom" on how to solve the Somalia crisis. Very fair humility, as it's an exceedingly protracted problem, but let's hope she gets the "whole national security apparatus" working on it, as she is suggesting now. 3:41. Feingold and Clinton both were surprised to learn that Somalia is just 20 miles from Yemen. [Evidently, they were both wrong. Commenter Patrick points out that Africa is 20 miles from Yemen, not so much Somalia. 3:34.. UN must be more transparent and efficient, Clinton agrees, but rightly adds that the U.S. must be a "good partner" with the UN and needs to "bear our burden" when we ask the UN to undertake peacekeeping or other initiatives that benefit U.S. interests. A fair description of the U.S.-UN relationship as a "two track agenda." If we don't do our part, we can't achieve a reform agenda.

Eat the View wins the ideas for On Day One contest! For the unitiated, Eat the View is a project of Kitchen Gardeners International, which supports the cause of local food production and consumption. Eat the View wants President-elect Obama to plant a vegetable garden on the White House lawn, and in so doing show his support for home gardeners and local food production. Roger Doiron started the campaign with an idea submitted to On Day One back in February. Since then, this idea has morphed into a movement of socially conscious gardeners advocating that the new president plant a vegetable garden on the White House lawn. Congratulations to Doiron!
This Lawn is Your Lawn from roger doiron on Vimeo.