Reprinted from Consortium News
Before last month's elections, the Democrats thought it would be smart to avoid policy debates. So, they delayed action on immigration, kept President Barack Obama away from many races, and withheld the Senate's report on CIA torture -- while following a "legacy" strategy of nominating Senate candidates with famous family names. The Democrats got clobbered and all their "legacy" candidates went down to defeat.
It turns out that this sort of strategy is not just anti-democratic -- by hiding the issues so the people don't get a chance to weigh in before an election -- but it's bad politics, too. Since then, the Democrats have moved forward with a different approach, with President Obama enunciating a somewhat more humane immigration policy and finally allowing release of the executive summary of the torture report.
Even the Washington Post's neocon editorial page praised the long-delayed disclosures. After citing the horrifying examples of near drownings, painful stress positions, sleep deprivations and "rectal feeding," the Post concluded: "This is not how Americans should behave. Ever."
So, what's the lesson here? It may be that the American people -- or at least many of them -- are ready for some truth-telling, whether it's about how black and brown people are treated in this country or about abuses committed by the government that should be confronted and corrected.
Maybe, these Americans are sick and tired of being treated like children or idiots -- and perhaps the new "smart" political play, as well as the right pro-democracy move, is to start respecting the people by giving them facts, not just pablum and propaganda.
So, President Obama might consider following up his new immigration policy and the recent protests against the police killings of Michael Brown and Eric Garner with a new commission on race in America (like the 1960s Kerner Commission which warned that "Our nation is moving toward two societies, one black, one white -- separate and unequal").
And he might continue reinvigorating American democracy by sharing more facts with the American people. From the same era that brought us CIA "black sites," it would be a no-brainer for Obama to release the hidden pages of the 9/11 report on Saudi funding of the hijackers.
As Saudi Arabia today pushes the United States to engage in a "regime change" in Syria -- a move that could lead to a victory by al-Qaeda's Nusra Front affiliate or the Islamic State -- the American people might want to know exactly which side the Saudi "allies" are on.
Obama also shouldn't stop at just releasing unnecessary secrets from George W. Bush's administration. He should update the American people on controversies in which his own administration rushed to judgments regarding issues related to war or peace.
The Sarin Mystery
On Syria, for instance, the Saudis (along with Turkey and Israel) almost fulfilled their dream of getting the U.S. military to destroy President Bashar al-Assad's defenses after Secretary of State John Kerry and other U.S. officials and media jumped to the conclusion that Assad was at fault for a sarin gas attack outside Damascus on Aug. 21, 2013.
Though the furor over that incident brought the United States to the brink of another Mideast war, many of the supposed "facts" cited by Kerry and the others have crumbled under closer scrutiny, such as the belief that a barrage of rockets carried the sarin from a Syrian military base when a subsequent United Nations investigation discovered only one sarin-laden rocket. Rocket experts also concluded that its very limited range traced more likely to rebel-held territory.
In other words, the sarin attack may well have been a rebel provocation meant to draw the U.S. military into the Syrian civil war on the side of the rebels whose most effective fighters are connected to either al-Qaeda or the even more extreme Islamic State. [See Consortiumnews.com's "Was Turkey Behind Syria-Sarin Attack?"]
More than a year later, U.S. intelligence analysts have a much more comprehensive take on what actually happened, and President Obama could declassify that information even if it embarrasses Secretary Kerry and other high-ranking members of the administration. If the Assad regime was falsely accused, there is also a fairness imperative to correct the record regardless of what you think about Assad.
Similarly, U.S. intelligence analysts have amassed substantial data on another crucial event, one that has ratcheted up war tensions in Eastern Europe, the July 17 shoot-down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 over Ukraine. Kerry and others rushed to blame the ethnic Russian rebels in eastern Ukraine and Russian President Vladimir Putin, who supposedly gave the rebels the sophisticated surface-to-air missiles capable of bringing down a plane at 33,000 feet.
The stampede of anti-Russian outrage was so strong that the European Union agreed to U.S. demands for economic sanctions against Moscow, touching off a trade war that has made life harder for people in both Russia and Europe. The shoot-down also gave impetus to the Kiev regime's "anti-terrorist operation" in eastern Ukraine, dispatching neo-Nazi and other paramilitary militias who have spearheaded the killing of thousands of ethnic Russians.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).