“Change you can believe in” or more of the same – Biden Picked as Obama Running Mate

By Kenneth J. Theisen

Bush political trajectory will not
change under Obama/Biden regime 

As I was writing this article I received
an email from Joe Biden.  I guess he thinks we are friends as he
addressed me as “Ken” and signed the email as “Joe.”  He
also asked me for money.  In the email, Joe wrote “Barack Obama
will secure America at home and restore our reputation abroad. And John
McCain will only extend the failed policies of George Bush.” Based
on his past record as a six-term Senator and as Chair of the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee I believe good old Joe and his running mate
will continue to serve U.S. imperialism, just as Bush has done. 
Maybe some of the policies will be adjusted, but in essence an Obama/Biden
administration will not fundamentally change the political trajectory
of the last 7 plus years of the Bush regime.

 

Justifying U.S. imperialist wars 

Let’s take a look at some of Biden’s
past statements and record.  On April 27, 2007, during one of the
presidential debates Biden lectured Representative Dennis Kucinich and
former Senator Mike Gravel who were critical of the regular use of force
by the U.S.  Biden said, “Stop telling us here about [how] the
use of force doesn’t make sense. “The use of force in Afghanistan
is justified and necessary; in Darfur, justified and necessary; in the
Balkans, justified and necessary. You guys can have your happy talk,
there’s real life.”  This statement was consistent with his record
as he has regularly justified U.S. imperialist adventures and wars as
necessary. 

Getting the Iraq war resolution approved 

In 2002 Biden assisted the Bush regime
by shepherding the Senate resolution authorizing the invasion of Iraq
through the Senate. As Chair of the Foreign Relations Committee, he
allowed only two days of hearings prior to the Iraq war vote. 
Biden refused to allow testimony from those who were experts on the
Middle East who would have testified that a U.S. invasion would result
in a lengthy counterinsurgency war, fomenting sectarianism and Islamic
extremism, as well as strengthening the Iranian regime. He would not
allow Scott Ritter to testify and expose the Bush regime arguments that
Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. 

Leading the charge into Iraq 

While many who voted for the Iraq war
subsequently claimed that they were misled by the Bush administration,
Biden was actually leading the charge for war even before Bush was elected.
Biden claimed Iraq under Saddam was “a long term threat and a short
term threat to our national security” and was an “extreme danger
to the world.”  As recently as a 2007 interview, Biden still
defended those remarks when he stated, “That’s right, and I was
correct about that.”

In 1998, Biden was calling for invading
Iraq and deposing Saddam. Biden claimed that UN inspections would not
lead to Iraqi disposal of WMDS.  He lectured weapons inspector
Scott Ritter by saying, “As long as Saddam’s at the helm, there
is no reasonable prospect you or any other inspector is ever going to
be able to guarantee that we have rooted out, root and branch, the entirety
of Saddam’s program relative to weapons of mass destruction.” 
He went on to say, that there was a need for an invasion similar to
the first Gulf War. Biden stated, “The only way we”re going to get
rid of Saddam Hussein is we”re going to end up having to start it
alone.” 

After the Bush regime came to power he
continued to push this theme.  He said, “One thing is clear:
These weapons must be dislodged from Saddam, or Saddam must be dislodged
from power”If we wait for the danger from Saddam to become clear,
it could be too late.” He defended the Bush administration by claiming
that Bush “did not snub the U.N. or our allies. He did not dismiss
a new inspection regime. He did not ignore the Congress. At each pivotal
moment, he has chosen a course of moderation and deliberation.” 
Biden further claimed in his support for the Iraq war resolution, “I
do not believe this is a rush to war. I believe it is a march to peace
and security. I believe that failure to overwhelmingly support this
resolution is likely to enhance the prospects that war will occur.” 
War is peace and security. Biden must have loved Orwell’s writings.

Biden also did not believe the Bush regime
happy talk of a quick victory in Iraq when he supported the invasion.
He stated before the invasion that “We must be clear with the American
people that we are committing to Iraq for the long haul; not just the
day after, but the decade after.” So much for Obama’s withdrawal
plan.

After the invasion of Iraq, Biden was
critical of how the Bush regime handled the aftermath.  He was
actually more hawkish than the Bush administration. Years before Bush
called for the 2007 “surge” or escalation of the war, Biden was
actively calling for the deployment of more U.S. troops in Iraq. On
November 27, 2005 on Meet the Press he said, “I’ve been calling for
more troops for over two years, along with John McCain and others”” 

Neo-colonialist partition plan 

He also called for a so-called soft partition
plan to be imposed on Iraq.  In a classical imperialist divide
and rule strategy, he pushed for the division of Iraq into three semi-autonomous
regions ruled by Kurds, Shia, and Sunni U.S. collaborators.  Iraq
would be held together by a weak central government. Given how intermixed
these various groups are in Iraq, this plan if implemented would probably
lead to ethnic and religious “cleansing,” massive death and relocation,
even worse than what has already occurred in Iraq as a result of the
U.S. invasion. 

“Strategic surge” in Afghanistan 

Biden, like his running mate Obama and
also like President Bush, has called for escalation of the war in Afghanistan.
He calls this proposed escalation a “strategic surge.” He states,
“We need more troops-but not many. A single brigade would make an enormous difference.
The real need is for the right kind of troops: we desperately need more
Special Operations Forces, more civil affairs and intelligence specialists,
more Foreign Area Officers. We also need more hardware: more fixed-wing
aircraft and helicopters for mobility, more surveillance drones, more
satellite tasking, more [armored vehicles] for troop protection.”
He fails to state how many more of Afghanistan’s people will die as
a result of this additional firepower. 

Biden demands
“better returns” for military aid in Pakistan 

Biden has been critical of past Bush
regime policy in Pakistan. He was vocally opposed to the Bush administration’s
almost uncritical support for past President and Army Chief Musharaff.
(Musharaff was recently forced to resign.) The Bush regime has given
over $10 billion in aid to Pakistan since 9/11.  Most of this aid
was military assistance. But Biden was not opposed to support of Musharaff
on the principle that he was a dictator, but rather because he was ineffective
in serving U.S. imperialism.   

In July Biden proposed giving $1.5 billion
over 10 years in non-military American aid to Pakistan. This aid would
be in addition to the $1 billion in annual military aid to Pakistan. 
Biden proposed to make military aid conditional on performance. 
He said, “We should be willing to spend more if we get better returns-and
less if we don’t.” The U.S. has been conducting an undeclared war
in Pakistan for the last several years.  U.S. missiles are regularly
launched against targets in Pakistan by unmanned drones such as the
Predator. 

Iran
– Military option still on the table 

Biden does have some differences with
the Bush regime policy in regard to Iran.   He states he is
opposed to Iran acquiring nuclear weapons. But he” claims that Iran
“regime change” should not be the focus of American policy in the
Middle East.  But he also refuses to take the military option off
the table.   

Biden says, “But we have time: Iran
is years away from having a bomb and a missile to deliver it. We need
to use the time wisely.” He states, “We need a policy that isolates
Iran, not America and tips the balance in Iran against pursuing nuclear
weapons. That means keeping our allies, Russia and China on the same
page as we ratchet up economic and diplomatic pressure on the government
to stop pursuing nuclear weapons. At the same time, there are growing
fissures within the ruling elite – we need to exploit them”Force must
be the last option because it’s a bad option. First, with our forces
bogged down in Iraq, our threat to use force doesn’t look very credible.
Second, we can set back Iran’s program but not stop it. Using force
would lead to retaliation by Iran, including against our troops in Iraq.
It would cause the Iranian people to rally behind Ahmadinejad and the
extremists. Third, even a ‘limited’ strike would be perceived as something
much bigger by the Iranians and could spark a real war.”  

Biden still wants to achieve U.S. imperialism”
goal of domination in the Middle East, but would prefer to do so without
open war with Iran.  He fails to mention how economic sanctions
are a form of war that also causes mass death like they did in Iraq
between the two Gulf wars. 

Support for Israel 

Biden maintains that the Bush administration
has not been supportive enough of Israel. Say what?  He was an
ardent supporter of the Israeli attacks on the civilian infrastructure
in Lebanon. He has supported the annexation of greater East Jerusalem
by Israel. He says, “Palestinians will have to yield on the right
of return to Israel, which would destroy the Jewish nature of the state.
In a 2007 interview with ‘Shalom TV’ Biden claimed, “I am a Zionist.
You don’t have to be a Jew to be a Zionist.” He referred to Israel
as the greatest Middle East ally of the U.S. He said, “Imagine
our circumstance in the world were there no Israel. How many battleships
would there be? How many troops would be stationed?” With Israel
as a military ally, the U.S. can use less resources to control the Middle
East than would otherwise be necessary is Biden’s view.  

He has consistently voted for and championed
the billions of dollars in aid given to Israel each year by the U.S.
I guess Biden believes that the U.S. gets better returns on its investments
in Israel than it does in Pakistan. 
 

Early
cheerleader for U.S. intervention in the Balkans 

After the break-up of the Soviet Union,
the nation of Yugoslavia also began to have divisions among various
ethnic and religious groups.  Joe Biden played a role in exacerbating
these divisions and using military force to resolve political disputes.
On March 23, 1999 in a 58 to 41 vote, the Senate passed a resolution,
“Air Operations against Yugoslavia” authorizing President Clinton
to conduct air strikes against Yugoslavia. The resolution was introduced
by Biden and Senator John Warner.  In effect it called for the
massive NATO bombing of Serbians that subsequently occurred. But this
was not the first time that Biden pushed for military operations in
the Balkan region. 

In 1998, along with John McCain, Biden
fought for a resolution to push the Clinton administration to use “all
available force” to confront Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic. The
resolution was intended to force the Clinton to use ground troops against
Serbian forces in the former Yugoslavia.   

In the early 1990s, Biden advocated lifting
the arms embargo on the Bosnian Muslims and supporting them with NATO
air power.  This policy was known as “lift and strike.” Clinton
initially was opposed to the policy, but in the face of opposition from
Biden and others he eventually implemented it. 

Biden supported the NATO bombing campaign
to force Serbian troops to leave the breakaway province of Kosovo. 
He later supported Kosovo’s independence despite opposition from Russia. 
 

NATO expansion to expand U.S. military
power in Europe  

Biden, Obama, and McCain have all supported
Georgia’s early admission to NATO.  NATO expansion is one of
the causes of the recent confrontation in Georgia.  (This article
will not get into recent developments in Georgia other than to touch
on the role of Biden.) But Biden has aggressively pushed for the expansion
of NATO in his role as Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. 
NATO now includes, or may soon include, many nations which border on
Russia or that were formerly part of the Soviet Union.  Russian
sees this as a threat and Biden has not done anything to lessen this
perception. 

Biden has stated, “It remains my
conviction that we should extend an offer of NATO membership to any
country that applies and meets the criteria.” 

Prior to being selected as Obama’s
running mate, Biden made a trip to Georgia. Shortly after his return
to the U.S. Biden announced, “When Congress reconvenes, I intend
to work with the administration to seek congressional approval for $1
billion in emergency assistance for Georgia.” 

U.S. Troops for Darfur 

Biden has repeatedly stated he would
send U.S. troops to the Sudan.  He has said that if international
forces are not sent, “I’m sending American troops alone.” 
 

Strict sanctions against Cuba 

Biden has been a long time supporter
of sanctions against Cuba. He has repeatedly fought against attempts
to lift or lesson these sanctions. 
 

More cops to occupy America

He helped write and pass legislation
that put 100,000 more police on the streets during the Clinton administration.

Bankruptcy
law favoring big banks and credit car industry

He helped pass legislation that tightened
bankruptcy rules for credit card and other debt on middle class Americans.
This created more profit for banks and the credit card industry by making
it harder to wipe out debts by filing for bankruptcy. Many people became
virtual slaves to their creditors as a result.

Biden will not serve the interests
of the people

The above is just a small part of the
many years of service to the American ruling class that Biden has provided
and it shows why he was chosen to be Obama’s running mate.  As
commentators have pointed out he was a “safe choice.”  But
safe for the ruling class is not safe for the vast majority of us. 

Biden has proven himself to those who
wish to maintain U.S. hegemony in the world.  But U.S. domination
is not in the interest of Americans or the people of the world. 
Based on Biden’s past we can expect to continue to send troops to
enforce U.S. imperialist interests around the world.  War in the
Middle East and Central Asia will continue. War in Europe is a real

possibility as well. NATO expansion will increase tensions with Russia.
Will the U.S. mount military expeditions in the guise of humanitarian
assistance?  If Biden gets his way, it will. 

Change you can believe in will not occur
with Obama and Biden at the head of the next administration.  The
only real way to change the course started during the Bush regime years
is to build a mass people’s movement not dependent on either imperialist
party.  Anything short of that will result in more years, similar
to those we have experienced for the last seven. Is that what you want?