The Obama administration has been receiving quite a lot of flack with regards to their conduct on recent upheaval in the Middle East. Some of my favourite writers, such as Barry Rubin, have been claiming that the administration is completely oblivious to the ways of the Middle East and are incapable to get a clear read on it. It's hard to argue with the facts...
But what would you say to the idea that the administration, and American foreign policy in general, simply does not care for the ways of the Middle East and don't care to get a clear read of it?
So the execution is not smooth? Who said they care much for a smooth execution?
Doesn't history show us that American foreign policy is cynical and self serving?
So now I will tie it to what's been going on in the Middle East recently.
Showing posts with label middle east. Show all posts
Showing posts with label middle east. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
It's Snowing Upwards!
It has been snowing ceaselessly for almost a day now. When I am looking out of my window, it appears as though it is snowing upwards!
No, I am not insane. I live in one of those tall, modern condominium buildings and there is a current of warm air emanating from the large vents some 30 floors down from where I am. This current is making the snow flakes travel upwards right in front of my window.
Let's assume for a second that I have never seen snow in my life. Let's assume that I do not understand the elementary physical principles involved. Let's pretend that my entire understanding of the situation comes from what I see right now going on outside my window. I may conclude that these piles of cold white stuff that is covering the streets is going to disappear shortly! I will however, get a nasty shock when I find myself stuck in 3 feet of snow a little later.
It is a little bit like what I see when I follow events in the Middle East unfold through the eyes of the mainstream media. They are looking at Egypt at a moment when it appears to be snowing upwards and they are optimistically relaying to us that 'soon a democratic consensual government will rise in Egypt!', 'soon all the snow will disappear!'.
But unfortunately, the situation is a lot more complex than that. While the snow might be gone if we wait a few days, and Egypt might stabilize within a few years, it is extremely dangerous to act prematurely based on a very narrow and limited vantage point.
It is, for example, extremely possible that the chaos Egypt is undergoing will lead to a radically anti-Western Islamic dictatorship lead by the Muslim Brotherhood. It is also possible that Mubarak's rule will decide to go out with a blast after realizing it has nothing to lose. Both outcomes seem very real if you consider the history and culture of the Middle East. A western like democracy, however, will be a pleasant change, but a rare precedent none the less.
For the time being, I will relay the advice of the radio talk show host from this morning: 'If you have to drive, proceed with caution and don't trust anyone. Even the guy driving next to you could potentially ruin your day, because chances are, he has no clue what he is doing'.
-QP
No, I am not insane. I live in one of those tall, modern condominium buildings and there is a current of warm air emanating from the large vents some 30 floors down from where I am. This current is making the snow flakes travel upwards right in front of my window.
Let's assume for a second that I have never seen snow in my life. Let's assume that I do not understand the elementary physical principles involved. Let's pretend that my entire understanding of the situation comes from what I see right now going on outside my window. I may conclude that these piles of cold white stuff that is covering the streets is going to disappear shortly! I will however, get a nasty shock when I find myself stuck in 3 feet of snow a little later.
It is a little bit like what I see when I follow events in the Middle East unfold through the eyes of the mainstream media. They are looking at Egypt at a moment when it appears to be snowing upwards and they are optimistically relaying to us that 'soon a democratic consensual government will rise in Egypt!', 'soon all the snow will disappear!'.
But unfortunately, the situation is a lot more complex than that. While the snow might be gone if we wait a few days, and Egypt might stabilize within a few years, it is extremely dangerous to act prematurely based on a very narrow and limited vantage point.
It is, for example, extremely possible that the chaos Egypt is undergoing will lead to a radically anti-Western Islamic dictatorship lead by the Muslim Brotherhood. It is also possible that Mubarak's rule will decide to go out with a blast after realizing it has nothing to lose. Both outcomes seem very real if you consider the history and culture of the Middle East. A western like democracy, however, will be a pleasant change, but a rare precedent none the less.
For the time being, I will relay the advice of the radio talk show host from this morning: 'If you have to drive, proceed with caution and don't trust anyone. Even the guy driving next to you could potentially ruin your day, because chances are, he has no clue what he is doing'.
-QP
Friday, January 28, 2011
Barry Rubin: Palestine Papers: We Know the Real Story
By Barry Rubin
We now know what actually happened in the negotiations mischaracterized by the "Palestine Papers," but before I tell you the true story, let me say some words about how it has been distorted.
Maybe it's just me out of step with the rest of the world, but someone tell me where the following paragraph is wrong:
The world is judging and condemning Israel on the basis of incomplete notes taken by people many of whom are not fluent English-speakers (of statements made by people who are not native-speakers of English) and who are passionate partisans of the Palestinian cause and who hate Israel; documents that have not been authenticated by anyone and whose translation has not been checked; documents that leave out much of what the Israelis said and leave out the concessions they made; then are filtered through the pro-Hamas, anti-Israel, anti-Palestinian Authority (PA) al-Jazira (whose record of reportage is marked by some amazing lies) and the anti-Israel, pro-Hamas, anti-PA Guardian (which is more radical sect than newspaper); which then misinterpret them in ways that seem deliberate to make Israel and the PA look bad; and then are quoted by journalists around the world who know little or nothing about the issues, haven't read the documents, have never seriously considered the possibility that they aren't 100 percent accurate, and ignore every other previous negotiation and public statement by Israel and the PA that contradict the claims being made; and who then add on even more claims that are neither in the documents nor in al-Jazira and the Guardian!
Sorry that paragraph was so long but it had to be to cover everything. Now have I missed something here?
The reaction to all of this in an age supposedly fixated on tolerance is more like that of a lynch mob than anything else. And have no doubt that before this is over there will be people who are lynched.
And now what actually did happen? The story is told here from interviews with then-Prime Minister Ehud Olmert before the papers came out. Briefly, Israel offered concessions; the Palestinian side talked about concessions. Olmert suggested they make a deal. PA leader Mahmoud Abbas hesitated and said he needed a few days, and then never responded, making public statements rejecting Israel's position.
So this does not prove that the PA made a generous offer of peace and Israel rejected it, the spin put on it by the media and by selective release of badly flawed documents. The PA rejected peace, as usual. Of course, a big reason for doing so was the fact that they knew they could not sell it to their people (who would denounce it as a sell-out), or Hamas, or even the Fatah Central Committee.
Note the new spin will be that if only Olmert remained in office and Netanyahu had not been elected there would have been a two-state solution. In other words, it will still be portrayed as Israel's fault. But this is ridiculous since the PA did not, and could not, agree on the conditions it had discussed. This is the structural problem with the peace process and it has not changed. The latest affair has made it worse.
No Israeli prime minister could make peace with the Palestinians when the Palestinian leadership isn't ready to make peace.
Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). The website of the GLORIA Center is at http://www.gloria-center.org and of his blog, Rubin Reports, http://www.rubinreports.blogspot.com
We now know what actually happened in the negotiations mischaracterized by the "Palestine Papers," but before I tell you the true story, let me say some words about how it has been distorted.
Maybe it's just me out of step with the rest of the world, but someone tell me where the following paragraph is wrong:
The world is judging and condemning Israel on the basis of incomplete notes taken by people many of whom are not fluent English-speakers (of statements made by people who are not native-speakers of English) and who are passionate partisans of the Palestinian cause and who hate Israel; documents that have not been authenticated by anyone and whose translation has not been checked; documents that leave out much of what the Israelis said and leave out the concessions they made; then are filtered through the pro-Hamas, anti-Israel, anti-Palestinian Authority (PA) al-Jazira (whose record of reportage is marked by some amazing lies) and the anti-Israel, pro-Hamas, anti-PA Guardian (which is more radical sect than newspaper); which then misinterpret them in ways that seem deliberate to make Israel and the PA look bad; and then are quoted by journalists around the world who know little or nothing about the issues, haven't read the documents, have never seriously considered the possibility that they aren't 100 percent accurate, and ignore every other previous negotiation and public statement by Israel and the PA that contradict the claims being made; and who then add on even more claims that are neither in the documents nor in al-Jazira and the Guardian!
Sorry that paragraph was so long but it had to be to cover everything. Now have I missed something here?
The reaction to all of this in an age supposedly fixated on tolerance is more like that of a lynch mob than anything else. And have no doubt that before this is over there will be people who are lynched.
And now what actually did happen? The story is told here from interviews with then-Prime Minister Ehud Olmert before the papers came out. Briefly, Israel offered concessions; the Palestinian side talked about concessions. Olmert suggested they make a deal. PA leader Mahmoud Abbas hesitated and said he needed a few days, and then never responded, making public statements rejecting Israel's position.
So this does not prove that the PA made a generous offer of peace and Israel rejected it, the spin put on it by the media and by selective release of badly flawed documents. The PA rejected peace, as usual. Of course, a big reason for doing so was the fact that they knew they could not sell it to their people (who would denounce it as a sell-out), or Hamas, or even the Fatah Central Committee.
Note the new spin will be that if only Olmert remained in office and Netanyahu had not been elected there would have been a two-state solution. In other words, it will still be portrayed as Israel's fault. But this is ridiculous since the PA did not, and could not, agree on the conditions it had discussed. This is the structural problem with the peace process and it has not changed. The latest affair has made it worse.
No Israeli prime minister could make peace with the Palestinians when the Palestinian leadership isn't ready to make peace.
Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). The website of the GLORIA Center is at http://www.gloria-center.org and of his blog, Rubin Reports, http://www.rubinreports.blogspot.com
Thursday, January 20, 2011
Netanyahu: 'Significant trade' with Iraq - Israel News, Ynetnews
I found this slightly old Ynet article that I believe reflects on the real intentions of the Netanyahu government.
It's almost as if he sees the prosperity of the Arab world as a precondition for long term prosperity of Israel. If only Palestinian leaders cared as much as Netanyahu does for the Palestinians, perhaps things would be better?
-QP
Pointing to what he described as "strong but unpublicized trade" between Haifa port and Iraq via Jordan, he suggested assembly points could be set up in the West Bank for some goods, which would create thousands of jobs. He did not elaborate on the nature or extent of the trade.
According to the prime minister, this would not be a substitute for a political settlement, but economic prosperity would make peace possible, as occurred in Northern Ireland.It seems that Israel would rather build economical connections and quiet relations than expect immediate social acceptance. The intentions of Netanyahu indicate that he he honestly wants to see the Palestinians and other countries in the area prosper.
It's almost as if he sees the prosperity of the Arab world as a precondition for long term prosperity of Israel. If only Palestinian leaders cared as much as Netanyahu does for the Palestinians, perhaps things would be better?
-QP
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)