Year: 2003

The “pig” metaphor could offend Muslim immigrants in Britain.

SALON’S SHAME: “Thanks for the item about Sami Al-Arian, Eric Boehlert and Nicholas Kristof. Mike Fechter of The Tampa Tribune had this story nailed in May 1995 and he continued to develop more stories about Al-Arian’s activities after that. Through it all, he took endless amounts of grief from other elements of the media, including the St. Petersburg Times, Miami Herald, Salon and others. They all sniffed that it was unseemly and a modern McCarthyite witch hunt. Instead, they just showed their ignorance and lack of legwork. Contrary to what Boehlert claims in the Howard Kurtz piece, the information was there. In May 1995, Fechter showed the link between Al-Arian’s Islamic Committee for Palestine and the World and Islam Studies Enterprise think tank at the University of South Florida. It was more than guilt by association. It was the kind of dogged and thorough investigative reporting most reporters say they champion, but the people so desperately trying to justify their actions now didn’t want to do the work to confirm it. Their loss.” – more sharp comments on the Letters Page.

Check out this website from Fox advertizing their newest (and not too successful) reality television show. This is how Fox views the sacredness of marriage. And yet the same network routinely features speakers and pundits who bemoan gay people’s sincere attempt to commit to one another as an assault on civilization. Motes and beams, don’t you think? Or just more double standards from those who claim to support the institution of marriage, but, in reality, just want to keep homosexual citizens permanently stigmatized?

Chatting with a senior member of the administration this weekend, I felt a sense of relief. The president is adamant that Saddam will soon be gone. It will happen. The only option short of war will be Saddam’s exile, or death. I think Saddam understands this, which is why we suddenly have his desperate attempts to show superficial disarmament. But it isn’t enough. It cannot be enough. Maybe if he’d done it three months ago, we could have come to an agreement. But now the moment has passed. The permanent and transparent disarmament we need – the reassurance that the world deserves – cannot be accomplished while that duplicitous monster is in power. We should try for a second U.N. resolution, but we shouldn’t be too disheartened if we don’t get it. When you’re dealing with the likes of Chirac, there can be no secure agreement. One reason the French get along with many of the Arab regimes, after all, is that they have the same approach to negotiation. They never mean a thing they say; and will pledge one thing one week (Resolution 1441 anyone?) and act as if it doesn’t exist the next. And the interminable delays only encourage our other foes (North Korea), and sap the morale of the armed forces. It’s time to act. It’s good to know that forces are now at full strength, that we can achieve our goals without Turkey’s help (a Kurdish blessing in disguise), and that the Brits are also ready to move. So let’s roll. Sooner rather than later.

THE REAL AGENDAS: And one reason to pay only limited attention to the howls of outrage as the U.S. and U.K. do what is necessary is the fact that very little of the opposition to this war is actually about this war. For some it’s about “war” in general – a newly empowered new age pacifism. For France, it’s about … France, and its eclipse as a power of any significance. France’s crisis is deepened by the fact that a successful war against Saddam could also accelerate the end of the Franco-German bloc as the power-house of the European Union. For Russia, it’s about money. For the Germans, it’s about a new national identity. The Germans have never been able to sustain a moderate polity on their own. They veer from extreme romantic militarism to romantic pacifism. Their current abdication of all strategic responsibility for Europe or the wider world is just another all-too-familiar spasm from German history. For the broader anti-war forces in Europe, it’s about American uni-polar power – and the need to counteract it, even if it’s being put to good use. For still others, especially in the Vatican and France, it’s the old Jew-hatred again. For the Democrats, it’s about getting back to prescription drugs. For the anti-war left in America, it’s really about Bush. The pent-up fury they felt after Florida never found expression or even validation in the wider culture. It was repressed in the first months of a new presidency – and then made irrelevant by 9/11. Finally, they have a chance to demonstrate their hate – which is why so much of the demonstrations’ focus has not been on Saddam, Iraq or even war, but on Bush. The anti-Bush left knows that a successful war will only strengthen the president further and marginalize them even more – hence their utter desperation and viciousness today. This is their moment; and the demonstrations are their therapy. Meanwhile, a real and actual problem in global security is being addressed. Thank heavens that for some, this moment really is about Saddam.

“When one reads the reports of UNO [United Nations Organization] conferences, or international negotiations of any kind, it is difficult not to be reminded of l’Attaque and similar war games that children used to play, with cardboard pieces representing battleships, aeroplanes, and so forth, each of which had a fixed value and could be counted in some recognized way. In fact, one might almost invent a new game called Uno, to be played in enlightened homes where the parents do not want their children to grow up with a militaristic outlook.

The pieces in this game are called the proposal, the demarche, the formula, the stumbling-block, the stalemate, the deadlock, the bottle-neck and the vicious circle. The object of the game is to arrive at a formula, and though details vary, the general outline of play is always much the same. First the players assemble, and somebody leads off with the proposal. This is countered by the stumbling-block, without which the game could not develop. The stumbling-block then changes into a bottle-neck, or more often into a deadlock or vicious circle. A deadlock and a vicious circle occurring simultaneously produce a stalemate, which may last for weeks. The someone suddenly plays the demarche. The demarche makes it possible to produce a formula, and once the formula has been found the players can go home, leaving everything as it was at the beginning.” – George Orwell, “As I Please,” December 12, 1946.

Fascinating interview in Le Monde with Bernard Kouchner, former socialist minister of health and founding member of Medecins Sans Frontieres. Here’s my translation of the last couple of questions and answers:

Le Monde: So France is in an impasse?
BK: Dead right we’re in an impasse. We’ve deepened the wound in Europe rather than healing it. We’ve enabled German pacifism, which was a mistake. We’ve brutalized the Eastern Europeans who have just emerged from dictatorship. That was a second mistake. And then we’ve opened up a serious split with the United States. That’s the charge I bring against the president of the Republic.
Le Monde: And your friends, the Socialists? You blame them too?
BK: You bet. France’s role, before all others, is to be concerned about human rights and to fight dictatorship.

Before we write off all of France, we should be aware that some of the French entirely understand the damage Chirac has done to himself, his country, and the security of the world.

AMERICA GOES TO SEA: Very smart piece in the Financial Times on America’s growing move away from land-based forces and toward maritime power. I wonder how much longer U.S. troops will remain in Germany.

Another corker from the BBC, attacking U.S.-U.K. enforcement of the no-fly zones in Northern and Southern Iraq. Money sentence:

The no-fly zones – which have never been sanctioned by the United Nations – were imposed by the US, Britain and France after the 1991 Gulf War, in what was described as a humanitarian effort to protect Shia Muslims in the south and Kurds in the north.

The sneer is unmistakable. In fact, the no-fly zones were a direct result of U.N. Resolution 688, designed to protect the Kurds and Shi’a from mass slaughter at the hands of Saddam. They saved thousands of lives and have resulted in a remarkably stable and democratic Kurdish enclave in Northern Iraq. But note how the BBC has to say that they are “described as” a humanitarian effort. Is Tariq Aziz writing their copy? Or just the Vatican?

THE LEFT’S MICHAEL SAVAGE: I often get emails linking to one Michael Morford of SFGate, an online branch of the San Francisco Chronicle. I usually chuckle, but rarely link because the guy seems, well, “disturbed” is not far off it. Anyway, the latest one is worth looking at purely from an anthropological point of view. The far lefties who assume you agree with them, the really angry ones who are somehow also into good karma, the ones who simply cannot understand why any intelligent person doesn’t believe that the U.S. is obviously a tool for corporate genocide or some such atrocity – here is one small part of their id. I offer you this opener:

Wanna know what conservatives really hate? What makes everyone from harmless GOP dittoheads to ultra-right-wing nutjobs full of rage and hiss and homophobia and blind jingoism roll their eyes and throw up their hands and scamper for their Bibles for reassurance that life is still repressed and we’re still going to war and Dubya is still smackin’ ’round the envurment along with them wimmin and homosekshuls and furriners? Why, hippie crap, of course.

Take it from there, Mark. But please understand that some of us actually love hippie crap, and we’re fighting to keep people like you free enough to do their thing. Somehow, I don’t think Osama and Saddam would be so indulgent.

The capture of KSM is big news. In fact, it’s surely the biggest news in the war on terror in months. The nabbing followed previous arrests and interrogations, all of which have clearly helped stymie and disorient al Qaeda. In terms of the broader debate about the war, one conclusion is obvious. It’s time to retire the frayed notion that somehow we cannot go to war against Saddam and al Qaeda at the same time. In fact, it would be hard to think of a more perfect refutation. Could the administration be more preoccupied with Iraq than it is today? It’s a little hopeful to think that this phony argument against waging war on more than one front will now be retired. But it is useful to remember that, as an argument, it was never based on any actual assessment of how the government works. It was an argument entirely designed to make the Democrats look tough on terror while they were counseling appeasement of Saddam. It was a pretty obvious ploy at the time. Now it’s transparent. I’m glad we’ve finally cleared it up.

THE TURKS: One day, someone will write a real account of what has actually been going on in Turkey’s ruling elite and parliament these past few weeks. You have a brand new government, run by a party that has never been in power before in the country’s history. You have an effective leader, Tayyip Erdogan, who, because he doesn’t have a parliamentary seat, isn’t the actual prime minister (but may be very soon). You have the possibility that some pro-American deputies might have voted against the U.S. troops purely to discredit the new Islamic-party government, in the hopes of bringing the government down, and then bringing the troops in under new auspices. Then you have the economic legacy of the last Gulf war – and the latest shenanigans from Baghdad – having an impact on public opinion. Who knows what’s next? But if the government is planning on a second vote, as they seem to be, they’d be suicidal if they thought they didn’t have it in the bag. Two lost parliamentary votes could precipitate a collapse in the government. So my fearless prediction is that US troops could be in Turkey by the end of this week, or there will be a government crisis in that country. I have mixed feelings about this – not least because one key test of the Bush administration’s plans for a post-Saddam Iraq will be how the semi-democratic Kurdish enclave in the north of Iraq survives and prospers. And somehow I think the Turks will be a little nervous about that. Cooperation with Washington now means greater leverage over the Kurds later. Uh-oh.

How else to describe this puff piece about a Welsh woman who supports suicide bombings? I’ve now read the piece several times to see if there is any irony involved. There isn’t. The headline? “Welsh pensioner turns freedom fighter: Ex-bank manager defends Palestinian suicide bombers.” “Freedom-fighter”? Someone who supports people who deliberately kill innocent civilians? The hatred of Israel and of Israelis is now reaching pathological proportions on the British left. If the hysteria continues, it will be at brownshirt levels soon.

SO IN LOVE: A mildly hilarious take on a high-level British-American love affair.

FROM PROTEST TO …: I cannot be the only one disturbed by reports that the anti-war movement intends not merely to protest the war before it happens, but to actually attempt to undermine it when it starts. If they go ahead and try to impede those people in the military doing their jobs, if they launch a “stop-the-war” movement after it has begun and American and British lives are at stake, it strikes me that they will massively over-play their hand. It took a long time in the Vietnam War for people to start campaigning against an existing war; and longer still for some to withhold support from the troops facing battle. If the anti-war brigades decide to cross that line instantly, then the backlash could be enormous. And deservedly so.