Month: April 2009

It should not be under-estimated, nor mistaken for a consensus among Israel's elite. Even Goldfarb notes:

I've heard numerous Israeli officials describe Iran as deterrable. One Israeli nuclear official suggested that while the Iranian leadership might not fear the destruction of Tehran, targeting the holy city of Qom could achieve the desired effect. In other words, everyone is deterrable, you just need to figure out what your enemy holds most dear.

When Michael Goldfarb says that Netanyahu "hypes the threat," you need to believe the danger is real.

Marc on the secret letter Obama sent to Medvedev:

The connective tissue between Russia and Iran is tough; Russia's support for the Iranian regime is based on leverage and mutual interest; it cannot be snipped until the benefits of the longstanding alliance (a market for Russian goods, non-interference by Iran in Muslim parts of the old Soviet empire, a counterbalance to U.S. hegemony) outweight the costs. 

What are the costs?  A nuclear Iran may become less dependent on Russia.  Others are harder to figure out.  And so the truth is that Russia has a stronger hand here; Russia realizes this and Medvedev seems to be in an expansive mood, willing to concede that because his country's support for Iran is based on practical (material) concerns rather than ideology, Russia can use its influence productively. In this way, the "strategic stability" between the U.S. and Russia depends quite a bit on the markers the world's major economic powers lay down this week.

Japanese artist Shinichi Maruyama describes it thus:

a meshing of black ink and water, both in midair and on white surfaces, before they merge into gray matter. Maruyama refers to the concept of "wabi-sabi," or "the beauty of imperfection and understated elegance."

Norm Geras is fed up with the “war” on drugs:

Doesn’t Felipe Calderón – and the FT, for that matter – understand that you can’t make war on a substance? Think about it – the war on chocolate, the war on cream cheese. Talking about a war on drugs also legitimizes drugs, suggests that drugs are a unity when in fact they are quite various, elevates those who purvey drugs from criminals into heroes, implies the use of purely military means in the… umm… contingency operation against drugs, and suggests that the rule of law can be suspended in the course of that operation. It’s a terrible phrase.

And war on terror?

A.L. diagnoses the GOP:

The notion that there is anyone of significance on the American left who still believes in anything approaching genuine socialism is pure fantasy. That debate, to the extent it ever really happened in this country, was settled a long time ago.  What we're dealing with right now are differences of opinion regarding how best to manage the failure of a number of major companies.  It's not a debate about socialism vs. capitalism; it's a debate about methods of damage control.  But many conservatives have so deluded themselves with their own propaganda that they're not even capable of following the conversation any more.  So instead they spend all day indulging in paranoid delusions and debates that have no relevance to current events.  It's a sad spectacle.