Back to Beruit or a wee Cup of Coffee

Well, I didn’t quite manage to stay away from Pappe’s book yesterday, so, so much for my little “holiday”! What the book is doing is it is helping me to understand that, although there is a pre-history, which stretches from the 1st Zionist Congress in 1897, through the Balfour Declaration of 1917 and the Arab Revolt of 1936-39, it is the UN Resolution 181 and the ethnic cleansing, “Al Nakba”, that followed that signals not only the beginning of the Palestinian diaspora but also the all too very real roots of the injustices and wrongs of today. Moreover, while the events of 1936 to 39 also have an importance, I am, in a sense, confirmed in my original belief that everything else is incidental to what happened in 1947/48. Nevertheless, that point of view is also indicative of someone whose interest in the Middle East remains at best academic, who has no real personal attachment to Palestine and who has the luxury of writing from a lovely big flat, in a nice little town, on the outskirts of one of Europe’s most pleasant cities. Having said that however, the more I get bogged down in the “nitty gritty” of the Palestinian catastrophe, the more I am inclined to feel, not only for the Palestinians but also for mankind as a whole and part of that “nitty gritty” is what is really happening in the area today. In 2006 I got a taste it when I was teaching Palestinian refugees in the Lebanon, it was a taste that confirmed where my sympathies lie and left me realising that those sympathies were not based on any contrived prejudices. Indeed, that I was, in a sense, free from prejudices. On returning home yesterday evening I was exposed to someone else’s “nitty gritty” and, while hardly a substitute for being in Palestine myself, I couldn’t help but empathise. In doing so I was made all too aware that, while, like everything else, this injustice has its historical roots, it is also a very real tragedy that is being lived out on a daily basis and that is largely being ignored.
Jonathan Cook is a British journalist who is based in Nazareth, in what is now Israel. He is married to an Arab Israeli and has first hand experience of the racist and arpatheid policies of the Jewish state. Before going to bed last night, I read two of his recently written articles. The first one, “Israeli Palestinians: The Unwanted who Stayed” was interesting not only because there was a direct link to the ethnic cleansing that not only preceeded the birth of Israel but has accompanied it since. However, more interesting was how the Israeli state views and solves its problem of the Arabs, who didn’t leave in 1948 and who have Israeli passports. Cook writes, “Ariel Sharon once explained this distinction during a speech in the Knesset. Palestinian citizens—“Israeli Arabs,” as he called them—had “rights in the land” whereas “all rights over the Land of Israel are Jewish rights.” (1) In other words, Palestinian citizens are merely tenants, temporary or otherwise, while the Jewish people are the landlords of Israel. He (Jonathan Cook) then goes on to explain at length how this distinction is reflected in property rights, access to jobs, education and other facilities, including water and electricity .... oh, and getting an internet connection. The obstacles are, sometimes, legal but also established through practice. For instance, the guy who connects your internet will just not come into an Arab area. However, he finishes the article by saying that, with 20% of its population Arab and that figure more likely to go up than down, this apartheid state might not be enough for the zionists and there are many within the Israel who are advocating “transfer”, in other words, further ethnic cleansing. The newspeak that the Israelis come up with really is mind boggling! Effectively, what this would mean is that Palestinian Arabs would be resettled in any future Palestinian state that might result out of a final peace settlement; a state, which, at best, will be a slightly larger patchwork of ghettoes than it is now. The evidence would appear to suggest that exchanging some of the Jewish stettlement blocs in the West Bank for Palestinian areas inside Israel is the next proposal Israel is going to bring to the “negotiating” table. The second article I read was,”Paramilitary Police Attack Al-Nakba March” and article, which only, further underlined the fascist and racist nature of a state that is not even mature enough to let some of its citizens remember their own personal tragedies.(2)
Finally, Cook is on the ground, he is in Nazareth and he has a personal stake in the tragedy. Indeed, if certain people get their way, he and his family might have to move home. In the meantime every Jew on the planet has the right to make “aliyah”, the right of return to their biblical homeland. If this weren’t such a tragedy, I would be tempted to laugh my head off considering its absurdity. That it is tolerated is not only an indictment of all of us but indicative of the fact that all too many people are able to look the other way, providing it is not their door that is being kicked in, their son who is being shot or they who are being dispossessed. Palestine is one example of this. Looking away though is a normal moral aberration and, indeed, Nietzsche once said, "there are no morals, there is only the law." While, I am not sure I agree with that completely, it does appear as if he was not totally wrong and in the global village it is time we enforced a set of laws that can facilitate a global civil society and already I am beginning to sense how detached I am from Jonathan Cook's reality, how I am drifting towards a world of books and platitudes and next door my neighbour is being robbed and assaulted but if I call the police, they will probably come and rob me too. Better for me to go down to the Cafe al Ponte and have a little cup of coffee. Mind my own business!
1 http://www.jkcook.net/Articles2/0331.htm#Top
2 http://www.jkcook.net/Articles2/0318.htm#Top

The Big Picture and the Sordid Details

The more I drift into Pappe"s book on the ethnic cleansing of Palestine, the more it becomes depressing; never being one for the "sordid" details, when looking at historical events I am generally content to look at the "big picture" and at least attempt to come to a conclusion as to what that big picture implies.
For instance, do we really need to know that Petra Brzica, on the night of 29th August 1942, cut the throats of 1,300 new arrivals at the Jasenovac camp and earned himself the title of "srbojek" (serb cutter) (1), do we really need to know about the perverse games that some of the SS guards played before sending the camp inmates to be gassed, do we need to know how the 'Khmer Rouge' tortured their victims before killing them and do we need to know exactly how the individual villages and, indeed, villagers were treated by the Haganah and Irgun during and after the ethnic cleansing of Palestine? In the past I have contented myself with the "big picture" with the figures, and it has been sufficient to know that some 750,000 Palestinians were forced to leave their homeland and that countless men, women and children were murdered, it was enough to know that up to 700,000, mostly Serbs but also Jews and Gypsies, were massacred at the Jasenovac camp, that about 30% of Cambodia's population died at the hands of the 'Khmer Rouge' and that millions and millions died because of the Nazi death machine. However, the more I delve into historical events, the first "delving into" I have done in some twenty years, the more I realise two things. Firstly, if you content yourself with the "big picture" you will have your doubters, the hecklers, the Holocaust deniers, the "Yes, some Serbs died but the figure is closer to 50,000 than it is to 100,000" Croats and the "Palestinians fled when the Arab League attacked the Jews" Israelis and secondly, when you look closely at the details that is when you understand the real nature of the crime in a way that figures cannot tell you and that is when it becomes depressing.
Today I won't read any more details of the ethinic cleansing of Palestine. It is overcast here in Munich and the cafes are full, today is a day for cups of latte, people watching, meeting a couple of friends, reading the papers and a few pages of Dawkins. Pappe's book is beginning to depress me and it is also beginning to make me angry; those are feelings that I have in the past associated with work and today I am going to have a holiday.
1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jasenovac_concentration_camp

Religion Part 3

A mail from a friend this morning directed me to Bill Maher's film, 'Religulous' and I will watch it if and when it arrives here in Europe and one thing is for certain, with me thinking of going to Saudi, wll, I am most certainly not going to see it there. More importantly, however, the tip led me to look for information on Maher and that led to me watching Maher interviewing Richard Dawkins and that in turn reminded me that I have Richard Dawkins's book 'The GOD Delusion' and so I have spent this morning and the first two hours of this afternoon reading Dawkins's book and watching a two hour video called 'The Four Horsemen'. In the video, Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens, all to "varying degrees" atheists, discuss why they don't believe in God and their arguments are, to varying degrees, interesting but not always that relevant or important. Of course, it is a two hour discussion and it is still, in my opinion, worth watching.(1)
Nevertheless, for me it is, more or less, enough that, like Dawkins, I am inclined to agree with Robert M. Pirsig, the author of 'Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance' when saying, "When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called religion."(2) On May the 18th I wrote, "Sitting on the train to Munich ...... there was this guy diagonally opposite me, he had his eyes closed and he was nodding his head, while chanting some gibberish. On the seat facing him he had opened a folder with a picture of the German "pop" idol, Dieter Bohlen on the left hand page and a picture of Jesus on the right hand page. Now the guy was obviously a bit of a nutter. As I too would be if I were to tell you all that I am waiting for the gobbly-gook in the sky to come down and take us all off to the chocolate and "Weissbier" paradise. Now, that very same day, on arriving in Munich I took myself off to the "Theatinerkirche" - big fan of Baroque and Roccoco despite my Northern European roots - and low and behold there was a wee lady under a big wooden cross with a guy stuck to it, she was playing with a set of beads and mumbling to herself. She, however, is sane, unlike the guy on the train, for hers is a collective madness ...... "(3).
Of course, we could discuss the evils of religion and the intolerance it nurtures, however, for now let us put aside both of those distinct but interrelated aspects of the great "gobbly gook" and look at another aspect, namely, the question of "truth", that is that "truth" that comes about because of scientific inquiry, as the result of a thesis, hypothesis and synthesis, and let us please come to the conclusion that the "gobbly gook"is an affront to our reason and to our common sense. This is enough to reject it and if we don't and blind faith is the order of the day, the guy worshiping Dieter Bohlen or the old lady with her rosary beeds will be the least of our problems. Indeed, they already are the least of our problems and that is why we should start to look at those other two interrelated aspects of the great "gobbly gook", the intolerance and evil, because at the end of the day that is what it is all about, blind faith, intolerance, evil.
1 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-225595257312538919&hl=en
2 'The God Delusion', Richard Dawkins, p28
3 http://thediplomatabroad.blogspot.com/search?q=religion
The picture needs no explanation. Sam Harris's book I have read; it is entertaining but, in my case, preaching to the converted. Dawkins's book I have started and it too seems entertainingly written.

A History Lesson

In the 80s, when I was studying History, I remember being confronted by the "Historikerstreit", (The Historians Conflict), which began in 1986 when, Jürgen Habermas, a left-wing philosopher, attacked the three leading conservative German historians, Andreas Hillgruber, Ernst Nolte and Michael Stürmer. My post graduate studies in History at the LSE were looming but I had already read Nolte's book, 'The Three Faces of Fascism' and I had already quoted Hillgruber in a number of essays. The debate attracted my attention at the time, with Ernst Nolte basically putting forward the thesis that Nazi Germany did not represent absolute evil and the Holocaust was not unique. Nolte, is not, in my opinion a particularly good historian but then that is only my opinion and in his favour, I have to say that any thinking person must come to the conclusion that "absolute" is hardly necessary to describe evil. Evil is evil and we don't need quantifiers. Nazi Germany was evil the 'Khmer Rouge' was evil, Indonesian atrocities in East Timor were evil. There is no "more evil" and, indeed, there is no "less evil" as such. Similarly, the Holocaust is unique only in the same way as other events in history are unique and, while it is a very poignant indictment man's inhumanity to man so too are the killing fields of Cambodia, the ethnic cleansing of Armenians, Palestinians and Bosnian Muslims, the attempted genoicide on East Timor and, finally, the UN sanctions that caused hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children to die.
Today I sort of stumbled onto a debate on who the Holocaust belongs to. With some people arguing that Israel has a special claim to it. No, the Holocaust belongs to everyone who has a conscience and not to Israel. Moreover, those who were slaughtered at Auschwitz, Treblinka, Sachsenhausen and elsewhere, and those who genuinely suffered because their nearest and dearest were killed by the Nazis, share an intrinsic bond with those who were tortured on Pol Pot's "killing fields", those who died at Adana in 1909, when the Turks massacred between 15,000 and 30,000 Armenians, those who were butchered at Jasanovac between August 1941 and April 1945 (see post from October 26) and those who were similary raped and butchered some fifty years later during the ethnic cleansing of Bosnia and, dare I say it, those who were forced off their land and killed during the Palestinian catastrophe.

Home

Temperatures are beginning to drop, late autumn turns to winter but there's an earthy smell still in the air, no frozen ground and no snow yet. The leaves are lying on the ground, crisp and golden brown and waiting to be turned into that brown mash that precedes the winter and my watch says that there are a couple of weeks left before it gets seriously cold and it might be a good idea to have a wee break in sunnier climes. Here, sweating is confined to my sitting in the steam cabin once a day afterwhich I run out into the garden starkers, no dip in the river though, too cold for that! Breakfast is had in Wimmer, too much as a rule and its three bread rolls instead of two. Back home and a little espresso before concentrating on the days news. In distant scenes, I thought I would relish the chance to read a hard copy of “Die Süddeutsche Zeitung” every day but it doesn’t work out like that. Online is where it is at and a big part of my life takes place in front of the computer. Not good for the foot I am afraid and the Chinese doctor did a decent job but he has neglected the ligaments a bit. Still, all in all, everything is sort of hunky-dory. In the evening there is the cup of coffee at the garage across the road, not in AGIP but in OMV, coffee used to be good in AGIP but now it is watered down, “segafredo” and anyway all my Slav friends have more or less disappeared. No more trying to speak my bad Bulgarian to Croats and Serbs who don’t understand me but praise me for my ability to speak a "language" that nobody understands. From time to time but not as a rule, I go into Munich, walk around, pop into the Türkenhof and talk to Charlie, drop by Scheideggers and say hello to Ian. Time has sort of stood still but look closely; everyone is a wee bit older, and after the Türkenhof or Scheideggers its into the Black Bean or the Deli; either the Deli in Amalien Strasse or the one in Kaulbach Strasse. Wireless internet you see and it all makes for a pleasant coming up for air, people watching, a little buzz, even if it is only a light buzz and the student population of Munich is not what it once was! However, the late autumn in the English Gardens still makes for a pleasant amble and then there are the bookshops. Is there a book in me? Probably not but maybe and I just don’t know, I get down and I look at some serious stuff and then I look at some serious stuff written about the serious stuff and I realise that I am just not that serious. Going on 53 and I have never quite grown up, football results are still important, mind you, I don’t cry if Rangers lose these days. Life is good for the time being and while it’s not all “carpe diem”, it is that a little bit, with the “que serra” and the past, recent and distant, taking a back seat….. still sense that I have a purpose but being the lazy shit that I am that purpose will never be realised and in the great scheme of things it doesn’t matter a “monkey’s” one way or the other. Of course, I am going to wake up one morning or look in the mirror one day and say …. “fuck” and then, of course, little deluded me should probably be doing that already. Doesn’t seem to matter though, there is the breakfast with the one bread roll too many every day, there is going to bed and snuggling up to the “missus”, there is getting up when I want to and then there are evenings in front of the computer and then there is writing shit like this every day and you know the that the “serious” job is round the corner because you have been here before and it doesn’t matter where and when because when it is all over bar the shouting, there will still be here, home!
The picture above shows the morning espresso, in the garden, at home.

Immoral and Illegal

It would never dawn on the Americans that they have no right whatsoever to be in either Afghanistan or Iraq and, indeed they are now beginning to have the audacity to think that they can go into neighbouring countries to pursue, as they see it, "terrorists. It is not enough for them that clashes between the Pakistani army and the Taleban have led to thousands and thousands of refugees on the Pakistani side of the border, they have also decided that the Pakistanis are not doing a good enough job and that they will have to help them. It is no secret that American troops are operating, against the wishes of the Pakistani government, on Pakistani territory and today for good measure a squad of "Rambos" decided to operate a little raid on Syria, attacking an area near the town of Abu Karmal some 8 kilometres from the Iraqi border.(1)
The Syrians are understandably furious and it would appear that eight civilians have been killed in the attacks, including a man and his four sons. The pretext, like the pretext for the raids into Afghanistan, is that they are looking for terrorists. However, the evidence would seem to suggest that every time these elite soldiers go looking for terrorists, innocent civilians get killed and very few "terrorists" get captured or killed. Surely it is time for more people to ask the question; who the fuck do these arrogant bastards think they are? Occupying sovereign countries and using them to attack other sovereign countries and killing thousands and thousands of innocents in the process, is not just illegal, it is immoral and it the actions of "Uncle Sam" would meet any definition of terrorism available. Yet, the evidence would seem to suggest that a different law and a different set of morals applies to the United States or can you imagine the Chinese bombing Afghanistan and Pakistan in pursuit of "terrorists" from XinJiang? At least, China would be operating from its own territory, into countries with which it shares a border. Innocents are being massacred and it is important that we stop listening to the poppycock that we hear from Washington. In the global village it is time for the village idiot to realise that he is not above the law.
1 http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/28/world/middleeast/28syria.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
The picture shows Syrian villagers carrying the coffins of those who died in the attacks

Choice or No Choice

At breakfast this morning I read in "Die Süddeutsche Zeitung" that Tzip Livni will be unable to form a coalition government and that she has been rejected because she is a woman and a moderate politician. However, the article also gives a more concrete reason for her being unable to form a coalition and that is that "Shas" are angry at her for not increasing child welfare payments.(1) "Shas", a party, which is led by ultra-Orthodox rabbis whose followers mostly have very large families, was demanding an increase of about a billion shekels (about 200 million €s). Her forming a coalition depended on their twelve seats in the 110 seat Knesset. However, the suspicion has to be that the possibility of her negotiating with the Palestinians on the status of Jerusalem has led to "Shas" withdrawing their support. Now, I can quite understand those who would argue that there is no real difference between a government led by Livni and a government led by the main opposition "Likud" party. Nevertheless, with Binyamin Netanyahu, the leader of the right-wing main opposition Likud party, appearing to be the main beneficiary of Ms Livni's failure, one cannot help but being depressed. This man is not good news!
The impending elections and the issue of choice in Israel brings me back to the coming election in the United States. After my post, "The Gloves are Off", from the 5th of October, I entered into a short dialogue with someone who asked me if I see any difference between Obama and McCain. In retrospect, I have to say that I reacted a little bit naively and, no, there probably is no real difference. Being that as it is, I have decided to post two little clips; one is of an interview with Chomsky and the other is a reaction to that interview.* The poster who entered into the dialogue with me, might find the answer to his question somewhere in those two clips and, while the heart would like to tell me otherwise, my head tells me that somewhere there, in those clips, is also an answer to the question is a coalition government headed by the "Kadima" and Livi any different from a government headed by Netanyahu? Still, what would you rather have a President McCain or a President Obama, a Prime Minister Livni or a Prime Minister Netanyahu? Silly, question really!
* It would appear that the CIA or NSA are preventing the uploading of one of the clips; you can find it at you tube, David Fleetwood, "The Lesser of Two Evils".
1 'Süddeutsche Zeitung', p4. Monday, 27th October.

Victim and Perpetrator

There are those who would argue that one reason Israel has a right to Palestine is because of the Holocaust but then I would be at least as likely to agree with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejdad, who argues that logically, a Jewish homeland in Austria or Germany would be more appropriate. After all the Nazis and not the Palestinians were responsible for the Holocaust. My more immediate concern, however, would be how can a people who went through the hell that was the Holocaust be willing to carry out an ethnic cleansing? Of course, the answer is that the real victims of the Holocaust were the six million who were murdered and that those victims have a great deal more in common with those who have suffered because of "Al Nakba" and those who are still suffering today, than they do with those who committed and continue to commit crimes in the name of Zionism. It was, therefore, with interest that I read today that there had been a 4th International Conferance on Jasonovac on 31st May 2007 and that it had been held in Banja Luka, the capital of the Republika Srbska.
Jasonavac was a concentration camp that was run by Ante Pavelic's fascist "Ustasa" regime in Croatia during the Second World War. Depending on whose statistics you agree with, up to 700,000 mostly Serbs, but also others, including a lot of Jews and Gypsies, were murdered there. At the conference there was a declaration urging the Council of Ministers of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the governments of the Repbulik Srbska and Serbia to bring charges against Croatia for the genocide of Jews, Roma and Serbs. Now Pavelic's independent state fo Croatia (Nezavisna Drzava Hrvatska, NDH) was a Croatian state and it is, therefore, important that the present Croatian government admit Jasenovac's existence and express regret, remorse and apologise in the name of all Croatians for all of the crimes commted by the "Ustasa" regime. The evidence would appear to suggest that, while they appear to still want to debate the actual numbers murdered there, they have made some efforts in the right direction and in 1999 the Jasenovac commander, Dinko Sakic, was extradited from Argentina at the Croatian government's request and he was then tried and convicted to twenty years imprisonment in Croatia. He died in Zagreb on 21st July 2008.(1) More important issues, however, remain unresolved, such as, the plight of the Krajina Serbs.
Nevertheless, what makes the International Conference on Jasenovac especially interesting are the efforts in the Republikca Srpska in particular to try to bring charges against Croatia for genoicide. Remember, this is the same poliical entity that owes its existence to the ethnic cleansing masterminded by Rodovan Karadzic, to the massacres at Srebenica and elsewhere under the auspices of General Ratko Mladica, a pseudo state where almost all of the mosques and catholic churches on its territory have been destroyed.
The victims of the Holocaust, Jasonovac, "Al Nakba and Srebenica have something very real in common; the are all victims of crimes against humanity. We should not allow their tragedies to be exploited by the perpetrators of those crimes.
1 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/dinko-sakic-concentration-camp-commander-875730.html
The picture shows Ante Pavelic, Head of the fascist "Ustasa" Regime, being greeted by Hitler at the Berghof

The Chagos Islands or the story of a government that breaks or bends the law

When, in 1997, Hong Kong went back to the glorious Chinese motherland, the harmonious society par excellence, the middle kingdom with 5,000 years of uninterrupted history, we were all worried about what might happen to that little island of freedom on the South China Sea and old "Blighty" was left with the DTs, or Dependent Territories. One of those DTs, the Chagos Islands, has been in the news recently and it would appear that, when it comes to pursuing that type of machiavellian "pragmatism" that protects their own pecuniary and "Uncle Sam's" strategic interests, the establishment in the land of hope and glory, or "gory", is as sober as the judges who voted in its favour and against the people who once inhabited those islands. The Chagossians, who now number 4,500 and who, by virtue of an act passed in 2002, are British citizens have been prevented from returning to Diego Garcia, the largest atoll, on the islands where they lived until they were forced to make way for an American base in 1971.1 "Uncle Sam" still has a base there, the Brits don't want to upset him and it would cost a lot of money to resettle the Chagossians.
The original verdict to allow them to return has been overturned in the House of Lords where the five law lords decided against the islanders and thereby accepted an order in council that was drafted by officials in the Foreign Office and endorsed by the Foreign Secretary in 2004.2 There was no parliamentary debate here and why should you have one when you have an independent judiciary and civil service? Nevertheless, the evidence would seem to suggest that Whitehall and the House of Lords are are getting their instructions from the government and that the government is doing all it can to prevent the Chagossians from finding justice almost forty years after they were ethnically cleansed from their land to make way for an American base, a base that remains not only important because of its relative proximity to the Middle East but also, as the evidence would seem to suggest, because of its being home to a secret prison that the CIA oversees in America's "war on terror".3 Note the academic caution in that last sentence and it should be noted that, on the 21st June 2004, the then British Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw, stated in parliament, "the United States authorities have repeatedly assured us that no detainees have at any time passed in transit through Diego Garcia or its territorial waters or have disembarked there and that the allegations to that effect are totally without foundation. The Government are satisfied that their assurances are correct. "3 Well, they would deny it Jack, as not only does it violate the terms of their lease, but it also breaks international law. Moveover, when I hear the American and British governments denying an accusation directed at them, I am all the more likely to believe that accusation and the more either government tells us time and time again that something is true, the less likely I am to believe them. It would, indeed, appear that Britain has a government that not only ignores international law but also interferes with the law at home. Could be China, couldn't it? Still, I am informed that Hong Kong has been doing just fine since it returned to the motherland's bossom. It would appear that Beijing has kept its promise and let Hong Kong keep its independent judiciary and its democratic system and it doesn't look likely that they will try to empty Hong Kong in the near future and lease it as a base to the Americans.
1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diego_Garcia
2 http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/oct/23/chagos-islands-human-rights
3 http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200304/cmhansrd/vo040621/text/40621w13.htm#40621w13.html_wqn9

Ethnic Cleansing and American Foreign Policy

Rodovan Karadzic is on trial in the Hague and it would be nice to think that ethnic cleansing does not pay. Unfortunately, his project, the Republika Srbska, is alive and kicking and although I am not quite sure exactly what the Republika Srbska is, Sarajevo doesn't have very much to say there. In effect, The Dayton Agreement gave the Serbs, who constitute 34% of the population of Bosnia and Herzogivina, 49% of the land1 and a lot of that land is land where Muslims and Croats used to live. The events at Srebenica in July 1995 tell the story of what happened to a lot of them.2 Of course, there were also mad Muslims and crazy Croats maiming and murdering all over the place and that is why I find it a bit difficult to understand Richard Holbrooke, the American diplomat who more or less got the Serbs their 49% at Dayton, when he greeted the news of Karadzic's arrest by saying "Karadzic was responsible for the deaths of 300,000 people and his arrest marked "a historic day."3 Moreover, considering the consensus is that the number of dead in Bosnia was closer to 250,000, well, Karadzic might be indirectly responsible for a lot of deaths but certainly not 300,000. Indeed, in 1996, when Mr Holbrooke needed Karadzic for his own political career the evidence would appear to suggest that he signed an agreed that, should he resign he would not be tried at the Hague.4 Holbrooke vehemently denies this but when the ex-Bosnian Foreign Minister, Muhamed Sacirbey, hardly a friend of Karadzic, also says that the deal happened,5 we might begin to think that, at least on this point, Karadzic is, in fact, telling the truth. Of course we would do well to remember that in August 1977 it was Richard Holbrooke who went to Indonesia to meet Suharto and praise him for Indonesia's human rights improvements at at a time when he was wiping out the population of East Timor. Indeed, Holbrooke helped put a damper on the efforts of human rights activist who wanted to stop US military aid to Indonesia and actually helped speed up the flow of weapons to the Suharto regime.6 Holbrooke might not have the authority to make a personal deal with Karadzic but might that not suggest that he was acting as an instrument of the United States if he had made such an agreement just as in 1977 he was acting as an instrument when he praised Indonesia on human rights?
Whatever the answer to the above question, Mr Holbrooke was no stranger to ethnic cleansing when he arrived at Dayton in 1995 and there he was one of the chief architects of one of Bill Clinton's main foreign policy "successes". Bill was to declare, "refugees will be allowed to return to their homes."7 However, what we in fact had was a rubber stamp on ethnic cleansing from the American administration. It is for good reason that Karadzic is in the Hague. Nevertheless, the slightest scratching of the surface reveals once again the hypocritical and, indeed, criminal nature of a machiavellian American "Realpolitik" and a foreign policy that has facilitated ethnic cleansing all over the planet from Indonesia to Palestine to Bosnia. Perhaps it is appropriate to finish with the title of John Pilger's book, "tell me no lies." and ask you to watch Bill Clinton and Richard Holbrooke telling lies at http://www.democracynow.org/2008/1/28/the_democrats_suharto_bill_clinton_richard . Go on, cut and paste the link and watch it, it is only eighteen minutes. After the all too blatent drivel spouted out by George and his cronies over the last eight years, it might at least give us an inkling of the style that will be the trademark of the next American president. That, however, is another story.
1 http://www.ohr.int/dpa/default.asp?content_id=380
2 http://www.pbs.org/wnet/cryfromthegrave/
3 http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-07-21-serbia_N.htm
4 http://eastethnia.blogspot.com/2008/08/secret-agent-man.html
5 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Holbrooke
6 http://www.democracynow.org/2008/1/28/the_democrats_suharto_bill_clinton_richard

China and EU heading for a confrontation over human rights

The European Parliament has awarded, the Sakharov Prize, to the Chinese dissident Hu Jia (see post from September 29th). This in turn has upset the Chinese, government which has now accused the European Union of interfering in China's internal affairs.1 Perhaps, they have a point and if news of the prize is to spread, it might encourage more dissidents. Nevertheless, unfortunately for the Chinese, it doesn't work that way in this part of the world and the European Parliament can give its prize to whoever it wants. It is bad enough having had the Americans dictate to us for decades as to what we can and cannot do and it would be awful if, for reasons of political and economic expediency, we were now to do what the Chinese government wants.
Moreover, while we might have been able to understand China's reaction if the prize were to have further encourage human rights' activists, the evidence would seem to suggest that people like Hu, although very thin on the ground, rarely need an extra incentive and yet here we have the Chinese government pulling out all the stops to try to prevent him getting the award. For instance, on Hu being announced as one of the finalists a few weeks ago, Song Zhe, the Chinese ambassador to the EU, said in a letter to Hans-Gert Poettering that honouring Hu “would inevitably hurt the Chinese people and once again bring serious damage to China-EU relations.”2 How serious that damage might be can be assessed in the next couple of days during the EU-Asian (ASEM) Conference that is taking place in Beijing.
The real hope though is that, in the global village, the Chinese understand that neighbours cannot be bullied and that they have every right to take an interest in what is going on outside their own four walls. If the Chinese can understand this, perhaps there will be a new chance for a set of morals and laws to hold sway over an international community that for all to long has been a victim of American unilateralism. Unfortunately, China is already beginning to act like the USA and in trying to dictate who the Europeans can give or cannot give a prize to, it is in fact China that is interfering in European affairs.
1 http://www.iht.com/articles/reuters/2008/10/23/asia/OUKWD-UK-EU-PRIZE-CHINA.php
2 http://www.kansascity.com/news/world/story/855551.html

Haider was gay and Austria is schizophrenic

"The successor to the Austrian right wing populist Jörg Haider (see blog entry from 10th of October), Stefan Petzner, has shocked the staunchly conservative country by revealing in a tearful interview that they shared a "special relationship."1 The news in today's 'Guardian' would only appear to confirm what a lot of people have suspected for a long time. Nevertheless, it should be remembered that Haider was a man who voted against lowering the age of consent for homosexuality, a married man with two daughters and a man who led Austria's far right. Granted, the double standards and hypocrisy of the far right is par for the course and not only in Austria, therefore, today's news should hardly be surprising even for those who didn't suspect Haider's sexual preferences. Nevertheless, there is an extra sociological cum psychological cum historical dimension that can be applied to the Haider case that gives it an added interest. In Austria a petite bourgeois "Weltanschaung", a hangover from the Hapbsburg Empire, mitigates against any assumption that a respectable member of the community could commit a serious crime or even deviate from the norm. That means that, while Haider's "coming out" or should I say, never coming out, is hardly a crime, it does require an attitude that can facilitate crimes such as those committed by the anti-social technician, Wolfgang Priklopiln, who kept Natascha Kampusch in his cellar for eight years until she managed to escape, and the respectable Engineer, Josef Fritzl, who managed to keep his daughter in a cellar for 23 years where she gave birth to seven of his children .... eight people living locked in a cellar and the neighbours never noticed? Two incidents within the space of less than two years and how many more have remained undiscovered or have yet to be discovered?
Of course, England had its Freddy West and the shenanigans in Belgium are known to all and sundry. Nevertheless, this is about Austria and it's about a class that creates its own little world and whose members don't tolerate outsiders prying into their business. It is a world where, more or less, everything is hunky-dory and and I remember when I was driving back to Munich from Budapest once and I had an argument at a service station on the "autobahn" between Vienna and Linz when on complaining about something I was told in no uncertain terms, " Wenn es dir hier nicht gefällt, dann hau ab" (if you don't like it here, then piss off). In little Austria, with its great cuisine and beautiful scenery, stuck somewhere on the "Autobahn" between Budapest and Munich, I am, of course, an outsider and an insider like Haider is hardly likely to tell the good citizens of Carinthia and Austria that he might just be a wee bit different from most of them.
There is an identity crisis in the Second Austrian Republic, a collective schizophrenia that denies the country's nazi past or even sees the people portraying themselves as victims of nazism. It is a schizophrenia that sees its people withdraw into their "heile Welt", their land of milk and honey, where they mind their own business and they expect you to mind yours. Of course, it should be added that for a lot of people, Austria is, indeed, a land of milk and honey, a truely beautiful country, clean, efficient, wealthy and with a lot to be proud of. Nevertheless, it is also a place where it is better for public figures not to come out as homosexuals and a place, where you might want to think about emigrating to if you are planning to lock a few people up in the cellar. Mind you, if you don't want to be noticed, you should have an Austrian passport or at least be white, outwardly petite bourgeoise and German speaking and maybe even capable of whiping the masses up to such a frenzy that they will want to invade a neighboring country. Could almost be describing someone here but then he was actually an Austrian that came to Germany a few years ago.
Finally, to the Alpine republic's credit though, it should be emphasised that "coming out" is not a crime like it is in Saudi Arabia where, I believe, they bury you alive. Moreover, it is a crime in Austria to father seven of your daughter's children and it is also a crime, unlike in some countries, to keep people locked up in cellars and if the police do get to hear about it, as they obviously occassionally do, you will get locked up. Furthermore, in Graz and Vienna in particular, there are little areas where everything can be hunky-dory even you are a non-white foreigner, a ranging left winger or outrageously gay. There are a lot worse places than Austria but, if you have a darker skin than most of the Austrians, be prepared for people staring at you in parts of the country ... oh, and be careful who you pick up at a disco, you don't want to end up in a cellar, do you?
The picture is of Hallstadt, on the beautiful "Hallstadtersee" in beautiful part of Austria, where everything is hunky-dory, everbody is white, everbody is straight and the houses have big big cellars.
1 http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/oct/23/jorge

Not a lot to be proud of

After the 1707 Act of Union, Scotland held onto three things that distinguished it from its southern neighbour; the kirk, or Church of Scotland, its education system and its own legal system. Scottish people tend to be proud of all three. Therefore, a couple of sentences will be spent on the first two institutions before two examples that refer to the legal system will be looked at; one where Scots law differs from English law and the other where it is beginning to show remarkable similarities.
Firstly, the church, with its, doctrine of predestination, the elected and the damned and all of that nonsense, its strict adherence of the sabbath and its, "you will burn in the fires of hell" attitude, is as gobbly gook as other churches and when it comes to putting the fear of god into innocents it is right up there with the wahabbi version of sunni islam. Indeed, if it wasn't for the fact that western civilisation has arrived at a point in time where it is par for the course to separate church and state, our presbytarian friends would probably be modelling their own little intolerant theocracy on the desert kingdom, oh, and what about the education system doesn't that produce free thinkers who would prevent this happening? Well, while scottish universities have produced some brilliant minds, a lot of real fucking idiots have gone and are going through the school system and, indeed, in my day, some of them even got up to university where they could always study theology, if no other faculty would have them. Of course, today anybody can get to university and not only in Scotland. Still, there is, in fact, a fine balance up in Scotland where the brilliant minds and free thinkers continue to exercise an influence, but only just, only just and if you don't believe me, take yourself along to a Rangers versus Celtic game.
Finally, that brings me to the "respected" Scottish legal system and I did have a sort of respect for it when in 1974 I was about to invoke a clause in Scots law called "minority in lesion" to get out of the British Army. It would appear that the contract I signed in Scotland as a 16 year old was not binding as I was a minor, whereas under English law my signature as a sixteen year old along with that of my mother would have meant my refusing to sign again at eighteen would have meant I was commiting a breach of contract. Anyway there was the army telling me that if I didn't reduce my contract to at least another three years they could oblige me to serve automatically for another nine. Anyway, I was about to set a legal precedent that would have had at least the not so not so daft "jocks" refusing to sign up for their Queen's shilling at which point the Army then decided to give me the order of the boot and let me pursue the rest of my life. My affection for Scottish law was immense and I walked out into civvy street convinced that the Scottish legal system is just dandy. Until, that is, what John Pilger refers to as "The Great Lockerbie Whitewash" came along.1
When I was a young man I would invariably find myself hitching up the A74 back to Glasgow and a couple of times I would stop off in Lockerbie for a cup of coffee and so it was that at some point in late January or early February 1990 I got to see the great big holes where a couple of houses used to be and they were not not too far from the little town's centre. Yes, we were over the border and this was definitely something for the Galloway constabulary to look into. Seriously though when it came to trying the perpetrators under Scots Law, I was all for it. The problem was that when the trial came along it was a farce and one theory is that it was a farce because the CIA didn't want a drugs run through Frankfurt Airport, that they were using to facilitate their little political games, to be uncovered.2 Whatever, the nature of the farce, a farce it was and when it led to the acquital of Al Amin Khalifa Fhimah but the conviction of Abdel bassset Ali al-Megrahi on 270 counts of murder and a subsequent life sentence for the latter it brought shame and disgrace on the Scottish court. Indeed, it puts Scottish justice right up there with its English counterpart.
"Lockerbie bomber with prostrate cancer may be freed to go home" is one of the headlines in today's 'Independent', which goes on to say, "It is unclear whether an agreement to repatriate Megrahi would mean the end to an appeal he has launched to quash his conviction over the destruction of PanAm flight 103, leading to 270 deaths in December 1988." While adding, "Some members of the victims' families have said they would not object to Megrahi's early release. Jim Swire, whose daughter, Fiona, was killed, said: "I think the cancer is a very serious threat to his life and it would be a tragedy if he is to spend what is left of the rest of his life in a Scottish prison, particularly if he is not guilty of the crime of which he was found guilty."3 "it would be a tragedy if he is to spend what is left of the rest of his life in a Scottish prison, particularly if he is not guilty of the crime of which he was found guilty."Yes, it would and Jim knows and I know that the verdict on January 31, 2001 by a panel of Scottish Judges sitting in a special court at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands was a triumph for the CIA but a slap in the face for the families who had lost their loved ones and who are still awaiting justice. It was, moreover, the day the great "independent" Scottish judiciary had its "Guildford Seven".4
1 "The Great Lockerbie Whitewash" in John Pilger's edited "Tell Me No Lies"
2 Ibid pp 219, 220
3 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/lockerbie-bomber-with-prostate-cancer-may-be-freed-to-go-home-968622.html
4 http://ella.gnn.tv/blogs/3968/30_years_later_Blair_apologises_to_Guildford_Seven
The picture above shows Abdel bassset Ali al-Megrahi at the time of his trial.

Ambience

The "university experience" is what it is, namely, the "university experience" and my mind drifts to an occassion when I had to write a particular essay for my "alma mater's" resident petite bourgeois Marxist on the French Philosopher, Jean Jacques Rousseau and there was me sitting at my window in Portstewart looking out to the Atlantic and my mate, Billy, a very clear thinking, extremely intelligent, fourth internationalist asking me, what the matter was? "This essay", I replied, and threw in a few "fuckings", such as, "it is fucking my head up". "Read me what you have written", he said and I read him up to the bit where I was drawing a comparison between, 'The Social Contract' and 'Emile'. "Right", he said and soon there he was brilliant Billy dicatating to me straight from the top of his head, with sources and everything and there was me with my touch typing skills knocking out a reasonable little ditty in no time at all. The following morning I handed in the essay to our resident petite bourgeois Marxist and a couple of days later he called me into his office. "Reluctantly, I have given you a 2i", he said and went on to say, "Reluctantly, because I don't understand how you can write two pages of crap and then three pages of what I can only say is brilliant." The point I am trying to make is this, an education is not all about sticking our heads in books and we really do need a wee bit of ambience sometimes and why I was reminded today a wee bit of what is missing in my life at the moment; the tête-à-tête, the quiet libation, the witty intelligent conversation, the ambience.
Today I took myself off to Munich and I met a couple of mates. The conversation was refreshing, challenging and it got me thinking and do you know, sometimes there is no substitute for a good discussion and listening to opinions other than your own, especially if those opinions make sense even although you might disagree with them because when we disagree with them we have to think why we are disagreeing and it really is living the "thesis, anti-thesis, synthesis" thing. When we leave university we usually look at books where we agree with the author and the author agrees with us and it is all so much easier than reading someone who we might not agree with and ... well, we become a trifle set in our ways, not so open minded, not so questioning and today I came up for air and was reminded that good witty, intelligent discussion is more than just one of life's little pleasures.

Orde Charles Wingate

Bumped into this character called Orde Wingate in Pappe's book, 'Die Ethnische Säuberung Palästinas' and it turns out to be the same Wingate who led the Chindits down in Burma in the fight against the Japanese.1 Anyway there was Orde, with an alarm clock wrapped around his wrist and an onion hanging around his neck; the onion because he thought that chewing raw onions was healthy and the alarm clock was to make sure he kept to his schedule; this was the type of fucking nutter that you like to have on your side. For as General Mutaguchi, commander of the Japanese 15th Army, said 'I realised what a loss his death was to the British army and said a prayer for the soul of this man in whom I had met my match'.2 Windgate died in a plane crash in 1944 and if there were, sighs of relief in Whitehall for a man who might have ended up an embarrassment in post war England, no doubt, the Japanese in Burma in 1944 were also breathing a bit easier.
It might, of course, be argued that at certain points in history we need the Wingates of this world. That means, of course, providing they are on our side and, while he might have broken the back of the Taliban in a few weeks he would probably have wiped out half the Pashtun population in the process. In 1936 the British made the mistake of sending this deeply religious fundamental Christian down to Palestine to help sort out the problems there. The real problem was that Wingate was an implacable advocate for a Jewish State and when it came to being a Zionist this guy was right up there with Theodore Herzl. As as soon as Orde got to the Holy Land he started organising the Haganah and he was so good at what he did that Moshe Dayan, who had served under him, was to later say, "Wingate taught us everything we know.".3 What Moshe and his mates knew we were to see some nine years after Wingate had to leave Palestine with a stamp in his passport forbidding him to return. The British had finally realised that the man was a liability, although they still decorated him with a DSO. Anyway, by the time Orde had to pack his bags, the damage had been done; the foundations had been laid, a small, reliable force had been established and it was ready to adopt methods that it had learned under Wingate to achieve its aim, the ethnic cleansing of Palestine and, in between, our mad Christian Zionist was to get the opportunity to put the fear of death into the Japanese .... well, at least, the Japanese were capable of returning fire.
1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orde_Wingate
2 http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2242/is_/ai_67051559
3 See 1 Ibid
The picture above is of Orde, could be holding his bible, cannot see the alarm clock but he appears to have forgotten, or eaten, the onion.
Note: Read; http://ellissharp.blogspot.com/2006/05/orde-wingate-war-criminal.html

Colin Powell backs Obama

Now, they are not completely stupid the neo-conservatives, are they? Indeed, I am apt to think about the wee bit in the film "Trainspotting" where the hero, Mark Renton, I think it was, gets fed up with his mates boasting about how great Scotland is and the Scots are, and, loosing his temper, shouts at them telling them that they are the biggest wankers on the planet and that they must be the biggest wankers on the planet as they have the next biggest wankers on the planet, the English, running them. Anyway, there was Dick and George shoving Colin in front of the UN to give a little presentation on Saadam Hussein's WMDs and Colin pointing to satellite pictures of things that appeared to be trucks and buses and dustbins and sheds and things like that and saying things like, "Well, I know that to you and me it looks like a shed but ....... " Christ, they are at it again with Iran! Anyway, there was Colin and there was me thinking, "this guy is either a complete idiot or he thinks that we are complete idiots and he is just as big a criminal as George and Dick. Yes, the neo-conservatives might be fools but the evidence would seem to suggest that there are even bigger fools out there. Me, I came to the conclusion that Colin is not an idiot and that he knew that the shed he was pointing at was a shed and the bus he was pointing at was a bus and the truck he was pointing at was a truck and the dustbin he was pointing at was a dustbin. Moreover, I even forgave him for treating us all as idiots because, all in all, just like most of the Scottish deserve the English, most of us deserve to be treated like idiots. Nevertheless, I wasn't in a hurry to forgive a man, who obviously has a brain, his participation in what was basically a war crime. Still, maybe if Colin hadn't been around, Dick and George in their heyday would have been tempted to nuke someone.
Whatever else, the evidence would seem to suggest that Colin is not a fool and with that in mind the news of him backing Obama has to be welcomed and if we think standing in front of the world press and the UN General Assembly and pointing to dustbins and sheds and buses and trucks and dustbins and telling all and sundry that these are installations where WMDs are hidden requires maverick diplomatic skills, the language Colin used today to underline why he is backing Obama shows that he still has those skills. Refering to Sarah Palin, he says, "“She’s a very distinguished woman, and she’s to be admired, but at the same time, now that we have had a chance to watch her for some seven weeks, I don’t believe she’s ready to be president of the United States, which is the job of the vice president.”1 No, Colin knows that she is an absolute fool and he might even also know, that should she ever have her heyday, she might do something even sillier than starting a couple of illegal wars. Perhaps, Colin's support for Obama will persuade some of the fools who are about to vote for Palin to change their minds and if I ever get the chance to sit on that tribunal to judge Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld, Rice and Powell for crimes against humanity, I might just accept Colin's plea that he stayed in office to prevent worse happening.
1 http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/20/us/politics/20campaign.html?hp

It wasn't planned, it just happened

A couple of days ago, I bought the German version of Ilan Pappe's book, "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine"1 and that led me to do some basic research on a certain "Benny Morris" who, it would appear, dons the guise of a Historian when spewing forth a series of allegations against Pappe that are invariably of a personal nature. Moreover, to some, his opinions on Arabs might appear downright racist. For instance, he writes, ".... in Arab and Islamic societies women are by tradition, and often by law, third-class members, who often lack basic rights (in some countries they have no vote, in others they cannot drive cars, and so on).2 It would be nice to put this into some sort of worthwhile context but it really doesn't have much to do with anything and certainly nothing to do with the main thesis being put forward in Pappe's book. However, I confess, Pappe also seems to go off on tangents that don't bear any real relation to his central thesis. Indeed, at the very beginning of the book he appears to be just filling pages when he gives us a number of different types of definition for the phrase, "ethnic cleansing".3 Still, "ethnic cleansing" is what the book is about Mr Morris and not Palestinian and Arab women, who, to be honest, are not really your concern unless, of course, you really do care about their well-being. Should that be the case you can discuss them elsewhere, perhaps, and, perhaps, less patronisingly and maybe you can even get a wee part time job at BTslem, where you can report them being pelted by stones or lynched by some zealot settlers . Enough of the drivel and let us concentrate on the main thesis of the book, which would appear to be that there was an intentional ethnic cleansing on the part of the Zionists.
Yesterday, for the first time, I was confronted with the famous, infamous, defensive, aggressive, whatever you want to call it, "Plan D" or "Plan Dalet". On the 10th March 1948, eleven men met in a house in Tel Aviv and planned the ethnic cleansing of Palestine.4 Now, while these days even Benny Morris would agree that the Palestinians didn't just pack their bags and voluntarily walk away from their houses, he would contend that "Plan D" was defensive. Alright Benny, I don't really know you, you might be a nice chap and you are the "Historian" oh, and, you are Israeli and I am only a foreigner. "Defensive" it was and what if it was and was it "defensive" like the Golan Heights are needed to "defend" Israel and was it "defensive" like the wall in the West Bank and the fences around the settlements? Benny, I don't really care; hundreds of thousands of Arabs were forced off their land and they are still being forced off of their land and even if you are right, and Ilan Pappe gets his facts wrong and a particular event didn't happen like that, and that incident never quite happened like that and that date is wrong, the reality is they were forced off their land and somebody else is living on their land and to force people off their land you have to at least point a gun at them and the evidence would seem to suggest that .... well the guns weren't just pointed at them, were they?
Now we have really had it all haven't we? The lands were empty and, if they weren't empty, they were up for grabs for as Golda Meir told the 'Sunday Times' in 1969, "There were no such thing as Palestinians. When was there an independent Palestinian people with a Palestinian state? It was either southern Syria before the First World War, and then it was a Palestine including Jordan. It was not as though there was a Palestinian people in Palestine considering itself as a Palestinian people and we came and threw them out and took their country away from them. They did not exist.".5 Who didn't exist, the people, who were there or the Palestinians? Then we had the lie that the people who were there just moved on of their own free will and then we got a well, they might have been forced out but they forced us to force them out and really it wasn't intentonal. Call them Palestinians, call them Smurfs, call them what you want to call them, but they were forced off of their land and Ilan Pappe is right when he calls this ethnic cleansing. The maps above tell their own story!
1 Ilan Pappe, 'The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine' Oxford, 2006
2 http://www.israel-palestina.info/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=417
3 Ilan Pappe, 'Die Ethnische Säberung Palästinas', German 1st Edition, 2007, Frankfurt am Main pp19-26
4 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan_Dalet
5 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golda_Meir

China in Africa

Not quite a ditty but, nevertheless, a well written little book, Mark Leonard's, "What Does China Think?"It reveals a number of interesting facts, while also addressing a some topics that I with my, albeit limited, knowledge of China and Chinese foreign policy already knew. Leonard's book is not only well written it is also well balanced and free from the type of bias and hype that invariably accompanies Western writers when they write about China; the book does, indeed, try to answer the question that is posed in its title. However, there are other questions within that question and it is to one of them in particular that I would like to turn my attention.
Leonard indirectly asks, does China have a deliberate policy of promoting autocracy throughout the planet or is it simply adopting a neutral approach that puts its own interests first?2 Perhaps, before answering that I should ask a question of my own; does the United States actively promote democracy around the world or is it, in fact, pursuing its own interests? Only an idiot would think that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are about establishing democracy and only an even bigger idiot would apply the term "democratic" to some of "Uncle Sam's" pals. China and the United States both pursue foreign policies, that, first and foremost, have their own, as Washington and Beijing respectively see them, particular interests at heart. In the case of the United States this has often led to unilateral action that has flauted international law and it has, on many occassions, led to support for some very unsavoury regimes. Of course, supporting Omar al-Bashir in the Sudan and Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe, as China does, also helps these two rather nasty characters hold onto power. Nevertheless, China, unlike the United States, will bend to pressure and, regarding the two African states mentioned, it has shifted its tactics and helped facilitate negotiations between the governments and the respective oppositions in both countries. The bottom line is that although China is in Africa mainly to get the raw materials it urgently needs for its own development, it is also constructing infrastructure and investing money in the form of soft loans into a continent that desperately needs both.
Of course, let us have no illusions, China is acting in its own interests first and foremost and we might want to discuss the weapons and surveillance equipment that Beijing also supplies to certain governments.3 However, let us have no illusions full stop. The West too acts in its own interests and it doesn't only supply weapons of war, it is invariably the root cause of that war. In 1896 the British and the French had a little altercation in the Sudan in what became known as the "Fashoda Incident". It was all about dividing Africa up into spheres of interests and that in turn led to drawing straight lines all over the continent of Africa that ignored tribal and ethinic borders and strangely enough a lot of the wars that we have in Africa today are basically tribal disputes. The history of the West in Africa is hardly exemplary and the hypocrisy and platitudes that come out of London, Washington and Paris are offensive to say the least. Today, China's involvement in Africa is, on the whole, a positive development for both Africa and China.
1 'What Does China Think', London, 2008
2 Ibid pp 125, 126
3 http://codrinarsene.com/2008/06/chinese-investment-in-africa/
The above is a map showing Chinese direct investment in Africa in 2005. The Africans might be pleased to know that the IMF is unlikely to arrive with its "conditions" for some time as the IMF doesn't have much money to spare these days anyway.
Do you see all the nice straight borders on the map? the borders that aren't straight tend to follow a dried up river or a stream or a lake. Ethnic groups have been split up. Straight lines and otherwise arbitary borders are a legacy of colonialism and it is a legacy that is at the root of a lot of wars all over the planet.

Newspeak and the Looming Prisoner Exchange

Information is beginning to seek out that Israel is ready to free all the prisoners demanded by Hamas in return for Gilad Shalit, the soldier who was "kidnapped" in June 2006, by the "Gaza militants".1 The newspeak is mind boggling; Shalit was captured, not "kindnapped", by Palestinian fighters, not "militants". Or have the 421 Palestinians killed between January and September 2008 alone been murdered by Israeli terrorists? No doubt, many Israelis would find this language offensive, however, most of them would have no difficulty in asserting that the 21 Israelis who died during the same period were the victims of terrorism.2
Statistics and actions tell stories of their own and "terrorists" preparing to throw fire bombs or even stones or even, maybe doing nothing at all, are shot by the thoroughly moral, exceedingly decent, wonderfully ethical IDF on a daily basis. For instance, earlier today an IDF spokesman said, "troops shot a protester who had been preparing to attack them with a fire-bomb."3 Yes, that is right, the youth who was protesting didn't actually throw the "fire bomb" but he was preparing to throw it when "bang, bang, bang". This was the third killing in three days in the West Bank and one of the three Palestinian "terrorists" who died, was shot in the chest "as Palestinians burnt tires to block a road north of the hub city of Ramallah, 100 meters from the settlement of Beit El."4 Now, we are not really sure if the particular Palestinian who was shot was actually helping to burn the tires. Sherlock Holmes is not required for some basic deduction here and the evidence would appear to suggest that if you are Palestinian and even get close to people burning tires you might get a bullet through the head, whereas if you are a "settler" living in one of the jewish "neighbourhoods" in the West Bank and you go out to lynch some Palestinians, the worse that might happen is you will be prevented from doing so by the IDF. Or have the IDF shot any settlers to date. With statistics and actions such as this we can begin to understand Israel's readiness to agree to Hamas's demands and the evidence would seem to suggest that one Israeli soldier is worth up to a 1,000 Palestinian prisoners5 or is it "terrorists"? Anyway, it will certainly be easier to shoot them once they are free, that is for sure.
1 http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1029209.html
2 http://www.mepc.org/resources_counts/CS2008.asp
3 See 1 ibid
4 ibid
5 ibid

A Two State Solution

The philospher, Karl Popper, limited as he is when it comes to a serious study of the social sciences, does provide a sound introduction to academic caution and very early on I was aware that you cannot write sweeping statements such as, "the English in the nineteenth century thought". How can we possibly know what "the English in the nineteenth century thought? My essays were soon peppered with phrases such as, "the evidence would seem to suggest", "it would appear", "it might be that" etc. However, today I stumbled on the Historian Ilan Pappe1 who, along with people like Norman Finkelstein and Avi Shlaim, render academic caution on the Palestinian tragedy superflous. There is no "might" and no "may be" and the "Nakba" happened, it is a historical fact, and it was an ethnic cleansing. Indeed, it is an ethnic cleansing that has continued until today. If there is any real debate in Israel it is not on whether there was an ethnic cleansing or not but rather on the morality of it. Israel, ethnic cleansing is not only immoral it comes under the rubric of "a crime against humanity".
For a lot of people the crime is all about what is happening now and the history is by and large ignored. In one of my earlier posts i came to the conclusion that, despite, what happened in 1948 some sort of of compromise is required on the part of the Palestinians. However, it appears that the more the history is delved into, the greater the dillema that confronts us. Today I looked at a three short videos under the heading '1948 Lest We Forget'.2 The third video was called "Sands of Sorrow", and it showed a Palestinian refugee camp in 1950. Forgetting won't happen and, if I might be permitted some academic caution, the evidence would seem to suggest that for many Palestines compromise has to be very difficult. Moreover, with Israel, still pursuing its ethnic cleansing in the West Bank, while simultaneously perpetrating a bit by bit genoicide in the Gaza strip, real compromise is not on the agenda. Nevertheless, while it is especially difficult for some of my Palestinian friends to accept, I still believe that a compromise based on the UN partition plan of 1947, is the only way forward even if I personally believe that there should be no such a thing as a Jewish, Muslim or Christian state.
The map above shows the 1947 UN partition of Palestine.
1 http://ilanpappe.com/?page_id=2 see link on the left
2 http://www.1948.org.uk/watch-videos/

Palin the Parrot

A nice little clip has appeared in which John Cleese describes Sarah Palin as a nice looking parrot who doesn't understand the meaning of the words that she is using although she is using them quite accurately1 and that would seem to be an accurate description of the lady . However, more revealing is John's trade mark laugh when asked what he thinks of Sarah Palin; a laugh that leaves me aware that I am not the only person who thinks that Ms Palin is a joke. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of the parrot should not be underestimated and my mind drifts back to the little shop at the bottom of the flat where I stayed in Suzhou and the parrot in that shop that said "bye, bye" to the customers in perfect English when they were leaving and there was me one evening, feeling a wee bit lonely, almost ready to launch into a conversation with the parrot. At that moment in time a "bye, bye" in RP English was most welcome and I am sure that for a lot of Americans what "Parrot Palin" is parroting is just what they want to hear; "America is a force for good in the world", "America is special", "you are all special" .... and none of this is up for discussion.
Of course, the parrot in the shop in Suzhou wasn't capable of having a conversation and neither is Sarah Palin. Don't ask her about the "Nakba" she hasn't "learned" that one yet and if she has to I am sure her answer would be something like, "well, tragedies happen and everyone has suffered but sometimes it is time to move on" and that will be the end of the conversation and we will all move on and we will learn that, "Russia will have to learn that it cannot march into independent countries, if it is to be fully accepted into the international community." However, don't tell the parrot that America has been marching into and bombing independent countries either itself or through its proxies for years. Parrots don't understand what you are talking about, they are just parrots.
1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMyNk8J1c8g&eurl=http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/oliverburkemanblog/2008/oct/14/uselections2008-sarahpalin

The Real Terrorists or Big Brother is Watching You

Sometimes it is nice look at news that makes you think and for that I invariably turn to 'Democracy Now' .1 Today, I watched Amy Goodman interview James Bamford who has written; "The Shadow Factory: The Ultra-Secret NSA from 9/11 to the eavesdropping on America." If you don't want to read the book, perhaps you should, at least, follow the interview at http://www.democracynow.org/. However, let me begin by briefly putting you in the picture as to what the NSA is.
The NSA is America's most powerful but least visable spy agency. It is based outside Baltimore on the road to Washington in a place called Fort Meade and it is so secret you cannot even contact them by phone. No, you don't phone them, they listen to you.2 Oh and if James Bamford is right, they certainly do eavesdrop with the capability to surveil just about every type of communication you can think of. Indeed, they are so good at their job that as early as December 1999, while monitoring Bin Laden's base in Yemen, they even picked up on the first clues that the 9/11 bombings were being planned and yet, somewhere, along the line they sort of just lost, Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, two of the conspirators they were shadowing and strangely enough so did the CIA and this weird story has an even whackier ending because there they were, five of the hijackers living in a motel right outside the gates of the NSA.3 Now am I insuating something here? No, of course, not, even although an FBI agent, who was attached to the CIA, was prevented by the CIA from informing his agency that Khalid al-Mihdhar had a visa for the United States when he was being tracked in Malaysia in January, 2000.4 The mind boggles and where would a suspected terrorist with a visa for the United States be going? Yet somehow the CIA and the NSA didn't pick up on him, not even when he was shopping in the same supermarket, drinking his coffee in the same Starbucks and eating his dinner in the same restaurant as some of the 38,000 NSA employees.
However, enough of my conspiracy theories, let us move onto after 9/11 and there was Lieutenant General Michael V. Hayden, Director, National Security Agency/Chief, Central Security Service a wee bit peeved at letting the terrorists slip through his fingers and, while James Comey at the Department of Justice, the Attorney General John Ashcroft and the FBI's Robert Müller III sort of stood up to Dick Cheney when Dick wanted to extend his warrentless and useless evesdropping on American citizens, Michael sort of took a step back and now we have NSA "secret rooms" installed inside major American telecommunication companies such as the AT&T operation at Bridgetown, Missouri. Now, just imagine you have a wee job as a "listener in" at the NSA and there you are listening in to all this private, irrelevant stuff, "nudge, nudge"; right you've got it, you are going to have wee jokes with your colleagues about other peoples' "private" stuff and, wait for it, .... this private stuff is actually tanscribed and kept on record.5 Well, there are not a lot of people out there who are really going to shake the system and get away with it, are there? No big changes with Obama then and if there were going to be, we would probably have heard his "little secret" a long time ago and I am surprised not to hear that Mullah Omar likes a wee glass of whisky from time to time? Joking aside though, more immediate and more important, however, are the allegations made by two ex-NSA employees, the former Military Intelligence Sergeant Adrienne Kinne and David Murfee Faulk, a Linguist, and their accusations that action is instigated by the NSA on information supplied by people who are not qualified. Murfee in particular mentions how a Linguist with little more than a year's training in classical Arabic might not understand properly what he is hearing but supply information that could lead to a number of people dying in Iraq.6 The evidence would seem to suggest that big brother is not only watching us but that he is killing us indiscriminately. "The indiscriminent killing of innocent people"; could this be an accurate definition of "terrorism".
1 http://www.democracynow.org/
2 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/2033791.stm
3 Ibid
4 http://visibility911.com/jongold/?p=699
5 http://www.democracynow.org/2008/10/14/james_bamford_the_shadow_factory_the
6 Ibid

"Troopergate" and the Office of Vice President

A 263 page report has come to the conclusion that Sarah Palin acted unethically in the so-called, "Troopergate Affair". When, after she became the Governer of Alaska, she apparently demanded that Alaska's Head of Police, Walter Monegan, dismiss Trooper Michael Wooten from his job. The said, Michael Wooten and Palin's sister, Molly, had gone through a particular messy divorce.1 As the report was the result of rather intensive and conclusive research that covered a number of weeks what might we, at least, expect from Palin? Did you say, "an apology". Not on your life and Sarah was having none of it as she told her fans that there was no abuse of office on her part.2 Fortunately, for all of us, she was speaking in a part of the world where any Republican candidate would be applauded, loved and given the benefit of the doubt and for these die-hard Republicans it is especially easy to love spunky, gutsy Sarah. It would appear, however, that elsewhere a lot of American voters will heed the 263 page report and the conclusive evidence that suggests that this is not a nice lady and that she is, indeed, capable of bearing the type of grudge that we might normally associate with a Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler or Mao Tse Tung. Die-hard Republicans won't be reading the report, won't be reading summaries of the report and won't be bothering too much about the report, full stop.! However, die-hard Republican voters are not going to win the election and the conclusions of the report represent good news not only for Barrack Obama but for all of us and all the more so in light of an article in today's 'New York Times'.
The article, "The Vice President as More Than a Standby", discusses how, starting with Walter Mondale, the Vice President in the Carter administration, and culminating in Dick Cheney, the powers invested in, or otherwise taken by, the Vice President have been increasing. Now, while Joseph R Biden called efforts by Mr Cheney to expand the power of his office as, "very dangerous",3 Palin, while not exactly clear of what the job entails, says that she "hoped to be given even more authority."4 What does she mean, even more than Dick Cheney? This becomes very worrying and all the more so because this really is a lady who doesn't know her arse from her elbows, the very same arse and elbows that play a far greater role than her little brain and her unethical behaviour when it comes to her attracting votes. Dan Quayle, a man with a brain about the size of Palin's but with a lot less ambition and with a less pretty arse and elbows, went to Dick Cheney to tell him about the boring aspects of the vice president job; fund-raising, foreign travel etc. Dick simply said to Dan, "I have a different understanding with the president." Hopefully, the report on the "Troopergate" affair will make it less likely that we will ever have to find out Palin's understanding with the president and her understanding of the office of vice president.
The picture shows Sarah Palin, hand on heart, hope to die if I tell a lie. "aaaahhhaaaaggghaaahh"
1 'Süddeutschezeitung' 13 October, 2008, p7 (article in German)
2 Ibid
3 Süddeutschezeitung' 13 October, 2008, 'New York Times' supplement, p3, essay John M Broder
4 ibid
5 ibid

The American Catastrophe

It would appear that John McCain is being drawn into Sarah Palin's black hole of negativity and nastiness as personal attacks against Obama are increasingly getting out of control; Obama it would seem is a genuine hate object for many Republicans in a way that no other Democrat could be and I wonder why and while Palin whips the crowds up to a point where we can even hear shouts of, "kill, kill, kill" and "terrorist, terrorist, terrorist", John "did I ever tell you that I was in Vietnam" McCain still appears to have some moral fibre and tells a lady who maintains that Obama is an Arab, "no Ma'am , he is a decent family man."1 The implication, perhaps, being that Arabs cannot be decent family men. Of course, you and I know that Arabs can be decent family men, but do they? Obama does, I am sure and as far as McCain is concerned, while his lapse of judgement here wasn't as big as it was when he nominated Palin as his running mate, I am sure also knows that Arabs can be good family men. Now with Palin we have a different kettle of fish. What we have is someone who represents and embodies that lowest common denominator that is now in control of the Republican Party and it will be gutsy, spunky Sarah that will be jockeying for their presidential nomination in 2012. This is actually quite frightening. Or is it, I mean, she couldn't possibly become President of the United States, could she? And we really thought that with George W Bush and Dick Cheney it couldn't get any worse and here my mind turns to the "German Catastrophe". Dehumanising whole sections of society and, indeed, whole races is a "good" place to start and this is what appears to be happening in America and with the Republicans already having attached the "terrorist" tag to all of their opponents it is only a logical step to put them under "protective custody" (the Nazis called it "Schutzhaft") should they win the election in 2012. No it is cannot happen, can it?
1 http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,583584,00.html

Riots in Acre

A couple of nights ago an Arab Israeli drove into a Jewish area of Acre, smoking an cigarette and with music playing in his car, during the 'Yom Kippur' holiday. Now, Orthodox Jews might tell you that this is a bit like me staggering down the Mecca Main Street in the middle of Ramadam, holding a bottle of Whisky and singing, "I belong to Glasgow". The man, however, says that he was only driving home and, as I have said, he is an Israeli citizen, so doesn't he have the right to go wherever he wants and whenever he wants? Difficult one to answer that and Israel does all itself a Jewish state and they even close the airports on that particular day. It is their, "holiest of holies" mate, so maybe you should have been a bit more careful. Anyway, what happened next was Jews attacking Arabs and Arabs attacking Jews and it is all got a little bit out of hand. Acre by the way has about 48,000 people a third of whom are Arabs.
Of course, I have my opinions on all of this and they might be sufficiently surmised from some of my past posts; I don't see the need to expand on them here. Nevertheless, what interested me was a certain Jewish MK (Member of the Knesset) saying that only some 15% of the Arabs in Acre are descended from the Arabs who lived there prior to "Al Nakba" and what is he trying to say? One wonders of course, what the Jewish population of Acre was prior to 1949. In wondering I can also remember an Israeli arguing that most Palestinians have never seen Palestine and are, therefore, not entitled to call it their home. Yet, every Jew on the planet from Alaska to New Zealand, from China to Argentina, is entitled to call Israel home no matter whether they have seen it or not. The mind boggles!

Jörg Haider

There was me leaving for Austria this morning and getting out of my bed at 6.30 am, I was already confronted with the news from Austria; Jörg Haider, who was apparently driving too quickly, has died in a car accident. Now, I can just envisage some of my readers asking who Jörg Haider is, or rather was? Well, Jörg Haider was a right wing populist who said some silly things but the sort of silly things that made him popular with a lot of Austrians and, indeed, facilitated him playing a very important role in Austrian politics since first becoming the first minister in the Austrian region of Carinthia in 1989. It's not really the place here to provide you with Jörg's detailed biography; you can google him if you want to. No, it is probably enough to report a little conversation one radio journalist had with a young Austrian lady on asking her what she thought about Jörg Haider's death and follow on by giving one quote from Jörg. Anyway, the young lady thought that his ideas were good but that they are difficult to put into practice and one of Jörg's ideas was to build camps in fields for foreigners living in Austria. That was only one of his ideas and the really good thing is that Jörg was an Austrian born in Bad Goisern in Upper Austria in 1950 and not an Austrian born in Braunau am Inn in, what is now Upper Austria, in 1889 or an American born in New Haven, Connecticut in 1946.

Mad Dogs

It would appear that Israel was only playing, bending to external pressure, not taking things seriously enough and that the last time round in the Lebanon it, poor little Israel, was punished for maybe being too "nice" when they only managed to kill about 1,300 and wound over 4,000 Lebanese, most of whom were innocent civilians.1
Now, I don't think that they were playing and I don't think that they weren't taking things seriously enough but maybe, just maybe, they were constrained a little bit by the"international community" and that is why I am a little bit worried for the Lebanese after picking up on the headline, "Israel Warns It Will Use "Disproportionate Force" Against Lebanon in Next War" The article goes on, "The head of the Israeli army’s northern command says Israel will use disproportionate force on Lebanese villages used by Hezbollah to fire rockets if another war is fought against Lebanon. Major General Eisenkot said, "We will apply disproportionate force on it and cause great damage and destruction there. From our standpoint, these are not civilian villages, they are military bases.” Eisenkot went on to say, "This is not a recommendation. This is a plan. And it has been approved.”2
Now, remember the "international community" that managed to at least keep an extended leash on the mad dog that is Israel, is in fact, good old "Uncle Sam" and his allies and back in 2006 I can remember Condoleezza Rice and George Bush giving Israel the green light to "defend itself" and then telling Israel to minimise collateral damage at a time when the Israelis were just getting into their swing. Indeed, they were so much into their swing that, while good old "Uncle Sam" was just getting the negotiations going the Israeli military launched an airstrike on Qana and killed some 40 women and children.3 Still, the brave Israelis, finally, saw themselves with no alternative but to go in on the ground and in they went and we know the rest of the story.
The point is, the Israeli military "will apply disproportionate force" the next time and Lebanese villages are in fact military bases, according to General Eisenkot. Well, maybe the next time round the "international community" won't want to restrain Israel, after all, that "international community", while pursuing a familiar strategy, can be a little bit fickle now and again and maybe, just maybe if the "international community" does try to restrain Israel, they won't be listened to because we all know what mad dogs are like when they are let off the leash. Mr Olmert, back in July 2006 said that he would destroy those who hate Israel - the same Mr Olmert who today is saying that Israel will have to withdraw from the occupied territories - and then we have Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's call for Israel to be "wiped off the map"4 and now we have Major General Eisenkot saying that a plan to use disproportionate force has been approved. There is a lot of huff and puff and a bit of bluff and not a lot of substance in Mr Ahmadinejad's threats and I suspect that the chances of Iran attacking Israel are a bit less than the chances of Israel dropping a couple of bombs on Iran. Nevertheless, with Israel still smarting from its defeat in 2006, a defeat that culminated in, what was for Israel, a humiliating prisoner exchange a couple of months ago,5 there will be a "next" war in the Lebanon. That could call Ahmadinejad's bluff. Whatever, to quote the title of RobertFrisk's book, "pity the nation" and maybe, just maybe, pity all of us, but let our heads rule our hearts and remember that come the day, "disproportionate force" means that a war crime is being commited.
The picture above shows a district in Beruit after "proportionate" force had been used on the "Hezbollah"
1 http://www.turkishpress.com/news.asp?id=138277
2 http://www.democracynow.org/2008/10/10/headlines#2
3 http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2006/07/30/lebano13881.htm
4 http://www.iranfocus.com/en/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4203
5 http://thediplomatabroad.blogspot.com/search?q=prisoner+exchange