The Arab Spring, or as some call it the Arab Awakening (although this term is too condescending) is in it's 5th month. Inflaming more and more Middle East countries - this remarkable social movement doesn't leave any "stone unturned"... None of the regional regimes is immune to this "freedom bug". Some Dictators fall almost too fast for the international community to react, others - especially those who collaborated with Russia for extended amount of time and never grew out of it, like Libya and Syria, put up a fight. Although I haven't written so far anything about Bahrain, Syria, Algeria, or Morocco, this article is dedicated to one of the longest struggles in the region - struggle of the Palestinian people. It's a struggle for their identity, place to live, and what all the people deserve in the same degree - Peace. I haven't written about this topic, because... I was afraid to touch this Pandora's Box.
April 27th, 2011 brought the events which single-handedly changed the equation, and spawned a completely new reality.
Two days ago the media announced that after days of the unofficial talks in Cairo, the representatives of HAMAS and FATAH came to a historic, conciliatory agreement, to create an Unity Interim Government, and organize the popular elections a year from now in both West Bank as well as Gaza Strip.
Right after I posted on Twitter a message referring to this remarkable event I received a response including a link to a short video: "Prager University: The Middle East Problem" (www.youtube.com/watch?v=63hTOaRu7h4). The video, which consists just of a concise statement by Dennis Prager, is on of the most agitating, inflammatory, 'rewriting history', and one-sidedly wrong, messages on that subject, which are available on the Internet. It spews venom and under a false scholarly pretense it denies the voice of reason.
After receiving this message, I had no other options, but to address this subject myself. I am not usurping myself a right to know the only truth. I am advocating asking questions and being open to any answers. We can not replace the Reason with Demagogy.
Unfortunately the "global village" which is the home to all of us, has an abundance of the "village idiots" who disregarding the proofs and common sense, and will deny things which are inconvenient to their agenda, like the President's US citizenship (D.Trump and other birthers), or the right of Palestinian people to have their own place to live, free and sovereign, located where they always lived (D. Prager and others sharing his views).
------------
The historic agreement between Hamas and Fatah was announced two days ago. The World's reaction was immediate. I do not deny that in a tinder box, like Middle East, a unification of the Palestinian authorities is an event to be watched very carefully. The reaction of the US Government was cautious, but hopeful. President Obama praised the political agreement but underlined the existing, axiomatic requirements, like the acceptance of the existing peace treaties, and acknowledgment of the right of the state of Israel to exist.
In the meantime the Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu squarely rejected the unification efforts giving the Palestinians the exclusive choice: either the peace with Israel OR the peace with Hamas. It's his first reaction to the new situation, but Netanyahu's negative remarks do not help the peace process.
The historic agreement between Hamas and Fatah was announced two days ago. It ended dated since 2006, harmful for the Palestinian cause, split between factions. Yes, this division was 'safer' for the US-Israeli interests, but it was an artificially maintained state of affairs. Since the death of Yasser Arafat in Ramallah 2004, there was no equally charismatic, and equally revered leader. The President Mahmoud Abbas, who was raising to the Position of the Premier, falling into oblivion, raising again as a President..., has been generally accused to be week and wavering. He has been governing the West Bank (with the Fatah), but the Gaza Strip was led by Hamas (meaning "Islamic Resistance Movement") who in 2007 won the majority of seats in the Palestinian Parliament. Since the Hamas has been associated (and/or involved) with the armed militia and the attacks (both racket and suicide bombers) on the population of Israel - The European Union, the United States, Canada, Israel and Japan classified Hamas as a terrorist organization - while nations such as China, Russia, Syria, Turkey, Norway and Switzerland did not.
-------------
It's already the second decade of the twenty first century. It's 2011-th year of our Era, according to the calendar associated with the Christian religion. According to the Chinese calendar it's already 4709-th year. Jews have already celebrated the 5771-st year. Arab calendar, however shows that this is only 1432-nd year of their timeline. Does it mean that all the people for whom now is the year 1432 of their calendar, didn't exist before, or came to the planet Earth from the outside at the beginning of their calendar? Or does it mean that the people with the highest year number in their calendar have always been in the territories in question. I guess, both of these statements are equally preposterous - an insult to the Reason. So, maybe all of them came to the territories of Palestine from some other place on Earth... Oh, well, some really did come from the places, located a bit more to the East, as others, (especially in recent years) came from all over the world (a huge number from the East European countries).
The majority of the current Palestinians are the descendants of the Canaanites living on the territories of modern day Palestine, more than 5 thousand years ago. In the 14th century BC came the Hebrews, a group of Semitic tribes from Mesopotamia, and the Philistines (after whom the country was later named). Even current name of Palestine in Arabic is spelled "Filastin" (فلسطي).
The conflict between Palestinians (backed morally by all the Arab states) and Israel (backed, not only morally, by the countries of the West) is probably THE BEST KNOWN CONFLICT in the World's history. Since it started, the new generations have been born. No matter what is the political leaning of any particular country, this conflict has been mentioned and discussed in the history courses in all the world's schools. And yet, at the same time, it is probably THE MOST MISUNDERSTOOD, AND THE MOST MISINTERPRETED CONFLICT in the world. One can easily find on the Internet and in the libraries, referring to it list of facts and it's time-line. I am not going to try to recreate this time-line in detail in this article. Anyone can do it on his/her own. I will cite only some historical 'milestones' to create a background for the argument.
-------------
The feud started in 1947 when the British decided to leave the Palestinian mandate and allowed to split the Palestine, creating Jewish state (Israel) along the Arab state with with Jerusalem as an international zone under UN jurisdiction. I am in no position to try to assign blame for the igniting of the conflict that followed. The fact is that in 1948 the first Arab-Israeli war was launched. When it ended the new country of Israel was established, and approved by the UN. Scattered all over the World Jews at last had a place they could call HOME. As a result of the war, the small Gaza Strip was left under Egyptian control, and the West Bank was controlled by Jordan. Of more than 800,000 Arabs who lived in Israeli-held territory before 1948, only about 170,000 remained. The rest became refugees in the neighboring Arab countries, ending the Arab majority in the Jewish state.
Throughout the years, the animosities between the surrounding Arab states and Israel resulted in a chain of skirmishes exploding in fully fledged wars in 1967, and in 1973. In 1974 The Arab Summit in Rabat recognized the PLO (established in 1965 and used in guerrilla war in 1967) as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people with Yasser Arafat as it's head. In all the Arab Israeli conflicts the Palestinian issue was always a serious bargaining chip. After the peace treaty between Egypt and Israel in 1979 the PLO existence in Lebanon resulted in 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon. When PLO withdrew from Beyrut, the Israeli occupying forces stayed in the Southern Lebanon for years. Starting in 1987 INTIFADAS (a series of uprisings of the Palestinians against occupying forces), and the Israeli's military response, put tremendous toll on the civilian population, and on the infrastructure of all Palestinian territories.
In 1991, the first comprehensive peace talks started, between Israel and delegations representing the Palestinians and neighboring Arab states. In 1994, after having signed the final version of the Declaration of Principles, Yasser Arafat along with his Israeli counterparts (Shimon Peres, and Yitzhak Rabin) received the Nobel Peace Price for their role in Peace process. In the following years a chain of bomb attacks caused fear in the Israeli population. Every explosion was followed by the army's, heavy handed response. In 1996 Prime Minister Netanyahu introduced his peace plan. At the same moment the plans for expanding the new settlements in the Arab East Jerusalem were unveiled. The signed in 1998 "peace-for-land" agreement gave Palestinians back parts of the West Bank making them responsible for enhancing the effectiveness of their anti-terrorism program. Shortly afterwards, on 03.29.2001 started Operation Defensive Shield, Israel's largest military operation in the West Bank since the 1967 Six-Day War with the goals stated as: "enter cities and villages which have become havens for terrorists; to catch and arrest terrorists and, primarily, their dispatchers and those who finance and support them; to confiscate weapons intended to be used against Israeli citizens; to expose and destroy terrorist facilities and explosives, laboratories, weapons production factories and secret installations. The orders are clear: target and paralyze anyone who takes up weapons and tries to oppose our troops, resists them or endanger them - and to avoid harming the civilian population." Palestinians participating in the resulting from it skirmishes were imprisoned, or exiled (to Cyprus).
The destruction of the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, and resulting from it Islamo-Phobia in the countries of the West, followed by the Afghan War (10.2001), "added oil to the fire" and by the deepening the sentiments on both sides, the conflict escalated. In June 2002 the construction of the West Bank Wall has been initiated. It was argued that the Wall impeded the abilities of Palestinians to move freely as well crossing a border to work in Israel, thus creating an unnecessary hardship for the population. On March 13.2002 - U.N. passed the Resolution 1397 by the Security Council, demanding an "immediate cessation of all acts of violence" and "affirming a vision of a region where two states, Israel and Palestine, live side by side within secure and recognized borders".
On March 20, 2003, based on the false pretenses, the Iraq War was initiated, galvanizing the Arab societies and forcing them even farther in disapproval of the West and all the associated with it policies.
On Feb 24, 2004, The International Court of Justice begins hearings on the legality of the Israeli security barrier, Israel and Palestinians use the hearings as a platform for demonstrations about terror and the occupation. In July of the same year The Court concludes that the Security Barrier violates the international law and it had to be dismantled - however, never implemented. In November of 2004 the PLO Leader, Yasser Arafat died during the siege of Ramallah Headquarters, in a very unclear circumstances... In the years following his death the escalated violence included hundreds of missiles fired into the Israeli territories.
After a series of violent clashes initiated by the Jewish settlers, In July 2005, Israel closed Gaza Strip to Israeli citizens other than residents. In August of that year the evacuation of Gaza settlements and four West Bank settlements was completed. In November 2006, after months of bombardments with Hamas missiles sent to Israel and Israeli targeted killings of the Hamas leaders, Israeli-Palestinian truce applying to the Gaza Strip was announced. The violence continued from both sides. After months of suicide attacks (Hamas) and helicopter gunship destroying the Palestinian cities, in July 2008 the Israeli-Hamas truce was proclaimed. At the same time the split between Fatah and Hamas intensified causing arrests of Hamas activists by the Fatah.
In December 2008 Israel launched Operation Oferet Yetzuka (Cast Lead) using air strikes and rocket attacks to destroy suspected Hamas infrastructure - rocket launching sites, factories, command centers. After causing 1300 Palestinian deaths and losing 13 own, the Operation was discontinued.
On June 1, 2009, the UN Human Rights Council investigative panel led by Judge Richard Goldstone entered the Gaza strip to investigate alleged Israeli war crimes, leaving June 4. Israel refused to cooperate.
On June 04, 2009, the World heard President Obama's speech in Cairo University trying to build a bridge between the West and the Arab countries, also calling for the freeze of the settlement program, and the Arab recognition of Israel.
The Gaza Strip has been isolated by Israel since 2007. The blockade was extended on both the land as well as nautical borders. Only the humanitarian goods were allowed in, while all building materials, stone, machines and the spare parts were completely banned. Egypt played a vital role in the Gaza blockade, operating (effectively closing), Gaza-Egypt border crossing. The Blockade was greatly condemned by the people of many countries including the countries of the West and some progressive activists in Israel itself. In May 2010 a flotilla of 7 ships with the humanitarian aid for the Gaza strip left Turkey to deliver the goods - against the strict blockade imposed by the Israelis. On May 31, 2010, their Flagship Mavi Mamara was stopped by the Israeli commandos boarding the ship from the helicopter under the cover of night. The ship's crew and activists' resistance resulted in 9 people killed by the Israeli forces. In July, the "Turkel" commission formed to investigate the incident didn't find any procedural failures.
In September 2010, the direct Israeli-Palestinian talks opened in Washington with the "blessing" of President Mubarak of Egypt and King Abdullah of Jordan.
When the Arab Spring started in December 2010, ending the 30 years long rules of President Mubarak, in the February 2010, the balance of powers in the region has changed completely. It hasn't left the Israeli-Palestinian relationship without it's impact.
A few days ago, Turkey announced that another flotilla of the humanitarian aid, decisively bigger than the former one, would be breaching the Gaza Blockade soon. Prompted by the Tell Aviv government for the action to stop it, Turkey denied any direct influence over the flotilla plans. The ground for another confrontation with the Israeli Security Forces has been set already. But is the Blockade effective any longer? (beside the question of it's legal, and humane violations).
The New Egypt is not playing any more the Guard of the Western Gaza border. They have just announced plans to permanently open the border crossing to Gaza Strip allowing the unrestrained traffic between Egypt and Gaza..., deeming the Blockade useless.
------------------
The whole history of that conflict is packed with facts, blending together in a hard to distinguish from each other - calamity. Both sides stubbornly use violence against one another. The Hamas militants keep firing the short range missiles, mortars, into the bordering cities and settlements on the Israeli side. Israel has a pretty advanced warning system in place, so after the initial strike all the inhabitants take shelter in the reinforced bunkers. They live in fear. Along both, West Bank and Gaza strip borders the Israelis do not have a normal life - they have to "sleep a rabbit sleep" - with the eyes open. And - sometimes they die. More dangerous for them are bombings in their cities. Yes, the statistical risk of any particular citizen is not huge, but the result is living in fear. Although the Palestinian extremists (I insist on calling the instigators of the violence - extremists, as oppose to peaceful Palestinians), do not have a sophisticated technology themselves, nor the sufficient amount of funds to purchase the more sophisticated weapons, their crude devices still can, and do kill the opponents.
The statistics do not lie, but do not tell the whole truth.
In retaliation for the attacks and for the danger they have to live in, the Israeli forces, not being able to tell a foe from a friend, deliver blows to the Palestinian Population in total. They conduct the "surgical", targeted strikes in which one or another Hamas leader is killed (being blown apart by multiple rockets launched from the helicopter gunships). Quite often (especially in the previous years) after a brief warning to the inhabitants, to vacate the area, the whole area suspected of being related to Hamas activities would be completely destroyed. Often in such situations the inhabitants of soon-to-be destroyed quarters refused to vacate the area.
When suspected tunnels between Egypt and Gaza were bombed, the "collateral damage" was unspeakable. Gaza strip is deliberately prevented from development. The policy, which has the name already, is called devolution. I understand the premise of such an action - but try to explain it to a family in one of the cities in Gaza, who's adults, having college degrees can't find any job. Try to explain it to people whose children do not know what the 'hot water faucet' is, since they are lucky if they have the running water at all. Try to explain it to the people who, during the winter do not fix their shattered windows, since another explosion near by would shatter them again, and again...
The extremist element among Palestinians is responsible for creating situation in which the Israelis have no choice but to retaliate. This is understood... But what the World can't understand, is a greatly disproportional response which is delivered every time and again, to the population of Palestinians. It is delivered indiscriminately. With every Hamas leader targeted and killed by a gunship strike, several bystanders perish.
I can't help but remember (not directly, but reading about it) the situation in Warsaw in 1942-44, when the resistance blew a bomb in a movie theater killing a few Nazis along with a few Poles who were in a wrong place at the wrong time. Every time, the following day a 100 or more, randomly caught on the street, not-involved people, were rounded, picked by the Nazis, and executed, very often on the spot - or transferred to the Nazi concentration camps, for a "slower" extermination...
One would think, that this argument should be rather "close to skin" for the decision-makers in Israel, and yet the disproportional revenge in a Palestinian-Israeli conflict is an every day reality.
Nothing is the same as once was... For centuries there was no country for the Jews. It was a subject of writing, it was a subject of prayers... In 1948 it became a reality. It is, right now one of the undeniable axioms. It's time to start thinking the same way about the Palestinian state.
Four years ago, while celebrating with my wife, one of my "round number birthdays" in a enchanting oasis of Siwa (Egypt, near Libyan border), where we took a short brake after while working on an archaeological preservation project, I met one of the prominent Israeli archaeologist on vacation. We talked about the situation in Egypt, and a wider context. We talked about the Palestinians in Gaza. He praised their education, common sense, good working attitude. He praised their ingenuity... and he couldn't understand why they had to endure such hardships...
---------------
One of the axioms of the history is that, at any given point the "things" are NOT the same, as they used to be. It's one of the everlasting truths.
At one point Yasser Arafat was a head of a terrorist organization. He was undeniably responsible for many unthinkable acts of terror. And then, he evolved (to serve better his own people), abandoned violence, and received a Noble Peace Price for trying better...
As mentioned before, Hamas is considered by many countries a terrorist organization, by some others, not). Maybe they also can denounce violence, if it would serve their people better. I am sure they would... if they could rely on the other side to abandon their expansion agenda as well. It's only a speculation on my part...
There is a growing community of people in the world, for whom the end of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is more and more important. This open-minded community consists of the members of all faiths, all denomination, all political leanings... This community includes quite a number of Israeli, American and European Jews as well. I am not talking only about radicals like an American scholar, Norman Finkelstein (whom I admire tremendously, sometimes not agreeing with his points), but a moderate, democratic minds, like those who run MondeWeiss.net, among others.
Recently (April 15) one of the Italian pro-Palestinian activists, Vittorio Arrigoni was kidnapped and subsequently murdered in Gaza.
Maybe I am naive, but I convinced that the Peace Process in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is an achievable goal, once we realize the lesson transpiring from the Arab Spring 2011:
NOTHING IS, AS IT USED TO BE.
SLOGAN
A RIGHT WORD IS WORTH A THOUSAND PICTURES...
ALL THINGS EVOLVE IN TIME - THIS BLOG IS NO EXCEPTION
PAGES
Friday, April 29, 2011
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Democracy in Egypt - are we there yet?...
The short answer is: NO, not yet.
It's been over 10 weeks since the 30-years-long, brutal Dictatorship ended in Egypt, with deposing of the President Mubarak. We were watching with awe, the unprecedented and unexpected events of the Revolution, which overturned in a swift and a decisive way the decades long regime, along with the decades long fear of Radicalism, which could have creeped in, burying the hopes for the democracy.
On February 11, 2001 Egypt concluded their Revolutionary fight against the regime. The regime has toppled. At that moment Egypt entered much more difficult phase, a clearly gargantuan task - to forge the democracy from scratch - creating the New State according to the Democratic principles, responding to a long time suppressed thirst for the political and civil freedoms of the Egyptians...
The Army, who forced the Dictator out, took charge of the country and it's affairs, both military and civilian. Although it was the only solution which could have brought the stability to the country, it raised more questions than it answered. It was a move in the right direction, provided that the Army would honor their promises to lead the country toward the civilian, democratic government. Since the institution of Army as such is not a very convincing guarantor of the democratic process - it's no surprise that the Tahrir Square became a weekly, Friday-after-prayer place of demonstrations, reminding the Army of it's role in the long process ahead, week after week.
Although the Mubarak's Egypt has been dismantled almost completely, one of it's, hated by all, elements is still in place - state of emergency, which was imposed after the assassination of the President Sadat. It's promised to be removed after the parliamentary elections in September, but for now it allows the army to control the society the way it chooses - some say, it's the same, excessive way, well known from the Mubarak era.
The curfew, imposed on January 28, which has been slowly eased, would be reduced just to 3 hours (from 2 to 5 in the morning).
The protesting crowd is still just partially satisfied by the progress of the reforms in their New Egypt. It's understandable that to the people involved, who's patience has been tested numerous times, sense of time is different, than to everybody else - they would like to have the fully functioning Democratic State in place by now. So, let's have a look at the timeline of all the Post-Mubarak road to Democracy:
Right after achieving the main goal of the protest - deposing the Dictator, the citizens themselves started to clean Tahrir Square from the reminders of sometimes violent events of the past 18 days. Self appointed clean up crews, shouting slogans referring to the New Beginning worked tirelessly removing the destroyed tents, debris and cleaning the stains from the pavement. Some participants voiced to the press their new (for them and the spectators), feeling of ownership of the country.
On Feb 13, 2011 - two days after taking power in their hands, Egypt's military authorities dissolved the 518-seat country's parliament and suspended the outdated and twisted by the former regime, Constitution.
On Feb 14, 2011 hundreds of the Police officers and plainclothes demonstrated in Tahrir Sq. demanding the better pay and work conditions. In the Mubarak Era the officers were underpaid severely, creating the conditions in which the bribery and extortion became the only means for survival. It was so embedded in the fabric of everyday life, that it became customary to approach a Policeman on the streets and offer a payoff, every time one saw a policemen on the beat.
On Feb 16, 2011 the Egyptian Stock Exchange restarted (not without the hiccup, since it had to be stopped for a few ours immediately afterwards to avoid the unintended losses).
During the unrests the Egyptian Museum was attacked by the thieves who stole a few objects and destroyed almost a hundred of others. Apparently, the thieves weren't well informed and were partially satisfied by stealing some replicas of the artifacts displayed in the Museum store. In the period when Mubarak government withdrew the Tourist Police and Police forces in general from the streets, many archaeological sites in Egypt were either completely unprotected or protected by self-appointed forces organized by the devoted functionaries of the Antiquities Department. However, their heroic efforts were not sufficient to prevent the unrepairable damages in the places like Saqqarah. The head of the Supreme Council of Antiquities, who became a face of Egyptian Archaeology for the whole World, Zahi Hawass, who was also raised to the position of the Minister of Antiquities by the Pres. Mubarak shortly before the end of his regime - resigned his post in the protest to the damages done to the cultural heritage.
Every Friday brought countless crowds to Tahrir Sq. either protesting against an actual mishandling of the country's affairs by the Interim Government (= ARMY), or just reminding the Army of their promises given to the demonstrators.
One of the things stirring the public opinion very deeply was the ban on the demonstrations imposed by the Army on all protests which MIGHT disturb the recovering economy of the country. Another - which has proven to be much more serious, was the persecution of the dissenters, and all who didn't agree with the Army's actions. It resembled the treatment the dissent received during 30 years of the Mubarak Regime.
On March 03, 2011, an activist, Amr Abdallah Elbihiry, 33, was convicted and sentenced to five years in military prison by Egypt's Supreme Military Court, after being charged with assaulting a public official on duty and for breaking curfew. He was arrested while peacefully demonstrating for the Prime Minister Shafiq to step down. He wasn't the isolated case of the abuse.
On March 07, 2011, the new Prime Minister was sworn in, along with the completely new Cabinet. The key ministries received the new heads. Some old, and sometimes despised by the 'street', faces still lingered in less important sectors.
Two days later on March 09, 2011, military forces removed the camping crowd from Tahrir Square and arrested more than 100 protesters, following up on the imposed ban of demonstrations. In the process, they also seized the photos, and video recordings from the journalists on the square. This action sparked the International protest and condemnation. It shed the very questionable light on the conduct of the Supreme Army Command, as well as the army's participation in the forging of the democracy in Egypt, especially in anticipation of coming on the March 19 Constitutional Referendum.
The State Security Investigations Service has had a reputation to be a very efficient, repressive tool in the Mubarak's apparatus. It was accused repeatedly of torture, kidnapping, and other human rights abuses serving the suppression of the dissent against the Regime. It was probably the most hated institution in the whole country. On March 15, 2011 the New Interior Minister, Maj. Gen. Mansour el-Essawy, a former Cairo security chief, dissolved that agency and announced the creation of the new National Security Force to replace it, with the reduced and redirected scope of responsibilities: just combating the terrorism. Dismantling the State Security Investigations Service was one of the major demands of the Revolution. The headquarters of the agency as well as regional offices in Alexandria and other cities ware a target of the demonstrations and attacks during the whole uprising. Several times the protesters stormed it's offices in order to seize the documents which might have provided the proofs of the abuse. Unfortunately, the officers of that agency succeeded in many cases destroying these documents before finally, the Army took the matter in their own hands and seized the documents themselves.
"We want to see public trials for those accused of torturing or abusing Egyptians..." - said Islam Lotfi, a leading youth activist. "As much as we are happy that State Security is now dissolved, National Security, the new entity, must be under real judicial supervision," tweeted Wael Ghonim, the Google executive, and a leader of the movement.
Although most of the protesters would prefer replacing the Constitution, modified several times by the Regime in the Past, with the completely new one, creation of the Committee to instigate the changes in the existing document to allow the Democratic development of the new country, was a fact welcome by all. The proposed, constitutional changes removed the monopoly of the National Democratic Party (ruling Mubarak's Party), removed restrictions against creating a religion based political parties, introduced a term limit for the publicly elected officials, etc.
On March 20, 2011, in all the civic centers in Egypt the unprecedented event had place - the Constitutional Referendum. It was the first in the modern history of Egypt, democratic VOTING EXERCISE. Although the voter turn-out wasn't as big as in previous, fixed elections, a mare 41% of the eligible voters, the exercise proved to be an overwhelming success. According to the Referendum Chairman, Mohammed Attiya Egyptians voted 3-to-1 for the implementation of the amendments.
We all remember about the specter of radicalization hanging over the future Democratic Egypt. One of the strongest, and best organized, political forces in Egypt - Muslim Brotherhood benefited greatly from the changes passed by the Referendum. However, their desire to introduce Islamic law, and their ambivalence about the role of women in the society are responsible for their relatively little popularity within the society. Muslim Brotherhood in our times is comprised of educated people, professionals, like engineers, lawyers and doctors. Their creed has changed since the time of the Sadat assassination and their factional split, followed by renouncing of violence. But there is an element in the Egyptian society which is far more unpredictable and dangerous - “Salafi” Islamists, growing in popularity among the poorest and the most confused part of the nation.
If we (the Western Countries) advocate the democratic processes in Egypt and all the participants of the Arab Spring 2011, we must accept the situation in which the part of the society might not like us... Well, in the previous era, when all the regimes of the Middle East were our allies - no one in the allied countries had any good feelings toward the West. What the Arab Spring brought, is the dramatic change in the attitude of the Egyptians (and not only) toward America. It has been dramatically shifted by our backing up the pro-democracy movements.
Egypt's Interim Government plans to use the amended Constitution as a road map toward the power transfer to a new, elected, civilian government. The Army agreed not to place it's candidate in the upcoming presidential elections. However, this fact alone doesn't convince the "street" about the Army's good intentions.
As mentioned previously, the Army, having as progressive intentions as it claims, can not escape from the relics of the past. It's extremely sensitive to the critical statements coming from the various social activists, and bloggers. On March 28, 2011, an Egyptian blogger, Maikel Nabil, was arrested and on April 10, sentenced to 3 years in prison for the charge of "insulting the army". Although it is a clear attempt to muzzle the voice of dissent violating multiple human rights, the case of Maikel Nabil is not that straight-forward. He is a self-declared "pro-Israel activist", whose naive believes in the triumph of democracy transferred to Egypt from Israel, resulted in other bloggers asking if the army put him in a wrong "institution"...
Newscaster Shahira Amin, quit her job in the government run Nile TV, before the fall of Mubarak, in the protest against her being forced by the officials to twist the reality and report only "state approved" news. Ten weeks along the road to democracy - she is still very critical of the army's control over the media. The State TV building in Cairo which is home to about 10 TV and radio stations is now a fortress guarded by tanks and cordons of soldiers. Who controls the media, controls the reality...
On April 13, 2011, one of the most important demands of the protesters has been addressed - President Hosni Mubarak and his two sons, Gamal and Alaa have been imprisoned and subjected to the thorough investigation in order to determine their participation in the corruption of the regime, as well as to determine their responsibility for the lives lost during the uprising. Imprisonment of the President and his family was a crown of the long chain of investigations conducted agains most of the officials of the fallen Regime. Allegations in all the cases include corruption and responsibility for human rights abuse during the 30 years of the Mubarak's Dictatorship.
As reported by Egypt's state news agency MENA, the number of deaths during the Revolution amounted to 864 people, and the amount of injuries rose to 6467 (including 26 Policemen killed).
It must have been difficult for the Military to stand against it's former Boss and prosecute him to the full extend of the law. But given the public persistence in insisting on the delivery of justice as well as growing public weariness about the army's real intentions, the Army was in no position to spare him even if they wanted to. At this point there is no more a possibility to satisfy the crowds with any sort of fake trials, and a "slap on the wrist" treatment of the Dictator. Excluding also the blood thirsty vendetta - the justice has to be served. Egyptian people demand the real, thorough investigation, and the real, just trial, delivering the real, just sentence and the punishment.
Egypt is the biggest Arab country in the world. It has been for decades in the center of attention of the whole region. Egypt is the leader of the Middle East and what happens to it's structure and political fabric is looked upon by all, as a guidance in going through the revolutionary, social and economical changes of the Arab Spring 2011.
On April 16, 2011, The High Administrative Court of Egypt dissolved the National Democratic Party (NDP), former ruling party, and ordered the seizure of its assets, thus meeting another of the key demands of the revolt that led to the downfall of President Hosni Mubarak. The NDP was formed by the Mubarak's predecessor, President Sadat, and was led by Mubarak after the Sadat's assassination. For 40 years the NDP was the only allowed political party in Egypt. Dissolving it, along with the prosecution of it's Leader, and seizing it's assets mark the end of the era, which for most of the Egyptian society has been the only geopolitical system they knew in their lives.
The Mubarak's Era has ended.
On April 21, 2011, an Egyptian Court decreed that the names of the deposed President Hosni Mubarak and his wife Suzanne to be removed from all public places, along with the removal of all apparitions of the Dictator...
It's not a first time in the long, Egyptian history, that the name of the former ruler was meticulously removed from the reliefs, previously dedicated to him/her... (it seems that Mubarak thought of himself as a Pharaoh).
Revising the answer to the title question: SOON.
It's been over 10 weeks since the 30-years-long, brutal Dictatorship ended in Egypt, with deposing of the President Mubarak. We were watching with awe, the unprecedented and unexpected events of the Revolution, which overturned in a swift and a decisive way the decades long regime, along with the decades long fear of Radicalism, which could have creeped in, burying the hopes for the democracy.
On February 11, 2001 Egypt concluded their Revolutionary fight against the regime. The regime has toppled. At that moment Egypt entered much more difficult phase, a clearly gargantuan task - to forge the democracy from scratch - creating the New State according to the Democratic principles, responding to a long time suppressed thirst for the political and civil freedoms of the Egyptians...
The Army, who forced the Dictator out, took charge of the country and it's affairs, both military and civilian. Although it was the only solution which could have brought the stability to the country, it raised more questions than it answered. It was a move in the right direction, provided that the Army would honor their promises to lead the country toward the civilian, democratic government. Since the institution of Army as such is not a very convincing guarantor of the democratic process - it's no surprise that the Tahrir Square became a weekly, Friday-after-prayer place of demonstrations, reminding the Army of it's role in the long process ahead, week after week.
Although the Mubarak's Egypt has been dismantled almost completely, one of it's, hated by all, elements is still in place - state of emergency, which was imposed after the assassination of the President Sadat. It's promised to be removed after the parliamentary elections in September, but for now it allows the army to control the society the way it chooses - some say, it's the same, excessive way, well known from the Mubarak era.
The curfew, imposed on January 28, which has been slowly eased, would be reduced just to 3 hours (from 2 to 5 in the morning).
The protesting crowd is still just partially satisfied by the progress of the reforms in their New Egypt. It's understandable that to the people involved, who's patience has been tested numerous times, sense of time is different, than to everybody else - they would like to have the fully functioning Democratic State in place by now. So, let's have a look at the timeline of all the Post-Mubarak road to Democracy:
Right after achieving the main goal of the protest - deposing the Dictator, the citizens themselves started to clean Tahrir Square from the reminders of sometimes violent events of the past 18 days. Self appointed clean up crews, shouting slogans referring to the New Beginning worked tirelessly removing the destroyed tents, debris and cleaning the stains from the pavement. Some participants voiced to the press their new (for them and the spectators), feeling of ownership of the country.
On Feb 13, 2011 - two days after taking power in their hands, Egypt's military authorities dissolved the 518-seat country's parliament and suspended the outdated and twisted by the former regime, Constitution.
On Feb 14, 2011 hundreds of the Police officers and plainclothes demonstrated in Tahrir Sq. demanding the better pay and work conditions. In the Mubarak Era the officers were underpaid severely, creating the conditions in which the bribery and extortion became the only means for survival. It was so embedded in the fabric of everyday life, that it became customary to approach a Policeman on the streets and offer a payoff, every time one saw a policemen on the beat.
On Feb 16, 2011 the Egyptian Stock Exchange restarted (not without the hiccup, since it had to be stopped for a few ours immediately afterwards to avoid the unintended losses).
During the unrests the Egyptian Museum was attacked by the thieves who stole a few objects and destroyed almost a hundred of others. Apparently, the thieves weren't well informed and were partially satisfied by stealing some replicas of the artifacts displayed in the Museum store. In the period when Mubarak government withdrew the Tourist Police and Police forces in general from the streets, many archaeological sites in Egypt were either completely unprotected or protected by self-appointed forces organized by the devoted functionaries of the Antiquities Department. However, their heroic efforts were not sufficient to prevent the unrepairable damages in the places like Saqqarah. The head of the Supreme Council of Antiquities, who became a face of Egyptian Archaeology for the whole World, Zahi Hawass, who was also raised to the position of the Minister of Antiquities by the Pres. Mubarak shortly before the end of his regime - resigned his post in the protest to the damages done to the cultural heritage.
Every Friday brought countless crowds to Tahrir Sq. either protesting against an actual mishandling of the country's affairs by the Interim Government (= ARMY), or just reminding the Army of their promises given to the demonstrators.
One of the things stirring the public opinion very deeply was the ban on the demonstrations imposed by the Army on all protests which MIGHT disturb the recovering economy of the country. Another - which has proven to be much more serious, was the persecution of the dissenters, and all who didn't agree with the Army's actions. It resembled the treatment the dissent received during 30 years of the Mubarak Regime.
On March 03, 2011, an activist, Amr Abdallah Elbihiry, 33, was convicted and sentenced to five years in military prison by Egypt's Supreme Military Court, after being charged with assaulting a public official on duty and for breaking curfew. He was arrested while peacefully demonstrating for the Prime Minister Shafiq to step down. He wasn't the isolated case of the abuse.
On March 07, 2011, the new Prime Minister was sworn in, along with the completely new Cabinet. The key ministries received the new heads. Some old, and sometimes despised by the 'street', faces still lingered in less important sectors.
Two days later on March 09, 2011, military forces removed the camping crowd from Tahrir Square and arrested more than 100 protesters, following up on the imposed ban of demonstrations. In the process, they also seized the photos, and video recordings from the journalists on the square. This action sparked the International protest and condemnation. It shed the very questionable light on the conduct of the Supreme Army Command, as well as the army's participation in the forging of the democracy in Egypt, especially in anticipation of coming on the March 19 Constitutional Referendum.
The State Security Investigations Service has had a reputation to be a very efficient, repressive tool in the Mubarak's apparatus. It was accused repeatedly of torture, kidnapping, and other human rights abuses serving the suppression of the dissent against the Regime. It was probably the most hated institution in the whole country. On March 15, 2011 the New Interior Minister, Maj. Gen. Mansour el-Essawy, a former Cairo security chief, dissolved that agency and announced the creation of the new National Security Force to replace it, with the reduced and redirected scope of responsibilities: just combating the terrorism. Dismantling the State Security Investigations Service was one of the major demands of the Revolution. The headquarters of the agency as well as regional offices in Alexandria and other cities ware a target of the demonstrations and attacks during the whole uprising. Several times the protesters stormed it's offices in order to seize the documents which might have provided the proofs of the abuse. Unfortunately, the officers of that agency succeeded in many cases destroying these documents before finally, the Army took the matter in their own hands and seized the documents themselves.
"We want to see public trials for those accused of torturing or abusing Egyptians..." - said Islam Lotfi, a leading youth activist. "As much as we are happy that State Security is now dissolved, National Security, the new entity, must be under real judicial supervision," tweeted Wael Ghonim, the Google executive, and a leader of the movement.
Although most of the protesters would prefer replacing the Constitution, modified several times by the Regime in the Past, with the completely new one, creation of the Committee to instigate the changes in the existing document to allow the Democratic development of the new country, was a fact welcome by all. The proposed, constitutional changes removed the monopoly of the National Democratic Party (ruling Mubarak's Party), removed restrictions against creating a religion based political parties, introduced a term limit for the publicly elected officials, etc.
On March 20, 2011, in all the civic centers in Egypt the unprecedented event had place - the Constitutional Referendum. It was the first in the modern history of Egypt, democratic VOTING EXERCISE. Although the voter turn-out wasn't as big as in previous, fixed elections, a mare 41% of the eligible voters, the exercise proved to be an overwhelming success. According to the Referendum Chairman, Mohammed Attiya Egyptians voted 3-to-1 for the implementation of the amendments.
We all remember about the specter of radicalization hanging over the future Democratic Egypt. One of the strongest, and best organized, political forces in Egypt - Muslim Brotherhood benefited greatly from the changes passed by the Referendum. However, their desire to introduce Islamic law, and their ambivalence about the role of women in the society are responsible for their relatively little popularity within the society. Muslim Brotherhood in our times is comprised of educated people, professionals, like engineers, lawyers and doctors. Their creed has changed since the time of the Sadat assassination and their factional split, followed by renouncing of violence. But there is an element in the Egyptian society which is far more unpredictable and dangerous - “Salafi” Islamists, growing in popularity among the poorest and the most confused part of the nation.
If we (the Western Countries) advocate the democratic processes in Egypt and all the participants of the Arab Spring 2011, we must accept the situation in which the part of the society might not like us... Well, in the previous era, when all the regimes of the Middle East were our allies - no one in the allied countries had any good feelings toward the West. What the Arab Spring brought, is the dramatic change in the attitude of the Egyptians (and not only) toward America. It has been dramatically shifted by our backing up the pro-democracy movements.
Egypt's Interim Government plans to use the amended Constitution as a road map toward the power transfer to a new, elected, civilian government. The Army agreed not to place it's candidate in the upcoming presidential elections. However, this fact alone doesn't convince the "street" about the Army's good intentions.
As mentioned previously, the Army, having as progressive intentions as it claims, can not escape from the relics of the past. It's extremely sensitive to the critical statements coming from the various social activists, and bloggers. On March 28, 2011, an Egyptian blogger, Maikel Nabil, was arrested and on April 10, sentenced to 3 years in prison for the charge of "insulting the army". Although it is a clear attempt to muzzle the voice of dissent violating multiple human rights, the case of Maikel Nabil is not that straight-forward. He is a self-declared "pro-Israel activist", whose naive believes in the triumph of democracy transferred to Egypt from Israel, resulted in other bloggers asking if the army put him in a wrong "institution"...
Newscaster Shahira Amin, quit her job in the government run Nile TV, before the fall of Mubarak, in the protest against her being forced by the officials to twist the reality and report only "state approved" news. Ten weeks along the road to democracy - she is still very critical of the army's control over the media. The State TV building in Cairo which is home to about 10 TV and radio stations is now a fortress guarded by tanks and cordons of soldiers. Who controls the media, controls the reality...
On April 13, 2011, one of the most important demands of the protesters has been addressed - President Hosni Mubarak and his two sons, Gamal and Alaa have been imprisoned and subjected to the thorough investigation in order to determine their participation in the corruption of the regime, as well as to determine their responsibility for the lives lost during the uprising. Imprisonment of the President and his family was a crown of the long chain of investigations conducted agains most of the officials of the fallen Regime. Allegations in all the cases include corruption and responsibility for human rights abuse during the 30 years of the Mubarak's Dictatorship.
As reported by Egypt's state news agency MENA, the number of deaths during the Revolution amounted to 864 people, and the amount of injuries rose to 6467 (including 26 Policemen killed).
It must have been difficult for the Military to stand against it's former Boss and prosecute him to the full extend of the law. But given the public persistence in insisting on the delivery of justice as well as growing public weariness about the army's real intentions, the Army was in no position to spare him even if they wanted to. At this point there is no more a possibility to satisfy the crowds with any sort of fake trials, and a "slap on the wrist" treatment of the Dictator. Excluding also the blood thirsty vendetta - the justice has to be served. Egyptian people demand the real, thorough investigation, and the real, just trial, delivering the real, just sentence and the punishment.
Egypt is the biggest Arab country in the world. It has been for decades in the center of attention of the whole region. Egypt is the leader of the Middle East and what happens to it's structure and political fabric is looked upon by all, as a guidance in going through the revolutionary, social and economical changes of the Arab Spring 2011.
On April 16, 2011, The High Administrative Court of Egypt dissolved the National Democratic Party (NDP), former ruling party, and ordered the seizure of its assets, thus meeting another of the key demands of the revolt that led to the downfall of President Hosni Mubarak. The NDP was formed by the Mubarak's predecessor, President Sadat, and was led by Mubarak after the Sadat's assassination. For 40 years the NDP was the only allowed political party in Egypt. Dissolving it, along with the prosecution of it's Leader, and seizing it's assets mark the end of the era, which for most of the Egyptian society has been the only geopolitical system they knew in their lives.
The Mubarak's Era has ended.
On April 21, 2011, an Egyptian Court decreed that the names of the deposed President Hosni Mubarak and his wife Suzanne to be removed from all public places, along with the removal of all apparitions of the Dictator...
It's not a first time in the long, Egyptian history, that the name of the former ruler was meticulously removed from the reliefs, previously dedicated to him/her... (it seems that Mubarak thought of himself as a Pharaoh).
Revising the answer to the title question: SOON.
Thursday, April 14, 2011
USA - fiscal responsibility in a wider context...
I started writing this blog to address our, American, political developments and their, sometimes, misguided instigators. Since the middle of January, though, the international events, stole my attention almost completely. Our own affairs, however, and unprecedented partisanship, especially on the Right became in time too saturated and painful to let them pass without a comment. It's the future of all of us, what is at stake. What's really interesting, is that one can draw some unpleasant analogies between the inner politics of the US and other countries, I have been writing about recently...
For the last few weeks we lived our lives with the "sword of Democles" hanging above our collective head - the government shutdown... The danger has been averted (for a while), but the problem just started to crystallize. Government shutdown is nothing new, it happened pretty recently while Pres. Clinton lead the nation. But, either my political sensitivity was then completely undeveloped, or the situation we witnessed in the past months was a 'completely different beast' from the one in 1995. The country is different now, it grew from 262 million people to 310 million, doubling the national debt to the whooping $14.3 trillion, and exceeding the whole GDP ($14.1 trillion), for the first time since the world War II...
Since the Republicans gained the majority in the Congress of the USA the political climate in the US has changed dramatically. The change came after two years of Obama's presidency, and after two years of the smear campaign against him. The campaign so "low", that it called sometimes for the revision of sanity of it's animators. At the end, EVERYTHING IS ABOUT MONEY...
Eight years of the 'Bush the Second' with their two wars and the unparalleled preferential treatment for the richest 1% of the American Society affected the fabric of the Nation greatly. Coincidentally (although it doesn't seem like a coincidence, but the result), the biggest economical crisis of our lives has killed the "American Dream" for millions of Americans, and still continues to create the waves "washing away joy" from faces of many inhabitants of this land.
Last year, 2010 was another year when the foreclosures reached the record number. During the last 10 years the actual earnings of the common men in America DECREASED, not taking under consideration any inflation factor. But, 2010 was, at the same time, the year when the American Corporations (including the ones who avoided bankruptcy only because of the government bailout) achieved the unmatched, record earnings.
The Lame Duck session of Congress brought some great breakthroughs like the end of "Don't ask, don't tell". But soon after that Obama was forced by the Republicans to forfeit his campaign promise, and extend the Bush Tax Cuts for the richest members of our society.
The New 2011 brought the new fiscal problems to quite of the few States of the Union. In some States, the newly elected Governors dealt with the problem in a constructive way (like Democratic Governor Andrew Cuomo in NY), in others not so constructive... like the new Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, who was just one of many Tea Party/GOP candidates inserted into office by the billionaires, Koch Brothers. The new State budget proposed by him was by many considered unconstitutional, and by all called by it's real name "union-bashing legislature". Even though Walker removed the Police and Fire Fighters from the bill taking away the "collective bargaining rights" from the Unions contracts, to his surprise both Police and Fire Fighters Unions joined the protest in the Wisconsin capitol.
It became clear for all, that the fiscal problems troubling some US States, as well as the whole Country will have to result in drastic spending cuts. It became clear that everyone will have to make sacrifices. Unfortunately, on the both sides of the isle, the areas designated to be affected by the cuts were completely different.
---------------
The US budget in it's majority is divided in 3 sections:
- 68% of the whole budget take: medicaid, medicare, social security and the national security.
- 20% of the budget take: unemployment insurance, veterans benefits, student loans and tax credits for the middle class.
- remaining 12% contains all other liabilities and responsibilities, including the infrastructure, some social programs, foreign aid and so on...
---------------
Coming out of the economical crisis in the eighties Pres. Reagan (and he was a Republican) made saving the Social Security an unbreakable Principle. Till this day it is a program which is "paid for" ahead, as estimated, until 2040. The other programs may not be that lucky.
In the nineties, without sacrificing the welfare of the seniors and underprivileged, the budget of the US actually became strong enough to produce the surplus.
And then, after the "911" irresponsible cowboy mentality of the "Bush the Second" put the country on the downturn spiral, from which we may have a huge difficulty recovering from. Let aside the wars which still ruin our economy, the costly prescription drugs plan imposed by Pres. Bush Junior along with the tax cuts for the rich are greatly responsible for it. Tax cuts alone increased our deficit for the additional $500 billion every year.
According to the Bush Government Comptroller: 7% of the total Bush debt came from these tax cuts - as revealed by Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-Cal) on MSNBC.
In the beginning of April the Republican Paul Ryan brought out a budget proposal which besides taking credit for already done or offered by the Presidents cuts and changes, attacked the 2 sacred for the Americans programs, both Medicare and Medicaid. Ryan changes the Medicare into a voucher exposing it to the practices of often unscrupulous insurance companies, in the result creating a situation in which the seniors would have to spent much more on the health care from already stretched by other factors fixed income. His plan also gives to the states the discretionary handling of the Medicaid creating a vacuum in which the poor will put even more strain on the health system. Repealing Obama Care by the Ryan's plan would be devastating for many.
When the Republicans threatened shutting down the Government on Friday night if their plan is not met by the President, suddenly one of the major bargaining chip happened to be nothing else, but the fate of the Planned Parenthood...
Although the whole Republican proposal was supposed to be under a flag of fiscal responsibility, suddenly a political detail became an unsurpassable obstacle. As falsely estimated by Republican Rep. Michelle Bachman, Planned Parenthood "devoured" almost $1 billion a year (in reality $130 million a year). The same time, the Tea Party accused the Planned Parenthood of having 90% of their activities dedicated to abortion (whereas in reality only 1.3% of their deeds was in any way related to it). The list of false accusation is long and utterly ridiculous.
For some reason these Fiscal Conservatives didn't even want to hear about the role which Bush Tax Cuts for the wealthiest 1% of the society play. Saving $130 million a year is more important than loosing $800 billion to $1 trillion a year. I fail to see logic in it. Do we, actually live in the same reality? Sometimes it seems like our worlds do not have anything in common - paralleled realities...
In the countries of the Middle East, created as a result of the revolution or not, but ruled by the regimes for many decades, the social divide has grown to the point of breakage. The economical development of these countries, often based on sale of oil or other natural minerals or other unprocessed goods created the small group of businessmen in whose hands laid the majority of the wealth of these countries. This elite grew apart from the majority of the population so fast an dynamically, that they ceased to feel any connection, any relationship with the masses. The system allowed for the favoritism, nepotism and all sorts of equally despicable deviations. Such state of affairs allowed the Dictators like Mubarak, Saleh, Ali, or Gadhafi, treat the population of their respective countries only as the sprockets in the money making machines - whose fruits they, the Dictators, were cashing without any remorse. In the end, opening fire on the protesters was just defending their own domains...
Even though most pundits and political commentators do not accuse the Republicans (or Tea Party members) in the US of being unpatriotic, their tendency to please ONLY the rich, by all means, doesn't prove their agenda to go along the principles of Democracy. Their budget proposal, being the true indicator of their real attitude toward other social groups, put's the main burden of providing revenue for the country's needs on the shoulders of the workers and the middle class. In fact the latter one is rapidly shrinking, thanks to years of the abuse of the system by the banks and corporations.
------------
On the April 13, President Obama's televised speech refreshed almost gone by now, hope in the government. In his passionate speech (immediately afterwards trashed by the Republicans) President renewed his pledge to let the Bush tax cuts expire, and making sure that the core of the population - the middle class and the workers - wouldn't have to bear the burden alone. He stated:
EVERYONE WILL MAKE SACRIFICES, BUT NO ONE WILL BEAR ALL THE BURDEN.
He promised the revision of the Tax Code allowing better management of the revenue and reducing the loopholes allowing right now some corporations escape from paying any tax.
During his speech the so called Beige Book ratings were announced. Finally, after a long time of economical stalemate, the economy is estimated to be in a state of "moderate recovery", across the industries, even considering the negative effect of the Japanese catastrophe.
It's obvious that the Deficit in the form we have it right now, is a destructive force. The Head of U.S. Armed Forces - Admiral Mike Mullen stated "that the main security threat to the future of America comes from the National Deficit".
However, according to many experts, the Deficit is only a symptom of the problem - the cause is the system of completely wrong economical decisions which have plagued the USA for many years in the past, resulting in:
- the most expensive and inefficient healthcare, which doesn't do what it's supposed to.
- the most expensive educational system, which doesn't do what it's supposed to.
- very expensive wars, which do not increase the country's security, quite a contrary...
Is President Obama strong enough to lead the country through the recovery?
It seems that most of the programs he tries to save or develop have the strong populous support. Is this support consistent enough to last until the elections of 2012.
We are stuck with the Republican Congress for a few years, but we desperately need the President Obama to serve the second term and hopefully reduce the long lasting effects of the Bush era.
For the last few weeks we lived our lives with the "sword of Democles" hanging above our collective head - the government shutdown... The danger has been averted (for a while), but the problem just started to crystallize. Government shutdown is nothing new, it happened pretty recently while Pres. Clinton lead the nation. But, either my political sensitivity was then completely undeveloped, or the situation we witnessed in the past months was a 'completely different beast' from the one in 1995. The country is different now, it grew from 262 million people to 310 million, doubling the national debt to the whooping $14.3 trillion, and exceeding the whole GDP ($14.1 trillion), for the first time since the world War II...
Since the Republicans gained the majority in the Congress of the USA the political climate in the US has changed dramatically. The change came after two years of Obama's presidency, and after two years of the smear campaign against him. The campaign so "low", that it called sometimes for the revision of sanity of it's animators. At the end, EVERYTHING IS ABOUT MONEY...
Eight years of the 'Bush the Second' with their two wars and the unparalleled preferential treatment for the richest 1% of the American Society affected the fabric of the Nation greatly. Coincidentally (although it doesn't seem like a coincidence, but the result), the biggest economical crisis of our lives has killed the "American Dream" for millions of Americans, and still continues to create the waves "washing away joy" from faces of many inhabitants of this land.
Last year, 2010 was another year when the foreclosures reached the record number. During the last 10 years the actual earnings of the common men in America DECREASED, not taking under consideration any inflation factor. But, 2010 was, at the same time, the year when the American Corporations (including the ones who avoided bankruptcy only because of the government bailout) achieved the unmatched, record earnings.
The Lame Duck session of Congress brought some great breakthroughs like the end of "Don't ask, don't tell". But soon after that Obama was forced by the Republicans to forfeit his campaign promise, and extend the Bush Tax Cuts for the richest members of our society.
The New 2011 brought the new fiscal problems to quite of the few States of the Union. In some States, the newly elected Governors dealt with the problem in a constructive way (like Democratic Governor Andrew Cuomo in NY), in others not so constructive... like the new Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, who was just one of many Tea Party/GOP candidates inserted into office by the billionaires, Koch Brothers. The new State budget proposed by him was by many considered unconstitutional, and by all called by it's real name "union-bashing legislature". Even though Walker removed the Police and Fire Fighters from the bill taking away the "collective bargaining rights" from the Unions contracts, to his surprise both Police and Fire Fighters Unions joined the protest in the Wisconsin capitol.
It became clear for all, that the fiscal problems troubling some US States, as well as the whole Country will have to result in drastic spending cuts. It became clear that everyone will have to make sacrifices. Unfortunately, on the both sides of the isle, the areas designated to be affected by the cuts were completely different.
---------------
The US budget in it's majority is divided in 3 sections:
- 68% of the whole budget take: medicaid, medicare, social security and the national security.
- 20% of the budget take: unemployment insurance, veterans benefits, student loans and tax credits for the middle class.
- remaining 12% contains all other liabilities and responsibilities, including the infrastructure, some social programs, foreign aid and so on...
---------------
Coming out of the economical crisis in the eighties Pres. Reagan (and he was a Republican) made saving the Social Security an unbreakable Principle. Till this day it is a program which is "paid for" ahead, as estimated, until 2040. The other programs may not be that lucky.
In the nineties, without sacrificing the welfare of the seniors and underprivileged, the budget of the US actually became strong enough to produce the surplus.
And then, after the "911" irresponsible cowboy mentality of the "Bush the Second" put the country on the downturn spiral, from which we may have a huge difficulty recovering from. Let aside the wars which still ruin our economy, the costly prescription drugs plan imposed by Pres. Bush Junior along with the tax cuts for the rich are greatly responsible for it. Tax cuts alone increased our deficit for the additional $500 billion every year.
According to the Bush Government Comptroller: 7% of the total Bush debt came from these tax cuts - as revealed by Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-Cal) on MSNBC.
In the beginning of April the Republican Paul Ryan brought out a budget proposal which besides taking credit for already done or offered by the Presidents cuts and changes, attacked the 2 sacred for the Americans programs, both Medicare and Medicaid. Ryan changes the Medicare into a voucher exposing it to the practices of often unscrupulous insurance companies, in the result creating a situation in which the seniors would have to spent much more on the health care from already stretched by other factors fixed income. His plan also gives to the states the discretionary handling of the Medicaid creating a vacuum in which the poor will put even more strain on the health system. Repealing Obama Care by the Ryan's plan would be devastating for many.
When the Republicans threatened shutting down the Government on Friday night if their plan is not met by the President, suddenly one of the major bargaining chip happened to be nothing else, but the fate of the Planned Parenthood...
Although the whole Republican proposal was supposed to be under a flag of fiscal responsibility, suddenly a political detail became an unsurpassable obstacle. As falsely estimated by Republican Rep. Michelle Bachman, Planned Parenthood "devoured" almost $1 billion a year (in reality $130 million a year). The same time, the Tea Party accused the Planned Parenthood of having 90% of their activities dedicated to abortion (whereas in reality only 1.3% of their deeds was in any way related to it). The list of false accusation is long and utterly ridiculous.
For some reason these Fiscal Conservatives didn't even want to hear about the role which Bush Tax Cuts for the wealthiest 1% of the society play. Saving $130 million a year is more important than loosing $800 billion to $1 trillion a year. I fail to see logic in it. Do we, actually live in the same reality? Sometimes it seems like our worlds do not have anything in common - paralleled realities...
In the countries of the Middle East, created as a result of the revolution or not, but ruled by the regimes for many decades, the social divide has grown to the point of breakage. The economical development of these countries, often based on sale of oil or other natural minerals or other unprocessed goods created the small group of businessmen in whose hands laid the majority of the wealth of these countries. This elite grew apart from the majority of the population so fast an dynamically, that they ceased to feel any connection, any relationship with the masses. The system allowed for the favoritism, nepotism and all sorts of equally despicable deviations. Such state of affairs allowed the Dictators like Mubarak, Saleh, Ali, or Gadhafi, treat the population of their respective countries only as the sprockets in the money making machines - whose fruits they, the Dictators, were cashing without any remorse. In the end, opening fire on the protesters was just defending their own domains...
Even though most pundits and political commentators do not accuse the Republicans (or Tea Party members) in the US of being unpatriotic, their tendency to please ONLY the rich, by all means, doesn't prove their agenda to go along the principles of Democracy. Their budget proposal, being the true indicator of their real attitude toward other social groups, put's the main burden of providing revenue for the country's needs on the shoulders of the workers and the middle class. In fact the latter one is rapidly shrinking, thanks to years of the abuse of the system by the banks and corporations.
------------
On the April 13, President Obama's televised speech refreshed almost gone by now, hope in the government. In his passionate speech (immediately afterwards trashed by the Republicans) President renewed his pledge to let the Bush tax cuts expire, and making sure that the core of the population - the middle class and the workers - wouldn't have to bear the burden alone. He stated:
EVERYONE WILL MAKE SACRIFICES, BUT NO ONE WILL BEAR ALL THE BURDEN.
He promised the revision of the Tax Code allowing better management of the revenue and reducing the loopholes allowing right now some corporations escape from paying any tax.
During his speech the so called Beige Book ratings were announced. Finally, after a long time of economical stalemate, the economy is estimated to be in a state of "moderate recovery", across the industries, even considering the negative effect of the Japanese catastrophe.
It's obvious that the Deficit in the form we have it right now, is a destructive force. The Head of U.S. Armed Forces - Admiral Mike Mullen stated "that the main security threat to the future of America comes from the National Deficit".
However, according to many experts, the Deficit is only a symptom of the problem - the cause is the system of completely wrong economical decisions which have plagued the USA for many years in the past, resulting in:
- the most expensive and inefficient healthcare, which doesn't do what it's supposed to.
- the most expensive educational system, which doesn't do what it's supposed to.
- very expensive wars, which do not increase the country's security, quite a contrary...
Is President Obama strong enough to lead the country through the recovery?
It seems that most of the programs he tries to save or develop have the strong populous support. Is this support consistent enough to last until the elections of 2012.
We are stuck with the Republican Congress for a few years, but we desperately need the President Obama to serve the second term and hopefully reduce the long lasting effects of the Bush era.
Monday, April 4, 2011
Libya - gains and losses...
The Libyan unrest started 6 weeks ago.
The UN passed the Resolution 1973 on March 17, accepting the establishment of the "no-fly zone" over Libya, to protect civilians.
French military attacked the Gaddafi's forces on March 19, saving the city of Benghazi and it's inhabitants from the fury of the Regime.
British and US Cruise missiles started falling on the designated military targets on March 20.
NATO took over the implementation of the "no-fly zone" over Libya on March 25.
Stalemate.
The Opposition forces containing mostly young and untrained fighters have proven already that with a "little help from their friends" (allied air support) can make a stand against quite well organized, trained and well equipped Gaddafi's army. All the observers agree that it's not a regular army. They are disorganized, acting on emotions, not knowing the concept of the chain of command, not understanding logistics, wasting ammunition making a lot of noise.
At the same time, however, they are driven by the passion for the new future for their country. They are on the quest for the new, democratic state...
Since the American and NATO forces started implementation of the "no-fly zone" the power equation has changed, greatly benefiting the Opposition. The Libyan conflict has proven to be much more dynamic than anticipated. Gaddafi's forces adjusted their strategy, evolved adapting to the imposed model of war. Instead of using the heavy armor in an obvious and visible way, the Pro-Gaddafi fighters attack in small units, using the light, and agile transport vehicles, making themselves a very difficult target for the Coalition to destroy.
To make the situation more complicated the reported number of sorties performed by all the allied planes has diminished significantly during the last week.
Is it because of the realization that the most of the Libyan defenses have been taken out, and the NATO limits itself to the strict interpretation of the no-fly zone resolution, leaving out the air support for the ground opposition troops? According to AFP, Admiral Mullen said that they had not been able to see through the weather to identify targets. "And that has more than anything else reduced the impact... reduced the effectiveness, and has allowed the regime forces to move back to the east."
We heard in the numerous reports that the Pro-Democracy Fighters had been joined by the big number of regular army soldiers. Very often these defections were done by the whole army units, including their commanders. Representatives of the opposition in the Southern town of Kufrah claimed that the members of the elite Khamis Brigade had gone over to the rebels (the infamous brigade took it's name from it's commander Khamis Gaddafi, who - as suspected - was killed). Reports were informing of a mysterious General who defected with about 13 thousand of the Special Forces soldiers, with the equipment.
Such a great number of the well organized regular army, well armed and motivated, would make a great difference on the 'front line' of the conflict. Unfortunately, for some reason, these alleged defections haven't produced too much of the improvement of the Opposition fighting capabilities. None of the CNN, NBC, or AlJazeera reporters have ever seen these anxiously awaited army units, which would have changed completely the situation. Do they exist at all?
Were all these Opposition claims about army defection, just an attempt to boost morale of the "ragtag" opposition forces? Or, these alleged defections are more just a diabolical plan of the Colonel Gaddafi to infiltrate and destroy the Opposition from within? Such a thought may cross one's mind when we learn that the allied jet-fighter bombed an Opposition fighters convoy near Brega on Saturday, after being shot upon from the ground, and thus mistaking it for the Gaddafi's army...
"As regrettable as it may be, we understand that we might have to give up lives for the greater good. We have to look at the bigger picture," opposition spokesman Mustafa Gheriani said. "This is a war and the lines are so fluid going back and forth, so it's natural that mistakes will happen."
Again, was it a mistake, or some Gaddafi's fighters opened fire on the allied plane from within the convoy or a close proximity?
Suspicions of such a new (for this conflict) Gaddafi's "fifth column" tactics are considered very seriously by all the observers.
Gaddafi is known for using the "cheap tricks". There were many confirmed reports about his army soldiers, dressed in the civilian clothes and hidden in the civilian houses in the cities like Brega, or Ras Lanuf, waiting until the opposition fighters enter the city and attacking them from the behind. Often having their tanks also hidden in the allies or even inside of the houses. There were numerous reports from the outskirts of Sirte (the Dictator's birth place and a stronghold) about the Gaddafi's army units waving the white flag, and "surrendering" to the Opposition, only to open fire on the unsuspecting opposition fighters from the close distance.
------------------
On March 30, the US official sources confirmed (what has already leaked) that Pres. Obama signed the document allowing the CIA covert actions in Libya, and that the CIA operatives were already on the ground to gather intelligence for military airstrikes and to contact and vet the beleaguered opposition forces. AlJazeera correspondents reported that in the Eastern Libya, there was a training camp for the selected Opposition forces, run by the American Special Ops. and the Egyptian Special Ops. Opposition have been asking for a long time for the arms. They have been greatly outgunned by the regime and needed more sophisticated weaponry to fight the Gaddafi's armed brigades. As reported this is the kind of weapons the opposition fighters are right now training for.
The Pro-Democracy fighters have no military training in general, especially when the new, Western made weapons are considered. As reported, they have been already training to use the sophisticated, Heat Seeking, shoulder launched missiles and the bigger and more powerful truck mounted launchers - which already have found their way into Libya, from Egypt.
Since the option of the Western "boots on the ground" has been generally rejected (for the multiplicity of the political reasons), providing the Opposition with the weaponry and the training allowing them to successfully challenge the Gaddafi's armor and rocket launchers, is the only choice of the Coalition. It can be argued if the existing embargo on the weapon trade to Libya in conjunction with the Resolution 1973 can be interpreted allowing such a help. However, considering that the Libyans have to depose the Dictator themselves, without the Western active intervention, it is the only choice.
------------------
There have been many defections of the Libyan officials, since the very beginning of the conflict. We witnessed the Ambassadors to many countries and to the UN, changing allegiance. We witnessed the Ministers changing sides (one of them is the head of the National Council - the main Opposition Governing Body).
In the recent days we could add to that list the Libyan Foreign Minister: Moussa Koussa, who was also a head of the Intelligence in the previous years. This defection delivered a heavy blow to the regime, and constitutes a bottomless well of the information about the regime and it's structure, resources, weak points... As reported by the correspondents in Libya, despite the governmental crack down on the potential defections, many politicians have already, and other prepare to defect. "It is not through actions of war that we can make Gaddafi leave, but rather through strong international pressure to encourage defections by people close to him," said Italy's foreign minister, Franco Frattini.
Unfortunately, the Libyan structure of the government allows the Leader (Gaddafi) to have an absolute control over the country by himself. He is still surrounded by some supporters (including his family).
Libyan dictator has sent his envoys to other countries several times already, trying to pressure the friendly, and unfriendly governments, and work out some "exit strategy" for himself and the family. Although the details oft these talks have never surfaced (so far), Gaddafi makes that effort repeatedly. Libya's former prime minister, and a current Deputy Foreign Minister Abdul Ati al-Obeidi, confirming remarks by US secretary of state Hillary Clinton that regime figures were trying to get in contact, said on Friday: "We are trying to talk to the British, the French and the Americans to stop the killing of people. We are trying to find a mutual solution". His comments followed the disclosure that a senior aide to Gaddafi's powerful son, Saif al-Islam, had met British officials last week on a visit to London.
On Sunday, 04.03, Abdel Ati al-Obeidi flew to Athens carrying a personal message from Gaddafi to Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou, that Libya wanted the fighting to end, a Greek government official told Reuters.
----------------
The pundits and analysts all over the Globe, as well as the military strategists are already unanimous in their opinion that considering the existing stalemate in the fights in Libya the solution to the crisis is probably going to be a political one, not a military. Only time will tell...
The UN passed the Resolution 1973 on March 17, accepting the establishment of the "no-fly zone" over Libya, to protect civilians.
French military attacked the Gaddafi's forces on March 19, saving the city of Benghazi and it's inhabitants from the fury of the Regime.
British and US Cruise missiles started falling on the designated military targets on March 20.
NATO took over the implementation of the "no-fly zone" over Libya on March 25.
Stalemate.
The Opposition forces containing mostly young and untrained fighters have proven already that with a "little help from their friends" (allied air support) can make a stand against quite well organized, trained and well equipped Gaddafi's army. All the observers agree that it's not a regular army. They are disorganized, acting on emotions, not knowing the concept of the chain of command, not understanding logistics, wasting ammunition making a lot of noise.
At the same time, however, they are driven by the passion for the new future for their country. They are on the quest for the new, democratic state...
Since the American and NATO forces started implementation of the "no-fly zone" the power equation has changed, greatly benefiting the Opposition. The Libyan conflict has proven to be much more dynamic than anticipated. Gaddafi's forces adjusted their strategy, evolved adapting to the imposed model of war. Instead of using the heavy armor in an obvious and visible way, the Pro-Gaddafi fighters attack in small units, using the light, and agile transport vehicles, making themselves a very difficult target for the Coalition to destroy.
To make the situation more complicated the reported number of sorties performed by all the allied planes has diminished significantly during the last week.
Is it because of the realization that the most of the Libyan defenses have been taken out, and the NATO limits itself to the strict interpretation of the no-fly zone resolution, leaving out the air support for the ground opposition troops? According to AFP, Admiral Mullen said that they had not been able to see through the weather to identify targets. "And that has more than anything else reduced the impact... reduced the effectiveness, and has allowed the regime forces to move back to the east."
We heard in the numerous reports that the Pro-Democracy Fighters had been joined by the big number of regular army soldiers. Very often these defections were done by the whole army units, including their commanders. Representatives of the opposition in the Southern town of Kufrah claimed that the members of the elite Khamis Brigade had gone over to the rebels (the infamous brigade took it's name from it's commander Khamis Gaddafi, who - as suspected - was killed). Reports were informing of a mysterious General who defected with about 13 thousand of the Special Forces soldiers, with the equipment.
Such a great number of the well organized regular army, well armed and motivated, would make a great difference on the 'front line' of the conflict. Unfortunately, for some reason, these alleged defections haven't produced too much of the improvement of the Opposition fighting capabilities. None of the CNN, NBC, or AlJazeera reporters have ever seen these anxiously awaited army units, which would have changed completely the situation. Do they exist at all?
Were all these Opposition claims about army defection, just an attempt to boost morale of the "ragtag" opposition forces? Or, these alleged defections are more just a diabolical plan of the Colonel Gaddafi to infiltrate and destroy the Opposition from within? Such a thought may cross one's mind when we learn that the allied jet-fighter bombed an Opposition fighters convoy near Brega on Saturday, after being shot upon from the ground, and thus mistaking it for the Gaddafi's army...
"As regrettable as it may be, we understand that we might have to give up lives for the greater good. We have to look at the bigger picture," opposition spokesman Mustafa Gheriani said. "This is a war and the lines are so fluid going back and forth, so it's natural that mistakes will happen."
Again, was it a mistake, or some Gaddafi's fighters opened fire on the allied plane from within the convoy or a close proximity?
Suspicions of such a new (for this conflict) Gaddafi's "fifth column" tactics are considered very seriously by all the observers.
Gaddafi is known for using the "cheap tricks". There were many confirmed reports about his army soldiers, dressed in the civilian clothes and hidden in the civilian houses in the cities like Brega, or Ras Lanuf, waiting until the opposition fighters enter the city and attacking them from the behind. Often having their tanks also hidden in the allies or even inside of the houses. There were numerous reports from the outskirts of Sirte (the Dictator's birth place and a stronghold) about the Gaddafi's army units waving the white flag, and "surrendering" to the Opposition, only to open fire on the unsuspecting opposition fighters from the close distance.
------------------
On March 30, the US official sources confirmed (what has already leaked) that Pres. Obama signed the document allowing the CIA covert actions in Libya, and that the CIA operatives were already on the ground to gather intelligence for military airstrikes and to contact and vet the beleaguered opposition forces. AlJazeera correspondents reported that in the Eastern Libya, there was a training camp for the selected Opposition forces, run by the American Special Ops. and the Egyptian Special Ops. Opposition have been asking for a long time for the arms. They have been greatly outgunned by the regime and needed more sophisticated weaponry to fight the Gaddafi's armed brigades. As reported this is the kind of weapons the opposition fighters are right now training for.
The Pro-Democracy fighters have no military training in general, especially when the new, Western made weapons are considered. As reported, they have been already training to use the sophisticated, Heat Seeking, shoulder launched missiles and the bigger and more powerful truck mounted launchers - which already have found their way into Libya, from Egypt.
Since the option of the Western "boots on the ground" has been generally rejected (for the multiplicity of the political reasons), providing the Opposition with the weaponry and the training allowing them to successfully challenge the Gaddafi's armor and rocket launchers, is the only choice of the Coalition. It can be argued if the existing embargo on the weapon trade to Libya in conjunction with the Resolution 1973 can be interpreted allowing such a help. However, considering that the Libyans have to depose the Dictator themselves, without the Western active intervention, it is the only choice.
------------------
There have been many defections of the Libyan officials, since the very beginning of the conflict. We witnessed the Ambassadors to many countries and to the UN, changing allegiance. We witnessed the Ministers changing sides (one of them is the head of the National Council - the main Opposition Governing Body).
In the recent days we could add to that list the Libyan Foreign Minister: Moussa Koussa, who was also a head of the Intelligence in the previous years. This defection delivered a heavy blow to the regime, and constitutes a bottomless well of the information about the regime and it's structure, resources, weak points... As reported by the correspondents in Libya, despite the governmental crack down on the potential defections, many politicians have already, and other prepare to defect. "It is not through actions of war that we can make Gaddafi leave, but rather through strong international pressure to encourage defections by people close to him," said Italy's foreign minister, Franco Frattini.
Unfortunately, the Libyan structure of the government allows the Leader (Gaddafi) to have an absolute control over the country by himself. He is still surrounded by some supporters (including his family).
Libyan dictator has sent his envoys to other countries several times already, trying to pressure the friendly, and unfriendly governments, and work out some "exit strategy" for himself and the family. Although the details oft these talks have never surfaced (so far), Gaddafi makes that effort repeatedly. Libya's former prime minister, and a current Deputy Foreign Minister Abdul Ati al-Obeidi, confirming remarks by US secretary of state Hillary Clinton that regime figures were trying to get in contact, said on Friday: "We are trying to talk to the British, the French and the Americans to stop the killing of people. We are trying to find a mutual solution". His comments followed the disclosure that a senior aide to Gaddafi's powerful son, Saif al-Islam, had met British officials last week on a visit to London.
On Sunday, 04.03, Abdel Ati al-Obeidi flew to Athens carrying a personal message from Gaddafi to Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou, that Libya wanted the fighting to end, a Greek government official told Reuters.
----------------
The pundits and analysts all over the Globe, as well as the military strategists are already unanimous in their opinion that considering the existing stalemate in the fights in Libya the solution to the crisis is probably going to be a political one, not a military. Only time will tell...
Sunday, April 3, 2011
All actions have their consequences - burning of the Quran...
...and we have a winner In the ongoing contest for a title of THE WORST AMERICAN. The winner is:
Pastor Terry Jones - an evangelical preacher from an nondenominational church of Gainesville, Fla. , who on March 20, 2011 burned a copy of the Islam Holy Book, after months of a public condemnation of the aforementioned act.
Intolerance is a part of the human psyche. There is no doubt about it. In the less socially advanced societies as well as those based on any kind of dogma (religious or political), intolerance leads to hatred, sometimes manifested by the acts of stupidity, sometimes by the acts of violence... In some dictatorial states, unsuspecting anything World learned about the racial, or ethnic tensions only after deposing of the regime, and springing from it ethnic cleansing. It was a case in the former Yugoslavia, it was a case in Rwanda, even Iraq...
More advanced socially, democratic states of Europe and America are not immune to these tensions, although the resulting from it hatred doesn't produce as many victims as in the previous examples, with the obvious exception of the Holocaust of the Jewish population in the invaded by Germany countries of Europe during the World War 2.
During more than 200 years of forging of the United States of America, it's society went through many dark periods, producing never healed scars in the people's minds.
Let aside the never completely eradicated (yet), racism, which still affects the fabric of our society, there were periods of time when a certain ethnic or religious minorities were isolated, detained, persecuted just for being members of that particular minority. It happened during the World War 2 to the Japanese minority. Many Japanese-Americans being a long time citizens of the USA or even born here, became the subject to the detention in the "War Relocation Camps" in the wake of the Pearl Harbor attack. Of those interned, 62% were American citizens.
In the late XIX century for a quite a long time the Catholics in the USA were a target of the severe persecution.
In the early nineteen-fifties a senator from Wisconsin, Joseph McCarthy instigated a country-wide mass hysteria which cased a "witch hunt", a persecution of anybody who could be accused (in the most cases falsely) of any Communist tendencies, or sympathies.
And then came 911, when 19 terrorists, acting out of hatred to our Country and the West in general attacked the USA in the worst terrorist attack ever, on our land. They were from a few different countries. They had, however, one thing in common (beside the obvious hatred to the USA) - they were all MUSLIM.
The Anti-Muslim sentiments have been always lurking in the Western societies. People fear what they can't understand. Muslim population in a great degree does not assimilate well in the Western countries. They stand out. Look a bit different, dress a bit different... But the 911 opened the Pandora's Box. The Muslim population in the US (about 3 million strong) became a target of violence, vandalism, arson...
In the meantime America got involved in 2 big wars, against Afghanistan, and Iraq (both Muslim countries). And even then our (then) President G.W. Bush explained over and over that America was not in the war with Islam, just with some of it's extreme followers.
In the beginning of this year the Congressional Hearing was called for, to investigate "The threat of radicalization of Muslim Community in the USA".
"We continue to solicit and receive the support of many Muslim Americans who love this nation and work with our government to protect it," said Democratic Senator Dick Durbin, who chaired the proceedings.
"At the same time, many law-abiding Muslim Americans face discrimination and charges that they're not real Americans simply because of their religion."
We all know what the Islamist Extremists are responsible for in the World. We hear about the suicide bombers or attacks on the hotels, political assassinations in Afghanistan, Iraq, India, Pakistan... It's easy to stir our imagination knowing that since 911 more than a hundred terrorist plots have been discovered and neutralized in the States. Most of them have been dealt with successfully thanks to the Muslim Community, which in general is a community of the law obedient and honest, hard working people who are grateful for the opportunities presented by the USA.
------------
Christians value their Bible as a Holy Book - written by the disciples, telling the truth of faith, but still being only a book. It's not a case with the Islam. The Quran (Kur'an, Koran etc) is in their beliefs not only a book containing the holly scripture. In their belief the Quran itself is THE WORD OF GOD. There are many aspects of the Islam, the non-believers do not understand (and their do not need to). However, the ignorance can NEVER be an excuse for any offensive acts against any religion.
In 2005 a Danish newspaper posted a series of cartoons showing a depiction of the Prophet Muhammad (so called "Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy"). Since the Prophet's depiction is blasphemous to people of the Muslim faith, the protests exploded in many of the Muslim countries, some of which escalated into violence with instances of firing on crowds of protesters (resulting in a total of more than 100 reported deaths), including setting fire to the Danish Embassies in Syria, Lebanon and Iran, storming European buildings, and burning the Danish, Dutch, Norwegian, French and German flags in Gaza City.
The act of posting such cartoons by a Danish cartoonist was an offensive act which had it's consequences (and it wasn't out of ignorance). We all learned about that in a hard way. Many people lost their lives...
In July 2010 the US public opinion was suddenly alerted by the prospect of another act against the Islam as such. In protest of what it calls a religion "of the devil," a nondenominational church in Gainesville, Florida, planed to host an "International Burn a Quran Day" on the ninth anniversary of the September 11, 2001, attacks. "We believe that Islam is of the devil, that it's causing billions of people to go to hell, it is a deceptive religion, it is a violent religion and that is proven many, many times," Pastor Terry Jones told CNN's Rick Sanchez. Terry Jones was also an author of a book titled "Islam is of the Devil.
To my surprise, the general response of the US society to this proposed act of dangerous stupidity, was overwhelmingly negative. Muslim community, along with the most of Evangelicals and other Christian denominations condemned the idea, as unnecessarily inflammatory, and carrying the unforeseen risks. In a few days preceding the planned event we learned that in Baghdad itself, there was a small Christian community who's church had been attacked several times prior to these events, and who's very existence would be threatened by the possible reaction to the proposed Quran burning.
And yet, on March 20, 2011 Pastor Terry Jones carried away his offensive, idiotic act. He burned a copy of the Quran and posted the video of it on YouTube.com...
Most of the logically thinking people in the World condemned it unanimously, along with the official disapproval of many governments. However, in Kabul, Afghanistan, the mass protests escalated into a violence when demonstrators set cars and shops ablaze. The uproar even brought violence to the normally peaceful northern city of Mazar-i-Sharif, when a crowd of protesters — apparently infiltrated by insurgents — stormed the U.N. compound in an attack that left four Afghan protesters and seven foreign U.N. employees dead. Several days after the violent protests in Afghanistan started, the tensions are still strong and the demonstrations continue, reviving the growing discontent of the Afghans against the US occupation. Anti-Western sentiments triggered by the act of Pastor Terry Jones resulted also in several additional suicide bombings and numerous incidents of the flag burning.
------------
After 2005 Danish cartoon incident we already had a chance to learn what is the reaction of the Muslims around the World to the blasphemy perpetrated by the West. It has already happened. People have died in the result of it. The relation between the act itself and the Muslim response is clearly defined and understood by all.
Bearing this knowledge, how can any sane person commit such an offensive (and proving nothing) act and completely disregard the danger of instigating the violence which may cost many innocent lives?
How can a person who claims to be a "Man of God" be so shortsighted and egocentric to cause a loss of life of many, just to prove (in his mind) a point. The reaction of very conservative Muslims in Afghanistan has not been unfathomable. Quite a contrary, it was an easy to predict reaction, following the same pattern as in 2005.
In my eyes, Pastor Terry Jones is directly responsible for the resulting from his act, loss of life and increased instability of the region, since he did what he did, being aware of the consequences. He himself killed the victims of the riots in Afghanistan.
Pastor Terry Jones - an evangelical preacher from an nondenominational church of Gainesville, Fla. , who on March 20, 2011 burned a copy of the Islam Holy Book, after months of a public condemnation of the aforementioned act.
Intolerance is a part of the human psyche. There is no doubt about it. In the less socially advanced societies as well as those based on any kind of dogma (religious or political), intolerance leads to hatred, sometimes manifested by the acts of stupidity, sometimes by the acts of violence... In some dictatorial states, unsuspecting anything World learned about the racial, or ethnic tensions only after deposing of the regime, and springing from it ethnic cleansing. It was a case in the former Yugoslavia, it was a case in Rwanda, even Iraq...
More advanced socially, democratic states of Europe and America are not immune to these tensions, although the resulting from it hatred doesn't produce as many victims as in the previous examples, with the obvious exception of the Holocaust of the Jewish population in the invaded by Germany countries of Europe during the World War 2.
During more than 200 years of forging of the United States of America, it's society went through many dark periods, producing never healed scars in the people's minds.
Let aside the never completely eradicated (yet), racism, which still affects the fabric of our society, there were periods of time when a certain ethnic or religious minorities were isolated, detained, persecuted just for being members of that particular minority. It happened during the World War 2 to the Japanese minority. Many Japanese-Americans being a long time citizens of the USA or even born here, became the subject to the detention in the "War Relocation Camps" in the wake of the Pearl Harbor attack. Of those interned, 62% were American citizens.
In the late XIX century for a quite a long time the Catholics in the USA were a target of the severe persecution.
In the early nineteen-fifties a senator from Wisconsin, Joseph McCarthy instigated a country-wide mass hysteria which cased a "witch hunt", a persecution of anybody who could be accused (in the most cases falsely) of any Communist tendencies, or sympathies.
And then came 911, when 19 terrorists, acting out of hatred to our Country and the West in general attacked the USA in the worst terrorist attack ever, on our land. They were from a few different countries. They had, however, one thing in common (beside the obvious hatred to the USA) - they were all MUSLIM.
The Anti-Muslim sentiments have been always lurking in the Western societies. People fear what they can't understand. Muslim population in a great degree does not assimilate well in the Western countries. They stand out. Look a bit different, dress a bit different... But the 911 opened the Pandora's Box. The Muslim population in the US (about 3 million strong) became a target of violence, vandalism, arson...
In the meantime America got involved in 2 big wars, against Afghanistan, and Iraq (both Muslim countries). And even then our (then) President G.W. Bush explained over and over that America was not in the war with Islam, just with some of it's extreme followers.
In the beginning of this year the Congressional Hearing was called for, to investigate "The threat of radicalization of Muslim Community in the USA".
"We continue to solicit and receive the support of many Muslim Americans who love this nation and work with our government to protect it," said Democratic Senator Dick Durbin, who chaired the proceedings.
"At the same time, many law-abiding Muslim Americans face discrimination and charges that they're not real Americans simply because of their religion."
We all know what the Islamist Extremists are responsible for in the World. We hear about the suicide bombers or attacks on the hotels, political assassinations in Afghanistan, Iraq, India, Pakistan... It's easy to stir our imagination knowing that since 911 more than a hundred terrorist plots have been discovered and neutralized in the States. Most of them have been dealt with successfully thanks to the Muslim Community, which in general is a community of the law obedient and honest, hard working people who are grateful for the opportunities presented by the USA.
------------
Christians value their Bible as a Holy Book - written by the disciples, telling the truth of faith, but still being only a book. It's not a case with the Islam. The Quran (Kur'an, Koran etc) is in their beliefs not only a book containing the holly scripture. In their belief the Quran itself is THE WORD OF GOD. There are many aspects of the Islam, the non-believers do not understand (and their do not need to). However, the ignorance can NEVER be an excuse for any offensive acts against any religion.
In 2005 a Danish newspaper posted a series of cartoons showing a depiction of the Prophet Muhammad (so called "Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy"). Since the Prophet's depiction is blasphemous to people of the Muslim faith, the protests exploded in many of the Muslim countries, some of which escalated into violence with instances of firing on crowds of protesters (resulting in a total of more than 100 reported deaths), including setting fire to the Danish Embassies in Syria, Lebanon and Iran, storming European buildings, and burning the Danish, Dutch, Norwegian, French and German flags in Gaza City.
The act of posting such cartoons by a Danish cartoonist was an offensive act which had it's consequences (and it wasn't out of ignorance). We all learned about that in a hard way. Many people lost their lives...
In July 2010 the US public opinion was suddenly alerted by the prospect of another act against the Islam as such. In protest of what it calls a religion "of the devil," a nondenominational church in Gainesville, Florida, planed to host an "International Burn a Quran Day" on the ninth anniversary of the September 11, 2001, attacks. "We believe that Islam is of the devil, that it's causing billions of people to go to hell, it is a deceptive religion, it is a violent religion and that is proven many, many times," Pastor Terry Jones told CNN's Rick Sanchez. Terry Jones was also an author of a book titled "Islam is of the Devil.
To my surprise, the general response of the US society to this proposed act of dangerous stupidity, was overwhelmingly negative. Muslim community, along with the most of Evangelicals and other Christian denominations condemned the idea, as unnecessarily inflammatory, and carrying the unforeseen risks. In a few days preceding the planned event we learned that in Baghdad itself, there was a small Christian community who's church had been attacked several times prior to these events, and who's very existence would be threatened by the possible reaction to the proposed Quran burning.
And yet, on March 20, 2011 Pastor Terry Jones carried away his offensive, idiotic act. He burned a copy of the Quran and posted the video of it on YouTube.com...
Most of the logically thinking people in the World condemned it unanimously, along with the official disapproval of many governments. However, in Kabul, Afghanistan, the mass protests escalated into a violence when demonstrators set cars and shops ablaze. The uproar even brought violence to the normally peaceful northern city of Mazar-i-Sharif, when a crowd of protesters — apparently infiltrated by insurgents — stormed the U.N. compound in an attack that left four Afghan protesters and seven foreign U.N. employees dead. Several days after the violent protests in Afghanistan started, the tensions are still strong and the demonstrations continue, reviving the growing discontent of the Afghans against the US occupation. Anti-Western sentiments triggered by the act of Pastor Terry Jones resulted also in several additional suicide bombings and numerous incidents of the flag burning.
------------
After 2005 Danish cartoon incident we already had a chance to learn what is the reaction of the Muslims around the World to the blasphemy perpetrated by the West. It has already happened. People have died in the result of it. The relation between the act itself and the Muslim response is clearly defined and understood by all.
Bearing this knowledge, how can any sane person commit such an offensive (and proving nothing) act and completely disregard the danger of instigating the violence which may cost many innocent lives?
How can a person who claims to be a "Man of God" be so shortsighted and egocentric to cause a loss of life of many, just to prove (in his mind) a point. The reaction of very conservative Muslims in Afghanistan has not been unfathomable. Quite a contrary, it was an easy to predict reaction, following the same pattern as in 2005.
In my eyes, Pastor Terry Jones is directly responsible for the resulting from his act, loss of life and increased instability of the region, since he did what he did, being aware of the consequences. He himself killed the victims of the riots in Afghanistan.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Libya - what's the plan?... and should we be there at all?...
On Friday, March 17, the UN Security Council approved the resolution for the establishment of NO FLY ZONE over Libya. The main objective of the military action was protecting of the civilians from the threat of the Gaddafi's army and the militia. The wording of the resolution included "...by all means necessary..." which opens the possibilities of targeting not only anti-aircraft weapons, but also any heavy armor, and the artillery of all sorts. The only restriction included prohibiting the "occupying forces". This line alone could be interpreted as allowing for the 'special forces' actions, or temporary military reinforcements of the opposition forces by the coalition troops (although this interpretation was initially dismissed by the Coalition).
It's been four days of heavy bombardment of the Libya's military installations located in the West of the country, including the capital city - Tripoli. To the general surprise, the first news on Saturday provided information of the unilateral French Air-force action, during which 24 of the French fighter-jets obliterated Gaddafi's forces trying to repossess Benghazi. The smoldering remains of the armored vehicles and personnel transporters as well as heavy artillery stood a somber witness of the Coalition punishing hand.
After the four nights, and more than 160 Cruise missiles delivered with the surgical precision to the designated military targets, the Gaddafi's army has been deprived from any own air-force and generally blinded in respect to the Coalition air power enforcing the No-Fly Zone over Libya. However, no military campaign is safe, even when the technological superiority is as overwhelming as in the case of the Libyan conflict. Even after destroying Gaddafi's air-defenses no allied plane is completely secure, can be hit 'accidentally' by a shoulder-to-air missile or even a small arms fire... or suffer the technical difficulties as in the case of one of American F15 fighter-jets which crashed in a vicinity of Benghazi. Fortunately, both crewmen who ejected when the problem occurred, have been recovered (one by the Marines Recovery Team, and the other by the rebel forces).
In the five days since the UN No-Fly Zone Resolution, Colonel Gaddafi confirmed again and again his untrustworthy status, offering already twice a cease-fire, while his forces were in the process of attacking the rebel-controlled cities. It seems that the concept of TRUTH is completely foreign to all of the Mid-Eastern Dictators (already fallen or in the process of being toppled, from Ali, Mubarak, Gaddafi, to Saleh). After a few days absence from the spot light, Colonel Gaddafi spoke to a small group of his supporters tonight. As always defiant, and melodramatic, he shouted repeatably that "he was not afraid of the imperialistic intervention and he would be victorious at the end".
While Gaddafi indulged the Libyan State TV viewers with the usual clownish performance, CNN aired the interview with Secretary Clinton who hinted that there were already some 'behind the scenes' communications with the Gaddafi's regime in regard of "the options" which would be still open for the deposed Dictator.
-------------
Let's have a closer look at the Coalition role in imposing the UN Resolution, and all it's implications.
Although the UN Mandate covers only "humanitarian" action, directed in crippling the Government forces and their abilities to harm the civilians, all the involved powers state that at the end Gaddafi would have to GO. Even considering the UN Mandate very precisely, leaving Gaddafi in power (like Hussein in Iraq after the 1st Gulf War) would have the dire consequences to the population of Libya. Gaddafi "promised" already several times, that he "would go door to door" and punish all the opposition members. In this aspect, I wouldn't dismiss it like all the lies he utters on other occasions. His track record proves it. There is no doubt - in order to prevent a genocide in Libya, Gaddafi must be removed from power. At the same time Colonel Gaddafi has not been designated as a target. According to the letter of the Resolution and the general understanding of the Coalition intentions, the Dictator has to be removed from power by the Libyans themselves.
So far, after 4 days of the "Operation Odyssey Dawn", the USA leads the action delivering the most of the missile strikes, as well as technical "know-how", jamming, logistics, air-tankers for the Coalition planes. The initial military involvement of the US forces was supposed to be eventually substituted by the NATO armies enhanced by participation of the Arab countries (as we already know - very limited Arab countries participation - 4 fighter jets from Qatar). It has been known from the very beginning of the operation that the US wouldn't want to lead yet another assault on another Arab Country. However, there is a split of opinions between the members of the NATO, on a subject "who would lead the operation", as well as any particular responsibilities of the Coalition members.
It seems, that the NATO members, being the sovereign countries themselves, may decide on their own if they would like to pursue any additional objectives, not included in the general operational goal by the Command of the Operation. It opens the option of active actions against the Dictator and his family personally by any Coalition member on it's own.
Gaddafi's propaganda machine already accused Denmark of being on a Crusade against him, after the Danish Cruise missiles hit one of the buildings in his compound.
Coalition missiles and planes have been very successful in destroying Gaddafi's air defenses, air-force, as well some of the heavy armor and artillery in the vicinity of the rebel stronghold, Benghazi. Any military convoy in this desert country is a fair game for the Coalition fighter-jets. However, it becomes obvious, that Gaddafi's forces adapted to the imposed conditions already, operating their tanks and the artillery pieces in the rebel controlled territories, hiding within the civilian settlements. One can not forget about the government 'sleeper cells', consisting of well armed ground troops, but including also some tanks and mortars, which (as reported from Benghazi) can operate against the opposition forces within the cities.
It has been anticipated that while the Western forces pound the Gaddafi's defenses, some members of the close to the Dictator circles might actively help in removing the Tyrant. Although some of the army units and the high rank officers defected to the opposition, the awaited coup hasn't happened. Maybe it's due to the fear of failure, and swift punishment, or the fear to be persecuted and punished by the opposition, for already committed atrocities.
It becomes more and more likely, that if Gaddafi doesn't surrender and doesn't leave, the conflict (including the Coalition involvement) might be prolonged indefinitely, or might require the dreaded ground operation. In the latter case the political consequences of such action may be very difficult to deal with, starting from the protests form Arab League and all already opposed countries like Russia, China..., but also the public opinion shift in the Arab countries which would be devastating. Not even considering the popular opposition within the participating countries...
So, what is the plan? Do we have the plan B if Colonel Gaddafi is more stubborn and defiant than anticipated?
-------------
The opposition within the participating countries has already started, at least in the USA.
Although almost 44% of the population supports the decision of joining the fight against Gaddafi, the same amount of the population opposes it. This by itself is not that harmful. However the split in the American Congress is much more significant and dangerous.
When Pres. Obama was debating if at all join the UN effort in creating the No-Fly Zone, some republican Senators (like Sen. John McCain, from Arizona) were criticizing the President for the indecision, playing the high note of the Principles of Democracy and the moral obligation of such countries like America...
Now, on both sides of the isle the Senators and Representatives raise their contemptuous voices. To everybody's surprise Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D. from Ohio) accused the president of the unconstitutional decision, when he "failed" to ask the Congress of the USA if to "go to war against Libya".
Unfortunately, looking at the political conditions in the US, one may conclude that no matter what would the President chose, the Washington politicians would criticize it and oppose it only because it was decided by the President who, for one reason or another, they hate. Outside of Washington, the Obama's popular approval is much better (Gallup weekly approval rating is 48% - 3% higher than Clinton's in a similar period of his presidency)
-------------------
It brings us to the last question, initiated in the title of this article: Should we be there (Libya) at all?
I quoted already the popular approval of 44% for the American involvement in the imposing of the UN Resolution 1973. What makes the Libyan situation worthy the commitment of American resources and putting the troops in a harm's way? What makes the other international situations in which the genocide occurs NOT worthy our involvement?
All the presidents sang the "Democracy" song very loud. It helped the Eastern Block countries to overturn the communist regimes and enter the new, democratic era in their history.
The American and NATO involvement in the Balkans helped preventing unimaginable atrocities (although it escalated from the "no-fly zone"). We tried to maintain the peace in Somalia, but it backfired to the point of the shameful withdrawal, leaving the country in chaos - which developed into the fully fledged civil war.
And then, in 1994 came another African conflict - Rwanda, where within 100 days, the ethnic cleansing caused 800,000 dead and countless amount of wounded. No one reacted on time.
Few years later, in 2003 almost 400,000 people died and almost 2.5 million have been displaced as a result of of atrocities by the Sudanese government-sponsored Janjaweed militia. No one reacted on time.
There were conflicts in Kongo, Chad, Ivory Coast (current), Algeria (both decades ago, and current), and many others. What is the decisive factor making them actionable, or not?
Many critics of the policies of the Western countries would list THE OIL as this decisive factor. Oil definitely changes the perception of the country who owns a lot of it in the eye of the World. It was probably the only reason for the "liberation" of the Iraqis from the brutal Dictator - Saddam Husein.
However, I believe that it's much more complicated in other cases.
After failures to provide the assistance and stop the atrocities in Rwanda, or Darfur the possibility of genocide in Libya is the sufficient reason to do anything what is physically possible to prevent it (and I hope that the fact that Libya produces 2% of the World's oil is not the most important factor in this equation).
It's been four days of heavy bombardment of the Libya's military installations located in the West of the country, including the capital city - Tripoli. To the general surprise, the first news on Saturday provided information of the unilateral French Air-force action, during which 24 of the French fighter-jets obliterated Gaddafi's forces trying to repossess Benghazi. The smoldering remains of the armored vehicles and personnel transporters as well as heavy artillery stood a somber witness of the Coalition punishing hand.
After the four nights, and more than 160 Cruise missiles delivered with the surgical precision to the designated military targets, the Gaddafi's army has been deprived from any own air-force and generally blinded in respect to the Coalition air power enforcing the No-Fly Zone over Libya. However, no military campaign is safe, even when the technological superiority is as overwhelming as in the case of the Libyan conflict. Even after destroying Gaddafi's air-defenses no allied plane is completely secure, can be hit 'accidentally' by a shoulder-to-air missile or even a small arms fire... or suffer the technical difficulties as in the case of one of American F15 fighter-jets which crashed in a vicinity of Benghazi. Fortunately, both crewmen who ejected when the problem occurred, have been recovered (one by the Marines Recovery Team, and the other by the rebel forces).
In the five days since the UN No-Fly Zone Resolution, Colonel Gaddafi confirmed again and again his untrustworthy status, offering already twice a cease-fire, while his forces were in the process of attacking the rebel-controlled cities. It seems that the concept of TRUTH is completely foreign to all of the Mid-Eastern Dictators (already fallen or in the process of being toppled, from Ali, Mubarak, Gaddafi, to Saleh). After a few days absence from the spot light, Colonel Gaddafi spoke to a small group of his supporters tonight. As always defiant, and melodramatic, he shouted repeatably that "he was not afraid of the imperialistic intervention and he would be victorious at the end".
While Gaddafi indulged the Libyan State TV viewers with the usual clownish performance, CNN aired the interview with Secretary Clinton who hinted that there were already some 'behind the scenes' communications with the Gaddafi's regime in regard of "the options" which would be still open for the deposed Dictator.
-------------
Let's have a closer look at the Coalition role in imposing the UN Resolution, and all it's implications.
Although the UN Mandate covers only "humanitarian" action, directed in crippling the Government forces and their abilities to harm the civilians, all the involved powers state that at the end Gaddafi would have to GO. Even considering the UN Mandate very precisely, leaving Gaddafi in power (like Hussein in Iraq after the 1st Gulf War) would have the dire consequences to the population of Libya. Gaddafi "promised" already several times, that he "would go door to door" and punish all the opposition members. In this aspect, I wouldn't dismiss it like all the lies he utters on other occasions. His track record proves it. There is no doubt - in order to prevent a genocide in Libya, Gaddafi must be removed from power. At the same time Colonel Gaddafi has not been designated as a target. According to the letter of the Resolution and the general understanding of the Coalition intentions, the Dictator has to be removed from power by the Libyans themselves.
So far, after 4 days of the "Operation Odyssey Dawn", the USA leads the action delivering the most of the missile strikes, as well as technical "know-how", jamming, logistics, air-tankers for the Coalition planes. The initial military involvement of the US forces was supposed to be eventually substituted by the NATO armies enhanced by participation of the Arab countries (as we already know - very limited Arab countries participation - 4 fighter jets from Qatar). It has been known from the very beginning of the operation that the US wouldn't want to lead yet another assault on another Arab Country. However, there is a split of opinions between the members of the NATO, on a subject "who would lead the operation", as well as any particular responsibilities of the Coalition members.
It seems, that the NATO members, being the sovereign countries themselves, may decide on their own if they would like to pursue any additional objectives, not included in the general operational goal by the Command of the Operation. It opens the option of active actions against the Dictator and his family personally by any Coalition member on it's own.
Gaddafi's propaganda machine already accused Denmark of being on a Crusade against him, after the Danish Cruise missiles hit one of the buildings in his compound.
Coalition missiles and planes have been very successful in destroying Gaddafi's air defenses, air-force, as well some of the heavy armor and artillery in the vicinity of the rebel stronghold, Benghazi. Any military convoy in this desert country is a fair game for the Coalition fighter-jets. However, it becomes obvious, that Gaddafi's forces adapted to the imposed conditions already, operating their tanks and the artillery pieces in the rebel controlled territories, hiding within the civilian settlements. One can not forget about the government 'sleeper cells', consisting of well armed ground troops, but including also some tanks and mortars, which (as reported from Benghazi) can operate against the opposition forces within the cities.
It has been anticipated that while the Western forces pound the Gaddafi's defenses, some members of the close to the Dictator circles might actively help in removing the Tyrant. Although some of the army units and the high rank officers defected to the opposition, the awaited coup hasn't happened. Maybe it's due to the fear of failure, and swift punishment, or the fear to be persecuted and punished by the opposition, for already committed atrocities.
It becomes more and more likely, that if Gaddafi doesn't surrender and doesn't leave, the conflict (including the Coalition involvement) might be prolonged indefinitely, or might require the dreaded ground operation. In the latter case the political consequences of such action may be very difficult to deal with, starting from the protests form Arab League and all already opposed countries like Russia, China..., but also the public opinion shift in the Arab countries which would be devastating. Not even considering the popular opposition within the participating countries...
So, what is the plan? Do we have the plan B if Colonel Gaddafi is more stubborn and defiant than anticipated?
-------------
The opposition within the participating countries has already started, at least in the USA.
Although almost 44% of the population supports the decision of joining the fight against Gaddafi, the same amount of the population opposes it. This by itself is not that harmful. However the split in the American Congress is much more significant and dangerous.
When Pres. Obama was debating if at all join the UN effort in creating the No-Fly Zone, some republican Senators (like Sen. John McCain, from Arizona) were criticizing the President for the indecision, playing the high note of the Principles of Democracy and the moral obligation of such countries like America...
Now, on both sides of the isle the Senators and Representatives raise their contemptuous voices. To everybody's surprise Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D. from Ohio) accused the president of the unconstitutional decision, when he "failed" to ask the Congress of the USA if to "go to war against Libya".
Unfortunately, looking at the political conditions in the US, one may conclude that no matter what would the President chose, the Washington politicians would criticize it and oppose it only because it was decided by the President who, for one reason or another, they hate. Outside of Washington, the Obama's popular approval is much better (Gallup weekly approval rating is 48% - 3% higher than Clinton's in a similar period of his presidency)
-------------------
It brings us to the last question, initiated in the title of this article: Should we be there (Libya) at all?
I quoted already the popular approval of 44% for the American involvement in the imposing of the UN Resolution 1973. What makes the Libyan situation worthy the commitment of American resources and putting the troops in a harm's way? What makes the other international situations in which the genocide occurs NOT worthy our involvement?
All the presidents sang the "Democracy" song very loud. It helped the Eastern Block countries to overturn the communist regimes and enter the new, democratic era in their history.
The American and NATO involvement in the Balkans helped preventing unimaginable atrocities (although it escalated from the "no-fly zone"). We tried to maintain the peace in Somalia, but it backfired to the point of the shameful withdrawal, leaving the country in chaos - which developed into the fully fledged civil war.
And then, in 1994 came another African conflict - Rwanda, where within 100 days, the ethnic cleansing caused 800,000 dead and countless amount of wounded. No one reacted on time.
Few years later, in 2003 almost 400,000 people died and almost 2.5 million have been displaced as a result of of atrocities by the Sudanese government-sponsored Janjaweed militia. No one reacted on time.
There were conflicts in Kongo, Chad, Ivory Coast (current), Algeria (both decades ago, and current), and many others. What is the decisive factor making them actionable, or not?
Many critics of the policies of the Western countries would list THE OIL as this decisive factor. Oil definitely changes the perception of the country who owns a lot of it in the eye of the World. It was probably the only reason for the "liberation" of the Iraqis from the brutal Dictator - Saddam Husein.
However, I believe that it's much more complicated in other cases.
After failures to provide the assistance and stop the atrocities in Rwanda, or Darfur the possibility of genocide in Libya is the sufficient reason to do anything what is physically possible to prevent it (and I hope that the fact that Libya produces 2% of the World's oil is not the most important factor in this equation).
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Libya - I am baffled and bewildered...
I am baffled and bewildered by an impasse in the UN Libyan talks, caused by a few undecided countries in the UN Security Council. While 3 weeks ago Gaddafi was pounding the opposition using his air force - all we heard from our media was: "unconfirmed reports suggest the use of the aircrafts against the civilian population...". We heard from our Leaders, that the "violence against civilians must stop...", and "all guilty of the war crimes will be brought to justice...". We heard: "we would impose the no-fly zone over Libya if only Arab League accepted it, and the atrocities were unquestionably high...".
On Saturday (03.12) the Arab League, after days of deliberation came with the unprecedented call - asking the Western World to impose the no-fly zone over Libya. There is no question if Gaddafi's forces use an aerial bombardments against the Opposition. There is no question if the Gaddafi's forces get the upper hand because of their military superiority AND the Western Indecision...
And now we hear that the no-fly zone wouldn't fix anything, it wouldn't prevent the massacre, because in this war Gaddafi is not relying solely on the aerial attacks, but uses the ground forces and the artillery. Of course, no one can deny that the Regime uses all the weapons in their arsenal including the tanks, heavy artillery, special forces... not only the air force. It is out of the question, but if deprived from the air superiority, with his air force being smashed to smithereens, and without any anti-air batteries, Gaddafi wouldn't be so cocky and defiant.
We were already talking about arming the rebels' army and providing them with any necessary supply and support. They have already proved that given a chance they can fight like the regular army. It has been surprising, to say the least, that they could stand against the Regime so strongly.
-------------
Our coalition Armies attacked Iraq twice. First time to slap Saddam's hands for being a naughty boy and invading our ally - Kuwait. The second time on a quest for WMD - which the CIA couldn't find, no matter how meticulously they looked for them.
And then the deposing of the Dictator wasn't a bad idea, even though all experts knew that the power vacuum in this split ethnically country would have completely unpredictable consequences. And we did it nevertheless - with a clear vision of the spoils (an access to the Iraq's oil and plenty of lucrative contracts for Halliburton and the like...). Now, 10 years later we leave the damaged goods behind us.
Libya is a different story. We already learned (or we simply can't learn), that this Spring of Nations in Arab countries of the Middle East works on the different ground then the "specter of the Muslim radicalism" with which we have been threatened constantly, for decades. Although some Republicans in our country do not believe in it - the EVOLUTION is what creates changes in the world. This Evolution applies not only to the DNA of the particular species, but also, and maybe, above all, to the social DNA of the developing socially nations.
And so, the unruly, socially undeveloped, and for 42 years deprived from any real political life, Libya creates the National Council in the first 10 days of the uprising. For some reason, the Opposition is wise enough to use the people with the experience (they gained it in the Gaddafi's regime, yes, but they chose the opposition), who could fill the post-Gaddafi vacuum.
-------------
I have been writing about this particular aspect of the Revolutions sweeping the Middle East from the very beginning. Nothing is as previously predicted. Nothing is the way it has been happening for decades. No single Anti-American demonstration, no flag burning. Quite a contrary, the reverence for the democratic principles for which the USA stands, and hope for help.
I couldn't believe how long it took to make a stand which allowed the Egyptian Army to end this Mubarak farce. Fortunately for the US, the events happened so fast, that even our indecision didn't ruin it. And now we can count on the fruitful cooperation with the democratic Egypt - probably the same way as previously on the ties with the Dictator. The same with Tunisia.
However in the case of Libya the story gets a bit more complicated. Gaddafi has never been a democratic Leader. In the beginning he lead the popular revolution, but soon enough he used the "Green Book" to muzzle any democratic forces in the country and successfully rid Libya of any subversive element...
Apparently not all of them have been lost, beaten, tortured, imprisoned, killed. Sweeping the Middle East (and not only), the wind of the modern, democratic ideas, found a fertile ground even under the repressive hand of the flamboyant buffoon - Dictator Colonel Gaddafi.
Unfortunately Gaddafi knows very well that before the Europe, UN, or even America can organize themselves to act against him, the rebellion will be OVER. He is very well aware of the powers he has, and how destructive can be the blows of his war machine. He has had enough time in his 34 years of defiance (before 2003 when he denounced terrorism for the benefit of the Western World) to know how long time is needed to debate on any important issues within the UN. Even knowing about his, not destroyed yet, 9 metric tons of the Mustard Gas doesn't speed up the process. And I thought that WMD is a term which always galvanizes the World's Leaders...
We all have to keep in mind that as fast as this revolution was ignited, that fast Gaddafi can defeat the Opposition forces ad bring back "the law and order", if he is left with a sufficient time to do so, and not stopped immediately.
When we lose time on pointless arguments, and despite the urgent calls of the Rebels and the Arab League, sit on our hands - we deliver the message to the World and in particular to the People of the Arab countries. And this is not the message we would like to send... In the meantime Gaddafi uses his air force as much as he can, decimating the rebels, systematically and on schedule. Schedule which he already knows by heart - The UN schedule.
A brilliant correspondent in Libya, Hoda Abdel-Hamid in her tweet on Wednesday afternoon asked: "The world needs to protect Benghazi if it really wants stability... or is it too uncomfortable to let go of #Libya's oil?".
Why do we have to ask this question. We, in Western World value greatly the principles of democracy. We have fought and have died for them...
And of course it helps when the object of our help and support provides us with a strong incentives to do so. But even in this context do not dismiss Libya all along. When/if the Opposition forces win and the New Libya (the one with 3 colored flag) revises their commercial obligations - I am pretty sure, that those who help them now wouldn't have to worry for the outcome of these revisions...
On Saturday (03.12) the Arab League, after days of deliberation came with the unprecedented call - asking the Western World to impose the no-fly zone over Libya. There is no question if Gaddafi's forces use an aerial bombardments against the Opposition. There is no question if the Gaddafi's forces get the upper hand because of their military superiority AND the Western Indecision...
And now we hear that the no-fly zone wouldn't fix anything, it wouldn't prevent the massacre, because in this war Gaddafi is not relying solely on the aerial attacks, but uses the ground forces and the artillery. Of course, no one can deny that the Regime uses all the weapons in their arsenal including the tanks, heavy artillery, special forces... not only the air force. It is out of the question, but if deprived from the air superiority, with his air force being smashed to smithereens, and without any anti-air batteries, Gaddafi wouldn't be so cocky and defiant.
We were already talking about arming the rebels' army and providing them with any necessary supply and support. They have already proved that given a chance they can fight like the regular army. It has been surprising, to say the least, that they could stand against the Regime so strongly.
-------------
Our coalition Armies attacked Iraq twice. First time to slap Saddam's hands for being a naughty boy and invading our ally - Kuwait. The second time on a quest for WMD - which the CIA couldn't find, no matter how meticulously they looked for them.
And then the deposing of the Dictator wasn't a bad idea, even though all experts knew that the power vacuum in this split ethnically country would have completely unpredictable consequences. And we did it nevertheless - with a clear vision of the spoils (an access to the Iraq's oil and plenty of lucrative contracts for Halliburton and the like...). Now, 10 years later we leave the damaged goods behind us.
Libya is a different story. We already learned (or we simply can't learn), that this Spring of Nations in Arab countries of the Middle East works on the different ground then the "specter of the Muslim radicalism" with which we have been threatened constantly, for decades. Although some Republicans in our country do not believe in it - the EVOLUTION is what creates changes in the world. This Evolution applies not only to the DNA of the particular species, but also, and maybe, above all, to the social DNA of the developing socially nations.
And so, the unruly, socially undeveloped, and for 42 years deprived from any real political life, Libya creates the National Council in the first 10 days of the uprising. For some reason, the Opposition is wise enough to use the people with the experience (they gained it in the Gaddafi's regime, yes, but they chose the opposition), who could fill the post-Gaddafi vacuum.
-------------
I have been writing about this particular aspect of the Revolutions sweeping the Middle East from the very beginning. Nothing is as previously predicted. Nothing is the way it has been happening for decades. No single Anti-American demonstration, no flag burning. Quite a contrary, the reverence for the democratic principles for which the USA stands, and hope for help.
I couldn't believe how long it took to make a stand which allowed the Egyptian Army to end this Mubarak farce. Fortunately for the US, the events happened so fast, that even our indecision didn't ruin it. And now we can count on the fruitful cooperation with the democratic Egypt - probably the same way as previously on the ties with the Dictator. The same with Tunisia.
However in the case of Libya the story gets a bit more complicated. Gaddafi has never been a democratic Leader. In the beginning he lead the popular revolution, but soon enough he used the "Green Book" to muzzle any democratic forces in the country and successfully rid Libya of any subversive element...
Apparently not all of them have been lost, beaten, tortured, imprisoned, killed. Sweeping the Middle East (and not only), the wind of the modern, democratic ideas, found a fertile ground even under the repressive hand of the flamboyant buffoon - Dictator Colonel Gaddafi.
Unfortunately Gaddafi knows very well that before the Europe, UN, or even America can organize themselves to act against him, the rebellion will be OVER. He is very well aware of the powers he has, and how destructive can be the blows of his war machine. He has had enough time in his 34 years of defiance (before 2003 when he denounced terrorism for the benefit of the Western World) to know how long time is needed to debate on any important issues within the UN. Even knowing about his, not destroyed yet, 9 metric tons of the Mustard Gas doesn't speed up the process. And I thought that WMD is a term which always galvanizes the World's Leaders...
We all have to keep in mind that as fast as this revolution was ignited, that fast Gaddafi can defeat the Opposition forces ad bring back "the law and order", if he is left with a sufficient time to do so, and not stopped immediately.
When we lose time on pointless arguments, and despite the urgent calls of the Rebels and the Arab League, sit on our hands - we deliver the message to the World and in particular to the People of the Arab countries. And this is not the message we would like to send... In the meantime Gaddafi uses his air force as much as he can, decimating the rebels, systematically and on schedule. Schedule which he already knows by heart - The UN schedule.
A brilliant correspondent in Libya, Hoda Abdel-Hamid in her tweet on Wednesday afternoon asked: "The world needs to protect Benghazi if it really wants stability... or is it too uncomfortable to let go of #Libya's oil?".
Why do we have to ask this question. We, in Western World value greatly the principles of democracy. We have fought and have died for them...
And of course it helps when the object of our help and support provides us with a strong incentives to do so. But even in this context do not dismiss Libya all along. When/if the Opposition forces win and the New Libya (the one with 3 colored flag) revises their commercial obligations - I am pretty sure, that those who help them now wouldn't have to worry for the outcome of these revisions...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)