Sunday, November 19, 2006
American "realism" and the failure of Arab liberalism
Michael Young, writing in Lebanon's Daily Star, observes that the return of the "realists" to power in Washington is a disaster for Arab liberals, who failed to support the American democratization strategy when they had the chance. Read the whole extraordinary column.
18 Comments:
By 
Purple Avenger, at
Sun Nov 19, 01:55:00 AM:
He's absolutely right. The American left has no inclinations towards liberalization in the ME either, so those people are going to have to suck on it for quite a while longer now.
Beware of what you wish for - you might get it...
By 
, at
Sun Nov 19, 08:28:00 AM:
Wild winds of change are swirling throughout the Globe.
The UN failure to implement the details of 1701 (non enforcement of agreement to stop the re-arming of Hezbullah and also others, - hamas/fatah and all the other local death cults on the west bank and gazoo), - more pressure on Israel.
The Baker cess-pit think tank, and the insane scramble by poodle Blair to engage with the leaders of the Axis of Evil is all revealed.
The seperation of Damascas and Tehran.
All part of the scramble to exit Iraq.
The price for Syrian compliance, - The Golan Heights.
The cost to Syria, - stop meddling in Lebanese politics, still get to cover up/kill, investigations of assasinations.
Italy/Spain/France want to put UN troops in Gazoo, urge Israeli withdrawal. BUT DON'T TALK TO ISRAEL!!!! Will raise/increase pressure, at future meetings.
Meanwhile Hez/Hams/Fatah/al-Qaeda/and other death cults are FULLY ARMED, and knocking on Israeli doors. Gazoo will still receive Iranian arms via Egypt (or is that the next leg in the "tour"?).
al-Qeda won't do political deals, they are an "ideal", not an attackable state. Iran is breeding and rearing the next 2 al-Qaeda leaders.
All this to isolate Iran, - a SHAFTING of Israel.
Will Damascas be an "honest broker"? Not a hope!
Will Hezb/Hamas/Fatah/other death cults lay down their arms, and behave like evolved human beings? Do they even know how? Not a hope!
Will al-Qaeda vanish into the diaspora? Not a hope!
Will Saudi stop funding Global expansion of Madsrassahs? Not a hope!
Will Pakistan reclaim Waziristan, stop harbouring, and providing medicalaid, R andR, etc for wounded Taliban? Not a hope!
Will Pakistan close down madrasahs, and deal with rabid preachers? Not a hope!
Will the Taliban melt into the diaspora? Do they even know how? Not a hope!
Will Hezb?hamas/Iran, stop training/arming/financing, Islamics in the Horn of Africa? Not a hope!
So whats the trade of, expressed at net?
US troops get to leave the Iraqi shit-hole created initially by US idiots (Bremmer et. al.) aided and abetted by Iran/Syria/al-Qaeda, and a host of other ME despots.
US politicians leave with egos intact.
Cannon-fodder grunts bear the cost (as always).
Whatever noble intentions there might have been, are screwed.
Donks in the US create career paths via "investigations".
Syria gets the Golan, but gives up - er - nothing! except something it wasn't too happy with anyway, - er - relations with Iran.
Do you really think it will? Not a hope!
The US with EU/UK connivance has shafted Israel, big time.
The US has shafted Israel, and rewarded the Islamics, big time.
Will Olmert come to his senses? Maybe!
Netenyaho (?sp) has.
Will Israel stand for this? Not a hope!
Will Buffett, Intel, Motorola, and hundreds of other major US companies sit down quietly? Not a hope!
Now that the moves take on a pattern, I have NEVER BEEN MORE DISGUSTED.
That said...
Eurabia marches on.
Look for next approaches to China, in efforts to screw US. (18 months?)
Where does Russia sit in all this?
The Yamamah deal still provides for Saudi prince lifestyle, why would they not continue funding nut jobs around the world?
By , at
Sun Nov 19, 08:39:00 AM:
By K. Pablo, at
Sun Nov 19, 11:16:00 AM:
I think he hits the nail on the head when he describes the inability of realists to think outside the framework of an international order of nation-states. This is the fundamental flaw of both the realist and leftist critique of Bush Administration geopolitical strategy. The globalization of Islamic irhabists transends borders, and in some cases is virulent enough to re-shape borders (see western Pakistan). We are about to enter into an unprecedentedly violent era of history which will severely test the coherence of central governments of marginally functioning middle eastern states. Our strategic imperative must be to position our assets (whether military, economic, intelligence, media, etc.) with entities likely to withstand several decades of war, famine, and refugee migrations. Unfortunately, the Scowcroft crowd has been so heavily bribed by the Saudis that it is unlikely to invest diplomacy or support to newly significant players like the Iraqi Kurds, Turkey, Pakistan and India.
By , at
Sun Nov 19, 11:46:00 AM:
Pablo.
Look at the ages of the saudi princes, and the numbers, there"s thousands of the buggers all seriously addicted to serious wealth, and seriously older than 70 years. Do you serously believe there's gonna be no tribal infighting for the pie that remains when they expire?
Look at the median age of palestinian males in Gazoo and the west bank, - 15.8 years.
And who do you think their role models are, other than gun runners, drug dealers, dead martyrs, deranged preachers, currency forgers and armaments technicians?
Stability?, there ain't gonna be no stability by negotiation, and bribes don't work with the majority, they so need those 72 virgins all rationality ceases.
How many muslims in Algeria murdered fellow muslims 'cos they weren't austere enough? How many Shia and sunni deaths caused by muslims in Iraq?
How many muslim on muslim deaths in Egypt, or Syria, or Lebanon, or Iran????
Even old bin laden (may he rot in hell) complaines about muslim on muslim death. Who ya gonna back, and should US lives be wasted?? The whole area is a freakin zoo.
By Gordon Smith, at
Sun Nov 19, 11:58:00 AM:
I don't know where to leave this comment, so this thread'll have to do.
Kissinger's saying we can't win militarily in Iraq. Kissinger.
WaPo: "Military victory is no longer possible in Iraq, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger said in a television interview broadcast Sunday.
Kissinger presented a bleak vision of Iraq, saying the U.S. government must enter into dialogue with Iraq's regional neighbors _ including Iran _ if progress is to be made in the region.
"If you mean by 'military victory' an Iraqi government that can be established and whose writ runs across the whole country, that gets the civil war under control and sectarian violence under control in a time period that the political processes of the democracies will support, I don't believe that is possible,"
---
Just thought I'd drop that in here.
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Sun Nov 19, 12:19:00 PM:
Michael Young: "Rather than drawing on the Americans' presence in their midst for their own benefit, far too many of liberals fell back on a restricting cliche that the US was practicing a new form of imperialism."
Yeah, well, that's life. People gets opportunities. Winners exploit them. Losers don't. You can't save people from themselves.
By , at
Sun Nov 19, 12:58:00 PM:
Dec, you seem sad about it, is that a streak of a philanthropist that I detect?
By Dawnfire82, at
Sun Nov 19, 01:26:00 PM:
Look how he defines the term.
"If you mean by 'military victory' an Iraqi government that can be established and whose writ runs across the whole country, that gets the civil war under control and sectarian violence under control in a time period that the political processes of the democracies will support, I don't believe that is possible,"
So what the good Mr. Kissinger says is that the mythical perfect and fast super-victory that people pine for is not realistic. We already know that.
And note that he doesn't say that it isn't possible. He says it isn't possible within the political period, etc. That is, before the Democrats' pet peace movement gets enough steam to end it prematurely.
If you want to read into a quotation, read into it all the way.
By , at
Sun Nov 19, 01:48:00 PM:
The U.S. was drawn out of isolationism into WW1 in 1917. America's ample strength and overarching presence spelled the end for the Kaiser's armies. And yet, despite Wilson's best efforts, America receded back into isolationism in 1920.
By 1939, the fascist threat started to rouse the U.S.; it STILL took Pearl Harbor to fully awaken America to take her rightful place, that is, in the lead of the fight against European and Asian totalitarianism. Only problem was, the communists were in complete control of large areas of the world, and were in the ascendancy... probably because of American isolationist policies in the 20s and 30s.
A new doctrine was then born... the doctrine of Cold War. Fight communism using proxy armies, and support thugocracies, thereby saving America from participating directly in that messy war thing. That meant (obviously), propping up dictatorial regimes headed by persons like the Shah or Pinochet. It took 40 years, but the Cold War was eventually won by the good guys (thank God). Freedom trumps despotism, at least as far as national wealth and the spirit of loyalty goes, does it not?
The Soviet Union kept the lid on a whole lotta nationalist and religious fervor, it turns out. Once communism evaporated, the vacuum it HAS left is what it's all about. Clinton took a "holiday from history" (as Mark Steyn labels it) in the 1990s. This vacuum STILL has been filled. An ideological war is raging to fill it. The Bush Doctrine is a nascent policy doctrine... it has only JUST been born. It was born of the necessity of America to be involved in world affairs; deeply involved... or else. Five years is nothing in the scope of time. This thing will go on for 50 years.
What is this "thing" about Iraqis having to "stand up" so the U.S. can "stand down"? If Iraqis do stand up, what then? The Iranian mullahs ought to get their asses kicked... 95% of their subject population hates them. More isolationism? Overthrow the mullahs and implant another Shah (who, I understand, was about 2% as loathed as the theocrats in charge now)? Chuck the whole thing and let the get nukes?
It's gonna take DECADES for the Bush Doctrine to bear fruit. GWB's administration might not be able to get their message across to the American people as good as it should... might have to do with Americans' reluctance to asssume the lead a la 1939. Don't throw in the towel, America! If not for the United States, this whole world would be screwed.
Respectfully signed, a Canadian who is grateful the United States of America is our neighbour and protector.
By , at
Sun Nov 19, 02:20:00 PM:
OOPS...
"... This vacuum STILL has not been filled..."
..."Chuck the whole thing and let theM get nukes?"...
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Sun Nov 19, 05:16:00 PM:
Anonymous asked: "Dec, you seem sad about it, is that a streak of a philanthropist that I detect?"
In predominantly Muslim Indonesia, a government official ordered the half-naked men in a tiny rural village to wear trousers.
The village men objected. "We won't wear pants until we receive free pants from the government," declared a spokesman for group.
The government refused to meet the demand.
I bought trousers for the male villagers.
That was my contribution to the Muslim world this year.
By Dawnfire82, at
Sun Nov 19, 10:02:00 PM:
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Sun Nov 19, 11:05:00 PM:
Sad?
I visited the home of a wealthy Indonesian man on Java. Several guards patrolled his property.
"Why do you have so many guards?" I asked. "Why don't you buy a couple of guard dogs."
"Dogs cost too much to feed," he replied. "Dogs eat meat. People eat rice."
By , at
Mon Nov 20, 12:59:00 PM:
In 1971 Lord Butler, K.G., C.H. published his autobiography, and told of his years as an employee of the UK Govn.
He narrates his experiences under 6 UK Prime Ministers, - Baldwin, Chamberlain, Churchill, Eden, Macmillan and Home.
He negotiated personally with the Foreign Ministers of France and Russia on the eve of the 1938 pact.
He took over as head of the Government at the climax of the ill-starred Suez Expedition.
A Conservative to the core, he was influencial on the domestic policies of the Conservative party.
The external climate of the times was instrumental in setting the tone of the UKs relations with the rest of the world.
The title of his autobiography is "The Art of the Possible".
He knew, from his many years of experience, and background knowledge just what was possible within the constricts of his relationships both within the UK and in his external relationships.
Knowledge, of the depth he possessed, was not acquired overnight.
Briefly, the Book was aptly named, - "The Art of the Possible".
New kids on the block don't have that expertise. The new kids in the Administration need briefing, before taking up their posts, and face a long learning curve.
By Gary Rosen, at
Mon Nov 20, 05:58:00 PM:
First,
"He negotiated personally with the Foreign Ministers of France and Russia on the eve of the 1938 pact."
Then,
"Knowledge, of the depth he possessed, was not acquired overnight. Briefly, the Book was aptly named, - "The Art of the Possible". New kids on the block don't have that expertise."
Yes, the "Art of the Possible" - the abandonment of Czechoslovakia followed by WWII. Do we really want or need that kind of "expertise"?
By , at
Tue Nov 21, 04:55:00 AM:
By , at
Tue Nov 21, 05:14:00 AM:
But also check your possible future, re Iraq and Israel.
You are wrong on History in the context of Butlers unheard warnings.
Your future increasingly looks like "The Art of the Possible".
