If you missed Hussein Agha and Robert Malley’s long piece The Arab Counterrevolution in the New York Review of Books a couple of weeks ago, as I did, go back and take a look. It’s not the least bit dated and is, in fact, one of the better analyses published lately of what is called the Arab Spring.
Middle Eastern liberals, they argue, only affected the direction of Arab history this year for the briefest of periods. The Arab revolution began on December 17, 2010, when Mohamed Bouazizi kicked off the revolt against Tunisia’s dictator Zine El Abidine Ben Ali by setting himself on fire in the town of Sidi Bouzid. The Arab revolution ended, they say, on February 12, the day after Hosni Mubarak was removed from his palace in Cairo. Men with guns and theology have been in charge of history’s direction since then.
“The outcome of the Arab awakening,” they write, “will not be determined by those who launched it. The popular uprisings were broadly welcomed, but they do not neatly fit the social and political makeup of traditional communities often organized along tribal and kinship ties, where religion has a central part and foreign meddling is the norm. The result will be decided by other, more calculating and hard-nosed forces.”
Thanks for recommending “the Arab Counter Revolution” by Agha and Malley. This tersely worded last paragraph of theirs is a real gem, and should be read slowly:
“The French and the British helped liberate the Arab world from four centuries of Ottoman rule; the US enabled the Afghan Mujahideen to liberate themselves from Soviet domination and freed the Iraqi people from Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship. Before long, yesterday’s liberators became today’s foes. Things are not as they seem. The sound and fury of revolutionary moments can dull the senses and obscure the more ruthless struggles going on in the shadows.”
….”Things are not a they seem”….I loved that one, also “…dull the senses…”
Why on earth do we Americans think that we can contribute…any…any…”nation building” to this cesspool?
The French and British drew these current boundaries; the French and British were broke after the Second World War, and handed this post-Colonial mess over to the new United Nations Organization. We Americans had to step in during the Cold War, and that tangled barrel of fighting cats remains an unending …..quagmire….I love to bring up that prickly word out of the ‘sixtie’s South East Asia….quagmire. It even sounds sticky, pulling at our boots.
What shallow learning pools we continue to draw from. Let’s get out of absorbent Asia with all of our massed troops and fight this Islam problem of ours from off-shore.
The problem with just leaving these countries to fester is that they become training grounds for Islamic terrorists.
It is no longer possible to pull up the drawbridge.
#2. Don Cox – That’s a good point. Transportation and technology has been shrinking the world. The Middle East was once half way around the world. Now it is only across town.
We can purge ourselves from ME oil and let the chinese be dependent on S. Arabia, etc
How?
Canadian oil sands, American oil, Alaskan oil………………
Why, exactly, is it “no longer possible to pull up the drawbridge”? I don’t buy the transportation and technology hand-waving. Transportation and technology should, in principle, have the same potential-and therefore-actual effect on sub-Saharan Africa as on the Middle East, but we (the “west”) have basically little to do with sub-Saharan Africa. I would rather we had more to do with sub-Saharan Africa than with the inevitably and essentially dysfunctional countries of the Arabs.
Since George Bush I, it has been standard rhetoric to insist that acquiescence to the worst of globalization is unavoidable. That has been rhetoric which disgusts me.
I agree with del. It is actually possible to “pull up the drawbridge”. The fact is that the west has been actively engaged in Arab countries socially, culturally and politically, and has at the same time had the welcome mat out for Arabs in western countries. That was a choice. Muslim countries are perfectly capable of self-destructing. In fact, I could make a pretty good argument that’s what they do best. It’s also my belief that by becoming so immersed in Arab countries and all their “issues” we are in fact maximizing our exposure to being harmed by them, rather than minimizing it as many of the pundits (wrongfully, imo) suggest we’re doing. I think if instead of trying to put restraints on “radical Islam” we just stepped away and left Muslim countries to themselves they’d either put themselves back into the stone age or mature to the point where they no longer posed the degree of threat to us that they do now. And we wouldn’t even have to go to war anymore to achieve that. The trick, of course, is to disallow anyone else such as France, Britain, Russia, China etc to step in to replace us and help save Arabs from themselves. Which, I admit, would be quite a task.
….remember…..we’re not “pulling up the drawbridge” by fighting our Islamic enemy from offshore. Think drones controlled from Nevada and locally nearer the scene for the precision radar requirements, and also missiles from ships…for starters. The angry protests of the Paki’s attest to their effectiveness. They’re smarting because we’re working around them.
….repeating..”Let’s get out of absorbent Asia with all of our massed troops and fight this Islam problem of ours from off-shore.”
It’s the old fashioned idea of “massed troops” which is too costly and apparently has led to little lasting accomplishment in these past ten years. The idea of “hearts and minds” and democratic nation building is simply too alien to these particular Central/West Asians. Incompatible mind-sets.
Post World War II Democracy as developed in Japan probably is not to be repeated in Central Asia. The Japanese were/are many generations ahead in western political theory after the Nagasaki Catholic Missionaries and Admiral Perry and gradually opening themselves to commerce on a large scale.
Islam seems to resist all innovation and cross fertilization simply for the sake of “resistance”. Islam has not yet had it’s Meiji “Leap Forward”.
Whut Craig said. I agree with del too.
I think a lot of people are naively optimistic about the Arab spring. However, I think people in general are naive about what it takes to create a functioning, centralised, modern state. It took most of Europe a century or more, and a bloody period of revolutions and counter-revolutions to even get half-way there. To expect that it could be done in a single revolution is crazy.
Having said that – you have to start somewhere – and I think that the arab spring could be seen in this context as a start of a very slow period of liberalisation which over a number of decades leads to something half decent. The revolutions thus far can be seen as the opening of a Pandora’s box in which the people discover that together they can change the government. Unfortunately they don’t really have a good idea of what kind of government will benefit them in the long term, and so now comes the slow period where they learn the hard way what that is.
Perhaps I am being naive myself.
Cassius Corodes, there are still countries in Europe who only have a superficial grasp of democratic principles:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15059817
During the initial investigations, Knox had accused Mr Lumumba of killing Ms Kercher, 21, of Coulsdon, south London, who shared her apartment in Perugia at the time of her death. As a result, Mr Lumumba was briefly detained but was later cleared. He is now suing Knox for defamation.
That’s the confession that was beaten out of her, no? Now you want to sue her for that?
Knox has previously said that she made the statement incriminating Lumumba under pressure, after being struck by a police officer and forced to speak without a lawyer or translator present.
Is that true? Did she have a lawyer or a translator present? There’s a yes or no answer to that question, isn’t there? And she recanted that “confession” the next day, didn’t she? Just as soon as she was able to. Just as soon as she wasn’t locked up in the same room with that lunatic prosecutor any more. And speaking of lunatic prosecutors, hasn’t the same man had some issues with the way he interrogates prisoners? The way he treats witnesses? The way he treats journalists? The way he treats parents? Didn’t he get a jail sentence for abuse of power recently?
Anyway, if this guy does sue I want the case to be in US court. Italian courts don’t seem very reliable to me, these days. Maybe we can get that fatass old Italian prosecutor in front of an American judge and an American jury and we can get to the bottom of what really happened in this case.
So, anyway, Cassius… are countries that don’t have due process or fair trials considered democracies?
More from that disgusting Italian lawyer:
One side is “angelic, good, compassionate, and in some ways even saintly”, but the other side is “Lucifer-like, demonic, satanic, diabolic” and “longs to live out borderline extreme behaviour”, he said.
Excuse me? Can he prove ANY of that? Can he even find a single person who knows Amanda Knox well who would sign off on any of that? He can’t, but even if he could what’s that got to do with a murder trial? Is that her motive? She did it just because she’s evil? I saw some lonely depressed British girl who has no friends say that Amanda’s motive for killing Meredith was that Meredith complained she didn’t help enough with the housework. So, the same kind of routine friction that everyone who has ever had a room-mate has encountered is motive for murder, now? Well, shit, I guess I better go pop that guy who said his chicken was undercooked at the BBQ the other day.
I bet that girl wonders why she has no friends, too.
“She is both one and the other. This is the Amanda of 1 November, 2007,” he added, referring to the night Ms Kercher’s body was found.
Right.
Mr Pacelli also said: “Who is Amanda Knox? Is she the mild-looking, fresh-faced person you see here, or the one devoted to lust, drugs and alcohol that emerges from the court documents?”
What does her sex life or whether or not she drinks and uses drugs have to do with a murder investigation?
We had shit like this in US courts too. Once upon a time. During the Salem witch hunts. We’ve come a long ways since then. The Italians obviously haven’t.
Sorry I keep bringing this up, but I just find everything about this case absolutely appalling. I think Amanda Knox would have had a better shot at a fair trial in Saudi Arabia. And I’m not joking about that.
What every American who hasn’t been following this case should read:
http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/the-neverending-nightmare-of-amanda-knox-20110627
When a sitting U.S. senator declares that the case “raises serious questions about the Italian justice system” and asks if “anti-Americanism” is to blame, and when 11 Italian lawmakers in Silvio Berlusconi’s coalition request a probe of the prosecutor’s office — well, at that point, you have an international crisis.
Page 5 contains an interesting account of how they got her to sign that confession which implicated her boss the bar tender.
I don’t see how any American could read the details of what’s really been going on with this case since day one, and not be left befuddled at the idea that this could happen in a supposedly civilized country in Europe.
Craig,
I’ve had bad experiences myself in Italy. Not as bad Amanda Knox by a long shot, but nevertheless bad. (Perhaps I should say I’ve had a hard time in Rome rather than Italy, as the northern part of the country is much friendlier, high functioning, and civilized.)
Here is a long piece I wrote about just one of my bad Roman episodes.
del, Craig, Charlie, etc. – Actually, I think that you guys and I are much more in tune regarding intervention vs nonintervention than you might think. I sometimes toss out contraries without explaining why. Bad habit. But you guys are pretty patient with me.
Anyway, I think the above could/might be the start of a good discussion sometime about how the United States is entangled with other countries, good and bad countries, militarily and economically, through treaties and other formal agreements. It really is quite complex. And quite honestly, I don’t begin to understand it all.
((For example, why did we ship crude oil to Japan from Alaska while we imported crude oil from Saudi Arabia? Aah, international agreements to keep crude an international *commodity*. We don’t necessarily get to keep all we drill. Maybe it’s a good idea , maybe it’s bad. But we felt it was in our best interests when we made the agreement.) http://www.indexmundi.com/united_states/oil_exports.html
Anyway, maybe I’ll toss out some things later just for discussion. When I get time. (Busy week.) And don’t feel lazy.
———–
del @8 – How often do you agree with del? Dikehopper and I don’t seem to agree on much. He has a thick skull.
———–
There was a column a day or two ago in Ynet about how the US’s support of Israel at the UN last week had a good result and a bad result for Israel. Good result – it helped block, at least temporarily, the PA’s effort for statehood. Bad result – the US is no longer the primary mediator in the conflict. (The PA is really p.o.’d at us now.) We were immediately replaced by the Quartet (the US, the UN, the EU and Russia), which isn’t so friendly to Israel.
And so once again, as the saying goes, my accuracy is like a stopped calendar. I’m right once a year.
Forgot – I was going to post this, too. On defense cuts. http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/09/26/defense-budget-cuts-jobs-security/
The projected defense cuts over the next 10 years are about 10% of the projected budget deficits over the next 10 years. Looks like we may not be the world’s policeman so much anymore. Looks like maybe we alone won’t be so much responsible for keeping the world’s shipping lanes open.
I have no idea how it will work out.
There will be a lot more of the old, “Nice container ship you’ve got there. It would be a shame if someone were to set it on fire.” I imagine.
Free of America’s “imperialist” military might, maritime security will take its rightful place as the dominion of a UN council constituted of a diverse, international, and cross-cultural group of pirates.
Michael @13, that certainly does sound like a horror story. I’m not sure how I’d have handled that but I’m guessing things would have gotten ugly. I’m not good at handling it when people lie to my face while refusing to do their jobs. Luckily, I’ve never been to Italy. My cousin is stationed there and he loves it but i suspect he’s never had any difficulty that the US Navy didn’t handle for him. I wonder how much he’d love it if he had a run-in with Italian “justice” and didn’t have anyone with influence to stand up for him? I’ve always thought that the behavior of people in any sort of position of power tells you a lot more about a country and its culture than stats ever will.
Squires: Free of America’s “imperialist” military might, maritime security will take its rightful place as the dominion of a UN council constituted of a diverse, international, and cross-cultural group of pirates.
The diverse, international and cross-cultural nonsense that Europeans like to spout is nothing but a big lie. I could tell you a lot of colorful stories about how my tiny little Chinese-American ex-wife was treated during the several months she stayed with me in Germany that’d prove that. Big old potentially homicidal white guy me, though? Nothing but respect and courtesy. Didn’t have the slightest bit of unpleasantness. If I hadn’t been with her and seen with my own eyes the difference in how we were treated, I would have left Germany thinking that they were just as nice as Americans.
Dikehopper,
I usually do agree with del. Amazing but true. But we’re both a little soft in the head sometimes. That may be the key.
About the oil exports to Japan…our government can override or control private decisions by legislation, but in general, most actions by Americans and American corporations are not done in the name of nor for the USA as a whole. It is a mistake of some furriners, often those with a totalitarian outlook, to assume there is central planning and control here.
That was part of the entertainment value to me in watching the riots in Indonesia and Pakistan when that Florida pastor, who aimed to burn a koran – was it last year- was in the news. The rioters assumed the pastor was acting for everyone when he wasn’t (Which is not to say that I have a problem with anyone burning a koran: as far as I’m concerned that is an act of free speech, protected by the US constitution). The lunatic rioters’ assumptions about group “responsibility” for individual acts were diagnostic about them .
Del, they probably assumed he wouldn’t have done it if the US government didn’t want him to as well. People get killed (or worse) in a lot of countries when they cause problems for their government. And people who live in countries like that tend to think that’s how it is everywhere.
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/09/27/daniel-pipes-is-turkey-going-rogue/
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4128276,00.html
hxxp://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204010604576595340186385286.html Turkey fights with UN security
This is not good.
ABC news
U.S. officials had once thought there was little chance that terrorists could get their hands on many of the portable surface-to-air missiles that can bring down a commercial jet liner.
But now that calculation is out the window, with officials at a recent secret White House meeting reporting that thousands of them have gone missing in Libya.
. . .
The nightmare has been made real with the discovery in Libya that an estimated 20,000 portable, heat-seeking missiles have gone missing from unguarded Army weapons warehouses.
The missiles, four to six-feet long and Russian-made, can weigh just 55 pounds with launcher. They lock on to the heat generated by the engines of aircraft, can be fired from a vehicle or from a combatant’s shoulder, and are accurate and deadly at a range of more than two miles.
Craig – I was thinking of something more along the lines of the vaunted human rights council.
Speaking of which, Iran has now threatened to send their navy to the Atlantic coast. I will await their arrival eagerly, though probably not as much as any salvage crews in the area.
Re: #14 of Dikehopper’s…
…”…..how the United States is entangled with other countries, good and bad countries, militarily and economically, through treaties and other formal agreements. It really is quite complex. And quite honestly, I don’t begin to understand it all.”
Neither does our State Department.
The key word here is “entangled”. Our good friend on some matters, Dr Google, has this entry….
“United States non-interventionism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
United States
This article is part of the series:
Politics and government of
the United States-
“Non-interventionism, the diplomatic policy whereby a nation seeks to avoid alliances with other nations in order to avoid being drawn into wars not related to direct territorial self-defense, has had a long history in the United States. It is a form of “realism”.
Non-interventionism on the part of the United States over the course of its foreign policy, is more of a want to aggressively protect the United States’ interests than a want to shun the rest of the world.
Non-intervention, sometimes referred to as military non-interventionism, seems to some to be the antithesis of isolationism.[1] Participating in global economic affairs would likely boost trade and expand US diplomacy, in the view of Edward A. Olsen.[1]”
How to “….agressively protect the United States’ interests” without being entangled by our politicians is our immediate problem. They’re simply not as smart as they think they are.
An interesting, non-technical profile of Lockheed Martin’s F-35 Lightning II:
http://www.military.com/video/aircraft/jet-fighters/the-f-35-lightning-ii-multirole-fighter/1185491966001/
Well, it turns out our fears of Gaddafi’s stockpiles were well founded. We were also right about the intent of the Kharg when it traveled to the Med. Now Iran is visiting our east coast: http://www.informationdissemination.net/2011/09/iranian-naval-diplomacy-public.html
We also note how Obama moved to counter the attacks on his relationship with Israel. We have a President that acts when pressured while his autopilot is set to chaos. Russian practice maneuvers in the Caspian Sea where their role is to protect Exxon facilities when Iran launches a counter-attack.
Obama’s hoping to make it to 2012 without having to make serious choices. Rumor has a US-Israel-Russian deal for Assad if he rejects Iran. This also may involve the Kurds and place Turkey in a reversed role. Putin may see these new deals as paving the way for his return.
Here are some interesting pictures of a project Putin is considering restarting. Not sure why: http://igor113.livejournal.com/51213.html
Ekranoplanes? Really?
Are they planning on future operations somewhere where these would be particularly advantageous? High-speed insertion of small forces? Quickly shuffling mobile missile/artillery systems around where there are no roads?
Did they even prove practical for anything the first time the Soviets tried these?