Desicritics Category: Politics: US

Peace With Dignity: Another Gift For Israel

temporal — Mon, 12 May 2008 07:46:14 EDT

Last week, the Western media focused on Israel’s 60 years as a nation. They accentuated the positives - business & technology development, growth rate, wealth, democracy – and either looked the other way or made light of its nuclear weapons of mass destruction, the Apartheid Wall that symbolizes occupation, its contemptuous disregard of UN resolutions and its discriminatory treatment of its Arab citizens and Palestinians under its occupation.

Let me focus on one editorial by the National Post. It ran a week-long series of Israel at 60. It makes no bones to hide it far right orientation and its neoconzix leanings. Since it is competing for survival in Canada’s toughest newspaper market and is behind the leading Toronto Star and the Sun, it tried to play fair and gave op-ed space to Jeet Heer and Benny Morris who tried to portray the other reality of Israel. But at the same time it “blared horns” and beat a loud trumpet to tell itself and its readership that it does not agree with Mr. Heer’s views.

At the culmination of this week, it ran an editorial wondering what would be a “fitting” birthday gift to Israel. It railed against those who oppose Israel branding them neurotic, leftists, Marxists and (invoking Godwin) anti-Semites:

Even in the West, it has become intellectually fashionable in left-wing circles to regard Israel as a mistake…Pundits and politicians…cast the Jewish state as a nation conceived in "original sin," and perpetuated as an "apartheid" society. As George Jonas, David Frum and Michael Coren noted in their contributions to our series, these accusations have no basis. At best, they represent the projected neuroses of self-loathing Western intellectuals who are still guilt-ridden over their own ancestors' colonial sins, and still influenced by Marx's toxic doctrines of class struggle. At worst, they are a politicized expression of crass antisemitism. Excising such intellectual bigotry from our societies would make a fitting (if belated) gift in commemoration of 60 years of Israeli survival.

This is the state that drove 700,000 inhabitants out, obliterating villages and cities (Deir Yassin is no longer on the physical map), refusing reparations or the law of return for those driven out, building the wall, ghettoizing and Bantustising what remains of the West Bank, dividing families and their homes and lands.

Citing Rachel Corrie and Muhammed al Durrah, it glides over by suggesting “the Israeli military makes mistakes during the execution of counter terrorist operations.” And then this classic defense of these cold blooded killings – “But what Western fighting force does not?”

Criticizing Zionism is NOT anti-Semitism. States do not exist without an “official” map. Israel has to exist. Its citizens have a right to live in peace and harmony within its defined borders. They forget that to ensure this its neighbors should also have the same rights.

Israel, Palestinians and other states in their neighborhood should come out of knee-jerkism and refrain from the tiresome blame game and extend guaranteed human rights to every citizen in their states.

Both Israel and Palestinians have to demonstrate more effectively that they want to live in peace and do not want to kill, maim, expel from their land. It is for them to deliberate and decide if this should come under One State of Two State solution.

The world should help them reach this decision but should not refrain to remind Israel that it should curb its policies of occupation, subjugation, ethnic cleansing, and terrorising.

We should encourage initiatives that will let all Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace, with dignity, justice and guaranteed fundamental human rights in secure borders, as enshrined in the various UN resolutions.

To remove misgivings, doubts and suspicions, international bodies including the UN, the European Union, OIC should be enlisted to provide guarantees. Peace in the region is not to be equated with death for the state of Israel.

Movie Review: Iron Man

Aaman Lamba — Sat, 10 May 2008 02:13:52 EDT

What if Goliath turned against the Philistines? David wouldn't be really needed, save as a spark, or a mirror to show the seeds of destruction sowed by the makers of sickles and swords. The walls of Jericho might come down, and the horror of crumbling bricks be revealed in small villages off Haditha or perhaps Gulmira, Afghanistan.

Iron Man carries dangerous memes with it, perhaps the kind that increase the knowing to a point where it breaks out of the pages of comic books. Then again, the knowledge has always been there, and shadows on curtains provided simulacra of reality, audiences have taken it in, had glimmers of awareness, then let it drift away, or buried it under unending torrents of media messages.

Tony Stark finally understands what he has probably already known - and breaks away from his carefully cultivated playboy image. It is a mission of self-redemption, by a knight in shining armor, quite literally. He is looking to make up for a lifetime, indeed a familial sense of guilt, and yet, his actions are explained away as 'accidents' or 'training exercises', yet again enabling media masseurs to manage reality. His attempt at balancing the scales between the asymmetrical counter-parties might be in vain, and the film avoids any examination of ultimate responsibility. The villains are stereotypical bad guys, and the centurions not expected to reason the whys and wherefores of their actions.

The best parts of the film are the intensely detailed engineering scenes, a kind of geekporn-meets-steampunk mashup. Post-modern user interfaces, including one that looks like what Microsoft Surface might turn out to be, and intricate CGI stunts blend, but don't quite flow together well. The CGI could have been better, especially in the flying scenes. The reactor is a bit fishy, especially in a climatic scene where the prototype explodes at the cost of one faux-Iron Man, yet spares the real steel.

Robert Downey, Jr., gives the role his all, yet comes across as Terminator on a Robocop mission, cloaked in a XOS exoskeleton. This is more interesting, given we know of his own failings at the all-too-human level. His transformation from smooth-talking playboy to metalmouth is compelling, and the shift in acting style quite evident. He does not turn misanthropic, or even pacifist, going for the counter-terrorist angle. The lightweight Jon Favreau could have done more with his source material, yet went for a gently muddled anti-war, pro-little guy tale, a safe bet when dealing with masters of destruction. He does go further in the quest of authenticity, than say, Spider-Man, with quite graphic scenes of torture. There are various layers to the film, despite its weaknesses, and it is most definitely enjoyable and promising, from a franchise perspective.

Interview: Michael Levin - The Next Great Clash

Desh — Mon, 5 May 2008 09:38:50 EDT

I very rarely find a book that I cannot keep down, specially when it comes to politics. The Next Great Clash: China and Russia vs. The United States by Michael Levin is a revelation. Not many analysts really do serious research before writing. Levin is different. He is a serious analyst who has had long stints in Soviet Union/Russia and China and he is currently Executive-in-Residence at the Thunderbird School of Global Management.

The introduction to the book starts in the most thoughtful manner. It is so gripping that you start believing in the power of book introductions once again - an art that had long vanished! He discusses his tough childhood and fight with disease as well as his struggle to learn about Russia and his success after some aimless times.

I love Levin's expression as it is profound, although it talks of some mundane things like global politics. Like he says:

"Reading is the collecting of intellectual income, writing is the spreading of it."

He uses a lot of research and the models of other researchers to test his conclusions that are based on his experience and knowledge.

Overall, a great book to read! Here is my interview with Michael Levin, the author.

1. You have talked of "One Radical Imbalance (American Debt) sustains another (Asian Surplus)". Just as the "rich" in the US are betting, foolishly, on a never ending stream of debt; aren't the Chinese, again foolishly, betting on unending stream of export wealth? And while talking of the aging US (and Western) population, we forget the same trend for China as well. So two questions:

(a) Is this a game of "who blinks first?" between the US and China and - in that sense - a repeat of the Star Wars tactic to destroy Soviet Union under its own weight?
(b) Is the Chinese "surplus" a notional surplus since it's invested in an instrument that it can best see ride down as the clash with the US increases?

LEVIN: Two things to keep in mind: if there is an economic break between the US and China, China has an ace in the hole: it can divert its attention to satisfying the demand of its domestic consumers as a replacement for export-led growth. The US seems to be at a disadvantage - it does not have an ace in the hole.

Second: You are right - both countries face demographic imbalances that will pose challenges in the future. It seems that America's advantage is its ability to absorb immigrants - recent protectionist sentiments aside. China also has some advantages: its social structure dictates that children take care of parents; it is a private, family matter - so the state is not, thus far, burdened with pension plans.

Imagine the additional wealth that China will have at its disposal as it implements pension schemes.

2. For the clash to tangibly occur as a military confrontation, a complete decoupling between China and US economies needs to occur. What will be that mechanism? Is it possible for either to voluntarily decouple from each other?

If there is outright war, the decoupling will be a byproduct. The whole global economy will go haywire.

But China is developing asymmetric capabilities that exploit US weaknesses. If China is able to prevent the US from protecting Taiwan during a military confrontation - it has won.

By the way - I would like to emphasize: I hope I am all wrong about the next great clash. As you see though, the evidence is quite compelling.

3. Like you said very well, Europe learnt to use the "Human Rights Imperialism" with telling effect. It is very true that all the major powers use a Utopian ideal to create surrogates and followers. Again, as you have very rightly said - the US has considerably weakened two major alliances (UN and NATO) in recent years (probably the worst foreign affairs folly of the last 8 years despite Iraq). So, the US has lost that romantic "Moral Imperialistic Ideal" that inspired other people in its "mission". China, on the other hand, has embraced capitalism and has also weakened its position in its strongest "base" - the Communists and Marxists! Predictably, China has also lost its "Moral Imperialistic Ideal". How will these two powers gather vassals and followers?

Not really. The Chinese have demonstrated that they are successful communists - unlike their Soviet brethren. The Beijing consensus of economic development seems to have more adherents than the current Washington consensus. And the Chinese have very skillfully honed their image (although the recent disturbances in Tibet have upset China's "charm offensive") in the Muslim world, in Africa, and in Latin America.

4. India's "fascination" for the USSR and Russia is mainly because of a consistent and uninterrupted arms flow as opposed to wavering US positions. In the last one and a half decades, India has sent more professional immigrants to the US than all the other countries put together (every year, Indians get 40-50% of all H1B visas). That creates an intellectual ripple effect over two generations that moves out to influence minds as opposed to lobbyists. At the same time, with the highest percentage of younger population in the major economies, English education, and an education system that is privately owned so it can adjust to the demand rapidly, India is positioned to become the provider of world's management and executive talent over the next few years. How does that change the dynamics of the world's economies in the coming centuries? (PS: Rajat Gupta, the CEO of McKinsey, for example was instrumental in opening a world class business school in India - ISB - and also has expanded McKinsey's presence in India. Same goes for the PepsiCo CEO Indra Nooyi).

You know way more about India than I ever will.

5. Does India's business elite have a great deal of influence within the corridors of political power, or are they simply one more lobby to contend with? It seems that India's leaders rise through political parties/families - they do not come from business circles. Also, the Indian business community in Russia is highly organized and very wealthy. I would imagine that they are very involved with the Congress party, whereas Indian business elites in the U.S. might identify more with the BJP. What do you think?

Undoubtedly India has a great competitive advantage in its English-language capability - but the Chinese are very determined and hard-working. And they seem to be much better organized politically and so could easily launch a national English-language campaign (Incidentally, there is a fascinating article about this in the most recent New Yorker).

6. Despite its earlier start and higher percentage rise in GDP over last 3 decades, China has less than half the number of billionaires (official wealth counted) than India. Does that tell a tale? Is China's economy a government-sponsored musical chairs of using money where it sees the best returns and forcing its decisions into enterprise-led initiatives? With rising paper surpluses and a challenge from the US and a private-government combine of Indian economy* apart from a slowly awaking Japanese military power, does the Chinese economy appear to you as a "House of Cards"?

(PS: the Kazakhastan deal for oil was greatly influenced by the Lakshmi Mittal - who owns large steel plants in that country and has a JV with ONGC - in India's favor against the Chinese bids.)

China's economy does have many weak points - chief amongst them, its high percentage of non-performing bank loans (which you point out elsewhere). But China also has many strengths that are not captured by statistics and economic data - such as its ability to mobilize the population and a fervent belief that their time has come. The Chinese are also used to deprivation and sacrifice - something that most westerners are not familiar with.

Regarding the number of billionaires - some thoughts: Do these statistics take into account the number of overseas Chinese who are billionaires?

Also, in China, political connections are more important than wealth (although that may start to change). It would seem that the massive levels of corruption also distort the wealth statistics.

In a sense, all of the members of the central committee (approximately 300) are billionaires of power. And they are not wanting for material comforts.

7. In World War II, the US was an Aaly of Western Europe for the most part. It did not START any war until the end, which many believe it ended in an immoral way. Since then, there have been very few, if any, wars which the US has started and won. Does the US have the ability to attract allies that can forge its position? China has created its vassal states like Pakistan and North Korea to fight its wars that it does not want to fight itself. It has chosen to use the poverty of these vassal states while arming them and providing them with a sense of self-esteem in the absence of actual wealth (a policy very fruitfully used by the British with Indian kings during colonial rule) to create a vast strong set of "allies". How do these two strategies (or otherwise) of the US and China in the recent decades affect the future dynamics?

No one likes a bully - all the kids gang up on the bully as soon as he is down. George Bush/the US is perceived as the bully, and China is skillfully exploiting this, but recent events in Tibet are a great threat to China's strategy of seeking a more "multipolar" world.

8. Finally, a rather small detail: You said that you would sell expensive editions of the Koran in Russia - where your contacts were "refuseniks" (Jews refused immigration to Israel) to earn money. Why were these Jews buying the Koran, and not the Torah?

Please note: i did not sell the Korans - i gave them to the refuseniks, who in turn sold them on the black market to muslims. Access to the Torah was not a problem.

Cosmetic Changes in Islamabad

temporal — Thu, 1 May 2008 09:11:55 EDT

Pakistan's Moment: We will fight terrorism -- our way appeared under the byline of Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani. Since his name is on the mast, I will assume that he takes full responsibility for this article. He writes:

It is important for Pakistan -- which has transited from an authoritarian regime to democratic governance -- that the message of this first critical post-election period be bold and clear. Like newly elected governments in other democratic societies, we intend to set the tone and agenda. We want to show the world that our nation is back in business, with an overwhelming mandate from our people.

It has been thirty days since he and his cabinet took oath. What does he have to show for the past thirty days? Please keep in mind that his party (PPP) and his coalition partners, PML-N, ANP and JUI had nearly six weeks to prepare an agenda before this oath taking.

Inflation is unchecked, prices for rice, flour, petrol and other commodities are still escalating. Law and order is still in a mess. The ministers travel in motorcades and the traffic is still diverted and blocked as it was under the previous administration.

The Judiciary issue is used as a lightening rod and a smokescreen simultaneously to deflect the attention and scrutiny away from the pressing problems facing the nation. The irony is, while the issue is being debated in Dubai between Asif Zardari the interim co-chairman of PPP and PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif, Mr Gilani is not even a member of the participating teams.

I find nothing bold and clear nor any attempts to set the tone and agenda.

Mr Gilani describes Benazir Bhutto as "Pakistan's quintessential democratic leader" ...facts and history speak otherwise.

My government is a coalition of modern, moderate, innovative, progressive democratic forces determined to jump-start the economy and to rebuild the social fabric of Pakistan.

We saw many of these "modern, moderate, innovative, progressive democratic forces" in the previous two terms each of PPP and PML-N. And the Pakistanis have not forgotten why both the PPP and PML-N were turfed out a total of four times.

We understand that unemployment, inflation and poverty are corrosive elements that, if left unaddressed, can create hopelessness and ennui that undermine authority.

The people of Pakistan did not elect him and his coalition to "understand" - they elected him to act quickly to alleviate these issues. Other than playing the blame-the-previous-government his administration has done nothing substantive.

He writes of "smuggling of Pakistani wheat across our borders."

Does he realise how impotent this sounds when read by the US readers? It reads as an confession of his Administration's inability to exercise control within his territory. This is going to raise eyebrows in the foggy bottom. The Pakistani detractors bring up the issue of Nuclear Weapon's safety and control every other week. If Pakistan cannot effectively control her side of the border how can he cite this weakness as a raison detre for smuggling?

Now we are negotiating from a position of strength.

The proof is in the pudding. This is what I have written here in Zardarigate: Who's Afraid of Judiciary:

Witness these recent developments from the new coalition government of Raza Rabbani:

* The coalition accepted the appointment of Maj Gen Jay Hood (of the Qur'an desecration infamy) in the US Embassy at Islamabad.

* The coalition recalled Gen. Mahmud Ali Durrani, a protege of Shirin Taher-Kheli and a colleague on Balusa, as Ambassador to the Court of St. Bush and appointed him National Security Adviser to the PM Raza Rabbani (Shirin is also a neocon and knows Hussain Haqqani, Ayesha Siddiqua and others through IDSA and other fora.)

* The coalition appointed Hussain Haqqani, first as Ambassador-at-large and then as Ambassador-designate to the Court of St. Bush. Last week Blogger Pakistan ran a long, rambling article by Moin Ansari - Husain Haqqani:-Dangerous 5th Column or Selfish opportunist? which tried to establish Hussain Haqqani as a neocon at best and a neoconzix at worst. * Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi has "detached himself" from the Balusa Group according to Mariana Babar.

The parachuting of Washington's dream team means status quo remains unchanged in Islamabad. And the criticism and bunking of President Musharraf's US tilt is self serving lip service. Playing His Master's Voice (no pun) does not indicate a "position of strength."

Yousaf Raza Gilani is in an unenviable position. He cannot tell people to eat cakes. He has to act boldly, clearly, firmly and quickly: which means refraining from blame-game and delivering results.

Why Neither India nor Pakistan Should Rely on America: Part I - Who Really Runs America?

Ruvy — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 15:02:57 EDT

This series of articles is written as an object lesson for you as to why you cannot trust the United States government as any kind of partner. This is as true for Pakistanis as it is for Indians, Sri Lankans, Nepalis, Bangladeshis or any other residents of the Indian sub-continent.

The series has three parts.

This article examines how the United States got to the apex it did. The second uses Israel as an example of American duplicity regarding its supposed "friends" or "allies". The third views what might have happened and how the world would be different if indeed the United States supported the State of Israel as one-sidedly as so many charge.

These articles is not written in an attempt to "inform" you of events in Israel, the Levantine or the Arab world. Unless you have relatives or business interests here, you probably have no reason to care.

The point of this series is to allow you to apply the sad lesson we provide of how a great power double-crosses a small one. There are many such examples of this, but I can speak as a resident of the victim. Indeed, not only Jews in Israel have been victims of this double-cross, but Arabs as well.

Before continuing further, I want to make clear several things. First; I live in Israel, in Samaria to be precise. While I reside in Israel. I am not a Zionist. The word "Zionism" was originally invented by English Christian theologians in the 17th Century; as a Jewish idea, it was originally expounded upon by rabbis from Serbia and Russia in the early 19th Century (though not called by this name), and was made palpable and real by secular Jews who wanted little to do with ritual, religion, or even with G-d. The creation of Zionism, the State of Israel, has been a success until recent years. The essential goal of Zionism, bringing the majority of Jews in the world back to the homeland, has nearly been completed. It is evident to anyone who lives here that the closer we come to that basic goal, the weaker the movement to achieve it becomes, and the weaker the apotheosis of Zionist ideology, the State, becomes as well.

Second; even though I live in Israel, I was born and raised in the United States and lived there for several decades before coming home to Israel. My field of study was political science and public administration, and I added to these subjects comparative government and linguistics. In addition, I was active in politics in the United States in both major political parties. This gave me a good grasp of the American political system and how it evolved.

Finally; I'm not slamming the people who inhabit the United States, the average folks known as Joe Sixpack. Americans, by and large, are a decent, generous and kind people, even if they are too Amero-centered for their own good. Perhaps they are too naïve at times. But the decency of the average American should never ever be in question.

The government of the United States, now in the hands of an oil and banking establishment for some eight decades, is a very different story. In this article, when talking about "America", I'm not talking about her decent inhabitants; I'm talking about her evil régime.

One last point. Credit for much of what you see in this article goes to Joel Bainerman, an Israeli investigative journalist, economist and publisher. My errors in relaying the data he has taught me and others is my responsibility alone.

And now to business.

The first three words of the American Federal Constitution of 1787 are "We the People" and if you ask most Americans, "who runs America?" that is the most likely answer you will get. The people.

If it were only true.

It isn't. It probably never was.

First of all, the United States were not designed to be a democracy at all, but a federation of states with a republican form of government. While the word "republic" comes from the Latin rex publica (one sees the root in the Russian word respublik) meaning "the people rule", and in spite of the fact that modern Greece is called Ελληνική Δημοκρατία ('Ellinikí Dhimokratía) which is translated as "the Hellenic Republic", the two words "democracy" and "republic" do not have the precise same meaning in English.

A republic connotes a form of government which is not monarchical in nature. Thus, the Republic of Florence, where Niccolo Machiavelli was a mid-level bureaucrat, was not a state where the average Florentine had a real voice in government. Only a small class of Florentines had any voice at all, and they ruled the country.

But the Principality of Florence, which succeeded the Republic upon its fall, was a monarchy, with the son supposedly succeeding the father. Machiavelli's book, De Principatus, "The Prince", was in essence, his curriculum vitae submitted to the man who had exiled him to his estate after overthrowing the republic. While the book has long outlasted the la famiglia Medici that Machiavelli was trying to impress, Machiavelli did not get his job back.

When first established in 1776, the various states restricted voting to white males only, usually only Christians who owned property. So voting was restricted somewhat for several decades. For all of this, the states that comprised the United States did move closer towards popular rule, and the American republic did edge towards democracy in the 1800's.

But a business oligarchy took the country over after its civil war in 1865, and controlled its industrialization. As the 19th Century progressed to a close, the rich men who built huge industries out of the steel plants of the Midwest, the railways, the ships, the meat packing plants and the like realized that competition was not "rational", so they bought each other out, building huge monopolies known in America as "trusts" and "rationalizing" the industries they controlled. This is the kind of stuff most American kids skip over in school, because it is so damnably boring, but it is precisely these events in America that provided the model for the concentration of wealth in the succeeding decades.

What American teachers tend to focus on is not the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few, but the efforts of the American government to combat that concentration of wealth, known as "trust busting". To make a long story short, American businessmen felt stymied in building monopolies in the States and looked out at the wide world instead, and started investing money in it in the early 1900's.

They invested all over the world; Germany, Turkey, Russia, France, as well as China, Cuba and Latin America. And when a world war broke out in 1914, the profits of many firms went right down the tubes.

This had consequences. One consequence was that rich American businessmen determined that they would not be burned again in another world war. They examined the Treaty of Versailles that crippled post-war Germany, the Russian Revolution, and the way people were buying Henry Ford's affordable "Model T" and made their moves.

Their first presumption was that there would be a rematch between Germany and Britain or the United States. They set up a triumvirate of banks - one was the Thyssen Bank in Germany, the second was the Union Bank in New York, and the third was a bank in the Netherlands. The idea was that the Netherlands would probably be neutral in this coming war, and that Germany and America would be on opposite sides. That is what had happened in the first war, and so they expected the pattern would hold.

If the Germans won this second world war, then the rich businessmen would be compensated for their losses in America through the Thyssen bank "looting" the assets of the Union Bank (and presumably others). If the Americans won the second world war, the rich businessmen would be compensated through the Union Bank "looting" the assets of the Thyssen Bank. In either case, the Dutch bank was supposed to e the intermediary.

It didn't exactly work that way, but these rich businessmen had foresight.

They also had the brains to make sure that they would have some level of control over who ran the governments. In America, they set up a "Council on Foreign Relations" to infiltrate the State, War, Navy and Commerce departments of the American government with their employees. The idea was to provide a pool of "respectable" professors and administrative types who would watch over their interests. They did the same thing in the United Kingdom. These councils still exist today, and in either the United Kingdom or the United States, if you do not have ties to the respective councils, you get nowhere fast. Note how Ron Paul was locked out of the national debate before McCain sewed up the nomination.

Investing in overseas political control was a bit trickier.

One act of these businessmen was to invest in the Soviet Union in an attempt to bring it to stability. This might have been their first act, persuading Lenin to introduce the New Economic Plan (NEP) in the early twenties; but Lenin had the temerity to die, and his successor, Joe Stalin, was a xenophobe.

The next move was to try and find someone who could be controlled in the Weimar Republic that had succeeded the German Empire. These businessmen found an ambitious young man originally from Austria, and they invested in him, building him a fancy house. This turned out to be a better investment - Adolf Hitler eventually became Reichskanzler in 1933, and continued his business ties with his American investors, attempting to use them to get some foothold in the American economy. And as these businessmen had foreseen, there was another world war, and they made sure that they were compensated for their German investments through the Dulles brothers, one of whom was an attorney on the Allied War Compensation Board set up after the war.

The final big move was to invest in a source of fuel for the "Model T" and its successors, and to lay the groundwork for a continuing fortune. This came by investing some money in the wastes of Arabia, arming the ibn Saud clan to the teeth, and supporting them as they stole Makka and Medina from the Hashemi family, its traditional guardians for centuries. The Hashemi family had to be satisfied with emirates in Mesopotamia and "Transjordan"- the eastern two thirds of the territory the British had allotted for a Jewish national home. The money wasn't a gift to the ibn Sauds. It was a deal. American and British oil companies got to control the oil under the ground. The ibn Sauds - now "Saudis" - got the sand. At least that's how it looked in the 1920's.

Thus is was that bit by bit, the oil and banking companies came to dominate America. One of the key parts of winning their dominion over America came from getting rid of trolley cars and replacing them with buses; getting rid of trains, and replacing them with trucks. These two moves guaranteed the dominion of oil over all other fuels. Gradually, the American State Department became the pliable tool of American corporations. Much of the Japanese drive for empire was a drive to control oil, and the same was true for the Germans. Americans never thought of using alcohol to fuel tanks, as did the Germans. They never had to.

With the Germans and Japanese broken and defeated by August 1945, the American oil and banking establishment bestrode the world like a colossus. And Americans, living the best lives that could be imagined at the time, never even dreamt that their country and that their democracy had been stolen from them.

The Greatest Nation On Earth Goes To The Polls

in search of sanity — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 10:23:25 EDT

For any of us who have been following the US primaries, the circus is becoming a little unbearable.

I guess it’s the extreme gullibility and ignorance combined with dangerous arrogance and short sightedness on the part of the American electorate that never ceases to surprise me. Or at least the interpretation of the American electorate in exactly these terms by the people who seek to govern them!

Yes, I’ve had to pinch myself several times to make sure I’m not just in an extremely kitschy and crass TV drama where the director has now lost the plot. So, a serious discussion is launched over the similarity of one of the candidates’ names to a well known terrorist. Pure pain for anybody who still believes that these elections are about selecting the candidate with the best credentials to rule this vast country. I think the only other time I was confronted with such a stupid idea as this was while trying to garner support of my classmates for class prefect in primary school, obviously I dismissed it as too kiddish!

America’s hegemony over the world ensures that people all over the world are affected by who sits in the oval office and delivers earth shattering sermons from the sterile security of the white house. So, is it then, too much to hope that a nation that controls one third of the world’s wealth and presides over which nationality should be wiped off the face of the earth next, should have a mature electorate, that’s the backbone of any functioning democracy? Its sickening to see starkly cynical and exploitative games and political nitpicking by the Clinton camp repeatedly in the quest for power.

The recent Pennsylvania episode where Barack Obama almost had his head bitten off for saying, what to me or any other human being with an ounce of grey matter inside his skull, appears to be honest and forthright opinion of a certain segment of the American socio-political fabric, only demonstrates that the average US voter certainly hasn’t lost appetite for utterly demeaning, patronizing and cliched bullshit that Senator Clinton has been so religiously dishing out.

Days later, the Obama/Clinton debate happens, with a former Clinton aide as moderator, and Obama gets questioned for not wearing a badge to show his patriotism. Utterly worrying, if this is the level of political savvy that the American voter will take to this election. Yes dear, it IS possible to be patriotic to your country without carrying a banner saying ‘I love America and the American people that live in America’…. as I’m sure the honourable Republican candidate will soon be seen doing.

A country deserves the Government it gets. A democratic setup ensures people exercise choice in who formulates policies that affect their day to day life. But this concept is for the ideal world......where people actually know what they want. In the present era where politicos hire the most cunning and unscrupulous brains in the business to scour every word of every sentence that comes out of their opponents mouth and then twist it in a hundred and twenty different ways to mislead the general public, choice seems to have vanished from the scene. False rhetoric swinging elections is the order of the day. So, Hillary Cliton hinting that she absolutely adores the working class 'common' white man, has people drooling over her deep understanding of the grassroot level problems in America, such as, ahem, the necessity of owning guns and hunting down animals, I suppose. Hmmm, surely all of us should be compassionate about this.

Call me biased, but Madame Clinton's phoney smile has started to get on my nerves of late. Despite best efforts to shake this off, I keep getting transported to the childhood tale of ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ who gets swallowed by the sweet talking wolf. Maybe it’s the wolfish smile, maybe the ability to change colour faster than you or me can blink. Only someone as determined to usurp power as Hillary Clinton, can get away by saying ‘screw em’ to the same working class white southerners (Benjamin Barber: The Truth of Power: Intellectual Affairs in the Clinton White House) that she now runs to hug in the streets.

I would like to think that people of this once great nation would have the insight to see through silly games and pure political gambits. I would like to think that people have had enough of a mentally stunted individual in power to try and put in a smarter version of Bush in the White House. For, mercifully GWB happened to be stupid - Mrs Clinton is anything but.

Book Review: Young Dick Cheney: Great American

Temple Stark — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 13:36:42 EDT

Who is a less caring person than Dick Cheney? Think about it a few moments and the names you can come up with live in the annals of political and global horror. They are loved by only the sickest people on the planet. Or academics.

It's hard to think on that too much without becoming melancholy and a touch depressed. That's where Young Dick Cheney: Great American (Alternet Books) comes in. The authors, Bruce Kluger and David Slavin, offer a comprehensive and expansive detailed narrative of Cheney's childhood - in a fictional, mocking way.

Go into this book, expecting to laugh and expecting a simple approach to satire. Thankfully, the only things tortured here are puns and your groan muscles.

Who'da thunk that a person could read about Dick Cheney and enjoy it?

Young Dick Cheney offers a respectful look at the Cheney years from birth to soul death - a span of about 18 years.

Respectful of the truth, naturally, not the man.

This underrated expose on Dick Cheney's Nebraska childhood and formative years offers a keen insight into what branded the current vice-president a real Dick. It wasn't just the Lazy Eight Fork to the rear.

The authors describe their pocket-sized work as an "inspiring and sometimes even true childhood story of Richard B. Cheney, a secretive yet sensitive boy with a shoot-from-the-hip, shoot-in-the-face style all his own."

Best of all there's James Thurber-esque simple illustrations by rather than photos so readers don't get that Gorgon effect of looking into his eyes and having all their emotions irreversibly turn to stone.

Young Dick Cheney does not, however, offer any details on how he received his training as a Sith Lord.

BEHIND THE IRON CURTAIN

Just in time to laugh, not cry, comes this over-the-top and mercifully short book. It achieves the near impossible by making you feel sorry for the guy - the fake guy in the book, anyway.

Child abuse, neglect, isolation, murder nor prostitution feature in Dick's childhood. No, those all came later in life, during his time in government.

From the book's dedication to the Constitution and the Ativa SX180D shredder, the book offers straightforward fictionalized biography with wickedly clever one liners strung end to end. Phrases and passages cause a variety of reactions from snorting recognition of humor ("The brutal blizzard that beat down on Lincoln the night of Young Dick's birth was somehow different. For one thing it was July.") to moments that bring tears to your eyes and sweat glands.

This passage gives a flavor of the humor, a mixture of subtle and in-your face (oh, sorry) at the same time.

Bundling up Young Dick in the business section from that morning’s newspaper, Jedediah and Mary Todd began the long journey home with their new child - walking down the straw path that led from his stable, then trudging through the deep midsummer snow that carpeted the seven-mile road that led out of town.

The moment the Cheneys stepped through their front door, the proud new parents got back to work. Mary Todd resumed her chores - finishing the wood-splitting she’d started before she went into labor, preparing the family meal, mopping up her amniotic fluid - while Jedediah placed Dick in a hickory crib that he’d carved from scraps of wood he’d found behind Clem Cullen’s casket factory.

As the weary couple dug into a warm supper of possum and root stew, Young Dick lay on his back in his new cradle, staring at the ceiling, his eyes open and unblinking.

Deep within the forests that surrounded the Cheney homestead, wolves howled into the dark night sky.

We get Dick's puppeteering hobby later used to good effect with US Presidents, his tendency to shoot mothers, friends and postman in the face, roustabouts with friends Donny and Scooter, his preference for working away from the spotlight, and his early addiction to oil which manifests itself into a pre-teen ground sniffing career and a desire to lay waste to nature.

And those are just the true parts, obviously.

Here's a final passage illustrating how Dick got his direction and purpose in life:

One sunny spring day when Dick was four years old, he was playing in his front yard with a beach ball. A gift from his parents, the inflatable sphere was painted to resemble the earth, and Young Dick took great delight in making it bounce any way he wanted it to. He also liked kicking it around.

Suddenly, the ball took a wild spin and rolled off in the direction of the driveway, coming to a stop beneath the back wheels of Mr. Cheney’s ’38 Packard.

Crawling beneath the car for the ball, Young Dick was startled by a sudden reflection. Just beneath the tail pipe, the sun illuminated a small, sparkling black puddle, creating the most beautiful rainbow Young Dick had ever seen. He was drawn to it, like a kitten to a dish of really dark milk.

Dick slid on his belly, closer to the inky slick. He smelled it - it was sweet and inviting. He touched it - it was wet and silky. Then he tasted it.

Suddenly the cramped space beneath the Packard seemed to glow, as if lit by the heavens above. Sprawled on his stomach and breathing heavily, Young Dick swore he could hear music - just like the songs of worship he heard every Sunday at St. Agnes’ Weeping Face of Christ Pentecostal Church. A tingle of excitement ran up his short, thick legs.

Tossing aside the earth ball, Young Dick slithered out from under the car and darted inside.

“Pa!” he shouted, bursting into the parlor and thrusting his hand beneath his father’s face. “I found this under your car! What is it?”

Jedediah took a long look at his son’s moist black finger, then smiled.

“Why, that’s oil, son,” he said. “You know: Black gold. Texas tea.”

Young Dick looked confused.

“It’s what makes cars run,” he continued patiently. “And tractors. And aeroplanes. And machines. It’s found underground, all over the earth. And people pay millions of dollars for it.”

That was when Young Dick Cheney had his first heart attack.

It's funny and a stress-leaving read. Some of the jokes are easy but still ridiculously funny. Buy this one, take a bottle, drink it down, and pass it around. It's a quick burst of humor, and with Cheney's popularity as an adult at 15 percent, most everyone you know will enjoy Young Dick ...

Try not to be too depressed by the unhappy ending we've all been witness to.

Zardarigate: Who's Afraid of Judiciary?

temporal — Sun, 20 Apr 2008 00:54:39 EDT

I read this passage in a column by Anjum Niaz in the Daily Dawn of April 13, 2007. Interestingly, the link I had saved for her column in Dawn does not work. I googled and again I got the same link to her column -

ISLAMABAD DATELINE: Amar Prem -DAWN Magazine; April 13, 2008
By Anjum Niaz. Is a living chief justice meant to be as pious as Mother Teresa ... My usage, therefore, of the word Amar Prem relates to your and my and the ... (www.dawn.com/weekly/dmag/dmag19.htm)

but the link goes to another page. I can get her full column later. For now I would like to quote from Baithak Desi:

Do you know what Hussain Haqqani and Rehman Malik did the minute they became VIPs? Both the gentlemen reportedly descended on the basement of the NAB (National Accountability Bureau) in Islamabad and personally supervised the destruction of all the records dripping with evidence against them and their benefactor Zardari. They took the law of the land in their own hands. So now for Zardari to pontificate that CJP has become “political” is an oxymoron when he himself is not going strictly by the book. Anjum Niaz.

Some pressure must have been applied to retract the story. A denial was issued by Dawn quoting sources from the Interior Ministry. (Yes, Mr Rehman Malik is the de facto minister, acting as the Adviser to the PM for Internal Affairs and Narcotics Control.) But the News confirmed Anjum Niaz's story the next day.

There appears to be a linkage of this action with the way the newly installed government is behaving. Musharraf and Benazir agreed on NRO - National Reconciliation Order - a baptismal for past sins under US arm twisting. Under NRO, a majority of past graft, corruption and bribery charges would be withdrawn by the Musharraf Administration.

PPP agreed to US overlordship, ostensibly through President Musharraf. And as it appears both Musharraf and Benazir's political heir co chairman Zardari appear to have kept their end of the bargain.

Witness these recent developments from the new coalition government of Raza Rabbani:

* The coalition accepted the appointment of Maj Gen Jay Hood (of the Qur'an desecration infamy) in the US Embassy at Islamabad.

* The coalition recalled Gen. Mahmud Ali Durrani, a protege of Shirin Taher-Kheli and a colleague on Balusa, as Ambassador to the Court of St. Bush and appointed him National Security Adviser to the PM Raza Rabbani (Shirin is also a neocon and knows Hussain Haqqani, Ayesha Siddiqua and others through IDSA and other fora.)

* The coalition appointed Hussain Haqqani, first as Ambassador-at-large and then as Ambassador-designate to the Court of St. Bush. Last week Blogger Pakistan ran a long, rambling article by Moin Ansari - Husain Haqqani:-Dangerous 5th Column or Selfish opportunist? which tried to establish Hussain Haqqani as a neocon at best and a neoconzix at worst. * Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi has "detached himself" from the Balusa Group according to Mariana Babar.

Shireen Mazari, columnist and Director General of Islamabad based Institute of Strategic Studies writes:

"The Americans have increased their intrusive activities on all fronts. We have had rising Predator and missile attacks from across the international Pakistan-Afghanistan border even as US-linked/supported personnel continue to occupy positions in the corridors of power. The Balusa Group members funded through an American, Shirin Taherkheli, are a key US investment in Pakistan's power echelons that continue to pay dividends for the US, and this is only one of the many influence-generating channels."

Even Ayesha Siddiqu, author of Military, Inc and a regular columnist who seldom agrees with Shireen Mazari here agrees with her assessment and writes:

"The PPP selected Washington's dream team to run foreign relations and national security. One is not sure that appointing Durrani as the National Security Adviser will do the job. The appointment (of Durrani) is in consideration of the general's close ties with the US Pentagon. Not to mention the fact that Durrani owes his intellectual growth to Shirin Tahirkheli, a Bush administration adviser and former senior official of the UN National Security Council".

The raid on NAB basement to retrieve and destroy incriminating evidence maybe an offshoot of the tripartite understanding between the Bush, Benazir and Musharraf.

It is little wonder that both Musharraf and Zardari pay lip service to an independent judiciary. The once vociferous media plays poodle - business as usual with some new faces.

Book Review: Snow Falling on Cedars by David Guterson

Shantanu Dutta — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 14:09:02 EDT

I have never seen snow falling on cedar trees but have seen snow fall over spells in the Himalayas covering every thing in sight gradually with a curtain and a cover of snow. It has a bit of a mystical experience for me – ethereal beauty of certain intensity on one end and a deep sadness and amplification of past losses and regrets that one knows can never be redeemed on the other. But with all this mixture, my reminiscences of snow and snow fall are

Snow Falling on Cedars by David Guterson is one such luminous book where nostalgia, beauty and realism blend. It is another multi layered book, a love story at one level, a court room drama at another and a living history of what it meant to be a Japanese American in the US in the Second World War time and its immediate aftermath. At this last level , it documents the treatment meted out to Americans of Japanese origin at that time and the perennial odyssey of minorities having to prove their loyalty time and again around the world – in different times , contexts and ways- some how, some things sadly never change and perhaps never will. Very deservedly, it had won the PEN/Faulkner award in 1994.

The brooding, lonely some what defeated character of Ishmael Chambers towers over the pages of the novel – a war veteran with one arm amputated and some one who never quite made it in life – but in spite of all the pain that filled his life, a man who never lost his decency and big heartedness. Ishmael is the son of a small time journalist on the tiny island of San Piedro where many Japanese Americans live and where following Pearl Harbor, ethnic stereotyping begins to happen.

As he sees his father valiantly trying to portray other facts in the local newspaper - the story of the many Japanese Americans and there numerous contribution to local society at a time when the flavor of the season is to be xeno phobic, Ishmael and his father discuss some timeless questions about journalism: “Not every fact is just a fact”-he (Ishmael’s father) added.” It’s all a kind of balancing act. A juggling of pins, all sorts of pins that are what journalism is about”. ‘This isn’t journalism.’ Ishmael answered. “Journalism is just the facts.” “But which facts?” Ishmael’s father asked him.” Which facts do we print, Ishmael?”

The unspoken answer is that a true journalist prints all facts and if he has a bias or a tilt, it is to report to highlight, to under line, those facts that others are not reporting, others are pushing under the carpet, that others are perhaps even hiding, a journalist is not just a man with a camera and a pen- he is a man who is called to be an advocate on behalf of those who are unable for one reason or another can not speak for themselves.

The most poignant section of the book is the one dealing with the aborted love story of Ishmael Chambers and the Japanese girl Hatsue Miyamoto, who eventually ends up marrying a man from her Japanese community, partly because of the interruption caused by the war and partly because when push comes to shove, human differences driven by ethnicity, language, race and religion will always remain to haunt us….. seemingly for over. This book of loss, lamentation and grief casts a long shadow indeed.

Poetry: smiling crocodile

temporal — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 08:45:49 EDT

in the parched marshes
crocodiles have stopped
shedding tears
at the never ending
deir yassins as sleeping
dieties from
the past are invoked
they have to feed too
in darfur there are
no crocodiles left
we eagerly await
a saharan ronnie
kasrils to discover
fahimi zidan
conscience is the biggest
crocodile of all
bigger than most gods
                    asleep
as we tuck our kids
with a kiss on the
                    forehead
after the bed time
stories we look
under our beds
for hidden reptiles
and satisfied go
                    to sleep
before the jaw closes
once i want to ask
the crocodile if
i can have a word
                    with his god